|
|
Terror
Free Legal Regime- PART 1 (November 5)
By Prof. Naorem Sanajaoba
The
United Nations Charter and the contemporary international law
have repudiated illegal use of force barring in the event of
self-defense. Armed conflicts and wars of national liberation
do occur and they are regulated by the humanitarian laws- the
Geneva, the Hague and the UN laws including the Martens
clause, among others. The jurisdiction of the International
Criminal Court would encompass the serious international
crimes as incorporated by the Rome Statute, 1998. Proposals
about bringing Terrorism and Drug-trafficking within the scope
of the ICC are on the record.
Some quarters even make the proposal that a UN High
Commissioner for combating international terrorism could be
created. The political discourse does not shy away at the same
time from drawing a red line between wars of national
liberation or exercise of the right to self-determination
through armed struggle and the international Terrorism as so
perceived by the global community. The debated has not been
ousted from the agenda, despite gray areas meticulously carved
out by the plenipotentiaries. A regulatory regime for
combating international Terrorism, has however, emerged with
the adoption of several conventions and declaration, which
carry immense moral authority.
Out of 12 treaties relating to international Terrorism, the
International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 15,
1997 and the International Convention for the Suppression of
the Financing of Terrorism adopted by the UN General Assembly
on December 9, 1999 is significant in the present context. The
Security Council Resolution 1267 (1999) dated October 15, 1999
has demanded the Taliban turn over Osama bin Laden to
authorities in a country where he has been indicted.
The UN Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) has given teeth
to the General Assembly resolution of December 9, 1999. By
this resolution 1373, the States have the obligation to ensure
to bring to justice any one who has participated in the
financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist
acts or in supporting such acts. The municipal laws and
regulations have to establish such acts as serious criminal
offences leading to harsh sentences.
The SC resolution 1373 further provides that all States should
suppress and prevent the financing of terrorism and freeze the
financial assets, the funds and the economic resources of
those who commit or attempt to commit, participate or
facilitate in committing terrorist acts, and shall refrain
from giving any form of support to entities or persons who are
involved in terrorist acts. The States would have to cooperate
with each other in exchanging terrorist-related information
about their possession of weapons of mass destruction,
communications and technologies and in matters relating to
criminal investigations or criminal proceedings as regards
financing terrorist acts.
The asylum-seekers would not have planned, facilitated or
participated in terrorist acts and extradition of alleged
terrorists would no be refused on claims of political
motivation. The need for launching a global response by way of
coordinating regional, sub-regional, national and
international efforts has also been highlighted. The SC
resolution 1373 has teeth in the form of SC Committee of the
Council, which will monitor the enforcement of the resolution.
The General Assembly debate in the first week of October 2001
on combating international terrorism has, however, reflected
pluralism in understanding terrorism and combating the same.
The States did not differ in combating terrorism and had
difference in their approaches to the problem. By representing
the Arab group, Libyan ambassador made the statement that the
Arab group would oppose any attempt to classify popular
resistance to occupation as terrorism and wanted to justify
resistance to army occupation by implication in any State.
Pakistan's ambassador supported the fight against terrorism
but emphasized that the root causes of terrorism have to be
tackled. Malaysia's ambassador made the remark, 'Acts of pure
terrorism, involving attacks against innocent civilian
populations- which can not be justified under any
circumstances- should be differentiated from the legitimate
struggles of peoples under colonial or alien domination and
foreign occupation for self-determination and national
liberation.
The Security Council resolution 1373 has been preceded by the
adoption of the International Convention for Suppression of
the Financing of Terrorism, December 9, 1999. After
ratification of the 1999 Convention by 22 States, it would be
enforceable. The offences as cited in the convention are
extraditable offences. The convention would halt the passing
of terrorist money, collection of funds that would be used in
committing crime by targeting civilians with the intention of
intimidating the Governments and would be instrumental in
seizing funds allocated or collected for committing terrorist
crimes. It targets at the financial sponsors of international
terrorism.
The Terrorist Bombing Convention, 1997 has been signed by 52
signatories and ratified by 8 States till the end of the year
2000. Wider international support to the enforcement of the
convention was anticipated, at the time when the Group of
Seven took the initiative in Paris and Lima in 1996. The less
industrialized States took lesser interest in the Terrorist
Bombing Convention, 1997 which is enforceable in 2001.
The international legal regime had made efforts to usher in a
terror-free global civil society since 1937 by adopting a
number of international conventions and regional instruments.
The UN General Assembly has adopted in 1989, the Convention
against Recruitment, Use, Finance and Training of Mercenaries,
1986. The member States shall not recruit, train, use and
finance mercenaries, prevent terrorism at the same time and
should not use the instrument towards opposing the exercise by
the people of their legitimate right to Self-Determination.
In retrospect, the anti-terrorism conventions may be assessed
briefly. Unification of all these conventions in one format or
another could be made a constructive proposition for the penal
lawyers. Article 1 of the Convention for the Prevention and
Punishment of Terrorism, 1937 provides for the installation of
an International Criminal Court for the prosecution and trial
of persons accused of committing crimes of Terrorism as
defined in the Convention. The corpa delicti are enunciated in
Articles 2, 3, 9 and 10 of the 1937 instrument.
Air
hijackings in the late 1960s and early 1970s, more singularly
by the Palestinians whose country had been totally demolished
and wiped out from the map by the West in order to construct
Israel in the Palestine territory and not in any European or
American lebensraum, raised the level of terrorism in the air.
The former Soviet Union and India did not encourage hijacking,
but solidly espoused the Palestinian cause. The West and their
collaborators- the Jewish Irgun and Stern terrorists have
ruthlessly committed the incipient sin of demolition of the
Palestine State. Even today, the genesis of Middle-East
terrorism remains the proverbial hen and egg argument.
However,
for all the misdeeds of the West, the global community had to
respond to terrorism with the adoption of
(a) The Convention of Offences and Certain Other Acts
committed on board Aircraft, September 14, 1963 (Tokyo
Convention),
(b) The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of
Aircraft, December 16, 1970 (The Hague treaty) and (c) The
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the
Safety of Civil Aviation, September 23, 1971 (Montreal
Convention).
The suicide bombers who used pen-knifes or something of that
kind and destroyed the WTC on September 11, 2001 smashed a
part of the American fortress- the Pentagon and nearly missed
the demolition of the White House, has committed crimes under
these conventions, among others. Before the pen-knifery event,
nobody on earth can ever have a wild imagination that American
defense has been that much vulnerable and weak in spite of the
NMD and Star Wars and so and so forth. The suicide bombers
have definitely committed crimes of terrorism, whatever their
intentions and justification of causes.
Next
to PART 2
(Courtesy:
The Sangai Express)
Back
to Top
|
|
