Accommodating terrorism an offence against the law of nations best first message online dating sample
While some interesting developments should be kept under close scrutiny in the near future (for instance, the growing attention to the environment), it is important to note the raising of issues of uniformity among different ‘families’ of countries, of coherence between the regional and the universal levels, and of the temptation to use the tools of criminal law in order to repress dissent in too wide a manner.26Secondly, despite a more resolute attitude towards the description of relevant offences, provisions on judicial co-operation are not always uniform, nor precise enough, with the notable exception of the EU judicial order.The same goes for mechanisms of compliance control.Having briefly reviewed the state of the art, this article will focus first on the definitional question of terrorism and try to single out a core notion which could facilitate the use of existing instruments of co-operation and the drafting of more satisfactory legal rules (Sections 2–6); it would be based on the quality of the protected value (basic rights of civilians, rather than the integrity or independence of the state) and the particularly heinous way of harming it (the recourse to terrorist methods by an organized group).I will try to demonstrate that a core approach to a criminal law notion of terrorism can avoid some supposed difficulties related to the political dimension in which this phenomenon is undoubtedly located and allow a satisfactory outcome of the negotiations on the draft UN Comprehensive Convention, as hoped for in the conclusions of the 2005 UN World Summit.5 Later, the results of this enquiry will be weighed against the sensitive issue of the inclusion of terrorism in the category of individual international crimes in order to demonstrate that the main problem lies in the interpretive option whether to consider the category of crimes against humanity as being already able to cover the vast majority of terrorist acts, or, alternatively, to affirm the process of the crystallization of a discrete crime of terrorism partially detached from the paradigm of such a category (Section 7).Notwithstanding the emphasis placed on the need for concerted international action to confront the problem of terrorism, positive international law is far from treating the issue of defining the criminal notion of terrorism coherently; the discussion of such a notion is being made hostage [sic!] to the abuse of the term ‘terrorism’ in the course of the debate and to the confusion between an empirical description of a phenomenon and its treatment under criminal law.
On one hand, they widen the ‘classical’ political dimension, stating that conduct aimed at destabilizing the state is terrorist and sometimes qualifying the political purpose as a necessary element; on the other, they increase the number of public interests protected by the relevant criminal offences, namely infrastructures, private property or goods, computer facilities, environment, etc.
The above-mentioned sectoral method was for some time adopted at the regional level, and consisted in the adoption of treaties aimed at repressing a series of offences deemed ‘terrorist’ , usually put in practice by terrorist groups), but, again, avoiding the issues of defining ‘terrorism’ and of introducing a crime of association.15 More recently, the regional context has shown that an attempt at a comprehensive definition is conceivable.16 Finally, other regional instruments17 have gone further, in that they provide a general definition of terrorism and a description of the crime of association.18As far as co-operation mechanisms are concerned, no decisive progress can be recorded when compared with universal conventions,19 except for the EU legal system.20 If we look at the post 9/11 initiatives, the African Union,21 the Council of Europe,22 the Organization of American States,23 and the SAARC24 have adopted new treaties, the contents of which are not, however, particularly innovative.
We are again faced with the continuing difficulty of providing a clear legal regime for the repression of terrorism even in consolidated regional circles.
Moreover, I suggest that not all such elements are necessarily likely to become constitutive elements of a supposed crime of terrorism.
Sometimes, some of those factors can lie in the background or in the criminal policy context of a technical notion of terrorist crime, but must not be confused with its constitutive elements.