(b)
Destroys an aircraft in service or causes damage to such an aircraft in .ight if that act is likely to endanger its safety in .ight, or
(c)
Places or causes to be placed on board an aircraft in service, by any means whatsoever, a device or substance which is likely to destroy that aircraft, or to cause damage to it which renders it incapable of .ight, or to cause damage to it which is likely to endanger its safety in .ight, or
(d)
Destroys or damages air navigation facilities or interferes with their operation, if any such act is likely to endanger the safety or aircraft in .ight, or
(e)
Communicates information which he knows to be false, thereby endangering the safety of an aircraft in .ight.
2. Any person also commits an offense if he:
(a)
Attempts to commit any of the offenses mentioned in paragraph 1 of this Article;
(b)
Is an accomplice of a person who commits or attempts to commit any such offence.
It should be noted that while Article 1 delineates several different offenses, the dual requisites of unlawfulness and intent apply to act of the offenses enumerated.
G.F. Fitzgerald observes:
The introductory language of paragraph1makes it clear that the dual element of unlawful-ness and intention must be present in all of the acts covered by sub-paragraphs (a) to (e); otherwise those acts will not be offenses. The dual element would also apply to attempts and complicity covered by sub-paragraph 2.606
Sub-paragraph (a) of Article 1 is designed to deter and punish acts of violence committed against person on board aircraft in .ight. It should be noted that not all acts of violence come within the scope of the offence, but only those likely to endanger the safety of the aircraft. The notion of an act of violence referred to in this sub-paragraph includes armed attack and also attack against the livesofpersons, the aircraft by other means, such as, by blows, strangling, poisoning or lethal injection.
The word “violence” used in sub-paragraph (a) can be interpreted as including not only an armed attack or physical assault, but also administration of poison through, for example, its introduction into the food or drink served on board aircraft.607
The act of violence perpetrated upon a person on board an aircraft according to sub-paragraph (b) may come from within or without the aircraft.
605Fitzgerald(1971, p. 67). 606Fitzgerald(1971, p. 68). 607Fitzgerald(1971, p. 68).
The manner in which sub-paragraph 1(a) is worded, when it is read with the opening language of Article 1, would lead one to conclude that the person performing the act of violence does not have to be on board the aircraft in order to come under the Convention. This means that the convention would apply to a person who, being outside the aircraft (for example a low .ying and slow-moving helicopter or light aircraft) in .ight or who, while on theground has poisoned food which is later consumed by a person on board such aircraft.608
According to this sub-paragraph, the act of violence is not restricted to those acts which imperil the life of the victim. Any act of violence perpetrated against a person on board and which is likely to interfere with the safety of the aircraft falls within the scopeoftheoffence.Hence,thestandardfordeterminingwhethertheConvention is applicable in a given situation does not hinge on the gravity or the heinousness of the act but rather on its effect on the safety of the aircraft in .ight. It is to be noted that the same de.nition as given in Article 3 of the Hague Convention for an “aircraft in .ight” applies in (Article 2(a) of the Montreal Convention).
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(177)
