557Shubber(1973a, p. 226).
558Aircraft Hijacking, Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 12 (1971) at 65.
C. Concerted Action Under the Auspice of the ICAO
Most hijackings, however, have been carried out simply by the use of threats, and may even be carried out through a variety of means other than those involving violence or force.
It is therefore reasonable to conclude that hijacking does not necessarily and absolutely fall within the “aircraft piracy” as de.ned by the Geneva Convention on the High Seas.559 Thehopes of the international community to control the crime of hijacking through the application of Geneva Convention on the High Seas (1958) may therefore have been frustrated by the exclusivity of the nature of the two offenses of aerial piracy and piracy related to the high seas. The Convention remains therefore to be of mere academic interest for those addressing the issue of aerial piracy.
C. Concerted Action Under the Auspice of the International Civil Aviation Organization: The Tokyo Convention (1963)
Shocked by the rising trend of aircraft hijacking in the early 1960s and the failure of the Geneva Convention on the High seas to offer rules applicable to the offence of hijacking, the international community considered adopting the Tokyo Convention of 1963, which was adopted under the aegis of ICAO. This Convention attempted to provide certain rules that would address the offence.
Prior to 1960, most of the collective action to combat international terrorism was undertaken by the United Nations or its predecessor, the League of Nations. Although the League of Nations made cohesive efforts to create an international criminal court, to deal, among other things, with acts of international terrorism by drafting a Convention to Combat International Terrorism in 1937,560 it was unfor-tunate that this Convention was signed only by 13 States and rati.ed by one State and was effectively precluded the Convention from coming in force.
At the end of 1950, a new crusader against international terrorism – particularly that which applied to aerial incidents of terrorism – appeared in the international scene to adopt necessary international measures to combat terrorism against air transport. This new entity was the International Civil Aviation Organization. In retrospect, it is noted that although the United Nations was unsuccessful in adopting suf.ciently compelling measures of international co-operation to deal with aircraft hijacking, ICAO has made signi.cant strides in the area of adoption of multilateral conventions. The primary aim of these Conventions has been to adopt measures, through international agreement, to control and arrest terrorist activities which are aimed against international air transport. It has been said of ICAO on its regulatory attempts in this .eld:
559Van Panhuys(1970, p. 13).
560This Convention was openedfor signatureat Genevaon16 November 1937.See Hudson(1941,
p. 862). See also U.N Doc, A/C.6/418, Annex 1 at 1.
these menacing incidents during the last few years have resulted in intense activities aimed at .nding possible solutions on the basis of universally accepted international treaty and/or other technical remedies. The beginning of concerted international effort since the forma-tion of ICAO in relation to the so-called problem of hijacking can be traced back to the formulation of certain provisions in the “Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft Commonly Known as the Tokyo Convention 1963.”561
中國航空網(wǎng) m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Aviation Security Law 航空安全法(161)
