I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The purpose of the Bill is to enable effect to be given in Irish domestic law to the Convention on Offences and Certain other Acts committed on board Aircraft, drawn up at Tokyo in September, 1963, and the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft drawn up at The Hague in December, 1970. Some of the provisions in the conventions can be applied administratively while others require legislation. The enactment of this Bill will clear the way for this country to formally adhere to the conventions.
The Tokyo Convention came into force internationally on 4th December, 1969, after the twelfth ratification was made and The Hague Convention came into force on 14th October, 1971, after the tenth ratification was made. The Tokyo Convention is now in operation between 67 states and The Hague Convention between 57 states.
The principal states with which we have regular air services, that is, the US, the UK, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands, have already ratified either or both of the conventions.
The Tokyo Convention was intended to establish international co-operation with a view to ensuring that persons who committed crimes on board aircraft in flight would not escape apprehension merely for lack of jurisdiction; it made it clear that the state of registration of an aircraft had the authority to apply its laws to events occurring on board its aircraft while in flight in any place whatsoever; it provided the aircraft commander with the necessary authority to deal with offenders; it delineated the duties and responsibilities of the contracting state in which the aircraft landed including its authority over and responsibility to any offender. It also dealt with hijacking of aircraft but in this regard it confined itself to requiring a contracting state to restore control of the aircraft to the lawful commander and to permit passengers and crew arriving in its territory to continue their journey. It did not provide for the establishment of hijacking as an international offence and it did not call specifically for punishment of hijackers.
The Hague Convention of 1970 expands and strengthens the Tokyo Convention provisions in regard to hijacking by providing at international level for the definition of the offence of hijacking, the establishment of jurisdiction over it and its punishment by heavy penalties or extradition of the offender, where appropriate. The convention makes hijacking an international offence in that, with some exceptions, it requires states to establish jurisdiction over the offence irrespective of where it is committed, the nationality of the offender or the state of registration of the aircraft.
The purposes of the Bill can be grouped under three main headings. First, it clarifies the legal position in regard to crimes of a general nature committed on board Irish aircraft. Secondly, it empowers the commander of Irish aircraft and of aircraft of any other state party to the Tokyo Convention to restrain, disembark or deliver up to the competent authorities in the state where the aircraft lands, any persons on board who have committed, or are about to commit any general offence on board or who jeopardise the safety of the aircraft or persons on board. Thirdly, it establishes hijacking as an international offence irrespective of the nationality of the aircraft, the nationality of the offender or the place where the offence is committed. These are the main features of the Bill and I will explain each of them in some detail.
In regard to the application of Irish law to Irish aircraft in flight outside the State, the present position is that, except for certain internationally recognised offences such as murder, an offence committed on an Irish aircraft while outside the state is not amenable to the Irish courts in the same way as an offence on an Irish registered ship. This represents a serious gap in jurisdiction particularly in regard to offences committed when an aircraft is flying over international waters not within the jurisdiction of any other state. In such cases there is a danger that an alleged offender may escape apprehension merely for want of jurisdiction. The Tokyo Convention accords international recognition to the exercise of extra-territorial jurisdiction under the circumstances contemplated in the convention. The Bill reflects this by providing that any act or omission which would constitute an offence if committed within the State shall equally constitute an offence if committed on an Irish aircraft in flight outside the state.
As a logical extension of the provisions about jurisdiction, the Bill furnishes the aircraft commander with powers to deal with persons who commit offences on board or who by their actions jeopardise the safety of the flight. In such cases the commander of an Irish aircraft, or of an aircraft of any other State party to the Tokyo Convention, is empowered to take such reasonable measures, including restraint of the person, as he reasonably considers to be necessary to protect the safety of the aircraft or of persons on board, to maintain good order or discipline or to disembark him or to deliver him to the competent authorities of the State of landing. Provision is made to safeguard the rights of individuals and to ensure that they are not kept under restraint any longer than is necessary. The Bill specifies limits beyond which restraint shall not be exercised and imposes on the commander the obligation of reporting to the appropriate authorities on any persons under restraint, disembarked or delivered. It lays down penalties for failure by the commander to observe these.
Section 11 establishes hijacking as an international offence by providing that an offence is committed by anybody regardless of his nationality who on board an aircraft in flight wherever it may be and regardless of its State of registration, unlawfully interferes with the control of the aircraft. Attempted hijacking and other acts of violence connected with hijacking also constitute such an offence. The offender will thus be amenable to Irish courts and subject to prosecution or extradition, as appropriate. In this way hijacking, including attempted hijacking or other acts of violence connected with hijacking, is established as an international offence. These provisions, taken in conjunction with the corresponding provisions in the legislation of other contracting states, are designed to ensure as far as possible that a hijacker will find no place of refuge.
The Hague Convention applies only if the place of take-off or the place of actual landing of the aircraft involved is outside the State of registry. The effect of this is that a hijacking of an aircraft on a domestic flight within its own country is not covered by the convention. A further limitation on the scope of the convention is that it does not apply to aircraft used in military, customs or police services. In the interests of affording the greatest possible protection to all forms of aviation, the Bill goes beyond the Hague provisions by extending the offence of hijacking to all cases of unlawful seizure of an aircraft, including a state aircraft, where:
(a) the act is committed by a citizen of Ireland or a person habitually resident in the State;
(b) the act is committed in or over the State, or
(c) the aircraft is an Irish controlled aircraft.
For example, a hijacking of an Aer Lingus aircraft flying between Dublin and Cork will be covered by the Bill although it is outside the scope of the convention. This will make for consistency in the application of Irish law and provide more effective and all-embracing legislative provisions to deal with hijacking.
The convention requires that the offence of hijacking shall be punishable by severe penalties. The Bill reflects this requirement and the enormous gravity of the offence by providing that an offender, on conviction on indictment, shall be liable for a term of imprisonment up to life imprisonment. It also provides that if a state does not extradite an alleged hijacker it shall without exception whatsoever submit the case for the purpose of prosecution. Contracting states are accordingly afforded the choice between extradition and prosecution and no substantive change in our existing extradition law is called for. Section 15 of the Extradition Act, 1965 provides that extradition shall not be granted where the offence in question is regarded as having been committed in the State.
In the case of offences committed within the territorial area of the State, therefore, we would discharge our obligation under the convention by way of prosecution. However, section 11 of the Bill by creating hijacking an international offence automatically brings it within the jurisdiction, no matter where it is committed and section 2 says that the offences may for all incidental purposes be treated as having been committed in the State. Some might seek to establish that as a consequence hijacking is not an extraditable offence in any circumstances. To safeguard against this it is necessary to provide that section 15 of the Extradition Act shall not apply in such cases.
Section 11 of the Extradition Act provides that extradition shall not be granted for an offence which is a political offence or an offence connected with a political offence, and a hijacker may escape extradition if the offence is in that category. It will be a matter for the courts to determine whether or not the offence is a political offence.
Before concluding, I should perhaps, say a few general words on why we are taking the Tokyo and Hague Conventions together in this Bill. The previous Government had a Bill prepared in 1970 to enable effect to be given to the Tokyo Convention which came into force in 1969. Unfortunately, however, as history has shown, that convention did little to halt the spate of hijacking and it became clear that it would be necessary to expand and strengthen the Tokyo Convention provisions on hijacking. The Hague Convention of 1970 did this by declaring hijacking an international offence. Since then other forms of interference with aviation, not covered by either the Tokyo or Hague Conventions, have been devised and it became necessary to draw up a third convention at Montreal in September, 1971 to cover these unlawful acts—they relate mainly to armed attacks, sabotage and similar acts of violence, other than hijacking, against aviation and its installations and facilities. It is proposed to ratify the Montreal Convention as quickly as possible but I have decided that the introduction of the Bill to enable effect to be given to the Tokyo and Hague Conventions should not be deferred any longer. Consequently, I am having a separate Bill prepared to give effect to the Montreal Convention and I would hope to introduce it in the near future.
It is clear that legislation alone is no panacea for the crime of interference with aviation. Hijacking of aircraft and other attacks against the safety of aircraft continue. The threat is as great as ever. Our efforts as an individual member of the international community to improve the situation involve action on two levels; on the one hand we have developed practical preventive security measures at our airports and on our air services and on the other we are assisting through this Bill in the creation of a structure of international law designed to outlaw the hijacker. However, until all countries are committed to ridding aviation of the scourge of interference, hijackers will not be entirely discouraged. Committed states may, therefore, be forced to think in terms of multilateral measures against defaulting states. A recent international conference on air law held in Rome considered proposals to this end but failed to reach agreement; these efforts are continuing and I will not hesitate to bring in any further legislation necessary to give effect to any further instruments in this field.
The present Bill is not a contentious one. We are seeking to give the force of law to the provisions of two international instruments designed to promote the safety of aviation and which have been signed or adhered to by all the major countries of the world. The airline industry and the airline pilots associations have called for adherence to the conventions. I commend the Bill to you in the assurance that all Deputies of the House will support it and in so doing make Ireland's contribution to a peaceful and safe development of civil aviation throughout the world.
