The Subcommittee held its first plenary session in Geneva on 3 September 1956, armed with a list of the main problems requiring an international solution. The work of the subcommission had been considerably mitigated by its agreement to limit the scope of the study to aspects of criminal law: the Munich project had thus created a means of simultaneous jurisdiction of the three States. “Proposals to include a system of priorities in the Munich project have failed, partly because it is difficult to reach agreement on classification among the states concerned, and partly because the question of priority would depend largely on the extent to which extradition treaties exist.” [20] Excerpt from ICAO press release[10], August 30, 1956: The Rome Project was published on August 20, 1956. It was submitted to the International Conference on Aviation Law in Tokyo in 1963, ending decades of debate and negotiation on some of the most important outstanding issues in international aviation law. The Conference was finally convened by the ICAO Council in Tokyo from 20 August to 14 September 1963 to continue the consideration, finalization, adoption and opening for signature of the Rome Project. Sixty-one States and five international organizations were represented at the conference. [23] But now we have one to 200 people flying together, usually for four to seven hours, sometimes for 12 to 15 hours. They fly in conditions of safety and comfort. You have space to move around.

They include both sexes. They are abundantly supplied with alcoholic stimulants. and the purely statistical chances of abnormal behaviour are obviously considerably increased. In addition, planes quickly cross borders that can be carefully controlled on land. They offer great possibilities for transfer from one country to another. raw materials for which a high price is paid and which cannot reach their most profitable market by land or sea: things like gold, drugs, diamonds, plans and secret drawings. It is very tempting for the passengers of these aircraft and their crews to take on these professions or to become fit as accessories for these professions. The study of the question of the legal status of the aircraft has been the subject of debate since the pioneering work of the French lawyer Paul Fauchille in 1902 and has often been visited by ancient organizations such as.dem International Technical Committee of Air Legal Experts[3].

the Institute of International Law, the International Criminal Police Commission and the International Law Association. [4] The issue remained one of the most important legal issues until the 13-year pre-legislative efforts of the International Civil Aviation Organization resulted in the Convention on Criminal Offences and certain other laws committed on board aircraft on December 4, 1969. The Tokyo Convention was drafted in its present form on 14 September 1963. [24] The Convention entered into force on December 4, 1969, ending ICAO`s efforts on this subject since 1950 and realizing many of the ideals of the early pioneer lawyers of aviation. The Convention on Criminal Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, commonly known as the Tokyo Convention, is an international treaty signed on 14 October. It was closed in Tokyo in September 1963. It entered into force on 4 December 1969 and has been ratified by 186 Contracting Parties since 2015. [1] On 27 November 1961, the ICAO Council requested the Chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs to appoint a subcommittee on the legal status of aircraft to examine the comments of States and international organizations on the 1959 Munich project. [21] The Committee on Legal Affairs acted accordingly, since the subcommittee met in Montreal from March 26 to April 5, 1962. The subcommittee made some changes and proposed replacement provisions in addition to the new ones. The draft recognized, for the first time in the history of international aviation law, the authority of the aircraft commander to take the necessary measures in the event that the safety of his aircraft and passengers was compromised by the action of a person on board.

It also recognized the immunity of the commander if he took appropriate measures in the given circumstances. In addition, it recognized the right of the commander to disembark any person who endangers the safety of the flight or to extradite that person under duress to the competent authorities of a State Party in which he or she may land; as well as a provision that the country of disembarkation shall detain, bring to justice, extradite or immediately release the person at fault in accordance with its laws. The legal status of the Aircraft Subcommittee, formed by the ICAO Committee on Legal Affairs at its 9th meeting in Rio de Jainero, was devoted to the investigation of problems related to air crime. During the 10th. Meeting in 1954 by the Committee on Legal Affairs, the subcommittee met to determine the best procedure for further studying the legal problems related to the investigation into the legal status of the aircraft. [9]:2 It has been established that physical circumstances should be taken into account wherever the aircraft may be at the time of a criminal offence, further taking into account the impact on the applicable law. [9]:3 Article 3(2) dealt with the jurisdiction of the territorial State and the landing State and provided:[11]:1–2 The ICAO Legal Affairs Committee, established by the Interim Council on 24 June 1946 and approved by the First Assembly on 23 May 1947 on the proposal of the Mexican representative, included the question of the legal status of the aircraft in its programme of work in 1950. [5]:10 The Committee appointed Mr. Enrique M. Loaeza (Mexico) as Rapporteur on the subject. [5]:32(g) The 15th. In May 1953, the ICAO Council raised the question of legal status and instructed the Law Commission to begin work on this question.

[6] Accordingly, at its 9th session in Rio de Janeiro from 25 August to 12 September 1953, the Legal Council established a Sub-Committee on the Legal Status of Aircraft to examine and revise the text of a draft Convention[7] to replace the Warsaw Convention. [8] With the Convention on International Civil Aviation referred to in Article 43, the International Civil Aviation Organization was established for the purpose and purpose of Article 44.” develop the principles and techniques of international aviation and promote the planning and development of international air transport in order to. [p]romote flight safety in international aviation. If the territorial State overflown is neither the registry State nor the landing State, its jurisdiction is limited by subparagraphs (a) to (e). Subparagraph (a) was proposed by Fernand de Vissher in Article 1(3) of his 1937 report. [16] Subparagraph (b) was proposed in Article 23 of the draft 1919 Paris Convention, which was not adopted at the Peace Conference. [17] Letter (c) on the principle of national security had been proposed by Paul Fauchille in 1902. [18] Point (d) corresponded to Article 23(2) of the 1919 draft Paris Convention[ [17]. The letter e was therefore the only new term. Similar problems arise in the case of a criminal offence.

Offences committed on board a Belgian aircraft are considered to have been committed in Belgium and are therefore subject to the Belgian Penal Code. However, if a Belgian vehicle flew over Switzerland at the time of committing a crime, it could also be subject to Swiss criminal law, which can impose completely different penalties. Following its study at its second plenary meeting in Montreal in September 1958, the Sub-Committee prepared the first draft of the ICAO Status of Aircraft Convention[11]:16-19[12], which dealt with the problem of offences committed on board aircraft. The Convention applies to offences under criminal law and to all acts that endanger the safety of persons or property on board civil aircraft during flights and international aviation. The scope of coverage includes the commission or intent to commit criminal offences and certain other acts on board aircraft registered in a State Party during a flight over the high seas and in all other territories outside the territory of a State, in addition to the airspace of a State Party. Criminal jurisdiction may be exercised by States Parties other than the State of registry under limited conditions, i.e. where the exercise of jurisdiction is necessary because of multilateral international obligations, in the interest of national security, etc.