THE 1958 GENEVA CONVENTION ON THE HIGH SEAS DEMONSTRATES THAT INTERNATIONAL PIRACY LAWS DO NOT APPLY TO HIJACKING. THE 1963 TOKYO CONVENTION ON OFFENSES AND CERTAIN OTHER ACTS COMMITTED ON BOARD AIRCRAFT DOES NOT ENFORCE STATES TO PUNISH HIJACKING OFFENDERS. INDIAN PENAL CODE CONCEPTS OF WRONGFUL RESTRAINT, KIDNAPPING, ABDUCTION, ROBBERY, AND CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION, DO NOT, ON THEIR OWN, COVER HIJACKING AND MIGHT BE INADEQUATE IF APPLIED CUMULATIVELY. BECAUSE NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RULES DO NOT ADEQUATELY MEET THE SITUATION CREATED BY THE RAPIDLY INCREASING ACTS OF UNLAWFUL SEIZURE OF AIRCRAFT, THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION SET UP A SUBCOMMITTEE IN FEBRUARY 1969, TO DETER PERSONS FROM COMMITTING THESE UNLAWFUL ACTS AND TO ENSURE THE PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THESE PERSONS. HOWEVER, ITS DRAFT CONVENTION LEFT SOME GAPS IN THE PROCEDURE FOR BRINGING THE OFFENDER TO PROSECUTION. THE U.S. DELEGATION PROPOSED AN UNAMBIGUOUS PROVISION OBLIGING THE STATE OF DISEMBARKATION TO EXTRADITE THE HIJACKER, BUT THIS PROPOSAL WAS LATER DENIED. THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT A STATE COULD REFUSE EXTRADITION IF THE HIJACKER ACTED FROM POLITICAL MOTIVES, AND A CONTRACTING STATE COULD REFUSE EXTRADITION FOR A POLITICAL PURPOSE. MEANWHILE, THE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PILOTS ASSOCIATIONS URGED THE ADOPTION OF STRONG MEASURES TO SAFEGUARD AIR TRAFFIC. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. (JLF)