Aviation terrorism is viewed as a serious problem that has spread drastically for the past three decades. The international community keeps observing that the frequency and intensity of terrorist attacks has increased. These alarming tendencies have induced the Member States of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to adopt and ratify several international conventions, such as the Tokyo, The Hague and the Montreal Conventions, that will be analysed as well as the question of liability of the air carrier pursuant to Art. 17 WA for personal damages resulting from such hijacking attacks.
Table of Contents
A. THE LEGAL TREATMENT OF AVIATION TERRORISM IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
I. Preliminary Remarks
1. Problems in Defining „Aviation Terrorism“
2. The Beginning Recognition of Aircraft Hijacking as an International Crime
3. Measures of Control as Adequate Instruments for the Suppression of Aircraft Hijacking
4. The Existing Difficulties in Coping with the Hijacking Offence in International Law
II. Aviation Terrorism in the Light of the Tokyo, The Hague, and Montreal Conventions
1. Introduction
2. Aerial Hijacking as a Form of Piracy pursuant to Art. 15(1)(a) of the 1958 High Seas Convention
3. The Legal Treatment of Hijacking under the 1963 Tokyo Convention
a) The Scope of the Tokyo Convention
b) Conclusion
4. The Hague Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft of 16 December 1970
a) The Application of The Hague Convention
b) Conclusion
5. The 1971 Montreal Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation of 1971 and the „1988 Montreal Protocol“ completing the Criminalisation of the Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft
6. Final Remarks
B. THE LIABILITY OF THE AIR CARRIER FOR PERSONAL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM HIJACKINGS UNDER THE WARSAW CONVENTION
I. Introduction
II. Applicability of the Warsaw Convention
III. Recovery for Personal Damages caused by Hijacking Incidents pursuant to Art. 17 WA
1. Meaning of the Term „Accident“
a) Comments
2. Discussion of Recovery for Psychosomatic Impairments, Mental Distress, Anguish, and other Forms of Personal Injuries resulting from Hijacking pursuant to Art. 17 of the Warsaw Convention
3. Place and Time of the Accident: The Interpretation of the Requirements „on Board“ the Aircraft and „in the Course of any of the Operations of Embarking and Disembarking“ pursuant to Art. 17 of the Warsaw Convention
a) The Scope of the Terms „Embarking“ and „Disembarking“
b) Schmid’s Proposals Concerning the Legal Interpretation of the Terms „Embarking“ and „Disembarking“
c) Comments
d) Conclusion
4. The Question of whether a Causal Connection must be established between „Personal Injury“ and „Accident“ and between the „Accident“ and „the Operation of the Aircraft“
a) Comments
5. Concluding Remarks
Objectives and Research Themes
This dissertation examines the legal treatment of aviation terrorism within international law and analyzes the civil liability of air carriers for personal damages sustained by passengers during hijacking incidents under the framework of the Warsaw Convention. The study explores whether such acts of violence satisfy the legal requirements for "accidents" and whether injuries such as mental distress fall within the convention's scope of liability.
- Legal definition and international criminal recognition of aviation terrorism.
- Application and limitations of the Tokyo, The Hague, and Montreal Conventions.
- Interpretation of the "accident" requirement under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention regarding terrorist acts.
- Assessment of carrier liability for mental injuries and the "embarking/disembarking" criteria.
- Analysis of jurisdictional challenges and extradition issues concerning hijacking offenders.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Problems in Defining „Aviation Terrorism“
There are different definitions about the general meaning of „terrorism”. On the national level, „terrorism“ can be characterised as the conduct of a group of persons who aims at revolutionary changing the existing constitutional order within the state by means of the commission of severe crimes, such as murder, bodily injury, kidnapping, blackmail fraud etc.14 On the international level, there is, however, no clear definition of terrorism. Instead, the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism of 16 November 1937, promulgated by the League of Nations, solely defines under its Art. 1(2) punishable acts in the field of terrorism „as criminal acts directed against a state and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons, or a group of persons or the general public“15. Moreover, the international community has only made a few attempts in certain areas to clarify the meaning of terrorism by penalising specific acts which are ordinarily viewed as grave and outrageous for the friendly co-existence between the nations.16 The same problem appears in the field of „aviation terrorism“, whose term, meaning and scope is not uniformly used in the literature. Furthermore, it is not evident what sort of offences fall under its scope. In addition, it is widely acknowledged that there is no general definition of terrorism in international law.17
Summary of Chapters
A. THE LEGAL TREATMENT OF AVIATION TERRORISM IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: This chapter analyzes the historical emergence of aviation terrorism as an international crime and evaluates the regulatory frameworks provided by the Tokyo, The Hague, and Montreal Conventions in suppressing these acts.
B. THE LIABILITY OF THE AIR CARRIER FOR PERSONAL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM HIJACKINGS UNDER THE WARSAW CONVENTION: This section investigates whether passengers can seek compensation from air carriers for injuries caused by hijackings, focusing specifically on the interpretation of "accident" and "bodily injury" under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention.
Keywords
Aviation Terrorism, Warsaw Convention, Aircraft Hijacking, Carrier Liability, Article 17, International Law, Montreal Convention, The Hague Convention, Tokyo Convention, Mental Distress, Bodily Injury, Extradition, Jurisdiction, Air Safety, Passenger Compensation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental objective of this dissertation?
The work aims to clarify the legal status of aviation terrorism in international law and specifically determine if air carriers are civilly liable for personal damages caused to passengers during hijacking incidents under the Warsaw Convention.
What are the primary themes covered in the research?
The core themes include the definition of aviation terrorism, the efficacy of international conventions (Tokyo, Hague, Montreal), the legal prerequisites of the Warsaw Convention, and the complex interpretation of "accident" and "bodily injury" in the context of terrorist attacks.
Which scientific methodology does the author employ?
The author conducts a comparative legal analysis, evaluating international treaties, historical legislative drafts, and international case-law—particularly from US and German courts—to interpret statutory requirements.
What is the central research question regarding liability?
The primary question is whether acts of violence, such as hijacking, constitute an "accident" under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention, thereby triggering carrier liability for passenger injuries.
What specific damages are analyzed in the main body?
The main body focuses on death, physical wounding, and importantly, the contentious area of mental distress, psychosomatic impairments, and anguish resulting from the trauma of a hijacking.
How are the terms "embarking" and "disembarking" defined?
The author explores these terms using the "proper care"-doctrine, which links the liability of the carrier to the degree of control the carrier has over the passenger in airport transit areas, rather than a purely temporal or spatial definition.
Does the author consider mental injuries as "bodily injury"?
The author notes that while pure mental injuries are often rejected by courts, some liberal interpretations suggest that "personal injury" or "bodily injury" can encompass psychical impairments if they result from physical impact or circumstances of detention.
What role does the "causal connection"-doctrine play?
The author argues that a causal connection between the accident and the operation of the aircraft is a necessary, albeit unwritten, requirement to ensure that carrier liability remains tied to risks inherently associated with air transportation.
- Quote paper
- Dr. Andreas-Michael Blum (Author), 1997, Aviation Terrorism with Particular Reference to the Air Carrier’s Liability for Personal Damages Resulting from Hijackings Pursuant to Art. 17 of the Warsaw Convention, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/358024
