The international legal framework to combat terrorism
Before we start discussing the problem of the international legal framework against terrorism, just specify that in the tactics of the specific situations of anti-terrorist actions, international law is not governed, as in most cases it might be counterproductive. Therefore, the international legal documents do not contain and should not contain ready-made "recipes" operations against terrorists. Instead, they contain the legal basis of such actions and determine the situations in which these actions are possible or even necessary.
As for the practical tactics and techniques for fighting terrorism, for every anti-terrorist services they — their own, tried and tested over many years of practice and, as a rule, were not disclosed. Although the general principles of, say, the U.S. intelligence services, Israel, France, Germany and some other countries are as follows:
— Pre-emption, the blocking of terrorism at an early stage and prevent its formation and development of the structures;
— Preventing the ideological justification of terror under the banner of "protecting the rights of the nation", "defending the faith" and the like; debunking media terrorism by all means;
— Transfer of control anti-terrorism activities most reliable security services with non-interference in their work of any other governing bodies;
— The use of negotiation with terrorists only these special services and only to cover the preparation of the action by the complete destruction of terrorists;
— No concessions to terrorists, not a single terrorist act with impunity, even if it is worth the blood of the hostages and random people — because experience shows that the success of any terrorists to provoke further growth and the number of victims of terror;
— Special media psychological operations serving as a tragic suppression of terrorist attack and the need for contrasting "black" terror clean those struggling with it, admired by terrorists in the media and calls for "get in position" absolutely unacceptable, as criminal.
As you can see, the general principles of the fight against terrorism tough enough and therefore they must have adequate legal support.
In the development of the legal framework against terrorism, the international community has ever experienced and is currently experiencing significant difficulties. Suffice it to say that has not produced a single definition of the concept of terrorism. Each country uses its own definition, so the discussion of many issues in the United Nations conflictual, which did not allow to come to a consensus and adopt one or other document governing the fight against international terrorism.
However, in this area done quite a lot.
First attempts to form international legal framework for counter-terrorism cooperation date back to the Second World War. In 1937, under the auspices of the League of Nations have developed the Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism and Punishment and the Convention on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court. Although both instruments in force and has not stepped in, they played a role in the development of international legal principles and norms against terrorism.
The modern system of multilateral cooperation in the fight against terrorism has developed mainly in the last four decades. At the global level, it operates under the auspices of the UN and its specialized agencies, in particular the IMO, ICAO and IAEA on the basis of the twelve universal conventions and protocols against various manifestations of terrorism on land, at sea and in the air.
It is these conventions and protocols are to date the only international legal instruments that the world has the right to use in the fight against terrorism:
1. Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, signed at Tokyo on 14 September 1963. Developed by ICAO member countries — 171. 2. The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, signed at The Hague on 16 December 1970. Developed by ICAO member countries — 174.
3. The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, signed at Montreal on 23 September 1971. Developed by ICAO member countries — 175.
4. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, New York, December 14, 1973. Adopted by the General Assembly, the participating countries — 107.
5. International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, signed in New York on December 18, 1979. Adopted by the General Assembly, the participating countries — 96.
6. The Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, signed in New York and Vienna on 3 March 1980. Developed by IAEA member states — 68.
7. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation. Signed at Montreal on 24 February 1988, the participating countries — 107.
8. The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation. Signed in Rome on 10 March 1988. Developed by the IMO, the participating countries — 52.
9. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf. Signed in Rome on 10 March 1988. Member countries — 48.
10. The Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection. Signed at Montreal on 1 March 1991. Developed by ICAO member states — 67.
11. The International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, adopted by the General Assembly of December 15, 1997, the participating countries — 26.
12. The International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, adopted in New York on 9 December 1999.
Furthermore, the General Assembly adopted the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism (1994) and the Declaration to Supplement the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, 1994 (1996).
Anti-terrorism conventions contain provisions defining the general legal framework necessary for the organization of an effective international response to terrorism. For example, the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, 1979 obliges states parties:
a) Take all measures to free the hostages if they are on their territory;
b) Take all necessary measures to prevent preparations in the commission of these crimes, including measures to prohibit in their territories illegal activities of persons, groups and organizations that encourage, instigate, organize or engage in acts of hostage-taking;
c) establish its criminal jurisdiction over the crime of hostage-taking, if the offense was committed:
— In its territory or on board a ship registered in that State;
— Any of its nationals or, if that State considers it appropriate, stateless (stateless persons) who are usually resident in its territory;
— In order to force a state to commit any act or to abstain from doing any act;
— With respect to a hostage who is a national of that State if that State considers it appropriate.
Prohibition of acts of a terrorist nature of armed conflict provides the rules of international humanitarian law, in particular the provisions of the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions for the protection of victims of war in 1949.