In recent years, terrorism has become one of the most controversial issues that not only by the states concerned face but also the international community as a whole. ... However, one should not view terrorism as a contemporary issue because the origin of terrorism can be traced back to early history. In fact, one has just to take a look at history books to discover that terrorism has been practiced throughout history and all over the world. ...
However, what we can notice in this last century is that there had been great changes in the use and practice of terrorism. Modern terrorism essentially differs from that of the past because its victims are frequently innocent civilians who are picked at random or who merely happen to be into terrorist situations. The numerous civilian victims as well as the constant fear triggered by terrorist groups on the society, have let the issue of terrorism one of the most urgent and major topics that should be dealt with by the international community essentially through the use of international law as an instrument to combat it. Therefore, as an attempt to effectively face terrorism, some international actors, mainly the United Nations, have agreed to face this by first providing a definition of terrorism, developing international law principles that regulate this issue, and then urging states to cooperate against terrorism through multilateral and regional conventions.
The General International Law of Terrorism
Defining terrorism
The international community has for long years tried to reach a common definition of terrorism. According to Rosalyn Higgins, a judge at the International Court of Justice and a writer of several books on the international law field, the United Nations itself, while initiating efforts to address the issue of terrorism, has faced the debate of whether or not terrorism should and could be defined (“The General International Law of Terrorism”, 14). In fact, there were those who argued that it was impossible to set legal measures for combating terrorism without actually finding out which conducts were prohibited, that is which conducts are considered terrorist acts. On the other hand, there were those who insisted on the fact that attempting to define terrorism would be unsuccessful. They instead proposed that terrorism should be dealt with in a pragmatic way, essentially through establishing norms that would be relevant to varied aspects of the overall problem (Ibid. ...
In 1972, the General Assembly established an Ad Hoc Committee on Terrorism. While holding some discussions, certain members viewed some types of conduct as characteristics of terrorism, others focused on the purposes of the action undertaken, others considered the characteristics of the perpetrator an essential factor in any definition, while other emphasized the prohibited target in order to provide a relevant definition of terrorism. In this way, as Higgins clarified, “many crimes such as hostage taking, aircraft piracy, sabotage, assassinations, threats, hoaxes, indiscriminate bombings or shootings have been viewed as acts of terrorism” (Ibid. ... Thus, it clearly appears that terrorism cannot be defined relying on the acts committed alone, neither can it be defined only by reference to targets. As for the purpose or motive, it definitely constitutes a key element in perceiving terrorism, because it is well known that the reason behind using terrorist acts by a terrorist is to “ use intense fear or anxiety to coerce the primary target into behavior or to mold its attitudes in connection with a demanded power (political outcome)” (Ibid.
To link to this page, copy the following code to your site:
All Papers Are For Research And Reference Purposes Only!
You may not turn these papers in as your own! You must cite our web site as your source!
