(b)
The offence has been committed by or against a national or permanent resident of such State.
(c)
The offence is against the security of such State.
(d)
The offence consists of a breach of any rules or regulations relating to the .ight
or manoeuvre of aircraft in force in such State.
(e)
The exercise of jurisdiction is necessary to ensure the observance of any obligation of such State under a multilateral international agreement.
514Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, signed at Tokyo on 14 September 1963, ICAO Doc 8364.
Since the Tokyo Convention has been accepted by many of ICAO’s Contracting States, this provision represents an important additional clari.cation to Article 3 bis of the Chicago Convention with respect to the interpretation of the term “any purpose inconsistent with the aims of this Convention”. It is submitted that any offence foreseen in Article 4 of the Tokyo Convention gives right to the State concerned to “interfere,” i.e., to require the landing or give the aircraft other instructions and to resort to proportionate and adequate use of force against such aircraft.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea does not foresee the right of hot pursuit of aircraft; the target of hot pursuit may be exclusively a ship but the procedures of hot pursuit may be effected by an aircraft (Article 111, paragraph 6).
IV. ICAO Assembly Resolution A 27-12
At its 27th Session, held in September/October 1989, the ICAO Assembly adopted the above Resolution which recognised the enormity of drug abuse and illicit traf.cking in drugs and psychotropic substances and urged the ICAO Council to give the highest priority to adopt concrete measures in order to prevent and to eliminate possible use of illicit drugs by crew members, air traf.c controllers and other staff of international civil aviation. The Resolution also urged the Council to continue its work in order to prevent illicit transport of narcotic drugs and psycho-tropic substances. A fortiori, the Assembly called upon Contracting States to continue their efforts to prevent the illicit traf.cking of drugs by air, to take appropriate legislative measures to ensure that the crime of illicit transport of narcotic drugs and other psychotropic substances by air is punishable by severe penalties. Contracting States are also urged by this Resolution to become parties, as soon as possible to the United Nations Convention of 1988.
It is incontrovertible that the foregoing discussion brings to bear the concerted efforts of the international community both through the United Nations Organiza-tion (through its General Assembly) and through the International Civil Aviation Organization – towards controlling the problem of narcotic drug traf.cking. A third force – the carriers themselves – have had considerable success in their anti-narcotic drug programme. One of the best examples of carrier action is re.ected in the United States Customs Carrier Initiative Agreement Programme which was introduced in 1984. This programme is a purely voluntary arrangement between governments and carriers in which the government allows each airline to create a security programme that is approved by Customs. The Carrier Initiative Agreement Programmes are aimed at both prevention and interdiction, covering areas of training, prevention and co-operation.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：Aviation Security Law 航空安全法(151)
