skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 62754 Find in a Library
Title: IN-FLIGHT CRIMES, THE TOKYO CONVENTION, AND FEDERAL JUDICIAL JURISDICTION
Journal: JOURNAL OF AIR LAW AND COMMERCE  Volume:35  Dated:(1969)  Pages:171-203
Author(s): J M DENARO
Corporate Author: Southern Methodist University Law School
United States of America
Date Published: 1969
Page Count: 33
Sponsoring Agency: Southern Methodist University Law School
Dallas, TX 75222
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: PROBLEMS AND POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS RELATED TO CUSTODY JURISDICTION, AND PROSECUTION IN CASES INVOLVING CRIMES COMMITTED DURING INTERNATIONAL FLIGHT ARE ANALYZED.
Abstract: THE TYPE OF CASE AT ISSUE IS ONE IN WHICH A NONRESIDENT ALIEN COMMITS A CRIME AGAINST ANOTHER NONRESIDENT ALIEN ON BOARD AN AIRCRAFT FLYING FROM A FOREIGN CITY TO AN AMERICAN CITY; IN WHICH THE OFFENSE IS PERPETRATED OVER THE HIGH SEAS; AND IN WHICH NO APPROPRIATE EXTRADITION TREATY EXISTS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE FLAG COUNTRY OF THE AIRCRAFT. THE FIRST PROBLEM IS CUSTODY: IF THE OFFENSE VIOLATES ONLY THE FLAG COUNTRY'S PENAL LAW, U.S. LANDING AUTHORITIES CANNOT DETAIN THE OFFENDER. THE TOKYO CONVENTION, UNRATIFIED AT THE TIME THE ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN, CONTAINS CUSTODIAL AND DEPORTATION PROVISIONS THAT WOULD REMEDY THIS PROBLEM AND SUBSTANTIALLY ASSURE IMMEDIATE PROSECUTION IN SUCH CASES. THE SECOND PROBLEM CONCERNS JURISDICTIONAL CONFLICT AMONG THE VARIOUS COUNTRIES INTERESTED IN THE OFFENSE. THE CONVENTION'S ARTICLES ON JURISDICTION MAY BE INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT ONLY THE FLAG COUNTRY CAN RAISE DIPLOMATIC CLAIM AGAINST THE LANDING COUNTRY, AND THAT PRIMARY JURISDICTION IS VESTED IN THE LANDING COUNTRY. THUS, THE CONVENTION IMPLIES A SYSTEM OF PRIORITIES THAT WOULD END DIPLOMATIC CONFLICT. THE THIRD PROBLEM IS THAT, WHEN NO APPROPRIATE EXTRADITION TREATY EXISTS AND WHEN THE CONVENTION'S DEPORTATION PROVISIONS DO NOT ASSURE PROSECUTION, THE OFFENDER CAN ELUDE IMMEDIATE PROSECUTION UNLESS THE UNITED STATES, AS THE LANDING COUNTRY, HAS THE POWER TO PROSECUTE. AN ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL AND U.S. LAW CONCLUDES THAT THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY DOES HAVE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION IN SUCH INSTANCES. THE TOKYO CONVENTION AND FEDERAL JURISDICTION ARE KEY FACTORS IN A SCHEME THAT GURANTEES IMMEDIATE PROSECUTION FOR INFLIGHT CRIMES. THE UNITED STATES IS URGED TO RATIFY THE CONVENTION. (LKM)
Index Term(s): Aircraft hijacking; Federal courts; International agreements; International extradition; Jurisdiction
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=62754

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.