The need to strike a balance between protecting persons and property from terrorist attack and assuring human rights has produced three principal types of solutions; universal authority to try terrorist offenders, creation of an international court for terrorists, and alterations of extradition laws. The European Convention for the Repression of Terrorism follows the third course, declaring that a list of infractions enumerated in the text are nonpolitical and subject to extradition. At the same time, each contracting state is to extend the application of extradition beyond the list by evaluation of cases that arise. Offenses requiring extradition are extremely violent terrorist acts, including hijacking, that involve grave danger to human life. Unfortunately, grave acts of violence are difficult to define, as all violence is grave. To complicate matters further, the convention allows each state to declare acts political or nonpolitical at will. If ratified by France, the convention would necessitate considerable changes in the definition of political offenses according to French law. According to French law, offenses are purely political, complex, or connected to political activities. Offenses considered purely political under French law are not subject to extradition and would not change status under the convention, but the other types would require redefinition. Furthermore, French law currently gurarantees the rights of individual fugitives by denying extradition requests in political matters and by permitting fugitives to use various means of defending themselves in extradition proceedings. Under the convention, the French concept of asylum would have to be considerably altered, although this is not necessarily undesirable, as the right to asylum is often abused. Both the judicial and the administrative phases of the extradition procedure would also have to be modified to accommodate the convention. Notes are supplied.