1 The Federal Aviation Administration uses the following categories: “successful,” where “hijacker controls flight and reaches destination or objective;” “unsuccessful” where “hijacker attempts to take control of flight but fails;” and “incomplete” where “hijacker is apprehended or killed during hijacking or as a result of ‘hot pursuit’.” Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Transportation, Hijacking Statistics, May 1, 1973.

2 When a passenger was asked whether he had checked his luggage and he replied, “I don’t need any bags to highjack the plane,” the carrier was held to to have acted reasonably in refusing to allow him to board the aircraft. Wolfer v. Northeast Airlines, Inc., 12 Av. Rept. 17, 186 (Small Claims Court (Dade Co., Fla.), (1971). A comparable statement resulted in a conviction under 49 U.S.C. §1472(m). Taylor v. United States, 358 F. Supp. 384 (S.D. Fla. 1973).

3 Statistics based upon compilations by Department of Justice, Federal Aviation Administration, International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations, and reports in Boston Herald American, Chicago Tribune, New York Times, Wall Street Journal. Successful and Unsuccessful Worldwide Hijackings

4 Successful and Unsuccessful Hijackings: United States

5 Other states which have had 5 or more hijackings: Argentina 8, Brazil 10, Canada, 5, Cuba 5, Czechoslovakia 6, Ecuador 5, Egypt 7, Ethiopia 5, Greece 5, Japan 5, Mexico 10, Poland 7, Soviet Russia 8, Venezuela 7.

6 Successful and Unsuccessful Hijackings: Other Countries

7 Aden, Albania, Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Cuba, Curacao, Denmark, East Berlin, Egypt, El Salvador, Falkland Islands, Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, Honduras, India, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malawi, Morocco, North Korea, North Vietnam, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, South Vietnam, Spain, Sudan, Syria, Trinidad, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, West Berlin, Yugoslavia, Zaire.

8 Albania refused to allow an Algerian aircraft to land. It went on to Yugoslavia. N.Y. Times, Sept. 1, 1970, 58:3. (All references to N.Y. Times are to the city ed.) Haiti refused landing to a Dominican Republic aircraft which then returned to the Dominican Republic. Chicago Tribune, Jan. 27, 1971. El Salvador refused to allow a Colombian aircraft to land. In a hedge-hopping trip, including five intermediate stops to refuel, the flight finally ended in Buenos Aires. N.Y. Times, June 2, 1973, 12:3. A Japanese aircraft was refused landing by Iraq, Bahrein, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, and Saudi Arabia. N.Y. Times, July 24, 1973, 1:1.

9 There have been several instances of hijacking apparently for the purpose of political kidnapping. The most serious in its international ramifications was the kidnapping in 1967 of the late Moise Tshombé, sometime premier of the Congo Republic (Kinshasa) (now Zaire), from Spain to Algeria. Held in prison in Algeria, pending his surrender to the Congo Republic on extradition charges, Tshombé’ died in prison in 1969. Bull, of the International Commission of Jurists, 28–29, No. 32 (Dec. 1967); N.Y. Times, July 1, 1969, 18:3. The hijackings to Cuba of two aircraft of U.S. registration in 1968 may have involved the kidnapping of Cuban or former Cuban nationals. N.Y. Times, March 13, 1968; 1:7; July 1, 1968, 16:6.

10 N.Y. Times, Sept. 1, 1968, 1:7; Sept. 4, 2:6; Sept. 18, 6:1.

11 Eritrean Liberation Front, N.Y. Times, Sept. 14, 1969, 16:4 (also involved in three other incidents between 1969 and 1972); Jewish Defense League, See United States v. Hershkovitz, 70 CR 741 (E.D.N.Y. 1971) (not published): Japan Red Army, N.Y. Times, March 31, 1970, 1:3; Afro-American Freedom Fighters, Sunday Herald Traveler (Boston), May 3, 1970, 42:6; Kashmiri National Liberation Front, N.Y. Times, Feb. 1, 1971, 6:6; Jordanian Liberation Front, Chicago Tribune, Feb. 20, 1972; Black Revolutionary Army, Herald Traveler (Boston), March 9, 1972, 13:3; Black Panthers, N.Y. Times, June 4, 1972, 1:8; People’s Revolutionary Army, Chicago Tribune, Aug. 16, 1972; Organization of Unity of South Yemen, N.Y. Times, Aug. 23, 1972, 2:4; Ustasha, N.Y. Times, Sept. 16, 1972, 1:7; Armed Liberation Front, Chicago Tribune, Nov. 9, 1972; Thai Black September, N.Y. Times, March 29, 1973, 19:2; Punto Cero, N.Y. Times, May 20, 1973, 14:3; Sons of Occupied Territory, N.Y. Times, July 24, 1973, 1:1. Iranian Communist Party, Sunday Herald Traveler (Boston), Oct. 11, 1970, 4:4; Philippine Maoists, N.Y. Times, March 31, 1971, 16:5.

12 N.Y. Times, July 23, 1970, 1:6; ibid., Oct. 30, 1972, 1:1.

13 Chicago Tribune, Oct. 22, 1970.

14 Cited, supra note 11.

15 Cited, supra note 11.

16 N.Y. Times, May 5, 1972, 2:4; Oct. 24, 1972, 9:1. On Oct. 9, 1970, alleged representatives of the Iranian Communist Party hijacked an Iranian aircraft to Baghdad where they held it for eight hours, demanding the release of 21 political prisoners. When their demands were not met, they surrendered to Iraqi police. Cited supra note 11.

17 N.Y. Times, May 20, 1973, 14:3; May 21, 11:1. The Japanese Deputy Minister of Transport served as a substitute for 99 passengers on a Japanese aircraft hijacked to North Korea in 1970. N.Y. Times, April 4, 1970, 1:4.

18 From time to time, there have been hijackings for the purpose of robbing the passengers and crew or robberies have been incidental to the objective of diverting the aircraft to an unscheduled destination. Philippines, N.Y. Times, Nov. 7, 1968, 3:1 (robbery was apparent motive for hijacking); United States, Herald Traveler (Boston), Nov. 5, 1968, 44:3 ($405 returned by Cuba), N.Y. Times, March 6, 1969, 76:4 ($1,750 returned by Cuba), Chicago Today, Jan. 9, 1972, 7:1 ($333 returned by Cuba). An aircraft of U.S. registration was hijacked to Cuba for the purpose of kidnapping an individual for $290,000 ransom. N.Y. Times, April 9, 1972, 32:3. A Nepalese aircraft was hijacked to India apparently for the theft of $400,000 belonging to the Central Bank of Nepal which was being carried thereon. Herald American (Boston), June 12, 1973, 2:7.

19 The first reported hijacking of a U.S. aircraft for extortion occurred on June 4, 1970, when Arther G. Barkley forced a Trans World Airlines Boeing 727, en route from Phoenix to St. Louis, to fly to Washington, D. C, where he demanded $1,000,000. Authorities delivered $100,750 to him. In the melee incident to his capture, the hijacker shot the pilot and was wounded himself. N.Y. Times, June 5, 1970, 1:4. The three incidents in 1971 were initiated on November 24 when “D. B. Cooper” parachuted out of an aircraft over Oregon with $200,000. He has not been heard from since. The other two occurred on Dec. 24 and Dec 26. N.Y. Times, Nov. 26, 1971, 1:4; Dec. 25, 1:4; Chicago Tribune, Dec. 27, 1971.

20 N.Y. Times, Aug. 19, 1972, 1:6.

21 N.Y. Times, May 6, 1972, 1:1 (hijacker bailed out over Honduras; returned voluntarily; money found in Honduras and returned); June 4, 1972, 1:8 (hijackers received asylum in Algeria, money returned by Algeria); Aug. 1, 1972, 1:4 (hijackers received asylum in Algeria; money returned by Algeria); Nov. 12, 1972, 1:1 (hijackers received asylum in Cuba, money not returned by Cuba).

22 Australia, May 1971; Canada, Nov. 1971; Federal Republic of Germany, Feb. 1972; Indonesia, April 1972; Ecuador, May 1972; Rhodesia, May 1972; Brazil, May 1972; Sweden, Sept. 1972; Italy, Oct. 1972; Japan, Nov. 1972; Mexico, Nov. 1972; Colombia, May 1973.

23 N.Y. Times, Feb. 26, 1972, 1:8.

24 N.Y. Times, Feb. 22, 1970, 1:4 (explosion on Swiss aircraft); ibid., May 31, 1972, 1:8 (Lod Airport). A Soviet aircraft is reported to have crashed with all aboard during an attempted hijacking in May 1973. Chicago Tribune, June 9, 1973.

25 For a discussion of the negotiations during this incident, see, Sundberg, J. W. F., La Guerre contre l’aviation civile internationale. Rev. de Droit Penal et de Criminologie, 52nd year (1971–1972), No. 3–4 (Dec. 1971-Jan. 1972), 419, 422–25 Google Scholar (hereinafter cited R.D.P.C.)

26 Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 17, 1971, 3:1. N.Y. Times, July 21, 1973, 1:1; July 25, 1:3.

27 22 UST 1641; TIAS 7192; 65 AJIL 440 (1971); 10 ILM 133 (1971).

28 75 Stat. 466 (1961); 49 U.S.C. §1472(i).

29 CAB Local and Joint Passenger Rules Tariff No. PR-5, CAB No. 117, at 9 (1968).

30 The nature of the profile is highly confidential. For a general discussion of the subject, See United States v. Lopez, 328 F. Supp. 1077, 1086–87 (E.D.N.Y. 1971).

31 N.Y. Times, Sept. 12, 1970, 11:5; Sept. 22, 1:2. The presence of marshals on board aircraft did not provide an effective deterrent, possibly because of concern for the dangers in a shootout in flight. N.Y. Times, Oct. 26, 1971, 10:3.

32 Eastern Airlines was reported to have installed electronic surveillance on Oct. 15, 1969; it was not apparently in use at Newark Airport on Feb. 10, 1970, when an Eastern aircraft was hijacked to Cuba. N.Y. Times, Feb. 17, 1970, 69:6. On Oct. 9, 1971, a hijacker who fitted the profile forced his way on board an aircraft with weapon in hand. Ibid., Oct. 10, 1971, 73:1. On May 5, 1972, a hijacker, who fitted the profile and was searched before boarding, hijacked an aircraft to Honduras, having concealed a weapon in a book. Metal detecting devices were reported as not operating at the boarding gates at the local airport. Ibid., May 17, 1972, 15:2.

33 N.Y. Times, Aug. 19, 1972, 1:6; Aug. 20, 24:1. He was convicted on a charge of aircraft hijacking and sentenced to 30 years imprisonment. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, Hijacking Statistics, May 1973.

34 White House Press Release, July 7, 1972. See also, 37 Fed. Reg. 5689 (Mar. 18, 1972).

35 N.Y. Times, Dec 6, 1972, 77:1. This screening includes visitors accompanying or meeting passengers; some carriers and airports, however, refuse to allow visitors in the boarding areas.

36 37 Fed. Reg., 25934 (Dec. 16, 1972), 14 C.F.R. §§107.1, 107.4. The deadline was extended by court order to Feb. 16. Wall Street Journal, Feb. 6, 1973. The Airport Operators Council International unsuccessfully sought a preliminary injunction to restrain the enforcement of this order on Feb. 16. Airport Operators Council International v. Shaffer, 354 F.Supp. 79 (D.D.C. 1973). The evolution of these security measures is summarized in a speech of May 18, 1973, by Lt. Gen. Benjamin O. Davis, Jr., Asst. Secretary of Transportation for Environment, Safety, and Consumer Affairs. Department of Transportation News. 28-DOT-73.

37 Four airports which failed to inform the Federal Aviation Administration by Jan. 6, 1973 about their plans for providing armed guards were fined $1000 a day until they supplied the necessary data. N.Y. Times, Jan. 10, 1973, 81:6. Two carriers which allowed a U.S. Senator to board their aircraft without submitting to electronic surveillance or a search of his hand luggage were fined $500 each. Newsweek, May 7, 1973. An airport which allowed two gates to be opened and unguarded and otherwise failed to carry out the security plan which it had filed with the Federal Aviation Administration was fined $1000. Wall Street Journal, June 6, 1973, 32:2.

38 The International Civil Aviation Organization adopted Resolution A17–10 at the Extraordinary Assembly, June 1970, recommending certain security measures of a general nature. 9 ILM 1278, 1281–83 (1970).

39 E.g. N.Y. Times, May 10, 1972, 1:1 (seizure of Belgian aircraft en route from Vienna to Tel Aviv).

40 The State of the Air Transport Industry, 1972, Annual Report by Knut Hammarskjöld, Director General, International Air Transport Association, for the 28th Annual General Meeting, London, Sept. 25–27, 1972, at 8.

41 Annual Report 1972, Air Transport Assoc, of America 24 (1973).

42 P. 4, cited supra note 40.

43 The Administration’s Emergency Anti-Hijacking Regulations, Hearings on S. 39, before the Subcomm. on Aviation of the Senate Comm. on Commerce, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess., ser. 93–1, at 29 (1973) (hereinafter cited as Hearings). The three hijackers who were wanted on various criminal charges seemed uncertain as to their destination, forcing the aircraft, a DC 9, to fly to Jackson, Miss., Detroit, Cleveland, Toronto, Lexington, Ky., Chattanooga, Havana, Orlando, Fla., and back to Havana. The caper lasted for 29 hours in the course of which the hijackers threatened to destroy the Atomic Energy Commission’s installation at Oak Ridge, Tenn., by crashing the aircraft into it. The FBI shot out the tires as the aircraft left Orlando, which action contributed to a hair-raising landing in Havana. N.Y. Times, Nov. 12, 1972, 1:1; Herald Traveler (Boston), Nov. 14, 1972, 1:3.

44 E.g., Lufthansa’s payment of $5,000,000 to the PFLP in South Yemen in February 1972. Cited supra note 23.

45 18 U.S.C. §2312. See, McBoyle v. United States, 1930 Av. Reft. 99; 1931 Av. Rept. 27.

46 66 Stat. 589 (1952); 18 U.S.C. §7(5). See, United States v. Cordova, 89 F.Supp. 298 (E.D.N.Y. 1950).

47 TIAS 7570; 66 AJIL 455 (1972); 10 ILM 1151 (1971).

48 Hearings at 77, cited supra note 43. U.S. H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 92–1599, 92nd Cong., 2nd Sess. (1972).

49 S. 39, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1973).

50 Comparison of hijackings originating in U.S. and abroad:

51 20 UST 2941; TIAS 6768; 58 AJIL 566 (1964).

52 N.Y. Times, June 9, 1972, 2:4.

53 189 UNTS 150; modified by the 1967 Protocol, 19 UST 6223, TIAS 6577.

54 See UN General Assembly, “Measures to Prevent International Terrorism,” A/C.6/418 (Nov. 2, 1972). See also, UN General Assembly, Secretariat, Compilation of Relevant Views Expressed in the Course of the General Debate at the General Assembly, A/C.6/L.867, Nov. 8, 1972/Corr. 1/Corr. 2; Summary of records of the 24 meetings of the Sixth Committee on the terrorism issue, A/C.6/SR.1355–1390 (Nov. 14, 1972-Dec. 15, 1972).

55 Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Cuba, Federal Republic of Germany, France, Israel, Japan, Lesotho, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Rwanda, South Africa, Soviet Union, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and United Kingdom.

56 It has been pointed out with respect to Austria, for example, that the acts listed in Art. 1 of the Hague Convention are comprehended in §98 of the Penal Code and that universal jurisdiction (Art. 4(2) Hague Convention) has always been recognized in Austria. R. Grassberger, Prise de position de l’Autriche, in R.D.P.C, 350, cited supra note 25. For an analysis of selected laws concerning hijacking, See the series of articles comprising a study entitled, “Attentats contre la navigation aéiienne,” in R.D.P.C, See also, the brief accounts of relevant legislation in Enquête de la commission diplomatique, Rev. Générale de l’aih et de l’espace, 34th year (1971), no. 3, at 327–37. (hereinafter cited as R.G.A.E.)

57 75 Stat. 466 (1961); 49 U.S.C. §1472(i).

58 49 U.S.C. §§1472(j)(l). Section 1472(k) lists the following sections of 18 U.S.C: 113 (assault), 114(maiming), 661 (larceny), 662 (receiving stolen property), 1111 (murder), 1112 (manslaughter), 1113 (attempt to commit murder or manslaughter), 2031 (rape), 2032 (carnal knowledge), 2111 (robbery), and D.C. Code, §22–1112. Section 1472(m) incorporates 18 U.S.C. §35 (false information).

59 49 U.S.C. §1301(4) (20).

60 84 Stat. 921 (1970), amending 49 U.S.C. §1472 (i)-(k). For an analysis of these definitional difficulties in the light of the Tokyo Convention, See Mendelsohn, A. I., In-Flight Crime: The International and Domestic Picture Under the Tokyo Convention , 53 Virginia L. Rev. 509 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

61 For an analysis of this legislation, See Lissitzyn, O. J., In-Flight Crime and United States Legislation , 67 AJIL 306 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The Tokyo Convention does not comprehend military aircraft.

62 S. 2280, 92nd Cong., 2nd Sess. (1972).

63 For a discussion of universal jurisdiction in relation to piracy jure gentium and to aircraft hijacking, See Dinstein, Y., Criminal Jurisdiction over Aircraft Hijacking , 7 Israel L. Rev. 195 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 Cited supra note 27.

65 408 U.S. 238 (1972). The effect of Furman on the hijacking law was noted in United States v. Bohle, 346 F. Supp. 577 (N.D., N.Y. 1972, aff’d. 475 F. 2d 872 (2d Cir. 1973)).

66 The original bill introduced on Jan. 3, 1973 included the death penalty as stated in the 1961 law for which the present language was substituted. For a discussion of the death penalty in this connection, See Hearings, 99 ff, cited supra note 43.

67 86 Stat. 1072 (1972); 18 U.S.C. §1201.

68 Art. 2(4), ICAO, Information Note Submitted by Israel.

69 Ibid., Art. 3.

70 Sec. 6( 1.1), 21 Eliz. II, 1972, c. 13.

71 Australia: §§13, 15, Act No. 64 of 1963, Crimes (Aircraft). A bill to reduce the maximum penalty to life imprisonment was introduced into parliament in October 1972. Bull, of Legal Developments, No. 22/1972 (Nov. 18,1972). Japan: Art. 2, 1970 Hijacking Law, in S. Dando, La repression de la capture illicite d’aeronefs au Japon, in R.D.P.C. 397, cited supra note 25; Soviet Union: N.Y. Times, Jan. 4, 1973, 74:1.

72 France: Loi No. 70–634, July 15, 1970, Journal Off. 6657, (July 17, 1970); Federal Republic of Germany. Bundesgesetzblatt I, No. 128, Dec. 18, 1971, at 1977; Israel: cited supra note 68.

73 E.g., Federal Republic of Germany provides for a minimum sentence of 10 years if the victim of a kidnapping or extortion is inadvertently killed. Bundesgesetzblatt I, No. 128, Dec. 18, 1971, at 1979; South Africa: Law No. 74, 1962, Aviation Act (6–10 years), R.G.A.E., 327, cited supra note 56; Argentina: Ley 17567, Jan. 4, 1968, amending Art. 193(3), Penal Code (3 to 15 years); Mexico: Decree, Dec. 19, 1968, amending Art. 170, Penal Code. Diario Oficial, Dec. 24, 1968 (5–20 years), 9 ILM 185 (1970); Brazil: Decree-Law, Oct. 22, 1969 (8–20 years), 9 ILM 180 (1970); Austria: §87, Penal Code, where risking the lives of passengers and crew results in an “accident,” the penalty ranges from 10 to 20 years, R.D.P.C, 350, cited supra note 25.

74 Four returned voluntarily. Fifteen were deported (Canada 11, Cuba 3, Bahamas 1). Five hijackers were killed by FBI or by police; two committed suicide.

75 Based upon Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Transportation Security, Legal Status of Hijackers—Summarization (1 May 1973).

76 Hearings, 112, cited supra note 43.

77 Extradition of hijackers has been denied by Yugoslavia to Algeria, Denmark to Poland (2), Federal Republic of Germany to Czechoslovakia, Cuba to Mexico (2), and North Korea to Japan. In the case of P. and A. Brazinskas who hijacked a Soviet aircraft on Oct. 15, 1970 from the Soviet Union to Turkey, killing one crew member and wounding another in the course of the flight, a superior court ordered the release of the hijackers on the political offense defense. The Supreme Court of Turkey reversed this decision on March 9, 1971, on the ground that hijacking was a criminal act, hence that extradition could be granted. The final decision as to surrender of the accused was at the discretion of the government. N.Y. Times, Oct. 15, 1970, 1:5; Nov. 22, 24:1; March 9, 1971, 15:3. Where an Algerian aircraft was hijacked to Yugoslavia, after being refused landing in Albania on Aug. 31, 1970, the court of first instance at Dubrovnik concluded that extradition would be in order. The Supreme Court reversed apparently on defendants’ argument that the hijacking was a continuous act, part of which took place in Yugoslavia, hence that the Yugoslav court had jurisdiction to try the offenders. The trial court gave them suspended sentences. T. Vasiljevic, Mesures à l’égard de la piraterie ahienne en Yougoslavie (6tat actuel), in R.D.P.C, 463–66, cited supra note 25. Apparently, the hijackers returned to Algeria where they were prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to 6 to 12 years imprisonment.

78 Number of hijackers convicted (international and domestic hijackings only): Algeria 3, Argentina 3, Austria 3, Brazil 4, Bulgaria 8, Canada 2, Denmark 1, Egypt 3, Federal Republic of Germany 13, France 5, German Democratic Republic 1, Greece 1, Israel 2, Italy 1, Lebanon 1, Mexico 1, Philippines 1, Poland 3, Spain 1, Sweden 1, Switzerland 3, Turkey 2, USSR 6, Uruguay 1, Yugoslavia 3.

79 Following the first successful international hijacking of a Canadian aircraft, the hijacker, who forced the aircraft to return to Canada after a foray into the United States, was convicted and sentenced in April 1972 to life imprisonment on four charges involving hijacking, 14 years on extortion, and 10 years on illegal possession of firearms and explosives. It was noted in the local press that he would be eligible for parole in 1979. Calgary (Alberta) Herald, April 12, 1972, 1:5, April 13, 4:1.

80 Albomoz, Re Jurado, 143 Revista Argentina La Ley 3 (Sept. 8, 1971)Google Scholar; Jackson, Re and Archila, Sanchez, Fed. Court, La Plata, Dec. 15, 1971 Google Scholar (unpub. decision).

81 E.g., An Austrian court sentenced two Polish hijackers, R. Zelotucho and W. Szymanldewicz, to two years and two years and three months, respectively, in March 1970 after they pleaded guilty to charges of blackmail, inhibiting personal freedom, and illegal possession of firearms. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, March 12, 1970, at 9. In the first case arising under the new hijacking law in the Federal Republic of Germany, two hijackers, Czech, Lerch, A. and Dolezel, K., were sentenced to seven years on July 31, 1972 Google Scholar. Die Welt, Aug. 1, 1972, at 1. Christian Belon who hijacked a United States aircraft to Lebanon in January 1970, was sentenced to nine months imprisonment by Lebanon on Oct. 30, 1970. Upon his return to France, he was prosecuted in the same factual situation on a charge of illegal possession of firearms. He was sentenced to eight months on Feb. 1, 1971. See, note by M. de Juglart and E. du Pontavice, La Sematne Juridique, 46th year, no. 7, item 16994 (Feb. 16, 1972). Minichiello, Rafael who hijacked a Trans World Airlines aircraft from Los Angeles to Rome on Oct. 31, 1969 Google Scholar, and who was characterized at his trial as a “romantic pirate,” was sentenced Nov. 11, 1970 to seven and one half years on charges of kidnapping, violence to a public official, and illegal possession of firearms, and fined $580. The Court of Appeals of Rome reduced the sentence to three and one half years which combined with his 18 months in jail before and during trial and a two-year general amnesty decree enabled him to be released on May 1, 1971. See, M. Pisani, heddroutement d’avions et la lot italienne, R.D.P.C., 391, cited supra note 25.

82 N.Y. Times, Oct. 30, 1972, 1:2.

83 Ibid., Nov. 12, 1972,1:1.

84 United States v. Healy and Oeth, 376 U.S. 75 (1964). The first hijacking case to reach the Supreme Court was Bearden v. United States, 372 U.S. 252 (1963).

85 39 C.M.R. 853 (1968).

86 United States v. Clark, 41 C.M.R. 82 (1969).

87 United States v. Pliskow, 354 F.Supp. 369 (E.D.Mich. 1973). In a prosecution on a charge of attempting to board an aircraft with a concealed weapon, a federal district court held that “an attempt to board” occurs when the passenger surrenders his ticket at the airline service agent’s desk and enters the departure lounge. United States v. Brown, 305 F. Supp. 415 (W.D.Tex. 1969).

88 United States v. Bohle, cited supra note 65.

89 Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Air Transportation Security—Current Legal Status of Suspected or Convicted Hijackers (May 1, 1973).

90 P. 1101, cited supra note 30. The evidence acquired in the search following the singling out of the defendant by the altered profile was ordered suppressed and the indictment dismissed. In United States v. Bell, the court upheld the constitutionality of an in camera proceeding on the application of the profile to defendant from which defendant and the public, but not defendant’s counsel, were excluded. 464 F.2d 667 (2d Cir. 1972), cert, denied 93 S. Ct. 335 (1972).

91 United States v. Epperson, 454 F.2d 769, 771 (1972), cert, denied 406 U.S. 947 (1972).

92 Matter of Samuels, 167 N.Y.L.J., no. 67, 17:6 (April 6, 1972) (S.Ct.N.Y. Grim. Term); Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).

93 P. 1099, cited supra note 30. See also, statement by Asst. Atty. Gen. (Cramton) to Chairman, Subcomm. on Aviation of Sen. Commerce Comm. (Cannon), Jan. 29, 1973, Hearings, 110–12, cited supra note 43. See also, United States v. Slocum, 464 F.2d 1180 (3d Cir. 1972).

94 United States v. Mitchell, 352 F.Supp. 38 (E.D.N.Y. 1972).

95 351 F. Supp. 1245 (1972).

96 People v. Boyles, 341 N.Y.S.2d 967, 969 (S.Ct.Sp. Narcotics, Queens Co., N.Y., 1973). In the first quarter of 1973, searches revealed 504 firearms and 2430 knives and resulted in 573 arrests on various charges. Christian Science Monitor, June 8, 1973, 1:2.

97 49 Stat. 3000, 37 LNTS 11. For text of Montreal (IATA) Agreement, See Kreindleb, , Aviation Accident Law, §12A.03 ff. (1972)Google Scholar.

98 330 N.Y.S.2d 829 (S.Ct., N.Y., Sp.Term, King’s Co., Pt. I, 1972); 66 AJIL 870 (1972).

99 219 N.Y.S. 2d 34 ( a . App. N.Y. 1961).

100 Herman v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 337 N.Y.S.2d 827 (App. Div. N.Y. 1972); 67 AJIL 550 (1973). The Appellate Division took the same position in Rosman v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 338 N.Y.S.2d 664.

101 351 F.Supp. 702, 707 (1972); 67 AJIL 549 (1973).

102 See, Lisi v. Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane, 370 F.2d 508 (2d Cir. 1966); aff’d by equally divided court 390 U.S. 455, reh. den. 319 U.S. 929 (1968) (notification of liability must be in readable type); 61 AJIL 812 (1967).

103 Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. The Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. et al., 71 Civ. 1118 (MEF) (S.D.N.Y.) The aircraft which was en route from Brussels to New York was hijacked to Beirut and then to Cairo because it was too large to land at Dawson’s Field, Jordan, where two of the other three aircraft hijacked that day were taken. It may be noted that a jury in a New York court held that Pan American was liable for the physical injuries sustained by two passengers in the course of evacuating this aircraft which was blown up within eight minutes of landing. Plaintiffs were awarded $70,000 damages. N.Y. Times, May 1, 1972, 51:1.

104 Memorandum of Defendants Aetna et al. on Pan American’s Motion for Summary Judgment against Lloyds, Sept. 26, 1972, at 4.

105 Ibid., 6.

106 Ibid., 8.

107 Post Trial Brief of Plaintiff, Pan American World Airways, Inc., April 30, 1973, at 86 ff.

108 Ibid., 95–99.

109 Ibid., 517. In the alternative, plaintiff argued that it was covered by the all-risk policies if the conditions described in the exclusionary clauses were not the cause of the loss or by the commercial war-risk policy and the government if the loss were due to perils other than strikes, riots, and civil commotion.

110 Memorandum of Defendants, 12 ff., 26 ff., cited supra note 104.

111 Sunny South Aircraft Service, Inc. v. American Fire and Casualty Co., 140 So.2d 78 (Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist., 1962).

112 American Fire and Casualty Co. v. Sunny South Aircraft Service, Inc., 151 So.2d 276 (1963).

113 Wall Street Journal, June 6, 1973, 32:1: Christian Science Monitor, June 8, 1973, 1:1. The report received unfavorable editorial response in such papers as the N.Y. Times, June 10, 1973, §4, 14:2; Wall Street Journal, June 8, 1973; Herald Advertiser (Boston), June 13, 1973, 46:1; Chicago Tribune, June 9, 1973.

114 Air Transport Association, Press Release No. 49, June 19, 1973. The F.A.A. has affirmed this statement. N.Y. Times, Aug. 11, 1973, 38:1.

115 In a full page advertisement in the N.Y. Times, Trans World Airlines announced a new x-ray device which could inspect luggage as rapidly as the magnetometer inspected the passenger. June 28, 1973, at 15.

116 ICAO figures as to current ratifications and accessions to the conventions from Department of State Treaty Division (as of August 31, 1973).

117 ICAO Special Subcommittee Meets at Washington, 67 Dept. State Bull. 357 (1972).

118 61 Stat. 1180, 15 UNTS 295; 59 Stat. 1693; 84 UNTS 389.

119 67 Dept. State Bull. 357, 361–64 (1972). ICAO. Report, Special Subcommittee on the Council Resolution of 19 June 1972, LC/SC CR (1972)-Report 15/9/72.

120 ICAO, Secretariat Note, LC/Working Draft No. 833. Rev., 22/1/73, at 3.

121 ICAO, Proposal by the Delegations of Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, LC/Working Draft No. 831. Rev. 24/1/73, at 3.

122 Ibid.

123 ICAO, Draft Protocol to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft Signed at The Hague on 16 December 1970, LC/Working Draft No. 826, 9/1/73.

124 See, for example, Art. 129, Constitution of USSR (1936). See also, Art. 83, Criminal Code of the RSFSR, in Berman, H. J., Soviet Criminal Law and Procedure, 184 (1966)Google Scholar.

125 United Kingdom-Swiss Proposal, LC/Working Draft No. 829; French Proposal, LC/Working Draft No. 821, 17/1/73.

126 ICAO, Proposal by the Austrian Delegation, LC/Working Draft No. 839, 27/1/73. The two meetings were scheduled to be held in Rome from Aug. 28 through Sept. 21, 1973, 28 ICAO Bull. 13 (April 1973).

127 “Memorandum of Understanding on the Hijacking of Aircraft and Vessels,” Dept. State Press Release No. 35, at 2 (Feb. 15, 1973); TIAS 7579; 67 AJIL 619 (1973); 12 ILM 370 (1973). This is an interesting example of an international agreement between two states which do not have diplomatic relations. The agreement reflects the Cuban hijacking law, Ley No. 1226, Sept. 16, 1969, 8 ILM 1175 (1969). The Soviet Union is reported to have a bilateral agreement with Afghanistan providing for mandatory extradition of hijackers. ICAO, Report, Special Subcommittee on the Council Resolution of 19 June 1972, at 33, LC/SC CR(1972) Report, 15/9/72.

128 S. 39, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1973) at 4–5.

129 Ibid., 5–7. This provision and the provision regarding hijack havens were also included in S. 2280, 92nd Cong., 2nd Sess. (1972) which failed to receive approval of a Conference Committee in 1972. See, Report of Senate Comm. on Commerce on S. 2280, S. Rep. No. 92–1012, 92nd Cong., 2nd Sess. (1972).

130 IFALPA, Press Release 2/5/2 CCJ/NMM, June 8, 1972.

131 IFALPA, Press Release, Joint Statement by IFALPA and ITF, June 19, 1972.

132 N.Y. Times June 20, 1972, 20:2; June 21, 20:4.

133 ibid., June 19, 1972, 1:8. On appeal, the order was upheld by the Supreme Court.