SEVERAL ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO CURB THE PRACTICE OF HIJACKING, SOMETIMES MISTAKENLY REFERRED TO AS AIR PIRACY. THE TOKYO CONVENTION DEFINES HIJACKING AND DETAILS PROCEDURES TO FOLLOW IN RESUMING AN INTERRUPTED FLIGHT, RESTORING AN AIRCRAFT TO ITS OWNER, AND PROVIDING FACILITIES FOR PASSENGERS AND CREW MEMBERS. THEREFORE, IF INDIA AND PAKISTAN WERE PARTIES TO THE TOKYO CONVENTION, THEY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FACILITATING RESUMPTION OF THE FLIGHT AND RESTORATION OF THE AIRCRAFT. THUS, THE LAW SEEMS FAIRLY CLEAR WHEN REFERRING TO PROPERTY. HOWEVER, THE POSITION REGARDING PERSONS IS MORE COMPLICATED SINCE STATES ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO EXTRADITE OFFENDERS. AT A CONVENTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION (ICAO) THE UNITED STATES MADE AN EFFORT TO INCLUDE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED HIJACKING INCIDENTS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE DRAFT CONVENTION. HOWEVER, THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE CONVENTION FAILED TO COVER POLITICALLY MOTIVATED HIJACKINGS, ALLOWING THE TRADITIONAL LAW OF EXTRADITION AND POLITICAL ASYLUM TO REMAIN UNCHANGED. THE HAGUE CONVENTION ADOPTED THE SAME FORMULA ON EXTRADITION AS THE ICAO DRAFT CONVENTION, WITH MINOR ALTERATIONS. THESE LAWS ILLUMINATE THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO INDIA AND PAKISTAN DURING A HIJACKING ATTEMPT, SHOWING THE HARM THAT SUCH INCIDENTS COULD CAUSE TO THE PRECARIOUS RELATIONS BETWEEN THESE NATIONS. IN VIEW OF THE EMOTIONS AROUSED DURING A HIJACKING (ESPECIALLY REGARDING THE SENSITIVE ISSUE OF EXTRADITION), POLITICAL HARMONY WOULD BE BETTER SERVED BY ADEQUATE COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGES AND QUICK PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE HIJACKERS, RATHER THAN THE DEMAND FOR EXTRADITION. REFERENCES ARE CITED. (DEP)