Legitimate use of military force against state-sponsored - Air University

the history of extradition… no viable international… community consensus exists in the area of
political crimes.” 28
Achieving international cooperation in this area has been difficult. The key problem has been the
political offense escape clause in extradition agreements, which gives a requested nation the right
to deny extradition to the requesting nation. Closing this loophole has proven to be a
monumental task. How can this clause be narrowed to exclude terrorists but retain its original
purpose of protecting dissidents and other like-minded persons from persecution through
prosecution for their politically held beliefs? How can third world support be obtained in light of
their primary concern for national liberation movements? How do you obtain the cooperation of
states that sponsor, support, or tolerate international terrorism by providing terrorists with safe
havens?
The effort of the European community and the revised United States—United Kingdom
extradition agreements are unusual successes in this area. 29 The 1977 European Convention on
the Suppression of Terrorism removes the political offense exception from extradition requests
for certain offenses such as aircraft hijacking, serious attacks on internationally protected
persons, kidnapping, hostage taking, and use of explosives and firearms to endanger persons.
Similarly, the 1985 supplement to the United States—United Kingdom extradition treaty
removes the political offense exception for selected crimes, such as aerial hijacking and murder
of diplomats, that are associated with terrorism. Noteworthy is the fact that successes to date
have been achieved only among the Western democracies.
Also significant is the fact that even United States courts, as demonstrated in Eain v.
Wilkes, have difficulty with the political offense issue if forced to address it.
The evidence in this case reveals that the PLO seeks the destruction of the
Israeli political structure… and thus directs its destructive efforts at a defined
civilian population. That, it could be argued, may be sufficient to be considered a
violent political disturbance. If, however, considering the nature of the crime
charged, that were all that was necessary in order to prevent extradition under the
political offense exception nothing would prevent an influx of terrorists seeking a
safe haven in America. Those terrorists who flee to this country would avoid
having to answer to anyone for their crimes. The law is not so utterly absurd.
Terrorists who have committed barbarous acts elsewhere would be able to flee to
the United States and live in our neighborhoods and walk our streets forever free
from any accountability for their acts. 30
With these words, the Eain court places the emphasis, not on law, but on logic. Much remains to
be done to make extradition an effective tool in combating terrorism.
Criminalizing Terrorist Acts
A second aspect of the law enforcement approach is an initiative to provide a sounder
basis for judicial cooperation among states through a common agreement on the definition of the