1 WORKING GROUP "CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN THE EU" Section A

WORKING GROUP "CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN THE EU"
Section A - Terrorism
Draft questionnaire to be administered to Member States in the initial stage of the activity in order
to gather information on their substantive and procedural framework.
A. The Phenomenon of Terrorism
BULGARIA
no answer
CZECH REPUBLIC
no answer
DENMARK
The Danish Criminal Act constitutes an act of terrorism if somebody is terrifying inhabitants
deliberately in a severe manner. An act of terrorism is therefore constituted if somebody
forces Danish or foreign public authorities or an international organization to act, abstain
from acting or if somebody is destabilising or devastating the fundamental political,
constitutional, economical or social structure of a country or an international organization.
It is a condition that the action can induce severe damages to a country or an organization
caused by the nature of the specific action. (The Danish Criminal Act, article 114).
ENGLAND & WALES
Terrorist activities are controlled, in the main, by the Terrorism Acts 2000 and 2006. The
purpose of the Terrorism Act 2006, inter alia, was to create offences to penalise conduct
which was considered to fall outside existing statutory provisions and the common law.
By virtue of section 1 Terrorism Act 2000, terrorism means the use or threat of action
where the use or threat is designed to influence the government or an international
governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public and the use
or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause.
(However, if firearms or explosives are involved, it does not matter if the use or threat is
designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to
intimidate the public or a section of the public.)
Action includes serious violence against a person or serious damage to property or if it
endangers a person’s life or if is creates a serous risk to the health or safety of the public
or is designed to interfere with or disrupt an electronic system.
1
Action includes action outside the UK and any reference to a person or property is not
dependent on where they are situated.
FRANCE
no answer
HUNGARY
no answer
ITALY
A. Definition of Terrorism - In this connection, it should be distinguished first of all between
domestic and international terrorism. As for domestic terrorism, whilst additional
information can be found sub A1. in respect of the individual crimes set out in domestic
legislation concerning terrorism, it should be pointed out that the wording "act of terrorism"
refers to a fighting method featuring the spreading of fear and anxiety among the
population via the use of unrestrained violence; this is actually the view held by the largest
part of Italy's criminal jurisprudence. This is different from the concept of "subversion",
which refers to the disruption of the State's democratic, pluralistic framework. Given the
above considerations, an act of terrorism need not be aimed at subversion - e.g. in the
case of a crime committed to achieve economic objectives and/or impact on foreign policy
decisions without jeopardising the State's structure. Under Italy's case law, the concept of
"act of terrorism" can be clarified further by having regard to the semantics of the relevant
wording as based on the shared cultural heritage; additionally, the wording "act of
terrorism" includes any activity featuring the commission of acts such as to spread fear
among the population (decision by the Court of Cassation dated 23 November 1995,
203769). - As for the concept of international terrorism, partly in the light of the
amendments made to Italy's legislation by decree no. 374 dated 18 October 2001, setting
out urgent measures to fight international terrorism, as subsequently converted into Act no.
438/2001, the search for a general definition of an act of international terrorism entails the
reference to supra-national instruments. The latter include, in particular, the New York
Convention of 1999, as adopted by the UN General Assembly to suppress the financing of
terrorism and enforced in Italy by Act no. 7 dated 23 January 2003, as well as the
Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of the EU on the use of firearms and explosives to
seriously intimidate the population. In both instruments the typical feature of acts of
terrorism is said to be the "depersonalisation of the victim" on account of the anonymous
condition usually applying to the victims of such violent actions - whose actual objective
consists in disseminating fear among the population and compelling a government and/or
an international organisation to do or abstain from doing a given act. - In order to bring
domestic law into line with the said framework decision 2002/475/JHA, Act no. 155 dated
31 July 2005 was passed by Italy's Parliament - whereby section 270-sexies was added to
2
the Italian criminal code to define the concept of "Conduct for purposes of terrorism". Any
type of conduct that, either because of its nature or on account of the respective context,
can seriously harm a country and is aimed at intimidating the population is conduct for
purposes of terrorism. This also applies to any type of conduct that is referred to as
conduct for the purpose of terrorism in whatsoever conventions and/or international law
instruments that are binding on Italy. It should be emphasized that his new definition
equates "subversion" and "terrorism" purposes; on the other hand, it sets out clear-cut
boundaries since it does not include acts of terrorism performed in the context of armed
conflicts. The provisions in question expressly refer to international conventions and/or
other international law instruments that are binding on Italy; thus, it can be argued that the
definition of act of international terrorism is an open one, i.e. "its scope can be expanded
or reduced in the light not only of such international conventions as have already been
ratified, but also of future conventions Italy may decide to accede to." (Decision no. 1072
by the Court of Cassation, 1st Division, dated 17 January 2007) - In this decision, Italy's
Court of Cassation ruled - as for the concept of international terrorism - that the given
conduct is for purposes of terrorism also where it is performed in the context of armed
conflicts and is aimed not only at civilians, but also at individuals who are not directly
involved in the conflict; additionally, only the attacks on fighting forces can be considered
to fall outside the scope of the concept of "terrorism". Furthermore, the Court of Cassation
clarified that the category of acts of terrorism also includes attacks on army personnel that
are discharging tasks that are totally unrelated to war operations - e.g. humanitarian
operations; based on the rationale of the international instruments mentioned above, the
Court argued additionally that an act of terrorism is also any attack on a military target
where the specific factual circumstances are such as to point to the inevitably serious
consequences such attack is bound to produce on civilians' life and bodily integrity - e.g. in
the case of the bombing of a military vehicle that is patrolling a crowded marketplace.
LITHUANIA
no answer
MALTA
no answer
NETHERLANDS
The Netherlands have implemented the Framework Decision of the European Council of
13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (2002/475/JHA). For the purpose of this
questionnaire, referral will be made to the relevant Articles in the Framework Decision.
According to article 2 of the Framework Decision (Offences relating to a terrorist group)
‘terrorist group’ means: a structured group of more than two persons, established over a
period of time and acting in concert to commit terrorist offences. ‘Structured group’ means
a group that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence and that
3
does not need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership
or a developed structure.
Article 1 of the Framework Decision (Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and
principles)
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional
acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which,
given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international
organisation where committed with the aim of:
- seriously intimidating a population, or
- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from
performing any act, or
- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or
social structures of a country or an international organisation, shall be deemed to be
terrorist offences:
(a) attacks upon a person’s life which may cause death;
(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an
infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the
continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result
in major economic loss;
(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives
or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development
of, biological and chemical weapons;
(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods
or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;
(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental
natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;
(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).
POLAND
Definition:
No definition of a terrorist act has been included in the Polish legislation as yet.
The legislators, however, on 1 May 2004 did include in the Penal Code of 6 June 1997
(JoL 1997 no. 88 item 553 as amended) a definition of a terrorist crime (Article 115 § 20).
A terrorist crime is – according to the definition – a criminal act punishable by
imprisonment with an upper limit of sentence of at least 5 years, committed in order to:
a) threaten and intimidate a sizeable portion of the population,
b) force government bodies of Poland or another country or an international
organization to take or abstain from taking certain measures,
c) cause a major disruption to the political system or economy of Poland, another
country or an international organization – including a threat to commit such acts.
Under this loose definition every criminal act which fulfills the criteria laid down in Article
155 § 20 of the Penal Code may be considered a terrorist crime, which includes:
- attack on air or sea transport safety, (Article 166-167 of the Penal Code),
- attack on public safety (including bombings - Article 163 § 1 and § 3 and Article 148 § 2
point 4 and § 3 of the Penal Code),
- hostage taking (Article 252 of the Penal Code),
4
- murder involved in hostage taking (Article 148 § 2 point 2 of the Penal Code).
In addition, as of 1 May 2004 Article 258 of the Penal Code came to include a provision on
involvement with armed militant groups acting to commit terrorist crimes.
PORTUGAL
A terrorist act can be defined, shortly, as an act that intends to pervert or that excludes the
organisation or the authority of the State, by offending or imperilling values of the person
or the community
ROMANIA
According to the provisions of Law No.535/2004 to Prevent and Suppress Terrorism,
terrorism is the sum of actions and threats representing a public danger and affecting
national security, which are committed with premeditation by terrorist entities, driven by
extremist ideas and attitudes, and hostile to other entities, against which they act by
violent, destructive means, are intended to achieve specific objectives of political nature,
are aimed at human, substantive factors and produce situations that have a powerful
impact upon the population, which is meant to draw attention to the goals pursued.
SCOTLAND
General background
The provisions of the criminal law that relate to terrorist offences are contained in
legislation made by the Westminster government which applies to all the jurisdictions
within the UK. Therefore, you are referred to the response of the Judicial Council for
England and Wales to supplement the responses to this part of the questionnaire.
5
a1. Is the commission of acts of terrorism established as a criminal offence in your domestic
law? If so, please provide information on the legal definition of the offence(s) and the relevant
punishment(s).
BULGARIA
Acts of terrorism are established as a criminal offense in Bulgarian criminal law. The text of
the Penal code is the following:
Art. 108a. (New, SG 92/02) (1) Who, for the purpose of causing commotion and fear to the
population, or threat or compel a body of the authority, a representative of the public or a
representative of a foreign country or of an international organisation, to do or omit
something in the sphere of his functions, commits a crime according to Art. 115, 128, Art.
142, para 1, Art. 216, para 1, Art. 326, Art. 330, para 1, Art. 333, Art. 334, para 1, Art. 337,
para 1, Art. 339, para 1, Art. 340, para 1 and 2, Art. 341a, para 1 - 3, Art. 341b, para 1, Art.
344, Art. 347, para 1, Art. 348, Art. 349, para 1 and 3, Art. 350, para 1, Art. 352, para 1,
Art. 354, para 1, Art. 356f, para 1, Art. 356h shall be punished for terrorism by
imprisonment from five to fifteen years, and when death has been caused - by
imprisonment from fifteen to thirty years, life imprisonment or life imprisonment without an
option.
(2) Who, in any way whatsoever, directly or indirectly, gathers or provides resources for
the act under para 1, knowing or expecting that they will be used for such a purpose, shall
be punished by imprisonment of three to fifteen years and a fine of up to thirty thousand
levs.
(3) The subject of the crime under para 2 shall be seized in favour of the state or if it is
missing or expropriated its equivalence shall be awarded.
As seen from the above definition the crime of terrorism involves the perpetration of one or
more other crimes to which a specific purpose is added. The constituent criminal acts
referred to above can be the following:
Art. 115 – homicide
Art. 128 – serious bodily harm
Art. 142, para 1 - kidnapping
Art. 216, para 1 – destruction and damaging
Art. 326 – transmitting by a radio, telephone or in any other way false calls or misleading
signs for help, accident or alarm
Art. 330, para 1 – arson
Art. 333 – damaging or destruction of objects by explosion
Art. 334, para 1 - causing flooding, thus exposing to danger the life or the property of
another
Art. 337, para 1 - manufacturing, processing, reparing, working out, storing, trading,
carrying, importing or exporting explosives, firearms, chemical, biological, or nuclear
weapons or munitions without having the right according to a law or a permit by the
respective body of authority or not carrying it out according to the given permit
Art. 339, para 1 – acquiring, in any way whatsoever, keeping or submitting to another
explosives, firearms, chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or munitions without having
due permit
Art. 340, para 1 and 2- damaging a railway rolling stock or a railway, an aircraft, an
automobile, an electric transport vehicle (trolley bus, tram and the like, designated for
public transportation) or installations or their appliances, a tunnel, a bridge or support wall
6
along the roads, or damages or allows damaging, stranding or sinking of a ship, thus
creating danger for the life of another or for substantial damaging of another's property,
Art. 341a, para 1 - 3- placing in an aircraft a device or a substance which can destroy it or
cause it a damage rendering it unfit for flying or creating danger for its flight safety
Art. 341b, para 1– illegal capture of an aircraft on the ground or during flight or
establishment of control over such an aircraft
Art. 344 - removing or moving a sign or a signal used for providing the traffic safety of the
railway and water transport, as well as of the electric transport, placing such a false sign or
giving a false signal, thus exposing to danger the life or the property of somebody
Art. 347, para 1 - damaging a telegraph, telephone or teletype installation or line, television
or radio installation or electrification installation, thus disconnecting or frustrating the
communications
Art. 348 – a) building, keeping or using a radio device which broadcasts in the ether
without a written permit; b) using a radio device which broadcasts in the ether without prior
registration with full positioning data or using it for purposes not allowed by the permit; c)
changing wilfully without prior written permit the registered data of the radio device which
broadcasts in the ether; d) obstructing or interfering with the activity of a radio
communication, radio broadcasting, television or radio repeater station or radio relaying
centre
Art. 349, para 1 and 3 - deliberately placing or admitting an object dangerous for the life or
the health in a well, spring, water pipe or in other appliance designated for general use,
where or by which drinking water is drawn
Art. 350, para 1 - preparing foodstuff or beverages for general use in such a way that they
create or contain substances dangerous for the health, as well as selling, offering for sale
or in any other way circulating such foodstuff or beverages
Art. 352, para 1 - polluting or admitting pollution of water streams, basins, underground
waters or the territorial and internal sea waters, the soil and the air, thus rendering them
dangerous for the people, the animals and the plants or unfit for using for cultural and
household, health, agricultural and other economic needs
Art. 354, para 1 - acquiring, keeping, alienating or submitting to another strongly active or
poisonous substance, not being a narcotic substance, placed under a permit regime,
without due permit
Art. 356f, para 1 - damaging a nuclear material, a nuclear installation or another source of
ionising radiation, thus causing a substantial property damage or damage to the
environment or creating a danger for the life and the health of another
Art. 356h – violating the rules for the nuclear or radiation safety knowing that a bodily injury
or death can occur for another
Pursuant to Article 109, para 1 of the Penal code the one who forms or leads an organized
criminal group having the goal of committing terrorist acts shall be punished by
imprisonment of up to twenty years.
Pursuant to Article 109, para 2 the one who is a member of such a group shall be
punished by imprisonment of up to ten years.
Pursuant to Article 109, para 3 A participant in the group who voluntarily surrenders to the
bodies of the authority, discloses everything known to him about the group, thus facilitating
substantially the discovery and the proving of crime committed by it shall be punished
under Art. 55 which provides for the determination of the punishment under the lowest limit
or its replacement with a less stringent punishment for exceptional or multiple extenuating
circumstances, when even the most lenient punishment stipulated by the law proves to be
disproportionately heavy.
7
Pursuant to Article 109, para 4 a participant in the group who voluntarily delivers himself
up and discloses the organisation or group before another crime is committed by it or by
him shall not be punished.
Article 110 envisages the punishment of imprisonment of up to six years for the
preparation of a terrorist act.
CZECH REPUBLIC
A1. The commission of act of terrorism is established as the criminal offence of terrorist
attack under sec.95 Act No. 141/1961 Coll., Criminal code of the Czech Republic:
(1) Whoever, acting with intent to damage constitutional order or the defense capability of
the Republic, to invade or destroy the fundamental political, economic or social structure of
the Republic or international organization, to seriously intimidate a population of the
Republic or unlawfully compel the Government or other governmental authority or
international organization to perform, omit or undergo:
(a) performs attack threatening person’s life or health with the aim to cause death or
aggravated bodily harm;
(b) takes a hostage or performs a kidnap;
(c) destroys or damages to a greater extent a public facility, a transport system or to
an infrastructure facility or telecommunication system, including an information
system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, energy, water-supply,
medical and any other important facility, a public place or private property with the
aim to endanger human lives, safety of abovementioned facility or system or public
place or to expose a property to extensive damage;
(d) interferes or suspends water-, energy-supply or supply of any other fundamental
natural source with the aim to endanger human lives or to expose a property to
extensive damage;
(e) seizures of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport; or
exercises a power upon its; or destroys or causes extensive damage to navigation
system or interferes to its service or communicates false important information and
thereby threatens the life or health of human beings, security of such means of
public transport or exposes a property to extensive damage.
(f) unlawfully manufactures or otherwise acquires, possess, imports, exports,
transports or supplies otherwise or uses of explosive, nuclear-, biological-,
chemical- or another mass effective weapon, or carries out unlawful research and
development of nuclear-, biological-, chemical- or another weapon or militant device
or explosive prohibited by law or an international treaty, or
(g) exposes people to the danger of death or aggravated bodily harm, or exposes
another person’s property to the danger extensive damage by causing a fire or
flood, or by causing damage by the use of explosives, gas, electricity or other
8
similarly dangerous substances or power, or commits some other similarly
dangerous act (common danger), or increases the common danger or impedes any
act averting or moderating such danger,
shall be punished by imprisonment for five to fifteen years, eventually, in addition to such
punishment, also by confiscation of property.
(2)
The same punishment shall apply to a person who
(a)
threatens with conduct mentioned in sub-provision 1, or
(b)
supports such conduct financially, materially or in an another way.
(3)
An offender shall be punished by imprisonment for ten to fifteen years, eventually, in
addition to such punishment, also by confiscation of property, or by extraordinary
sentence1,
(a)
if he commits the act stipulated in sub-provision (1) as a member of an organized
group,
(b)
if he, by such act, causes aggravated bodily harm or death,
(c)
if he, by such act, causes the fact that larger number of people remains without
shelter,
(d)
if he, by such act, causes large difficulties in production of goods of essential need
or in supplies of such goods,
(e)
if he, by such act, causes interruption of traffic,
(f)
if he, by such act, causes extensive damage
(g)
if he, by such act, acquires for himself or for another person extensive benefit,
(h)
if he, by such act, severely threatens international status of the Czech Republic or
the international organization, whose member the Czech Republic is, or
(i)
commits such act during a state of peril or during a state of war.
(4)
Protection according to sub-provisions (1) to (3) shall be allowed also for any
foreign state.
Comments:
1
Deprivation of liberty for 15 to 25 years of imprisonment.
9
This criminal offence fully implemented the Art. 1 and 2 of the Council Framework Decision
475/2002/JHA on combating terrorism and has also been influenced by the 1979
International Convention against the Taking of Hostages (UN Convention).
Such definition as in Sec. 95 is has been preserved in the Czech Criminal Code Bill which
shall enter in force in 2009. In addition, some details have been added, namely:
• In sec. 279 para 3 (similar to sec. 95 para 2) the sentence of imprisonment raised:
from the range 10 to 12 to the range from 12 to 15 years of imprisonment.
• Sec. 279 para 2: the support may be newly directed to a terrorist or to a terrorist
organization, not only to conduct referred in para (1).
DENMARK
Actions of terrorism are established as a criminal offence in Danish domestic law and the
legal definition is mentioned above. A violation of the Danish Criminal Act article 114 can
entail life imprisonment.
Additionally the Danish Criminal Act constitutes a prohibition on other situations related to
terrorism:
- it is prohibited to recruit, groom, instruct or educate other individuals to commit terrorist
actions.
- furthermore, the Danish Criminal Act constitutes a prohibition on persons participating in
corps, groups or unions of terrorism.
- the Danish Criminal Act also constitutes a prohibition on persons who significantly
contribute to corps, groups or unions of terrorism - for instance financial support.
Finally the Danish Criminal Act constitutes a prohibition on persons contravening the Act
on Weapons of Mass-destruction.
The above mentioned prohibitions can entail imprisonment up to 10 years.
An action of terrorism can also be punished as a violation on the common prohibitions on
manslaughter, severe violence, false imprisonment, disruption of traffic safety, hijacking,
fire-raising etc. in the Danish Criminal Act.
ENGLAND & WALES
The following are the main terrorist-specific offences:
Membership of proscribed organisations: a person commits an offence if he belongs
to or professes to belong to a proscribed organisation (Terrorism Act, 2000, s. 11).
The maximum sentence is 10 years imprisonment.
Support for proscribed organisations: a person commits and offence if he invites
support for a proscribed organisation and the activity is not covered by the fundraising offence created by
s. 15 (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 12). A person commits an offence if he arranges,
manages or assists in arranging or managing a meeting to support a proscribed
organisation, to further the activities of a proscribed organisation or to be addressed
10
by a person who belongs to or professes to belong to a proscribed organisation. A
person commits an offence if he addresses a meeting and the purpose of his
address is to encourage support for a proscribed organisation or to further its
activities (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 12). The maximum sentence is 10 years
imprisonment.
Fundraising: a person commits an offence if he invites another to provide money or
other property and intends that it should be used or has reasonable cause to
suspect that it may be used for the purposes of terrorism. There is a like offence for
receiving and providing money (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 15). The maximum sentence
is 14 years imprisonment.
Use and Possession: a person commits an offence if he uses money or other
property for the purposes of terrorism. There is a like offence for possessing money
or property (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 16). The maximum sentence is 14 years
imprisonment.
Funding arrangements: a person comments an offence if he enters into or becomes
concerned in an arrangement as a result of which money or other property is made
available or is to be made available to another and he knows or has reasonable
cause to suspect that it will or may be used for the purposes of terrorism (Terrorism
Act 2000, s. 17). The maximum sentence is 14 years imprisonment.
Money laundering: a person commits an offence if he enters into or become
concerned in an arrangement which facilitates the retention or control of another
person of terrorist property (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 18). The maximum sentence is
14 years imprisonment.
Disclosure of information duty: the Terrorism Act 2000 by section 19 creates an
obligation to disclose information relating to possible offences under sections 15 to
18 above and section 21 imposes a like obligation to cooperate with the police. The
maximum sentence is 5 years imprisonment.
Information about acts of terrorism: a person commits an offence who does not
disclose information as soon as is reasonably practicable when he knows or
believes the information might be of material assistance in preventing the
commission of an act of terrorism or in securing the apprehension, prosecution or
conviction of someone for an offence involving the commission, preparation or
instigation of an act of terrorism (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 38B). The maximum
sentence is 5 years imprisonment. There is a like offence for prejudicing or
interfering with an investigation.
Weapons training: a person commits an offence who provides, or receives,
instruction or training in the making or use of firearms, radioactive material or
weapons designed or adapted for discharge of any radioactive material, explosives
or chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. If someone invites another to receive
such training (whether in the UK or elsewhere), he or she commits an offence. The
maximum sentence is 10 years imprisonment (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 54).
Directing Terrorism: a person commits an offence who directs, at any level, the
activities of an organisation which is concerned in the commission of acts of
terrorism. The maximum sentence is life imprisonment (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 56).
11
Possession for terrorist purposes: a person commits an offence if he possesses an
article in circumstances which give rise to a reasonable suspicion that his
possession is for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or
instigation of an act of terrorism (but there is a defence of being able to prove that
his possession was not for such a purpose) (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 57). The
maximum sentence is 15 years imprisonment (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 54).
Collection of information: a person commits an offence who collects or makes a
record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or
preparing an act of terrorism or he possesses a document or record containing
information of that kind (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 58). The maximum sentence
following trial on indictment is 10 years imprisonment.
Inciting Terrorism Overseas: a person commits an offence if he incites another
person to commit an act of terrorism wholly or partly outside the UK and the act
would, if committed in the UK, constitute one of a number of specified serious
offences (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 59). The maximum sentence corresponds to the
particular offence incited. It is irrelevant whether the person incited is in the UK at
the time of the incitement.
Terrorist bombing: if a person does anything outside the UK as an act of terrorism
or for the purposes of terrorism and his action would have constituted the
commission of the offences of causing explosions under the Explosive Substances
Act 1883 or offences under the Biological Weapons Act 1974 or the Chemical
Weapons Act 1996.
Terrorist financing: a person commits an offence if he does anything outside the UK
that is an offence against terrorist fund-raising (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 15), use and
possession of money or property for terrorism (Terrorism Act 2000, funding
arrangements for terrorism (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 17) or money laundering for
terrorism (Terrorism Act 2000, s. 18).
Encouragement of terrorism: a person commits an offence if he publishes a
statement or causes another to do so and at the time he publishes it or causes it to
be published, he intends members of the public to be directly or indirectly
encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate
acts of terrorism or Convention offences (or is reckless as to his result) (Terrorism
Act 2006, s. 1). The maximum sentence is 7 years imprisonment.
Dissemination of terrorist publications: a person is guilty of an offence if he is
involved in the publication of terrorist material when his intention is that an effect will
be, directly or indirectly, to encourage or otherwise induce or assist the commission,
preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism (or he is reckless in this regard)
(Terrorism Act 2006, s. 2). The maximum sentence is 7 years imprisonment.
Preparation of terrorist acts: a person commits an offence if, with the intention of
committing acts of terrorism or assisting another, he engages in any conduct in
preparation for giving effect to his intention (Terrorism Act 2006, s. 5). The
maximum sentence is life imprisonment.
Training for terrorism: a person commits an offence if he provides instruction or
training in certain of the skills needed for terrorism (as defined) when at the time of
providing the instruction or training he knows that a person receiving it intends to
use the skills for or in connection with the commission or preparation of acts of
12
terrorism or Convention offences or for assisting such acts or offences. There is a
like offence for the person being trained (Terrorism Act 2006, s. 6). The maximum
sentence is 10 years imprisonment. There is a linked offence for attending any
place for terrorist instruction or training (Terrorism Act 2006, s.8).
Use of nuclear weapons: by section 47 of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security
Act 2001, there are a range of offences connected with causing a nuclear explosion,
possessing or transferring a nuclear weapon or engaging in military preparations in
which a nuclear device is to be used or threatened. The maximum sentence is life
imprisonment.
Making and possession of devices or materials: a person commits an offence if he
makes or has in his possession a radioactive device or radio active material in the
course of or in connection with the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism
(Terrorism Act 2006, s. 9). The maximum sentence is life imprisonment.
Misuse of devices or material and misuse and damage of facilities: a person
commits and offence is he uses a radioactive device or radioactive material in the
course of or in connection with an act of terrorism or for the purposes of terrorism
(Terrorism Act 2006, s. 10). The maximum sentence is life imprisonment.
Terrorist threats relating to devices, materials or facilities: a person commits an office if in
the course of or in connection with the commission of an act of terrorism or for the
purposes of terrorism he makes a demand, accompanied by a threat, for the supply of a
radioactive device or radioactive material or for a nuclear facility to be made available or
for access (Terrorism Act 2006, s. 11). There is a like offence for making a threat in the
course of or in connection with terrorism regarding the use of a radioactive device or such
material or to use or damage a nuclear facility.
FRANCE
La France s=est dotée progressivement d=une législation antiterroriste spécifique dont la
loi du 9 septembre 1986 constitue la clé de voûte et qui a été régulièrement actualisée.
Depuis les attentats du 11 septembre 2001, les lois du 15 novembre 2001, du 9
septembre 2002, du 18 mars 2003, du 9 mars 2004 et du 23 janvier 2006 sont venues
renforcer la législation de fond et les règles de procédure.
Ce corpus législatif ne crée nullement un droit d=exception mais seulement un droit
spécialisé et dérogatoire comme il en existe en droit pénal économique et financier ou en
droit de la criminalité organisée dans lequel le droit de la lutte anti-terroriste s'insère
aujourd’hui.
Outre la matière pénale, outil privilégié de la lutte anti-terroriste, le droit français emprunte
également aux droits civil et administratif pour lutter contre le terrorisme (interceptions de
sécurité, refus d'entrée sur le territoire, refus d=asile, opposition à la naturalisation,
déchéance, expulsion, reconduite à la frontière, contrôle des associations, groupes de
combats et milices privées...)
13
L'article 421-1 du code pénal définit la notion d’acte de terrorisme par la réunion de
deux éléments:
- l=existence d=un crime ou d=un délit de droit commun énumérés par une liste
limitative établie par le législateur à l=article 421-1 du code pénal.
- la relation de ce crime ou délit de droit commun avec une entreprise individuelle ou
collective ayant pour but de troubler gravement l=ordre public par l=intimidation ou la
terreur, qui caractérise la circonstance de terrorisme.
Les catégories d’infractions visées par article 421-1 du code pénal susceptibles de
constituer des actes terroristes lorsqu'ils sont en relation avec une entreprise individuelle
ou collective ayant pour but de troubler gravement l=ordre public par l=intimidation ou la
terreur, sont les suivantes :
1° Les atteintes volontaires à la vie, les atteintes volontaires à l'intégrité de la
personne, l'enlèvement et la séquestration ainsi que le détournement d'aéronef, de
navire ou de tout autre moyen de transport, définis par le livre II du code pénal ;
2° Les vols, les extorsions, les destructions, dégradations et détériorations, ainsi que
les infractions en matière informatique définis par le livre III du code pénal ;
3° Les infractions en matière de groupes de combat et de mouvements dissous
définies par les articles 431-13 à 431-17 et les infractions définies par les articles
434-6 et 441-2 à 441-5 du code pénal ;
4° Les infractions en matière d'armes, de produits explosifs ou de matières
nucléaires définies par les 2°, 4° et 5° du I de l'article L. 1333-9, les articles L. 23392, L. 2339-5, L. 2339-8 et L. 2339-9 à l'exception des armes de la 6e catégorie, L.
2341-1, L. 2341-4, L. 2342-57 à L. 2342-62, L. 2353-4, le 1° de l'article L. 2353-5, et
l'article L. 2353-13 du code de la défense ;
5° Le recel du produit de l'une des infractions prévues aux 1° à 4° ci-dessus ;
6° Les infractions de blanchiment prévues au chapitre IV du titre II du livre III du code
pénal ;
7° Les délits d'initié prévus à l'article L. 465-1 du code monétaire et financier.
Ces actes de terrorisme sont punis de peines aggravées selon le mécanisme suivant (art.
421-3, code pénal) :
Le maximum de la peine privative de liberté encourue pour les infractions ci-dessus
mentionnées est relevé ainsi qu'il suit lorsque ces infractions constituent des actes de
terrorisme :
1° Il est porté à la réclusion criminelle à perpétuité lorsque l'infraction est punie de
trente ans de réclusion criminelle ;
2° Il est porté à trente ans de réclusion criminelle lorsque l'infraction est punie de vingt
ans de réclusion criminelle ;
14
3° Il est porté à vingt ans de réclusion criminelle lorsque l'infraction est punie de
quinze ans de réclusion criminelle ;
4° Il est porté à quinze ans de réclusion criminelle lorsque l'infraction est punie de dix
ans d'emprisonnement ;
5° Il est porté à dix ans d'emprisonnement lorsque l'infraction est punie de sept ans
d'emprisonnement ;
6° Il est porté à sept ans d'emprisonnement lorsque l'infraction est punie de cinq ans
d'emprisonnement ;
7° Il est porté au double lorsque l'infraction est punie d'un emprisonnement de trois
ans au plus.
Les deux premiers alinéas de l'article 132-23 relatif à la période de sûreté sont
applicables aux crimes, ainsi qu'aux délits punis de dix ans d'emprisonnement, prévus
par le présent article.
Par ailleurs, se trouvent incriminées spécifiquement des infractions terroristes par nature
ou pouvant en revêtir le caractère :
Χ
L’acte de terrorisme écologique (introduction dans l=atmosphère, sur le sol, dans le
sous-sol, dans les aliments ou les composants alimentaires ou dans les eaux, y
compris celles de la mer territoriale, d=une substance de nature à mettre en péril la
santé de l=homme ou des animaux ou le milieu naturel : article 421-2 du code pénal).
Peines de 20 ans de réclusion criminelle et 350 000 euros d=amende, et de la
réclusion criminelle à perpétuité lorsqu=elle a entraîné la mort d=une ou plusieurs
personnes (article 421-4 du code pénal).
Χ
L’association de malfaiteurs terroriste (participation à un groupement formé ou à une
entente établie en vue de la préparation, caractérisée par un ou plusieurs faits
matériels, d=un des actes de terrorisme précédemment mentionnés : article 421-2-1
du code pénal). Peines de 10 ans d=emprisonnement et 225 000 euros d=amende
(article 421-5 du code pénal) portées à 20 ans de réclusion criminelle et 350 000
euros d’amende pour le dirigeant ou l’organisateur d’une telle association de
malfaiteurs (article 421-5 du code pénal) ou lorsqu’elle a pour objet de commettre
des infractions particulièrement graves (listées par l’article 421-6 du code pénal).
Enfin, le fait de diriger ou d’organiser un groupement ayant un tel objet est punie de
30 ans de réclusion criminelle et de 500 000 euros d=amende.
Χ
Le financement d’une entreprise terroriste (article 421-2-2 du code pénal). Peine de
10 ans d=emprisonnement et 225 000 euros d=amende En outre, est créée une
peine complémentaire de confiscation de l=ensemble des biens du délinquant
terroriste et affectation du produit des condamnations au fonds de garantie des actes
de terrorisme (articles 422-6 et 422-7 du code pénal)
!
!
La non justification de ressources de personnes en lien avec personnes se livrant à
des actes de terrorisme (article 421-2-3 du code pénal). Peines de 7 ans
d=emprisonnement et 100 000 euros d’amende.
Le recel d’auteurs d’un acte de terrorisme puni d=au moins 10 ans
d=emprisonnement est également réprimé par l=article 434-6 du code pénal et puni
d=une peine de 3 ans d=emprisonnement et de 45 000 euros d=amende, 5 ans et 75
15
000 euros lorsque les faits sont commis de manière habituelle.
!
La provocation et l’apologie du terrorisme réprimés par l=article 24 de la loi du 29
juillet 1881.La provocation est punie de 5 ans d=emprisonnement et de 45 000 euros
d=amende. L=apologie est punie d’un an d=emprisonnement et de 45 000 euros
d=amende.
HUNGARY
1. Is ) Yes, the commission of acts of terrorism is established as a criminal offence, as
follows:
Act IV of 1978 on Criminal Code, Section 261 - Acts of Terrorism
(1) Any person who commits a violent crime against one of the persons referred to in
Subsection (9) or commits a crime that endangers the public or involves the use of a
firearm in order to:
a) coerce a government agency, another state or an international body into doing, not
doing or countenancing something;
b) intimidate the general public;
c) conspire to change or disrupt the constitutional, economic or social order of another
state, or to disrupt the operation of an international organization;
is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for between ten to fifteen years, or life
imprisonment.
(2) Any person who seizes considerable assets or property for the purpose defined in
Paragraph a) and makes demands to government agencies or non-governmental
organizations in exchange for refraining from harming or injuring said assets and property
or for returning them shall be punishable according to Subsection (1).
(3) The punishment of any person who:
a) abandons the commission of the criminal act defined under Subsections (1) and (2)
before any grave consequences are able to materialize; and
b) confesses his conduct to the authorities;
in such a manner as to cooperate with the authorities to prevent or mitigate the
consequences of such criminal act, apprehend other coactors, and prevent other criminal
acts may be reduced without limitation.
(4) Any person engaged in plotting or making preparations for any of the criminal acts
defined under Subsections (1) and (2) is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for
between five to ten years.
(5) Any person who instigates, suggests, offers, joins or collaborates in the commission
of any of the criminal acts defined under Subsections (1) and (2) in a terrorist group or any
person who is involved in aiding and abetting such criminal conduct by providing any of the
means intended for use in such activities or by providing or raising funds to finance the
activities or support the terrorist group in any other form is guilty of a felony punishable by
imprisonment for between five to fifteen years.
(6) The perpetrator of a criminal act defined in Subsection (5) shall not be liable for
prosecution if he confesses the act to the authorities before they become aware of it and
reveals the circumstances of the criminal act.
16
(7) Any person threatening to commit the crimes specified in Subsections (1) and (2) is
guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for between two to eight years.
(8) Any person who has positive knowledge concerning plans for a terrorist act and fails
to promptly report that to the authorities is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for
up to three years.
(9) For the purposes of this Section:
a) 'violent crime against a person and crime of public endangerment that involves the use
of firearms' shall mean homicide [Subsections (1) and (2) of Section 166], battery
[Subsections (1)-(5) of Section 170], willful malpractice [Subsection (3) of Section 171],
violation of personal freedom (Section 175), kidnapping (Section 175/A), crimes against
transportation safety [Subsections (1) and (2) of Section 184], endangering railway, air or
water traffic [Subsections (1) and (2) of Section 185], violence against public officials
(Section 229), violence against persons performing public duties (Section 230), violence
against a person aiding a public official (Section 231), violence against a person under
international protection (Section 232), public endangerment [Subsections (1)-(3) of Section
259], interference with public works [Subsections (1) and (2) of Section 260], seizure of an
aircraft, any means of railway, water or road transport or any means of freight transport
(Section 262), criminal misuse of explosives or explosive devices (Section 263), criminal
misuse of firearms or ammunition [Subsections (1)-(3) of Section 263/A], arms trafficking
(Section 263/B), criminal misuse of radioactive materials [Subsections (1)-(3) of Section
264], criminal misuse of weapons prohibited by international convention [Subsections (1)(3) of Section 264/C], crimes against computer systems and computer data (Section
300/C), vandalism (Section 324) and robbery (Section 321);
b) 'terrorist group' shall mean a group consisting of three or more persons operating in
accord for an extended period of time whose aim is to commit the crimes defined in
Subsections (1)-(2).
ITALY
A1. The following criminal offences are established in Italy's law as regards terrorism: Section 270-bis of the Criminal Code: "Association for purposes of terrorism, including
international terrorism, or subversion of the democratic system." Whoever organises
associations seeking the commission of acts of violence for purposes of terrorism is
punished by imprisonment for between seven and fifteen years. For the purposes of
criminal law, the purpose is terrorism also if an act of violence is targeted against a foreign
country. - Section 270-ter of the Criminal Code: "Providing Assistance to Associates".
Whoever provides hospitality to individuals that are members of the associations referred
to in section 270-bis above is punished by imprisonment for up to four years, unless the
offence consists in aiding and abetting. - Section 270-quater of the Criminal Code:
"Recruiting for purposes of terrorism, including international terrorism." Whoever recruits
one or more individuals with a view to performing acts of violence for purposes of
terrorism, including acts targeted at a foreign country, is punished by imprisonment for
between seven and fifteen years. This provision was introduced following the attacks on
9/11/2001 and is aimed at criminalising any entity that recruits, in Italy, "fighters" to be sent
to foreign countries in order to concretely implement acts of violence and/or sabotage. 17
Section 270-quinquies of the Criminal Code: "Training in activities for purposes of
terrorism, including international terrorism." Whoever provides training in or instructions on
the use of explosives for the commission of acts of violence, including those targeted at a
foreign country, is punished by imprisonment for between five and ten years. - Section
270-sexies of the Criminal Code. This provision was described above in connection with
the concept of "act of terrorism" and establishes what conduct for purposes of terrorism is
a criminal offence. - Section 280 of the Criminal Code: "Attack for purposes of terrorism or
subversion." Whoever makes an attempt on a person's life for purposes of terrorism is
punished by imprisonment for not less than twenty years. - Section 280-bis of the Criminal
Code: "Act of terrorism by means of destructive and/or explosive devices." Whoever
performs any activity for purposes of terrorism such as to damage another's movables
and/or immovables with the help of explosive devices is punished by imprisonment for
between two and five years. - Section 289-bis of the Criminal Code: "Kidnapping for
purposes of terrorism or subversion." Whoever kidnaps another for purposes of terrorism
is punished by imprisonment for between twenty-five and thirty years. - Reference should
also be made to section 1 of decree no. 625 dated 15 December 1979 as converted into
Act no. 15/1980, whereby an aggravating circumstance applying to any criminal offence
consists in its being committed for purposes of terrorism; if so, the punishment is always
increased by a half.
LITHUANIA
Article 250 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania “The act of terrorism”:
1. Person, who in the place of residence, the workplace, the gathering pace or
the public place put the explosive device in order to cause the explosion, who explode or
set fire incurs ten years imprisonment.
2. Person, who committed the activities, mentioned in the part 1 of the article
and harmed the health of the injured or destroyed, damaged the vehicle or the building or
the equipment in the building incurs imprisonment from three to twelve years.
3. Person, who explode or set fire or in some other way destroyed or damaged
the building or the equipment and it caused danger to the human life or health, or spread
the nuclear, biological or chemical hazardous materials, substances or microorganisms
incurs imprisonment from five to fifteen years.
4. Person, who committed the activities, mentioned in the part 3 of the article
and which was directed against the object of the strategic importance or it caused serious
consequences incurs imprisonment from ten to twenty years or life imprisonment.
5. Person, who established the terrorist group for the carrying out of activities,
mentioned in this article, participated in the activities of such group also financed or
provided material or other support to such group incurs imprisonment from four to ten
years.
6. Person, who established the terrorist group for the carrying out of activities,
mentioned in this article with purpose to terrorize people, illegally demand the state, its
institutions or international organisations to commit particular actions or refrain from acting,
participated in the activities of such group also financed or provided material or other
support to such group incurs imprisonment from ten to twenty years.
18
7. Legal person is also liable for the acts, mentioned in this article.
MALTA
Sub-Title IVA of Title IX of the Criminal Code deals with Acts of Terrorism, Funding of
Terrorism and Ancillary Offences. The punishment for the various offences various as
provided
in
the
attachment
(For
ease
of
reference
vide:
http://docs.justice.gov.mt/lom/legislation/english/leg/vol_1/chapt9.pdf)
NETHERLANDS
Yes, though acts of terrorism as such are not punishable. The Dutch concept of ‘act of
terrorism’, is a common offence committed ‘with terrorist objective’. These terrorist
offences are punishable by custodial sentences heavier than those imposable under
national law for such offences in the absence of the special terrorist objective.
In conformity with Article 2 of the Framework Decision the following intentional acts are
punishable:
(a) directing a terrorist group, i.e. directing a group with terrorist objective;
(b) participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by supplying information or
material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that
such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the terrorist group.
Punishable are also terrorist-linked offences (Article 3 of the Framework Decision):
including the following acts:
(a) aggravated theft with a view to committing one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);
(b) extortion with a view to the perpetration of one of the acts listed in Article 1(1);
(c) drawing up false administrative documents with a view to committing one of the acts
listed in Article 1(1)(a) to (h) and Article 2(2)(b).
(Article 4 Framework Decision): Punishable are also the inciting or aiding or abetting an
offence referred to in Article 1(1), Articles 2 or 3, and attempting to commit an offence
referred to in Article 1(1) and Article 3, with the exception of possession as provided for in
Article 1(1)(f) and the offence referred to in Article 1(1)(i).
According to Article 5 (Penalties) of the Framework Decision, the aforementioned offences
referred to are punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties,
which may entail extradition. The terrorist offences referred to in Article 1(1) and offences
referred to in Article 4, inasmuch as they relate to terrorist offences, are punishable by
custodial sentences heavier than those imposable under national law for such offences in
the absence of the special intent required pursuant to Article 1(1), save where the
sentences imposable are already the maximum possible sentences under national law.
Offences listed in Article 2 are punishable by custodial sentences, with a maximum
sentence of not less than fifteen years for the offence referred to in Article 2(2)(a), and for
the offences listed in Article 2(2)(b) a maximum sentence of not less than eight years. In
so far as the offence referred to in Article 2(2)(a) refers only to the act in Article 1(1)(i), the
maximum sentence shall not be less than eight years.2
2
Article 1 of the Framework Decision reads: Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a)
to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country
or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:
19
POLAND
A terrorist crime is every criminal act committed in order to (a) threaten and intimidate a
large number of people, (b) force government bodies of Poland or another country or an
international organization to take or abstain from taking certain measures, (c) cause a
major disruption to the political system or economy of Poland, another country or an
international organization – including a threat to commit such acts, if punishable by
imprisonment, with an upper limit of sentence of at least 5 years.
Sanctions:
The following legal sanctions have been provided for the criminal acts referred to
hereinabove:
- causing a threat to air or sea transport safety, (Article 166-167 of the Penal Code) – 2 to
12 years’ imprisonment, planting devices or substances threatening human safety or
property of significant value (Article 167 of the Penal Code) – 3 months’ to 5 years’
imprisonment,
- threat to human life or health, including by bombings (Article 163 § 1 point 3) – 1 to 10
years’ imprisonment,
- murder involving the use of firearms or explosives (Article 148 § 2 point 4 of the Penal
Code) – 25 years’ or life imprisonment,
- hostage taking (Article 252 of the Penal Code) – 1 to 10 years’ imprisonment,
- murder involved in hostage taking (Article 148 § 2 point 2 of the Penal Code) –25 years’
or life imprisonment,
- involvement with armed militant groups acting to commit terrorist crimes (Article 258 § 2
of the Penal Code) – 6 months to 8 years’ imprisonment.
PORTUGAL
Yes. This is the legal definition:
A terrorist association is a group of two or more persons that agree to act in order to harm
national independence or integrity, to affect the functioning of the constitutional State
institutions, to force the public authority to act, not to act or to admit the practise of acts, to
intimidate certain people or groups of people or general population through:
- seriously intimidating a population, or
- unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or
- seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a
country or an international organisation, shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:
(a) attacks upon a person’s life which may cause death;
(b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
(c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
(d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility,
including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private
property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;
(e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
(f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or
chemical weapons, as well as research into, and developmentof, biological and chemical weapons;
(g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods
or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;
(h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of
which is to endanger human life;
(i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).
20
a) murder or violence against the person;
b) crimes against transportation, security and communications;
c) using explosives, arson, radioactive or toxic substances, inundation, avalanche,
food or water contamination or propagation of contagious disease;
d) developing biological or chemical weapons;
e) using nuclear energy, firearms;
when these crimes, by their nature or context can seriously affect the State or
population.
ROMANIA
According to Art.2 of Law No.535/2004, acts committed by terrorist entities are
punished according to the provisions of Chapter 4 if they meet any of the conditions listed
in Art.2 a), b) and c) of the same law.
The criminal offences are provided in Articles 32 to 41, and the law refers also to
other serious criminal offences provided in the Criminal Code or in special laws.
Thus:
- the criminalisation in Art.32 concerns any of the offences in a)-f), perpetrated
under the conditions in Art.2, and penalties are provided depending on the seriousness of
the act; the limits of the penalties provided in the law are much extended by comparison to
the offences to which they relate: the maximum reaches 20 years.
The law criminalises in Art.33 acts that the lawmaker equates to terrorist acts,
namely any illicit actions that are likely to cause serious consequences, both by affecting
protected social relations and by creating a strong sense of uncertainty and a pause in
activity.
For such acts, penalties are provided up to 15 years. Art.33 punishes also any
deliberate act aimed at supporting, facilitating or concealing the perpetration of terrorist
acts, as well as the instigation to the perpetration of such acts, as distinct criminal
offences.
Art.34 criminalises other substantive acts as offences, which affect the social
relations by the commission of illicit acts relating to the normal course of social relations on
a ship, a fixed platform or special installations or navigation services; sanctions are
provided for attempt and for preparatory acts, namely the production or obtainment of
technical means and instruments, for the purposes above. The penalties reach up to 25
years, with the differentiations provided in the law.
The law separately sanctions – in Art.35, the act of directing a terrorist entity, of
associating with, initiating or joining such an illicit activity, and provides penalties of up to
25 years.
Law No.535/2004 punishes, by means of distinct criminalisation, also the acts of
providing financial support to terrorist entities, regardless of how such support is provided
– Art.36 and 39, and irrespective of whether the goods – in kind or financial operations,
come from legal or illegal sources.
21
SCOTLAND
There are various criminal offences set out in the several statutes concerning terrorism.
The main statutes are the Terrorism Act 2000, the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act
2001, the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 and the Terrorism Act 2006. In addition, a
new Counter-Terrorism Bill was introduced by the UK government in the House of
Commons on 24 January 2008.
The following are examples of offences relating to terrorism:
The Terrorism Act 2000 defined terrorism, in section 1, as serious violence towards
persons, damage to property, serious risk to health or safety of the public etc, the use or
threat of which is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a
section of the public, and the use or threat of which is made for the purpose of advancing a
political, religious or ideological cause.
The 2000 Act also made provision for proscribing organisations and created new offences
of membership of and support of a proscibed organisation; inciting terrorist acts; and
providing training for terrorist purposes.
The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 introduced a system of “control orders” as an
alternative to the detention regime that was introduced by the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and
Security Act 2001. The latter regime was held by the House of Lords in the case of A and
Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56 be in breach of
Articles 5 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Terrorism Act 2006 created new offences of directly or indirectly encouraging or
inciting others to commit acts of terrorism (including glorification of terrorism). It also
introduced a new offence of preparation of terrorist acts.
22
a2. Are specific procedural measures, special courts and/or limitations on the right of defence
provided for in connection with proceedings against individuals charged with acts of
terrorism? If so, please describe the individual provisions set out in domestic law.
BULGARIA
There are no specific procedural measures, special courts and/or limitations on the right of
defence provided for in connection with proceedings against individuals charged with acts
of terrorism under Bulgarian law. These particular defendants enjoy the same
constitutional and statutory rights as any other defendants.
CZECH REPUBLIC
A2. In the Czech Republic there is no specific procedural measures in the prosecution of
terrorist offences, no special courts for persons charged with terrorist offence, no
limitations in the right on defense when prosecuting a person accused or charged with the
crime of the terrorist attack.
The suspect, accused or charged person has all the rights stipulated in the European
Convention of Human Rights (Council of Europe). The Czech Republic didn’t opted-out as
some States, even some Member States of the EU, did. The right to fair trial under Art. 6
of ECHR is preserved in criminal trials in general. Besides the fact, that the European
Convention of Human Rights (“Convention”) will be used primarily, the rights of suspect,
accused and charged person are preserved under the constitutional act – under the Chart
of Rights and Freedoms and under the Rules of Criminal Proceeding under the part –
Fundamental principal of criminal proceeding. The basis for both abovementioned national
documents is the Convention and other international instrument on protecting human
rights.
According to the Czech Constitution the suspect and detained person can be held without
accusation no more than 3 days. i.e. in 48 hours from detention, the suspect must be
released or be put before a court and in 24 afterwards the judge must decide of custody or
release the person.
DENMARK
In Denmark proceedings are dealt with at the ordinary courts when it comes to criminal
cases concerning individuals charged for actions of terrorism.
There are some limitations in the right to defence when it comes to proceedings against
individuals charged for actions of terrorism. A remarkable limitation is article 784 of the
Administration of Justice Act:
For instance when a court has to decide whether the police can tap the phone of a
suspect, the court has to assign a defence lawyer before the court makes its decision on
this point. This is a normal procedure in all cases concerning the authorities’ intervention in
private life. But if the case is concerning individuals charged for actions of terrorism (or
23
other crimes concerning national security or national independence) the court can only
assign certain defence lawyers.
According to article 784 of the Administration of Justice Act the Ministry of Justice engages
a number of lawyers that the courts can assign in these cases. Practically the courts have
to contact the Danish Intelligence Services (also known as PET) as the intelligence service
is able to inform the court about this question.
Article 845 of the Administration of Justice Act also enables the use of anonymous
witnesses. However, anonymous witnesses can also be used in other criminal cases that
do not concern possible actions of terrorism.
ENGLAND & WALES
Alleged terrorist are tried in conventional criminal courts, and the standard rules of
evidence and procedures apply. The only significant special provision relates to the length
of detention post arrest, prior to charge (28 days, Terrorism Act 2006, ss. 23-25).
Additionally, in certain instances for terrorist offences the detainee can have access to a
lawyer delayed for 48 hours if certain conditions are met: para 8 (1) schedule 8, Terrorism
Act 2006.
FRANCE
Les infractions terroristes obéissent à un régime procédural spécifique, parfois commun à
celui de l a criminalité organisée :
1) Au cours de l=enquête
•
Un régime de garde à vue spécifique: (article 706-88 du code de procédure
pénale (CPP) :
- durée de garde à vue portée à 96 heures (4 jours) y compris pour des mineurs de
plus de 16 ans (article 4 de l=ordonnance du 2 février 1945 complété) « lorsqu’il existe
une ou plusieurs raisons plausibles de soupçonner qu’une ou plusieurs personnes
majeures ont participé comme auteurs ou complices à la commission de l=infraction » pour
toutes les infractions terroristes;
- durée de garde à vue portée à 144 heures (6 jours) s=il existe un risque sérieux
de l=imminence d=une action terroriste en France ou à l=étranger ou si les nécessités de
la coopération internationale le requièrent impérativement (loi du 23 janvier 2006) ;
- intervention de l’avocat reportée à la 72ème heure de garde à vue pour les
majeurs.
•
Des techniques d=investigations spéciales :
- possibilité d=effectuer des saisies et perquisitions en dehors des heures légales
soumise à un régime d=autorisation particulier (articles 706-89 à 706-94 du CPP) ;
24
- surveillance sur l’ensemble du territoire national des personnes, de
l=acheminement ou du transport des objets, biens ou produits tirés de la commission de
ces infractions ou servant à les commettre possible (article 706-80 du CPP) .
- opérations d=infiltration autorisées par le procureur de la République ou le juge
d=instruction afin de faciliter la révélation d=infractions sans les provoquer et bénéficier
d=une immunité pénale pour les actes visés (articles 706-81 à 706-87 du CPP) ;
- protection des services de police spécialement habilités en leur permettant
d=acter sous leurs numéros de matricules ;
- écoutes téléphoniques autorisées, en enquête de flagrance ou préliminaire, par le
juge des libertés et de la détention, pour une durée de 15 jours renouvelable une fois, à la
requête du procureur de la République (article 706-95 du CPP) ;
- sonorisation ou captation d'images ordonnées par le juge d=instruction, après avis
du procureur de la République y compris hors des heures légales de perquisition sur
autorisation du juge des libertés et de la détention, sans le consentement des intéressés,
dans les véhicules ou tout lieu public ou privé (articles 706-96 à 706-102 du CPP) ;
- possibilité pour le parquet de requérir les services fiscaux en application de
l=article 10 B du livre des procédures fiscales dans le cadre d=enquêtes menées des
chefs de financement du terrorisme (article 421-2-3 du code pénal) ;
- possibilité de créer des équipes communes d=enquête (articles 695-2 et 695-3 du
CPP) ;
- rétribution des informateurs (article 15-1 de la loi du 21 janvier 1995 d=orientation
et de programmation relative à la sécurité) ;
2) Un traitement judiciaire spécifique
- compétence concurrente entre le Tribunal de grande instance de Paris et les
autres tribunaux de grande instance territorialement compétents pour la poursuite,
l=instruction et le jugement des infraction terroristes ce qui conduit, de fait, à une
centralisation à Paris de la quasi totalité des procédures terroristes (art 706-17 du CPP) ;
- compétence exclusive du Tribunal de grande instance et de la Cour d'appel de
Paris pour l'application des peines en matière de terrorisme (art 706-22-1 du CPP)
- spécialisation des magistrats au tribunal de grande instance de Paris : une section
anti terroriste au parquet, un pôle de magistrats instructeurs antiterroristes et un juge
d’application des peines exclusivement compétent en matière de terrorisme ;
- désignation conjointe d’un juge d=instruction économique et financier et d=un juge
anti-terroriste pour les informations judiciaires visant les délits de financement du
terrorisme, de recel, délits d=initiés, blanchiment en relation avec une entreprise terroriste
et de non justification de ressources en lien avec des personnes se livrant à des actes de
terrorisme (art. 706-17 du CPP),
- jugement des crimes terroristes par une cour d=assises spécialement
composée de magistrats professionnels pour les accusés majeurs et les
mineurs de plus de 16 ans (art. 706-25 du CPP) ;
- - allongement des délais de prescription de l=action publique et de la peine : 30
ans pour les crimes (au lieu de 10 ans), 20 ans pour les délits (au lieu de 3
ans). (art. 706-25-1 du CPP) ;
- durée de détention provisoire plus longue pour l’association de malfaiteurs
terroriste (3 ans : art. 706-54-3 du CPP).
25
HUNGARY
2.) No, there are no specific procedural measures, special courts and/or limitations on the
right of defence provided for in connection with proceedings against individuals charged
with acts of terrorism, the general rules must be applied.
Note: However, there are special investigative teams, and according to Act XIX of 1998 on
Criminal Procedure Section 16 the acts of terrorism are tried by county courts/the
Metropolitan Court of Budapest.
ITALY
A2. As regards proceedings for acts of terrorism, there are no limitations under Italian law
on the rights of defence vested in the accused nor are the establishment of special courts
or similar measures envisaged.
LITHUANIA
In accordance with the article 225 of the Criminal Code of Lithuania criminal cases when
persons are accused of committing serious and grave crimes are within the jurisdiction of
the regional courts. The act of terrorism also belongs to the category of grave crimes. The
criminal cases where persons committed grave crimes and the sentence of which may be
the life imprisonment (the act of terrorism) are heard by the chamber of three judges from
the regional court.
MALTA
There are no special courts, procedural measures or limitations imposed on defendants
charged with terrorism-elated offences. A person charged with terrorism-related offences
enjoys the same rights, and has the same procedural rules applied in his regard as a
person charged with an offence other than one which is terrorism-related.
NETHERLANDS
No
POLAND
Courts
Cases brought against individuals accused of terrorist crimes are heard by competent
courts. The competence of lower courts, i.e. regional court (sąd rejonowy) includes all
cases which are not reserved for other courts. The competence of higher courts, i.e.
district courts (sąd okręgowy) includes all crimes, i.e. cases brought against individuals
26
accused of offenses punishable by at least 3 years’ imprisonment or more and of minor
offenses enumerated in the legal provision.
The crimes referred to hereinabove which may be recognized as terrorist crimes will be
heard by a district court in the first instance.
Additional sanctions
According to Article 65 § 1 and § 2 of the Penal Code, provisions on multiple recidivism
shall apply accordingly to individuals accused of terrorist crimes and of involvement with
militant armed groups acting to commit terrorist crimes. Consequently, penalties of
imprisonment administered by courts will be - as a rule -absolute and therefore not subject
to conditional suspension (Article 69 § 3 of the Penal Code). A court may, however,
conditionally suspend one’s imprisonment in “special cases as justified by exceptional
circumstances” (Article 69 § 3 of the Penal Code), and in such cases probation periods of
3 to 5 years will be administered (Article 70 § 2 of the Penal Code); in addition, the court is
expected to appoint a probation officer or another trustworthy individual to supervise the
perpetrator who had had his or her punishment suspended (Article 73 § 2 of the Penal
Code). A person who committed any of the crimes referred to hereinabove may be
conditionally released after serving at least 75% of the original sentence, no earlier than
after 1 year (Article 78 § 2 of the Penal Code).
PORTUGAL
There are no specific procedural measures, special courts or limitations on the right of
defence. Although, the crime of terrorism, in any of its forms, is treated as a very complex
crime, it is submitted to the same procedural measures that are applied to other complex
crimes.
ROMANIA
Law No.535/2004, as a special law, is supplemented with the provisions of the Criminal
Procedure Code, in what concerns the applicable procedures for investigating offences of
terrorism, terrorism-equated offences or terrorism financing.
Given the complexity of such investigations, the lawmaker has provided that the
court of appeal has the competence to try terrorism offences in first instance.
Also, it is compulsory for criminal prosecution to be performed by a public
prosecutor.
The law does not provide special judgement panels, special courts or special
procedural measures for the criminal prosecution or trial of such offences.
According to the spirit and the letter of the legal provisions on criminal proceedings,
as well as in order to respect and apply the Constitution of Romania, there are no
limitations and there can be no limitations on the right of defence for persons who commit
terrorist offences.
The law provides in Art.40 para.(2) that the procedure for carrying out criminal
prosecution and trial is the same as that for flagrant offences, as regulated in Title IV,
Chapter I, Art.465 et seq. of the Criminal Procedure Code.
27
SCOTLAND
There are various instances where the defender may not have sight of evidence relied
upon by the prosecution in proceedings relating to terrorist offences. These include
proceedings before the Special Immigration Appeal Commission; proceedings before the
Proscribed Organisations Appeals Commission; certain proceedings under the Terrorism
Act 2000; and control order proceedings under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. The
new Counter-Terrorism Bill contains provision for asset-freezing proceedings which would
take place outwith the presence of accused. In such proceedings, a special representative
or special advocate may be appointed to represent the interests of the accused, however,
that person may not consult with the accused or his solicitor.
28
a3. Are derogations from the principle of the State's national sovereignty provided for in
respect of acts of terrorism?
BULGARIA
The Penal Code of Bulgaria does not provide for a specific derogation from the principle of
the State's national sovereignty in respect of ingacts of terrorism. The only derogation,
provided in Article 6 of the Penal Code refers to crimes against the peace and mankind.
Pursuant to its Article 6, para 2 however the Penal Code shall also apply for other crimes
committed by foreigners abroad wherever stipulated by an international agreement party to
which is the Republic of Bulgaria. Several conventions to which Bulgaria is a party
establish subsidiary universal jurisdiction: 1970 Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft , 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts
against the Safety of Civil Aviation, 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, 1979 International Convention against
the Taking of Hostages, 1980 Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material,
1988 Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving
International Civil Aviation, supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, 1988 Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988 Protocol for the
Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the
Continental Shelf, 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings, 1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of
Terrorism, 1977 Europen Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (Council of
Europe).
CZECH REPUBLIC
A3. The law of the Czech Republic recognizes territorial-, personal or universal jurisdiction.
Based the personal jurisdiction the Czech Republic (its authorities responsible for criminal
proceedings) will prosecute all crimes committed by the Czech citizen or by the person
who has its domicile in the Czech Republic if crimes committed in any other state. Based
on the universal jurisdiction it is possible for Czech authorities responsible for criminal
proceedings to prosecute in the Czech Republic (or outside the country) a citizen of
another State or a person without a domicile in the Czech Republic or a person without
any citizenship if he /she committed the terrorist attack in any other State.
DENMARK
The Danish rules on jurisdiction in criminal matters are stipulated in the Criminal Act. With
regards to actions of terrorism the Danish authorities may have ex-territorial jurisdiction:
Actions of terrorism committed outside Danish territory are under the jurisdiction of Danish
authorities regardless of the domicile of the offender, if Denmark is under the obligation to
prosecute the specific action in accordance with an international treaty. For instance
29
Denmark is under the obligation to prosecute in accordance with the European Convention
on the Fight Against Terrorism.
In other words the rules on ex-territorial jurisdiction are based on the principle of ‘aut
dedere aut judicare’ on this point.
ENGLAND & WALES
Terrorism Act 2000
If a UK national or a UK resident does anything outside the United Kingdom, and his
action, if done in any part of the UK, would have constituted an offence under s.54
(weapons training) or ss.56 to 61 (directing terrorist organisation, possession for terrorist
purposes, collection of information, inciting terrorism overseas), he shall be guilty in that
part of the UK of the offence (TA 2000 s.63A(1), inserted by the Crime (International Cooperation) Act 2003, s.52).
The amendments made to the Terrorism Act 2000 by the Crime (International Cooperation) Act 2003 have also extended jurisdiction in relation to certain other offences:
If a UK national or UK resident does anything outside the UK as an act of terrorism
or for the purposes of terrorism, and his action, if done in any part of the UK, would
have constituted an offence listed in the TA 2000 s.63B(2), he shall be guilty in that
part of the UK of the offence (TA 2000, s. 63(B)(1)).
[The offences listed in s. 63(B)(2) are:
(a) murder, manslaughter, culpable homicide, rape, assault causing injury, assault to
injury, kidnapping, abduction or false imprisonment;
(b) an offence under the Offences Against the Person Act ss.4, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 29, 30 or 64;
(c) an offence under any off ss. 1 to 5 of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981;
(d) the uttering of a forged document or an offence under the Criminal Law
(Consolidation)(Scotland ) Act 1995, s.46A;
(e) an offence under the Criminal Damage Act 1971, s.1 or 2;
(f) an offence under article 3 or 4 of the Criminal Damage (Northern Ireland) Order
1977;
(g) malicious mischief;
(h) wilful fire-raising.]
if a person does anything outside the UK as an act of terrorism or for the purposes
of terrorism, his action is done to, or in relation to, a UK national, a UK resident or a
protected person and his action, if done in any part of the UK, would have
constituted an offence listed in s.63C(2), he shall be guilty in that part of the UK of
the offence (s.63C(1)). The offences are identical to (a)-(d) above.
If a person does anything outside the UK as an act of terrorism or for the purposes
of terrorism, his action is done in connection with an attack on relevant premises or
on a vehicle ordinarily used by a protected person, the attack is made when a
protected person is on or in the premises or vehicle and his action, if done in any
part of the UK, would have constituted an offence listed in s.63D(2), he shall be
guilty in that part of the UK of the offence (s. 63D(1)). (Criminal damage offences)
30
If a person does anything outside the UK as an act of terrorism or for the purposes
of terrorism, his action consists of a threat of an attack on relevant premises or on a
vehicle ordinarily used by a protected person, the attack is threatened to be made
when a protected person is on or in the premises or vehicle and his action, if done
in any part of the UK, would have constituted an offence listed in s.63D(4), he shall
be guilty in that part of the UK of the offence (s.63D(3)).
Proceedings for any of the above offences are not to be started in England and
Wales except by or with the consent of the Attorney General (s.63E(1)).
Terrorism Act 2006
If a person does anything outside the UK, and his action, if done in a part of the UK, would
constitute an offence falling within subsection (2), he shall be guilty in that part of the UK of
the offence (s.17(1)). The offences falling within s.17(2) are:
(a) an offence under section 1 or 6 of this Act so far as it is committed in relation to any
statement, instruction or training in relation to which that section has effect by
reason of its relevance to the commission, preparation or investigation of one or
more Convention offences:
(b) an offence under any of sections 8 to 11 of this Act;
(c) an offence under s11(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000;
(d) an offence under s.54 of that Act (weapons training);
(e) conspiracy to commit an act falling within this subsection;
(f) inciting a person to commit such an offence;
(g) attempting to commit such an offence;
(h) aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of such an offence.
Proceedings against such an offence may be taken at any place in the UK, and for all
incidental purposes may be treated as having been committed at any such place.
FRANCE
1) D'une manière générale, les juridictions françaises sont compétentes dans les
conditions suivantes en cas d’infractions commises hors du territoire de la
République :
Code pénal :
Article 113-6
La loi pénale française est applicable à tout crime commis par un Français hors du
territoire de la République.
Elle est applicable aux délits commis par des Français hors du territoire de la République
si les faits sont punis par la législation du pays où ils ont été commis.
Il est fait application du présent article lors même que le prévenu aurait acquis la
nationalité française postérieurement au fait qui lui est imputé.
Article 113-7
La loi pénale française est applicable à tout crime, ainsi qu'à tout délit puni
d'emprisonnement, commis par un Français ou par un étranger hors du territoire de la
République lorsque la victime est de nationalité française au moment de l'infraction.
31
Article 113-8
Dans les cas prévus aux articles 113-6 et 113-7, la poursuite des délits ne peut être
exercée qu'à la requête du ministère public. Elle doit être précédée d'une plainte de la
victime ou de ses ayants droit ou d'une dénonciation officielle par l'autorité du pays où le
fait a été commis.
Article 113-8-1
Sans préjudice de l'application des articles 113-6 à 113-8, la loi pénale française est
également applicable à tout crime ou à tout délit puni d'au moins cinq ans
d'emprisonnement commis hors du territoire de la République par un étranger dont
l'extradition a été refusée à l'Etat requérant par les autorités françaises aux motifs, soit que
le fait à raison duquel l'extradition avait été demandée est puni d'une peine ou d'une
mesure de sûreté contraire à l'ordre public français, soit que la personne réclamée aurait
été jugée dans ledit Etat par un tribunal n'assurant pas les garanties fondamentales de
procédure et de protection des droits de la défense, soit que le fait considéré revêt le
caractère d'infraction politique.
La poursuite des infractions mentionnées au premier alinéa ne peut être exercée qu'à la
requête du ministère public. Elle doit être précédée d'une dénonciation officielle, transmise
par le ministre de la justice, de l'autorité du pays où le fait a été commis et qui avait requis
l'extradition.
Article 113-9
Dans les cas prévus aux articles 113-6 et 113-7, aucune poursuite ne peut être exercée
contre une personne justifiant qu'elle a été jugée définitivement à l'étranger pour les
mêmes faits et, en cas de condamnation, que la peine a été subie ou prescrite.
Article 113-10
La loi pénale française s'applique aux crimes et délits qualifiés d'atteintes aux intérêts
fondamentaux de la nation et réprimés par le titre Ier du livre IV, à la falsification et à la
contrefaçon du sceau de l'Etat, de pièces de monnaie, de billets de banque ou d'effets
publics réprimées par les articles 442-1, 442-2, 442-5, 442-15, 443-1 et 444-1 et à tout
crime ou délit contre les agents ou les locaux diplomatiques ou consulaires français,
commis hors du territoire de la République.
Article 113-11
Sous réserve des dispositions de l'article 113-9, la loi pénale française est applicable aux
crimes et délits commis à bord ou à l'encontre des aéronefs non immatriculés en France :
1° Lorsque l'auteur ou la victime est de nationalité française ;
2° Lorsque l'appareil atterrit en France après le crime ou le délit ;
3° Lorsque l'aéronef a été donné en location sans équipage à une personne qui a le siège
principal de son exploitation ou, à défaut, sa résidence permanente sur le territoire de la
République.
Dans le cas prévu au 1° , la nationalité de l'auteur ou de la victime de l'infraction est
appréciée conformément aux articles 113-6, dernier alinéa, et 113-7.
Article 113-12
La loi pénale française est applicable aux infractions commises au-delà de la mer
territoriale, dès lors que les conventions internationales et la loi le prévoient.
32
2) En outre, en matière de terrorisme, la loi française prévoit une compétence quasi
universelle des juridictions françaises en application des conventions anti-terroristes
ratifiées par la France et visées aux articles 689-1 à 689-10 du code de procédure
pénale si l’auteur des actes de terrorisme commis hors du territoire de la
République se trouve en France.
Code de procédure pénale :
Article 689
Les auteurs ou complices d'infractions commises hors du territoire de la République
peuvent être poursuivis et jugés par les juridictions françaises soit lorsque, conformément
aux dispositions du livre Ier du code pénal ou d'un autre texte législatif, la loi française est
applicable, soit lorsqu'une convention internationale donne compétence aux juridictions
françaises pour connaître de l'infraction.
Article 689-1
En application des conventions internationales visées aux articles suivants, peut être
poursuivie et jugée par les juridictions françaises, si elle se trouve en France, toute
personne qui s'est rendue coupable hors du territoire de la République de l'une des
infractions énumérées par ces articles. Les dispositions du présent article sont applicables
à la tentative de ces infractions, chaque fois que celle-ci est punissable.
Article 689-3
Pour l'application de la convention européenne pour la répression du terrorisme, signée à
Strasbourg le 27 janvier 1977, et de l'accord entre les Etats membres des Communautés
européennes concernant l'application de la convention européenne pour la répression du
terrorisme, fait à Dublin le 4 décembre 1979, peut être poursuivie et jugée dans les
conditions prévues à l'article 689-1 toute personne coupable de l'une des infractions
suivantes :
1° Atteinte volontaire à la vie, tortures et actes de barbarie, violences ayant entraîné la
mort, une mutilation ou une infirmité permanente ou, si la victime est mineure, une
incapacité totale de travail supérieure à huit jours, enlèvement et séquestration réprimés
par le livre II du code pénal ainsi que les menaces définies aux articles 222-17, alinéa 2, et
222-18 de ce code, lorsque l'infraction est commise contre une personne ayant droit à une
protection internationale, y compris les agents diplomatiques ;
2° Atteintes à la liberté d'aller et venir définies à l'article 421-1 du code pénal ou tout autre
crime ou délit comportant l'utilisation de bombes, de grenades, de fusées, d'armes à feu
automatiques, de lettres ou de colis piégés, dans la mesure où cette utilisation présente
un danger pour les personnes, lorsque ce crime ou délit est en relation avec une
entreprise individuelle ou collective ayant pour but de troubler gravement l'ordre public par
l'intimidation ou la terreur.
Article 689-4
Pour l'application de la convention sur la protection physique des matières nucléaires,
ouverte à la signature à Vienne et New York le 3 mars 1980, peut être poursuivie et jugée
dans les conditions prévues à l'article 689-1 toute personne coupable de l'une des
infractions suivantes:
1° Délit prévu à l'article 6-1 de la loi n° 80-572 du 25 juillet 1980 sur la protection et le
contrôle des matières nucléaires ;
2° Délit d'appropriation indue prévue par l'article 6 de la loi n° 80-572 du 25 juillet 1980
précitée, atteinte volontaire à la vie ou à l'intégrité de la personne, vol, extorsion,
33
chantage, escroquerie, abus de confiance, recel, destruction, dégradation ou détérioration
ou menace d'une atteinte aux personnes ou aux biens définis par les livres II et III du code
pénal, dès lors que l'infraction a été commise au moyen des matières nucléaires entrant
dans le champ d'application des articles 1er et 2 de la convention ou qu'elle a porté sur
ces dernières.
Article 689-5
Pour l'application de la convention pour la répression d'actes illicites contre la sécurité de
la navigation maritime et pour l'application du protocole pour la répression d'actes illicites
contre la sécurité des plates-formes fixes situées sur le plateau continental, faits à Rome
le 10 mars 1988, peut être poursuivie et jugée dans les conditions prévues à l'article 689-1
toute personne coupable de l'une des infractions suivantes :
1° Crime défini aux articles 224-6 et 224-7 du code pénal ;
2° Atteinte volontaire à la vie ou à l'intégrité physique, destruction, dégradation ou
détérioration, menace d'une atteinte aux personnes ou aux biens réprimées par les livres II
et III du code pénal ou délits définis par l'article 224-8 de ce code et par l'article L. 331-2
du code des ports maritimes, si l'infraction compromet ou est de nature à compromettre la
sécurité de la navigation maritime ou d'une plate-forme fixe située sur le plateau
continental ;
3° Atteinte volontaire à la vie, tortures et actes de barbarie ou violences réprimés par le
livre II du code pénal, si l'infraction est connexe soit à l'infraction définie au 1°, soit à une
ou plusieurs infractions de nature à compromettre la sécurité de la navigation maritime ou
d'une plate-forme visées au 2°.
Article 689-6
Pour l'application de la convention sur la répression de la capture illicite d'aéronefs, signée
à La Haye le 16 décembre 1970, et de la convention pour la répression d'actes illicites
dirigés contre la sécurité de l'aviation civile, signée à Montréal le 23 septembre 1971, peut
être poursuivie et jugée dans les conditions prévues à l'article 689-1 toute personne
coupable de l'une des infractions suivantes :
1° Détournement d'un aéronef non immatriculé en France et tout autre acte de violence
dirigé contre les passagers ou l'équipage et commis par l'auteur présumé du
détournement, en relation directe avec cette infraction ;
2° Toute infraction concernant un aéronef non immatriculé en France et figurant parmi
celles énumérées aux a, b et c du 1° de l'article 1er de la convention pour la répression
d'actes illicites dirigés contre la sécurité de l'aviation civile précitée.
Article 689-7
Pour l'application du protocole pour la répression des actes illicites de violence dans les
aéroports servant à l'aviation civile internationale, fait à Montréal le 24 février 1988,
complémentaire à la convention pour la répression d'actes illicites dirigés contre la sécurité
de l'aviation civile, faite à Montréal le 23 septembre 1971, peut être poursuivie et jugée
dans les conditions prévues à l'article 689-1 toute personne qui s'est rendue coupable, à
l'aide d'un dispositif matériel, d'une substance ou d'une arme :
1° De l'une des infractions suivantes si cette infraction porte atteinte ou est de nature à
porter atteinte à la sécurité dans un aérodrome affecté à l'aviation civile internationale :
a) Atteintes volontaires à la vie, tortures et actes de barbarie, violences ayant entraîné la
mort, une mutilation ou une infirmité permanente ou, si la victime est mineure, une
incapacité totale de travail pendant plus de huit jours, réprimés par le livre II du code
pénal, lorsque l'infraction a été commise dans un aérodrome affecté à l'aviation civile
internationale ;
34
b) Destructions, dégradations et détériorations réprimées par le livre III du code pénal,
lorsque l'infraction a été commise à l'encontre des installations d'un aérodrome affecté à
l'aviation civile internationale ou d'un aéronef stationné dans l'aérodrome et qui n'est pas
en service ;
c) Délit prévu au quatrième alinéa (3°) de l'article L. 282-1 du code de l'aviation civile,
lorsque l'infraction a été commise à l'encontre des installations d'un aérodrome affecté à
l'aviation civile internationale ou d'un aéronef dans l'aérodrome et qui n'est pas en service
;
2° De l'infraction définie au sixième alinéa (5°) de l'article L. 282-1 du code de l'aviation
civile, lorsqu'elle a été commise à l'encontre des services d'un aérodrome affecté à
l'aviation civile internationale.
Article 689-9
Pour l'application de la convention internationale pour la répression des attentats
terroristes, ouverte à la signature à New York le 12 janvier 1998, peut être poursuivie et
jugé dans les conditions prévues à l'article 689-1 toute personne coupable d'un crime ou
d'un délit d'acte de terrorisme défini par les articles 421-1 et 421-2 du code pénal ou du
délit d'association terroriste prévu par l'article 421-2-1 du même code lorsque l'infraction a
été commise en employant un engin explosif ou un autre engin meurtrier défini à l'article
1er de ladite convention.
Article 689-10
Pour l'application de la convention internationale pour la répression du financement du
terrorisme, ouverte à la signature à New York le 10 janvier 2000, peut être poursuivie et
jugée dans les conditions prévues à l'article 689-1 toute personne coupable d'un crime ou
d'un délit défini par les articles 421-1 à 421-2-2 du code pénal lorsque cette infraction
constitue un financement d'actes de terrorisme au sens de l'article 2 de ladite convention.
HUNGARY
3.) Yes, there are departures from the principle of the State's national sovereignty, as
follows:
Act IV of 1978 on Criminal Code, Section 3 and 4 - Territorial and Personal Scope
Section 3
(1) Hungarian law shall be applied to crimes committed in Hungary, as well as to any
conduct of Hungarian citizens abroad, which are deemed criminal in accordance with
Hungarian law.
(2) Hungarian law shall also be applied to criminal acts committed on board of Hungarian
ships or Hungarian aircraft situated outside the borders of the Republic of Hungary.
Section 4
(1) Hungarian law shall be applied to any act committed by non-Hungarian citizens in a
foreign country, if:
a) it is deemed a felony in accordance with Hungarian law and is also punishable in
accordance with the laws of the country where committed;
35
b) it is a crime against the state (Chapter X), excluding espionage against allied armed
forces (Section 148), regardless of whether or not it is punishable in accordance with the
law of the country where committed;
c) it is crime against humanity (Chapter XI) or any other crime that is to be prosecuted
under the strength of an international treaty.
(2) Espionage (Section 148) against allied armed forces by a non-Hungarian citizen in a
foreign country shall be punishable according to Hungarian penal laws, provided that such
offense is also punishable by the law of the country where committed.
(3) In the cases described in Subsections (1)-(2) the indictment shall be ordered by the
Attorney General.
Note: These departures are provided not only in respect of acts of terrorism.
ITALY
A3. There are no derogations envisaged from the principle of the State's national
jurisdiction; in particular, the connecting link consists in the place of commission of the
offence. Reference should be made in this regard to section 270-quater of the Criminal
Code (see point A1 above), whereby whoever recruits one or more individuals in Italy is
punished irrespective of whether the acts of terrorism are to be performed in a foreign
country.
LITHUANIA
According to the article 7 of the Criminal Code of Lithuania persons are responsible
for the crimes (act of terrorism) the liability of which is established in the international
agreements despite their nationality, place of residence, the crime place and the fact
whether the laws of the crime place shall be applied. Persons liable for the crimes
committed abroad are charged due to the criminal code only in those cases if the
committed actions are recognised as crime and persons for this activity must be charged
according to the criminal code of the state where the crime took place and the Republic of
Lithuania. However, if persons liable for the crimes committed abroad are tried in the
Republic of Lithuania and both states intend different penalties in this case penalty is
imposed due to the laws of the Republic of Lithuania but it cannot exceed the ultimate
penalty intended by the state where the crime took place. Person, who committed rime
(act of terrorism), is not liable according to the Criminal Code of Lithuania if he/she served
the sentence imposed by the court of foreign country, if he/she received full or partial
pardon for the sentence imposed by the court of foreign country, if he/she was discharged
by the court of foreign country, if he/she was indemnified from the criminal liability or
penalty, also if penalty was not imposed due to the limitations of legal proceedings or other
legal basis applicable to that foreign country.
MALTA
36
Art.328M extends the jurisdiction of the Maltese Courts:
“Without prejudice to the provisions of article 5, the courts in Malta shall also have
jurisdiction over the offences laid down in this sub-title where (a) the offence is committed even if only in part in the territory of Malta or on the sea
in any place within the territorial jurisdiction of Malta;
(b) the offender is a Maltese national or permanent resident in Malta;
(c) the offender is a person suspected or convicted of an offence laid down in this
sub-title and whose surrender or extradition to another country for such an offence is
refused by Malta even if there is no provision according to the laws of Malta other than the
present provision in virtue of which the criminal action may be prosecuted in Malta against
that person;
(d) the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established in Malta;
(e) the offence is an offence under article 328B or an offence under article 328D
which involves a terrorist group even if the terrorist group is based or pursues its criminal
activities outside Malta;
(f) the offence is committed against the institutions or people of Malta or against an
institution of the European Union or a body set up in accordance with the Treaties and
based in Malta:
Provided that for the purposes of this paragraph:
“the European Union" shall have the same meaning assigned to it by article 2(1) of the
European Union Act;
"the Treaties" means the Treaty establishing the European Community done at Rome on
the 25th March, 1957 and the Treaty on European Union done at Maastricht on the 7th
February, 1992, and the Protocols annexed thereto.”
NETHERLANDS
Yes. Article 9 (Jurisdiction and prosecution) of Framework Decision (2002/475/JHA),
Section 2, reads as follows:
“When an offence falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and when
any of the States concerned can validly prosecute on the basis of the same facts, the
Member States concerned shall cooperate in order to decide which of them will prosecute
the offenders with the aim, if possible, of centralising proceedings in a single Member
State. To this end, the Member States may have recourse to any body or mechanism
established within the European Union in order to facilitate cooperation between their
judicial authorities and the coordination of their action. Sequential account shall be taken
of the following factors:
the Member State shall be that in the territory of which the acts were committed,
the Member State shall be that of which the perpetrator is a national or resident,
the Member State shall be the Member State of origin of the victims,
the Member State shall be that in the territory of which the perpetrator was found.
Section 3
Each Member State shall take the necessary measures also to establish its jurisdiction
over the offences referred to in Articles 1 to 4 in cases where it refuses to hand over or
extradite a person suspected or convicted of such an offence to another Member State or
to a third country.
37
Section 4.
Each Member State shall ensure that its jurisdiction covers cases in which any of the
offences referred to in Articles 2 and 4 has been committed in whole or in part within its
territory, wherever the terrorist group is based or pursues its criminal activities.
Section 5
This Article shall not exclude the exercise of jurisdiction in criminal matters as laid down by
a Member State in accordance with its national legislation.
POLAND
According to Article 109 of the Penal Code the Polish penal law shall apply to Polish
citizens who commit crimes in a foreign country. In the case of terrorist crimes it is possible
to apply the Polish penal law to foreign citizens who commit crimes against Poland in a
foreign country and to Polish citizens, Polish corporate entities or unincorporated Polish
organizations and to foreign citizens who commit a terrorist crime in a foreign country.
PORTUGAL
That is a possibility. However, it doesn’t concern terrorism issues exclusively. In any case,
we can state that derogations from the principal of State's national jurisdiction are provided
for in order to make sure that our courts are competent as stated in the question.
ROMANIA
According to the provisions of the Criminal Code, regarding the spatial application of
criminal law, this question requires several discussions. Thus:
- according to the principle of personality of the criminal law – Art.4 of the
Criminal Code, criminal law is applied to offences committed outside Romanian
territory if the perpetrator is a Romanian national or a stateless person domiciling
in Romania.
The syntagma criminal law refers to criminalisation in the general criminal law –
namely the Criminal Code and the special laws – including Law No.535/2004.
- according to the principle of universality of the criminal law, criminal law – as a
whole, including the criminalisation provided in special laws – applies to offences
committed outside Romanian territory by foreign nationals or stateless persons
who do not domicile in Romania, provided that the law of the State in which the
offence was committed provides that same act as a criminal offence (the principle
of double criminality), and the perpetrator is in Romanian territory.
It should be mentioned that criminal law does not apply to offences committed by
diplomatic representatives of other States or by other persons who, under the international
conventions, are not subject to the criminal jurisdiction of the Romanian State (Art.8 of the
Criminal Code).
38
SCOTLAND
Yes. For example, the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 provides that persons
may be prosecuted in the UK for certain offences regarding biological, chemical and
nuclear weapons committed elsewhere.
39
a4. How many trials have been held in connection with acts of terrorism? Please describe the
types of conduct at issue, the indictment(s) against specific individuals, and the outcome of
such judicial proceedings.
BULGARIA
Since terrorism was established as a criminal offence in the Bulgarian Penal Code in 2002
there have not been held trials in connection with terrorism.
CZECH REPUBLIC
A4. The criminal offence of the terrorist attack was implemented into the Czech legal order
at the end of 2004. Since then, only following trial has been held:
In 2004: None
In 2005: One trial has been held at the end of 2005 (December) and the person has been
convicted at the beginning of year 2006 with the crime of terrorist attack under sec. 95
para (2) (a) Czech Criminal Code –threatens with conduct mentioned in para (1).
In 2006: only one abovementioned trial has been held in the respective year with a person
charged with the crime of the terrorist attack under sec. 95 para (2) lit. (a) Czech Criminal
Code and convicted and sentenced with the unconditional sentence of deprivation of
liberty.
We would like to kindly excuse us for not to submitting any part of the respective decision
for security reasons. We would like to thank you for your understanding.
In 2007: None. One criminal prosecution for the crime of terrorist attack was terminated by
the public prosecutor.
DENMARK
In Denmark we have only had a handful of cases concerning attempts of terrorist actions.
However, the cases have had an enormous public interest.
In one of the cases the defendant was found guilty as he had incited other persons to
commit terrorist actions. He was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment.
(The Danish Prosecution Service vs. a Danish-Moroccan citizen).
In another case three persons (not all the defendants) were found guilty as the three of
them had prepared an action of terrorism in Denmark. Two of the persons were sentenced
to 11 years of imprisonment by the Eastern High Court. The third person was sentenced to
4 years of imprisonment by the Eastern High Court. However, this court ruling has been
appealed and has not been heard at The Supreme Court yet.
(The Vollsmose-case).
Another case concerned the sale and marketing of t-shirts of a union called ‘Lovers’. The
surfeit of the sale of t-shirts was contributed to the Kurdish organization PKK. PKK is
outlined on the official list of terrorist organizations of EU. ‘Lovers’ were not found guilty in
40
contributing to a terrorist organisation. The ruling was appealed and has not been heard at
The Eastern High Court yet.
(The ‘Lovers’-case).
Finally a person was sentenced to 7 years of imprisonment by the Eastern High Court, as
he had planned an attempt of a terrorist action.
(The Glostrup-case).
Unfortunately the abovementioned rulings are not available in English.
ENGLAND & WALES
As regards the relatively recent past, the UK has been dealing with terrorism since the
early 1970s when the IRA became particularly active. There have been a multitude of trials
since that time, and it would be unrealistic and onerous to attempt to list the number of
trials, the types of conduct, the indictments or the results of those trials as a part of this
questionnaire.
However, the UK police terrorism arrest statistics (excluding Northern Ireland) from 11
September 2001 – 31 March 2007 show 1228 arrests were made:
•
•
1165 arrests have been made under the Terrorism Act 2000
63 arrests under legislation other than the Terrorism Act, where the investigation
was conducted as a terrorist investigation
Of the total 1228 arrested:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
132 charged with terrorism legislation offences only
109 charged with terrorism legislation offences and other criminal offences
195 charged under other legislation including murder, grievous bodily harm,
firearms, explosives offences, fraud, false documents
76 handed over to immigration authorities
15 on police bail awaiting charging decisions
1 warrant issued for arrest
12 cautioned
1 dealt with under youth offending procedures
11 dealt with under mental health legislation
4 transferred to Police Service of Northern Ireland custody
2 remanded in custody awaiting extradition proceedings
669 released without charge
1 awaiting further investigation
Of those charged:
•
•
41 Terrorism Act convictions to date
183 convicted under other legislation: murder and explosives offences (including
conspiracies), grievous bodily harm, firearms offences, fraud, false documents
offences, etc (this includes the 12 cautions detailed above)
41
114 at or awaiting trial
FRANCE
De 1996 à 2006, il y a eu – au minimum – 648 condamnations d’individus des chefs des
diverses infractions terroristes sus-énumérées au a1).
Le tableau ci-joint détaille pour chaque type d’infraction à caractère terroriste le nombre de
condamnations annuelles prononcées.
A la lecture de ce tableau détaillé, trois précisions s’imposent :
-
L’étude portant sur 10 ans, il convient de tenir compte dans l’analyse de la
fluctuation des condamnations des évolutions législatives intervenues au cours de
cette période (par exemple la qualification de participation à une association de
malfaiteurs en vue de la préparation d’un acte terroriste est entrée en vigueur en
juillet 1996 mais la prise en compte statistique spécifique de cette qualification n’a
été créée qu’en septembre 2007).
-
L’important différentiel entre le nombre de condamnations dont l’infraction principale
est une infraction en matière terroriste et le nombre d’infractions terroristes ayant
donné lieu à condamnation s’explique par le fait qu’une personne est souvent
condamnée du chefs de plusieurs infractions terroristes.
-
Les données 2006 sont des données provisoires, les données définitives étant
disponibles au mois de septembre de l’année suivante.
S’agissant des typologies de terrorisme, la justice française est confrontée au terrorisme
basque (ETA), corse, islamiste, turque ou kurde (PKK et TK/PML), tamoul (LTTE ), breton,
d’extrême gauche et d’extrême droite.
A titre indicatif, au 29 février 2008, 375 personnes étaient incarcérées en France (mis en
examen ou condamnés) pour des faits de terrorisme, notamment en lien avec les
mouvances suivantes :
- basque : 121 prévenus détenus et 54 condamnés
- islamiste : 43 prévenus détenus et 36 condamnés
- corse : 35 prévenus détenus et 26 condamnés
- tamoul : 18 prévenus
- turque : 12 prévenus
- extrême gauche : 7 condamnés
- extrême droit : 4 condamnés
- breton : 1 condamné
HUNGARY
4.) Between 2004-2007 eight cases were brought before courts. It must be emphasized
that most of them were not the type of a “classical” terrorism case.
42
In one of the case tried by the Metropolitan Court of Budapest the defendant (a Hungarian
citizen) on 4 December 2003 called from his home (in the countryside) the Embassy of
France in Budapest and he told in French that as he had escaped from the French foreign
legion he considered a person with previous conviction. He claimed to provide him within
15 days an official document on having a clean record if not he would explode the building
of the Embassy. The defendant repeated his claims and threat 5 times. He was sentenced
1 year imprisonment suspended for 2 years.
In an other case (also tried by the Metropolitan Court of Budapest) a minor (age of 17) on
8 March 2006 on behalf of an non-exist rightist group send an e-mail to the Prime Minister
in which he called the PM to resign. He warned that they had fire-arms and detonators and
they knew the PM and his family's address so he must confine himself to this instruction.
He found guilty and was sentenced 1 year probation.
ITALY
A4. Regarding the trials that were held recently in Italy in connection with acts of terrorism,
a summary of the following decisions can be provided:
- Decision no. 9 by the Assize Court of Milan dated 21.09.2006; in addressing the concept
of international terrorism by having regard to the supervening criminal provisions, in
particular the introduction of section 270-sexies of the Criminal Code (conduct for
purposes of terrorism) pursuant to Act no. 155/2005, the Court remarked the following:
"Therefore, it can be concluded that section 270-bis of the Criminal Code applies - until
coming into force of the definitions set out in section 270-sexies of the Criminal Code whenever a criminal association operates in order to commit, whether in Italy or in a
foreign country where no armed conflict is in progress, any of the acts of violence
mentioned in the specific sector-related conventions referred to by the New York
Convention of 1999. If the act in question is to be committed in a country where an armed
conflict is in progress, the provision mentioned above applies if the act is targeted against
civilians and/or entities that are not actively participating in the conflict - providing it is
committed in order to disseminate fear and terror among the population and/or compel a
government or any other organisation to do or abstain from doing a given act... Thus, it
can be argued that the new definition of act of terrorism as such [pursuant to section 270sexies of the Criminal Code] ... is broader in scope. Under the New York Convention, an
act of terrorism is "an act intended to cause death or serious bodily injury." Other sectorspecific conventions supplemented this definition by having regard to equally specific
activities. Conversely, section 270-sexies of the Criminal Code considers "any conduct
that, either because of its nature or on account of its context, can seriously harm a country
and/or international organisation" to be an act of terrorism."
- Decision no. 10 by the Assize Court of Milan dated 06.11.2006, ruling that a person
indicted pursuant to section 270-bis of the criminal code is criminally liable for acts of
terrorism committed abroad. As regards specifically the concept of acts of terrorism, the
court remarked the following: "Section 270-bis of the Criminal Code applies if the criminal
association operates in order to commit, whether in Italy or abroad, any of the acts of
violence mentioned in the specific conventions and instruments that are referred to in the
New York Convention of 1999, or else in order to commit acts of violence against civilians
and/or entities that do not participate actively in the ongoing armed conflict, with a view to
disseminating fear or else compelling a government and/or another organisation to do or
43
abstain from doing a given act - on condition the underlying motive is of a political,
ideological and/or religious nature." (re: decision no. 7 of the Assize Court of Milan dated
09.05.2005)
- Decision no. 9 by the Appellate Assize Court of Brescia dated 29 June 2007 (upholding
decision no. 1 by the Assize Court of Cremona dated 15 July 2006). Here the Court made
the following considerations: "Therefore, we reaffirm that the crime mentioned in section
270-bis of the Criminal Code belongs with the category of multiple-offence crimes as it
harms and/or endangers the life and bodily integrity of its victims as well as the freedom of
self-determination vested in States and international organisations. The objective element
of the crime consists in several types of conduct that arise out of the offender's
membership of a given structure as related to the different tasks discharged within the
association... Accordingly, participation of an individual in a terrorist group may also
consist in conduct that is instrumental to and logistically supportive of the activities
performed by the association and clearly points to that individual's membership in the
association - providing part of the conduct is performed in Italy. The subjective element
consists in the mens rea, whereby the awareness and intention of wrongdoing are aimed
at achieving the specific purposes of terrorism that are a feature of the whole association;
such purposes are referred to by the Code as consisting either in spreading terror among
the population or in compelling States or international organisations to do or abstain from
doing a given act... The Court deciding on the merits could show exhaustively that the
purposes pursued by ANSAR AL ISLAM when DRISSI NOUREDDINE joined the training
camp managed by the said organisation in Iraq as well as when the defendant (in
agreement with TRABELSI) organised financing actitivies for the aforementioned
organisation also entailed attacks against military forces among the methods to be
deployed in order to implement the association's plans, whereby it was expressly
acknowledged that such attacks might also involve entities that had nothing to do with the
military forces in question."
- Decision no. 4 by the Assize Court of Perugia dated 20 December 2006. After
exhaustively addressing the concept of international terrorism based on the relevant
international conventions, the Court ruled that "the concept in question includes not only
acts of violence committed in peacetime against civilians, but also acts committed in
wartime against entities that are not taking part directly in the hostilities, even though no
reference is made to conduct aimed at destabilising or disrupting political, economic and
social structures - which can also be categorised as subversion."
- Decision no. 151 by the Judge for pre-trial investigations of the Milan Court dated 24
January 2005, whereby "Acts of violence and/or warfare committed within the framework
of hostilities, including those done by armed forces other than institutional ones, may not
be prosecuted under international law, except for ... violations of international humanitarian
law." On this point, the Court of Cassation recently affirmed a different principle (see sub
A. above - decision no. 1072 of the Court of Cassation, 1st division, dated 17 January
2007, which quashed the decision by the Appellate Assize Court of Milan dated 28
November 2005 which had also excluded that an association was pursuing terrorism
purposes in connection with warfare activities). It should be pointed out that the Second
Assize Court of Milan, which had been seized of the proceeding quashed by the Court of
Cassation, issued a decision (no. 36 dated 23 October 2007) in which the defendant were
found liable for the offence of association for purposes of terrorism; in this connection, the
Court remarked the following: "The decision by the Court of Cassation (no. 1072 dated 17
January 2007) provides general guidance as for the legal definition of acts of terrorism and
allows solving this issue even apart from and beyond the current proceeding." The
guidance issued by the Court of Cassation was abided by in the decision issued by the
Appellate Assize Court of Milan (no. 38 dated 29 October 2007).
44
- Decision no. 13 by the Assize Court of Milan dated 18 December 2006. After stating that
the concept of acts done for purposes of international terrorism arises out of international
instruments that are binding on our country, and that the provisions set out in section 270sexies of the Criminal Code (criminalising conduct for purposes of terrorism) do not apply
"to acts done in a war context", the Court remarked that the judge is to take account in
concrete of the features of the association, as it is inappropriate to criminalize "conduct
that is merely an expression of ideological support and has not taken on the additional
features of real violence and/or endorsed the purposes the provisions in question are
meant to suppress and punish." Based on this assumption, the Court ruled out, in the case
at issue, existence of a link between the Islam integralists' group operating in Italy and the
larger international organization performing acts of terrorism, and ruled that the offence
consisted in "establishment of the association mentioned in section 416 of the Criminal
Code [so-called ordinary criminal association] for the purpose of making available and
circulating forged documents among the members and/or fellow-supporters."
- Decision no. 9 by the Assize Court of Milan dated 03.08.2007, which ruled out that the
evidence gathered in the proceeding allowed indicting the defendant of the offence of
association for purposes of international terrorism and stated the following: "It has not
been shown that an association operating on the Italian territory had been set up, by
having regard to the meaning of "association" under criminal law - that is to say, a stable
organisation, capable to commit an indefinite amount of crimes, necessarily provided with
a social corporeity (to quote the felicitous expression used by a scholar) that is
independent of the single individuals and the activities of its members, with a structured
framework and featuring roles allocated among its members as well as the presence and
recognition of hierarchical bonds and rules of conduct to be abided by."
- Decision no. 1676 by the Office of the pre-trial investigation judge of the Court of Milan
dated 5 October 2006: "The technical and legal concept of terrorism set out in the law is
currently comprised of two parts. The former provides a general definition of conduct for
purposes of terrorism, which is modelled after the definitions of terrorism contained in the
framework decision of 2002; the latter is a sort of renvoi to all the other definitions of
terrorism contained in present and future international law instruments that are binding on
Italy. In this manner, the lawmaker could exhaustively outline the concept of conduct for
purposes of terrorism in order to provide a definition of this criminal offence that could be
as close as possible to that set out in other EU Member States by incorporating and
summing up the international law instruments referred to above. This was done in view of
the harmonization of the criminal law of European countries so as to better counter
terrorism by taking account of the mechanisms, scope and methods that have applied to
terrorism over the years at international level." This decision was upheld by the Appellate
Assize Court of Milan in decision no. 34 dated 11 October 2007.
- Decision no. 30 by the Appellate Assize Court of Catania dated 31 May 2006. Here the
Court remarked the following: "The elements typically making up the criminal association
in question (pursuant to section 270-bis of the Criminal Code) are all present: both
defendants co-operated in order to foster the creation of groups of individuals ready to
perform attacks, demonstrative actions and acts of violence against ordre public as well as
in view of providing such groups with an action plan (see the publication of the manifesto
and the leaflets of the Gruppo di Azione Rivoluzionario on the website managed by
defendants)... Both defendants are directly related to entities holding explosives at their
disposal and planning the commission of acts with the help of such explosives."
- Decision no. 1362 by the Preliminary Hearing Judge of the Court of Florence dated 7
December 2005: "As for the definition of acts of international terrorism in respect of
activities committed prior to entry into force of Act no. 155/2005, which introduced section
270-sexies in the Criminal Code, reference should be made to the guidance provided by
45
international instruments such as the New York Convention of 1999 on terrorism, which
was transposed into Italian law by Act no. 7 dated 14 January 2003, as well as to the
framework decision of the EU Council dated 13 June 2003 on joint investigation teams.
With regard to the evidence in question, the mere fact of holding propaganda materials at
one's disposal, whilst such materials can be easily found on the Internet, is not sufficiently
indicative of one's membership in an association for purposes of international terrorism."
- Decision no. 3 by the Assize Court of Florence dated 26 June 2007: "The definition of
association for purposes of international terrorism can be found in section 270-sexies of
the Criminal Code as also related to activities performed prior to entry into force of Act no.
155/2005. With regard to the structural features of the association, "devising and/or
participating in a terrorist project, which - though not all the relevant details are set out and
only a general outline thereof is available - is substantiated by the fact of having stated
one's full readiness to put such project into practice and rests on the organisation of
individuals sharing the relevant purposes and preparing the tools that are indispensable in
view of performing acts of violence and/or subversion, can be considered as such to fulfil
the conditions under which the criminal offence has been established. As regards the
evidence in question, the fact of attending the same places of worship, getting in touch
repeatedly by phone, having noted down the same telephone numbers and addresses can
be accounted for by the defendants' sharing of friendship and religious circles and may not
be regarded as evidence of the establishment of a criminal association."
- Decision no. 139 by the Court of Siracusa dated 26 February 2007: "As for the definition
of acts of terrorism, reference should be made to the guidance provided by the New York
Convention of 9 December 1999 on the financing of terrorism, which was transposed into
Italian law by Act no. 7 dated 14 January 2003, as well as by the framework decision of the
EU Council no. 2002/475/JHA on the use of firearms and explosives to seriously intimidate
the population. Regarding offences committed prior to entry into force of Act no. 155/2005,
which introduced section 270-sexies into the Criminal Code, the definition of association
for purposes of terrorism may not be grounded on the provisions contained in section 270sexies of the Criminal Code on account of the principles applying to supervening criminal
provisions. In the case at issue, the Court ruled that the explosions of devices created by
using camping gas cans, which had been placed close to private buildings, and the threats
against individuals holding institutional offices, which were contained in letters claiming
responsibility for those explosions, did not amount to acts of terrorism, whereas the acts in
question consisted in the offences of attempted damage to another's movable and
immovable goods and aggravated threats."
- Decision no. 777 by the Office of the Judge for pre-trial investigations of the Court of
Bologna dated 14 July 2003: in acquitting the defendant of the offence referred to in
section 270-bis of the Criminal Code, because the facts at issue fell short of the legal
definition, the judge pointed out the following: "The offence in question is committed when
the members of the association set themselves the objective of doing acts of violence in
order to subvert the democratic system; accordingly, the existence of a subversive
purpose should be descried by having regard to the concrete features of the programme
developed by the association, exactly because this is the purpose for which the
association was established and the acts in question are carried out. By the same token, it
is necessary to detect an organised structure that should be concretely in a position to
pursue the specific objective of doing acts capable per se to endanger the constitutional
framework."
- Decision no. 1037 by the Office of the Judge for pre-trial investigations of the Court of
Bologna dated 2 July 2001: "Regarding the acts done in the years 1995 to 1998, i.e. prior
to the amendments made by Act no. 438/2001, it is to be ruled out that they amount to the
offence referred to in section 270-bis of the Criminal Code if the purposes of terrorism
46
and/or subversion of the democratic system underlying the criminal plans pursued by the
association are focused on a foreign country. Indeed, the fact that the subversive intent
does not apply to our democratic system entails that there is no association at issue and
therefore one of the constituents of the offence is missing."
Additionally, reference can be made to the following decisions that relate to domestic
terrorism cases:
- Decision no. 7 by the Appellate Assize Court of Rome dated 1 February 2003: in
considering that the offences at issue (sabotage, kidnapping, robberies, etc.) fell within the
scope of application of the definitions set out in sections 270-bis and 306 of the Criminal
Code, the Court evaluated the subjective element inherent in the said offences and
remarked that such element consisted in participating in "the establishment and
organisation of a stable structure ... that on account of the amount and potential of its
armaments is capable to effect, for the said purposes, not just violent acts, but especially
serious and dangerous violent acts impacting on individuals and the legal system because
of the use of weapons and explosive devices." - Decision no. 487 by the Office of the
Judge for pre-trial investigations at the Court of Bologna dated 15 March 2005: this
decision found Banelli Cinzia, a member of the armed band called Red Brigades for
building up the Fighting Communist Party, guilty of the offence set out in section 280 of the
Criminal Code because of having made an attempt on Mr. Marco Biagi's life jointly with
others and having caused the latter's death. This decision clarified that planning of the
attempt took place "in accordance with a military technique based on warfare methods.";
see also decision no. 4 by the Assize Court of Bologna dated 1 June 2005, returning a
verdict of guilty for the co-defendants in respect of the said attempt, which was found to be
terrorist in nature. - Decision no. 4 by the Appellate Assize Court of Florence dated 13
February 2001, finding that the defendants were guilty of the offence of massacre pursuant
to section 422 of the Criminal Code, with regard to several criminal activities including the
attempt made in Florence on the 27th of May 1993, in via dei Georgofili. - Decision no. 18
by the Appellate Assize Court of Rome dated 1 June 2006, finding that the defendants
were guilty of the offence set out in section 280 of the Criminal Code (attack for purposes
of terrorism), as they had willfully and intentionally caused the death of Prof. Massimo
D'Antona for purposes of terrorism and subversion of the democratic system. The Court
clarified that the associates participated "in an association that had set itself the objective
of doing acts of violence for the purpose of subverting the State's system in its various
components as well as disrupting its Constitutional, democratic, and pluralistic framework."
- Reference should also be made to decision no. 7 by the Assize Court of Rome dated 10
March 2006, ruling out that the specific case, which concerned "an "affinity group"
supporting theoretical positions, albeit extreme, of the anarchist thought", could fall within
the scope of application of the offence referred to in section 270-bis of the Criminal Code because there was no such organisational structure as is typical of associations for
purposes of subversion.
Finally, with regard to episodes of terrorism that took place in Italy in the 1970's-1980's,
the following judicial decisions should be mentioned: - Decision no. 5 by the Assize Court
of Ancona dated 28 June 1988, re-iterating the concept of "Armed Band" as follows: "It is a
group of individuals holding weapons at their disposal, although not all associates need
have such weapons at hand, organised on a permanent basis and capable to perform
certain actions, whether current or future, to harm the State's national or international
personality, and featuring bonds based on disciplinary rules and subordination to one or
more chiefs. This concept of armed band clearly fits in with the organisation underlying the
Red Brigades, which are armed groups pursuing the objective of subverting the State's
economic and social system by means of violence and disrupting the political and legal
47
framework of the Italian society." - Decision no. 9 by the Assize Court of Nuoro dated 17
December 1984, listing the constituents of the offence of establishing an armed band: "1)
The purpose of subversion; 2) the subversive program as evidenced in shared writings; 3)
the organisation of the association; 4) the possession of weapons." - Decision no. 1 by the
Assize Court of Nuoro dated 8 June 1988: in considering that the Movimento Armato
Sardo was an association for purposes of terrorism under section 270-bis of the Criminal
Code, the Court remarked the following : "It is unquestionable that section 270-bis of the
Criminal Code was meant by Parliament as a tool to fight terrorism in order to suppress
concrete criminal initiatives... therefore, it punishes whoever promotes, establishes,
organizes or heads organisations pursuing the objective of doing acts of violence for
purposes of subverting the democratic system... The rationale underlying the aggravating
circumstance related to terrorism consists in the specific methods used, which cause
social alarm and are therefore markedly disruptive of citizens' peaceful co-existence." Decision no. 14 by the Assize Court of Cagliari dated 2 August 1983: "The purpose of
terrorism mentioned in section 1 of Act no. 15 dated 6 February 1980 does not apply
exclusively to the offence referred to in section 306 of the Criminal Code (armed band), as
it is not a consistent, indispensable constituent of the said offence - whilst it is an
accidental element that only features in certain cases." - Decision no. 1 by the Assize
Court of Taranto dated 25 January 1984: this decision found the members of the armed
band called Prima Linea guilty also of a number of offences representing the ultimate
purposes of their activities; the Court clarified that "the concept of terrorism is usually
related to a specific method of political fighting, featuring the repeated, systematic
recourse to the use of especially violent tools, i.e. to extreme violence, which shows the
utter contempt for the goods safeguarded by our legal system and is such as to cause
major social alarm... accordingly, the purpose of terrorism ...is no constituent of the offence
in question [armed band], as it is rather a specific aggravating circumstance as per section
1 of decree no. 625 dated 15 December 1979." - Decision no. 4 by the Assize Court of
Bologna dated 11 July 1988, which found the defendants guilty of massacre, multiple
murders and armed band intended to commit, with the help of weapons and explosives,
offences against the State's personality and the democratic system, following the attempt
made with an explosive device placed in the waiting room of the Bologna railway station
on 2 August 1980, which caused the death of 85 people and seriously injured additional
200 people. - Decision no. 52 by the Appellate Court of Bologna - Juvenile Division dated
13 December 2004, which returned a verdict of guilty in respect of a minor participating in
the armed band that caused the massacre at the Bologna railway station on 2 August
1980; - Decision no. 11 by the Appellate Assize Court of Turin dated 30 May 1985, which
upheld the verdict of guilty returned in respect of the members of the so-called "Turinese
branch of the Red Brigades" as for murders and other criminal offences; reference can
also be made to decision no. 9 by the Appellate Assize Court of Turin dated 20 March
1982.
LITHUANIA
On 16/01/2005 the Vilnius Regional court passed the sentence and the first
defendant was plead guilty due to the paragraph 1, Article 250 of the Criminal Code and
48
sentenced to 5 years imprisonment; the second defendant was plead guilty due to the
paragraph 1, Article 250 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment; the
third defendant was plead guilty due to the paragraph 1, Article 250 of the Criminal Code
and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment. All the defendants committed the act of terrorism
in the territory of the Republic of Lithuania.
On 14/12/2007 by resolution the Klaipėdos Regional court transferred the
consideration of the criminal case to the court session where seven persons were charged
for the act of terrorism by exploding the property of other people due to the paragraph 2,
Article 250 of the Criminal Code.
MALTA
To date no person has been charged with an offence under Sub-title IVA of Title IX.
NETHERLANDS
The query “terrorist objective” (which covers most but not all relevant acts of terrorism) in a
major data base (that does not cover all cases) displays up to date (February 2008)
- 18 criminal cases (including decisions from first instance courts, courts of appeal
and cassation)
- Period: between September 2001-january 2008.
- Types of conduct:
. murder (Theo van Gogh-case) and attempts to commit murder
. hate mail
. membership of a group with terrorist objective
POLAND
So far no legal action has been taken in Poland on account of terrorist crimes and
consequently no terrorism-related trials have been held.
PORTUGAL
Terrorism acts are not common in Portugal. There has been a classic case, that took place
in the 80´s, concerning a terrorist organisation operating in Portugal, called “FP 25”, based
on a political position and related to the political developments in the country, after de
25/4/74 revolution.
Since then, there have been only a few episodes concerning the use of the territory by
foreign terrorist organizations, like ETA, but that did not turn into effective crimes in the
country.
ROMANIA
49
Since the adoption of Law No.535/2004 to Prevent and Suppress Terrorism, two
indictments have been drawn up regarding offences of terrorism. The cases are now being
tried in appeal on points of fact with the supreme court – the High Court of Cassation and
Justice. Here are the details:
- first, the public prosecutors of the D.I.O.O.C.T. investigated, since March 2005,
the initiation and support of a group in Iraq, as an entity driven by extremist ideas and
attitudes, by a Romanian national of Arabic origin, for the kidnapping of a group of three
journalists who were in Baghdad with the purpose of making documentaries; the
investigations made by the prosecutors showed that the journalists’ guide also was
involved in the illicit retention activity and in the accomplishment of the kidnapping, and he
too was investigated.
The case was tried in first instance and the main perpetrator was sentenced to 20
years’ imprisonment; this sentence was appealed against on points of fact, which appeal is
ongoing with the High Court of Cassation and Justice;
- during the year 2006, the public prosecutors of the D.I.O.O.C.T. completed an
indictment in a case concerning a Romanian national who, being full of strong antiAmerican feelings and wishing to support fundamentalist Islamic beliefs, intended to
detonate, in a central and crowded area of the City of Timişoara, a hand-made explosive
device placed inside his own car. The device was composed of two methane gas cylinders
and an ignition device consisting of a piezoelectric lighter, which was remote controlled by
means of a mobile telephone. The information was used in order to stop the criminal
activity of the perpetrator. He was tried in first instance by the Court of Appeal in Timişoara
and sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment; an appeal lodged by the defendant is currently
being tried by the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
We do not have any copies of the judgements rendered by the courts.
SCOTLAND
Statistics of the number of terrorist charges brought under terrorism legislation since 2001
in solemn proceedings in Scotland are set out below, although we are not yet able to
establish how many of these cases resulted in convictions. If we are able to obtain this
information, details will follow separately.
Terrorism Act 2000
Section 11(1) (professing to belong to a proscribed organisation) - 29
Section 12(2) (assisting meeting of a proscribed organisation) - 1
Section 13 (wearing clothing etc that shows support/membership of proscribed
organisation) - 2
Section 15(2) (receiving money/property for purposes of terrorism) - 1
Section 15(3) (providing money/property for purposes of terrorism) - 14
Section 16(2) (processing money/property for purposes of terrorism) - 6
Section 17 (funding arrangements for purposes of terrorism) - 4
Section 53 (failure to complete and furnish landing card) - 1
Section 53 (failure to furnish information when required) - 9
Section 54 (providing or receiving instruction/training re-use of weapons) - 2
Section 57(1) (possessing article for terrorist purposes) - 27
50
Section 58(1) (collecting/ recording/ possessing information) - 2
Terrorism Act 2006
Section 2(1) (publication or circulation of terrorist publication) - 1
51
a5. Has your country entered into conventions or agreements and/or developed a specific
modus operandi with other countries in view of countering terrorism?
BULGARIA
Bulgaria is a party to the following multilateral conventions on terrorism:
1963 Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed On Board Aircraft
1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft
1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation
1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally
Protected Persons
1979 International Convention against the Taking of Hostages
1980 Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material
1988 Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving
International Civil Aviation, supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation
1988 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime
Navigation
1988 Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms
Located on the Continental Shelf
1991 Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection
1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings
1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism
Bulgaria is a signatory to the 2005 International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of
Nuclear Terrorism.
Bulgaria is a party to the following regional conventions on terrorism:
1. 1977 Europen Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (Council of Europe)
2. 2005 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism
3. 2004 Additional Protocol on Combating Terrorism to the Agreement Among the
Governments of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Participating States on Cooperation
in Combating Crime, in Particular in Its Organized Forms
Combating terrorism figures expressly among the subjects of bilateral agreements such as
the ones concluded with Macedonia, Romania, Moldova and Kazakhstan.
As an EU member Bulgaria benefits from and contributes to the cooperation within the
framework of Eurojust among the competent authorities of the different memeber states on
matters concerning the investigation and prosecution of serious cross-border and
organised crime, including terrorism. Since January 2007 Bulgaria has its national member
in Eurojust – Maraiana Ilieva Lilova. Since June 2007 Pavlina Panova has been elected by
the Supreme Judicial Council to be the Bulgarian Judge in the Common Supervisory Body
of Eurojust.
Bulgaria suports the realization of the global counter-terrorism strategy for the United
Nations adopted by all 192 Member States on 8 September 2006 and launched at a highlevel meeting of the General Assembly on 19 September 2006.
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has been resident as a Project Office in
Bulgaria since 1999. It started with a regional Joint UNDCP - Phare Programme for
Strengthening Drug Law Enforcement Capacities in Southeastern Europe. From January
2005 its presence has been formally expanded to that of Regional Project Office for South
Eastern Europe (RPOSEE) maintaining a small nucleus of staff in Sofia and a network of
52
subordinated National Project Offices in Ankara, Belgrade, Tirana, Bucharest, Bratislava
and Chisinau. There are no current projects dealing with anti-terrorism.
CZECH REPUBLIC
A5. The Czech Republic has signed and ratified numbers of counter-terrorism conventions
and other conventions regarding to legal cooperation in criminal matters, which
strengthened the legal cooperation in criminal matters. The Czech Republic broadly uses
the instruments adopted by the European Union, especially the European Arrest Warrant.
None of these cooperative methods shall be considered as a specific modus operandi.
Other European Conventions the Czech Republic entered into following Council of Europe
Conventions:
Extradition:
1957 European Convention on Extradition (between Member States to European Union
replaced by European Arrest Warrant);
1975 Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition;
1978 Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition,
Counter-Terrorism:
1977 European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism;
Legal Co-operation in criminal matters:
1959 European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters;
1964 European Convention on the Supervision of Conditionally Sentenced or Conditionally
Released Offenders;
1972 European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters;
1978 Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal
Matters;
1978 European Convention on the Control of the Acquisition and Possession of Firearms
by Individuals;
1983 Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons;
1990 Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from
Crime;
1995 Additional Protocol to the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons;
2001 Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in
Criminal Matters
Some of the UN counter-terrorist conventions the Czech Republic entered into:
1963 Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed On Board Aircraft
(Aircraft Convention) (reg. No. 102/1984 Coll.)
1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation
(Civil Aviation Convention) (reg. No. 16/1974 Coll.)
o
Requires parties that have custody of offenders to either extradite the offender
or submit the case for prosecution.
1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally
Protected Persons
(Diplomatic agents Convention) (reg. No. 131/1978 Coll.)
53
1979 International Convention against the Taking of Hostages
(Hostages Convention) ( No. 36/1988 Coll.)
1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings
(Terrorist Bombing Convention)
o
Creates a regime of universal jurisdiction over the unlawful and intentional use
of explosives and other lethal devices in, into, or against various defined public
places with intent to kill or cause serious bodily injury, or with intent to cause
extensive destruction of the public place.
1999 International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism
(Terrorist Financing Convention) (No. 18/2006 Coll.)
o
Provides for the identification, freezing and seizure of funds allocated for terrorist
activities, as well as for the sharing of the forfeited funds with other States on a
case-by-case basis. Bank secrecy is no longer adequate justification for refusing
to cooperate.
2005 International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism
(Nuclear Terrorism Convention) (No.57/2007 Coll. Int. Trs.)3
o
Deals with both crisis situations (assisting States to solve the situation) and
post-crisis situations (rendering nuclear material safe through the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Legal cooperation in criminal matters at the EU level: (only the most important instrument
regarding to fight against serious crime)
European Arrest Warrant; Convention on mutual cooperation in criminal matters between
member states of the European Union (in force since 23.8.2005); Protocol to the
Convention on mutual cooperation in criminal matters between member states of the
European Union, European Freezing Order, European Evidence Warrant, Framework
Decision on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence between law
enforcement authorities (shall be implemented in 2008).
A5b)The Czech Republic is making use of the instruments adopted at the European Union
level regarding the cooperation in criminal matters.
As regard the relationship with Eurojust, the Czech Republic according to Art. 2 para (1)
(Council Decision 2002/187/JHA from 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust with a view to
reinforcing the fight against serious crime) has its own national member to Eurojust and
one deputy national member to Eurojust. The process of cooperation between the Czech
Republic and Eurojust follows the rules and competences as provided in the Council
3
http://www.un.org/terrorism/instruments.shtml
54
Decision 2002/187/JHA from 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust with a view to
reinforcing the fight against serious crime.
DENMARK
Denmark has entered several conventions and agreements with other countries. Among
the entered conventions are:
The UN Convention on Fighting the Funding of Terrorism, The EU-decision on Terrorism,
Resolution no. 1373 (2001) of the UN Security Council, the Convention on Fighting Illegal
Actions Against Air Transport, the European Convention on Prosecutions in Criminal
Matters, the European Convention on Fight Against Terrorism, the IMO Convention on
Hijacking and the Montreal Convention on Terrorism in Airports.
ENGLAND & WALES
The UK cooperates in conventional ways with other countries and other organisations as
regards terrorism as it does with other kinds of serious crime and it would be unrealistic to
attempt to set these out as part of a questionnaire on this subject. However, set out below
is a list of some of the main relevant conventions:
INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS RELATING TO TERRORISM : STATUS OF THE UK
AND OVERSEAS TERRITORIES
1. Convention on Offences and certain other Acts Committed on board Aircraft (Tokyo,
14.9.1963)
UK Signature: 14 Sept. 1963
UK Ratification: 29 Nov. 1968
UK's Ratification was on behalf of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Territories under the Territorial Sovereignty of the United Kingdom (excluding
the Associated States)
Subsequently extended to Anguilla with effect 1 Dec. 1982.
2. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, 16.12.1970)
UK Signature: 16 Dec. 1970
UK Ratification: 22 Dec. 1971
UK's Ratification was on behalf of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Territories under the Territorial Sovereignty of the United Kingdom, including
the British Solomon Islands Protectorate (but excluding the Associated States).
Subsequently extended to Anguilla with effect 15 Dec. 1982.
3. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation
(Montreal, 23.9.1971)
UK Signature: 23 Sept. 1971
UK Ratification: 25 Oct. 1973
UK's Ratification was on behalf of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Territories under the Territorial Sovereignty of the United Kingdom, including
55
the British Solomon Islands Protectorate (but excluding the Associated States).
Subsequently extended to Anguilla with effect 7 Nov. 1990.
Statement: 8 October 1971 (Communicated to all States recognised by the UK), HMG
'recalled their view that if a regime is not recognised as the Government of a State, neither
signature nor the deposit of any instrument by it, nor notification of any of those acts will
bring about recognition of that regime by any other State'.
4. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally
Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents (New York, 14.12.1973)
UK Signature: 13 Dec. 1974
UK Ratification: 2 May 1979
Extended to:
Date
Anguilla
26 Mar. 1987
Bailiwick of Guernsey
1 June 1979
Bailiwick of Jersey
1 June 1979
Bermuda
1 June 1979
British Antarctic Territory
1 June 1979
BIOT
1 June 1979
British Virgin Islands
1 June 1979
Cayman Islands
1 June 1979
Falkland Islands
1 June 1979
Gibraltar
1 June 1979
Isle of Man
1 June 1979
Montserrat
1 June 1979
Pitcairn Group
1 June 1979
St. Helena and Dependencies
1 June 1979
Sovereign Base Areas
1 June 1979
Turks and Caicos Islands
1 June 1979 (see
over):
Declaration: 7 Dec.1977 – Regarding the reservation entered by the Government of
Burundi (on accession) as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention,
and are unable to consider Burundi as having validly acceded to the Convention until such
time as the reservation (to Arts. 2(2) and 6(1)) are withdrawn.
Objection: 2 May 1979 – UK does not regard as valid the reservation made by Iraq in
respect of paragraph 1(b) of Article 1 of the said Convention.
Objection: 12 Nov. 1979 – to Guatemala's rejection of the UK's extension of the above to
Belize.
Objection: 28 Feb. 1985 – to Argentina's Declaration of 3 October 1983 (re. the Falkland
Islands).
31 May 1985 – Communication of 2 Notes to the Depositary re. terrorist attacks in London.
5. International Convention against the Taking of Hostages (New York, 17.12.1979)
UK Signature: 18 Dec. 1979
UK Ratification: 4 June 1982
UK's Ratification was on behalf of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Territories under the Territorial Sovereignty of the United Kingdom.
56
6. Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials (Vienna, 3.3.1980)
UK Signature: 13 June 1980
UK Ratification: 6 Sept. 1991
Declaration: 11 Dec. 1991 – stating that the UK's instrument of ratification of 6 Sept. 1991
should be construed as extending to the Bailiwicks of Jersey and Guernsey.
No further extensions to OTs recorded
7. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving
International Civil Aviation, Supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, done at Montreal on 23 September 1971
(Montreal, 24.2.1988)
UK Signature: 26 Oct. 1988
UK Ratification: 15 Nov. 1990
Was extended to Hong Kong with effect 21 May 1997
(Subsequently extended by China to HKSAR with effect 1 July 1997)
Extended to Isle of Man with effect 14 Feb. 1997
8. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime
Navigation (Rome, 10.3.1988)
UK Signature: 22 Sept. 1988
UK Ratification: 3 May 1991
Extended to Isle of Man with effect 8 Feb. 1999.
9. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms on
the Continental Shelf (Rome, 10.3.1988)
UK Signature: 22 Sept. 1998
UK Ratification: 3 May 1991
Extended to Isle of Man with effect 8 Feb. 1999.
10. Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection
(Montreal, 1.3.1991)
UK Signature: 1 Mar. 1991
UK Ratification: 28 Apr, 1997
Declaration: 28.4.1977 – the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a
producer of plastic explosives
Extended to:
Date
British Virgin Islands
26 Jan. 2001
Cayman Islands
30 Oct. 1999
Falkland Islands
30 Oct. 1999
Guernsey
30 Oct. 1999
Isle of Man
30 Oct. 1999
Jersey
30 Oct. 1999
Montserrat
30 Oct. 1999
11. Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings (New York, 15.12.1997)
UK Signature: 12 Jan. 1988
UK Ratification: 7 Mar. 2001 (entry into force: 23 May 2001)
No extensions to OTs recorded
12. Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of terrorism (New York, 10.1.2000)
UK Signature: 10 Jan. 2000
UK Ratification: 7 Mar. 2001 (entry into force: 10 April 2002)
57
No extensions to OTs recorded
EUROPEAN CONVENTIONS
A) European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (Strasbourg, 27.1.1977)
UK Signature: 27 Jan. 1977
UK Ratification: 24 July 1978
UK Ratification included; Bailiwick of Guernsey, Bailiwick of Jersey and the Isle of Man
Subsequently extended to Gibraltar with effect 21 Nov. 1988
B) Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union
relating to Extradition between the Member States of the European Union (Dublin,
27.9.1996)
UK Signature: 27 Sept. 1996
UK Adoption: 20.12.2001 (in accordance with Art.18(2))
No extensions recorded
FRANCE
Les instruments bilatéraux de coopération judiciaire en matière pénale
La France n'a pas pour habitude de négocier des conventions de coopération judiciaire en
matière pénale spécifiques à la lutte contre le terrorisme. Néanmoins, les conventions
bilatérales élaborées en matière d’entraide pénale et de d’extradition s’appliquent, de
manière générale, à toutes formes de criminalité. Elles ont donc vocation à être mises en
œuvre en matière de lutte contre le terrorisme.
Les conventions et accords auxquels la France est partie
En matière de lutte contre le terrorisme, la France est partie à l’ensemble des conventions
de l’ONU et de l’UE relatives à la prévention et à la répression des agissements
terroristes. La France a d’ailleurs participé activement à l’élaboration de ces conventions à
vocation universelle.
Parmi les treize conventions des Nations Unies relatives à la lutte contre le terrorisme, les
plus emblématiques sont les suivantes :
-
Convention sur la prévention et la répression des infractions contre les personnes
jouissant d'une protection internationale, y compris les agents diplomatiques.
Adoptée par l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies le 14 décembre 1973
-
Convention internationale contre la prise d'otages. Adoptée par l'Assemblée
générale des Nations Unies le 17 décembre 1979
-
Convention internationale pour la répression des attentats terroristes à l'explosif.
Adoptée par l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies le 15 décembre 1997
-
Convention internationale pour la répression du financement du terrorisme.
Adoptée par l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies le 9 décembre 1999. La
France avait, pris l’initiative de cette dernière Convention, ratifiée à ce jour par plus
de 130 Etats.
58
-
Convention des Nations Unies sur la répression des actes de terrorisme nucléaire,
adoptée par l’assemblée générale le 13 avril 2005. La France avait d’ailleurs
exprimé à cette occasion son souhait de voir le consensus se prolonger pour
l’adoption prochaine du projet de Convention générale sur le terrorisme
international.
Au plan régional, la France est également partie à l’ensemble des conventions de l’Union
européenne et du Conseil de l’Europe applicables à la lutte contre le terrorisme. Comme
tous les Etats membres de l’Union européenne, elle applique également les instruments
de mise en œuvre du principe de reconnaissance mutuelle (mandat d’arrêt européen,
notamment).
L’entraide en matière de terrorisme
Les outils internationaux et européens auxquels la France est partie ont pour seule
vocation d’établir entre les Etats parties des normes communes et des définitions
communes de l’ensemble des infractions relevant d’agissements à visée terroriste.
Les derniers développements en la matière au sein du conseil de l’Europe ont trait
notamment à l’utilisation d’Internet à des fins terroristes.
L’entraide en matière de terrorisme s’appuie sur les outils classiques de l’entraide,
conventions multilatérales ou accords bilatéraux, l’influence des outils internationaux
précédemment visés consistant à favoriser cette entraide en limitant les obstacles dus à
l’exigence de double incrimination des faits visés.
Equipes communes d’enquête
Depuis la loi du 9 mars 2004, les magistrats du parquet ou les magistrats instructeurs
peuvent créer des équipes communes d’enquête avec les autorités judiciaires des autres
Etats membres de l’Union Européenne (articles 695-2 et 695-3 du code de procédure
pénale). Cette possibilité avait été décidée au sein de l’Union Européenne dans le cadre
de l’article 13 de la convention du 29 mai 2000 et de la décision-cadre du 13 juin 2002.
Les équipes communes d’enquête vont au delà des instruments classiques d’entraide
puisqu’elles permettent à des enquêteurs d’un autre Etat d’agir en France sous la direction
d’un magistrat français. A l’inverse, des enquêteurs français agiront sous l’autorité d’un
magistrat d’un autre Etat lorsqu’ils se trouveront sur le territoire de ce dernier et dans le
cadre de la procédure ouverte dans ce pays.
C’est pourquoi, la constitution d’une équipe commune d’enquête est soumise à l’accord
préalable du ministre de la justice.
Des protocoles d’accord-type ont été signés :
- le 6 novembre 2003 avec l’Espagne,
- le 12 octobre 2006 avec l’Allemagne,
- le 23 février 2007 avec la Slovénie,
- le 19 juin 2007 avec la Roumanie,
- le 5 février 2008 avec les Pays-Bas,
59
Des contacts ont également été pris avec les autorités portugaises, belges, britanniques et
bulgares aux mêmes fins.
La première équipe commune d’enquête a été signée le 15 septembre 2004 avec
l’Espagne.
Au 7 mars 2008, 13 équipes communes d’enquête ont été signées par la France dont 8 en
matière terroriste (6 avec l’Espagne, 1 avec la Belgique et 1 avec l’Allemagne), ce qui fait
de la France une nation pilote en la matière au sein de l’Union Européenne.
Relations avec Eurojust :
Le ministère de la justice français (Direction des affaires criminelles et des grâces) veille à
optimiser l’information du représentant national auprès d’Eurojust en application du code
de procédure pénale et des décisions du Conseil de l’Union européenne du 28 février
2002 et du 20 septembre 2005.
Parfois, Eurojust transmet à la DACG des informations intéressant directement des
procédures judicaires françaises en cours
Code de procédure pénale :
Section III : De l'unité Eurojust.
Article 695-4
Conformément à la décision du Conseil du 28 février 2002 instituant Eurojust afin de
renforcer la lutte contre les formes graves de criminalité, l'unité Eurojust, organe de l'Union
européenne doté de la personnalité juridique agissant en tant que collège ou par
l'intermédiaire d'un représentant national, est chargée de promouvoir et d'améliorer la
coordination et la coopération entre les autorités compétentes des Etats membres de
l'Union européenne dans toutes les enquêtes et poursuites relevant de sa compétence.
Article 695-5
L'unité Eurojust, agissant par l'intermédiaire de ses représentants nationaux ou en tant
que collège, peut :
1° Informer le procureur général des infractions dont elle a connaissance et lui demander
de faire procéder à une enquête ou de faire engager des poursuites ;
2° Demander au procureur général de dénoncer ou de faire dénoncer des infractions aux
autorités compétentes d'un autre Etat membre de l'Union européenne ;
3° Demander au procureur général de faire mettre en place une équipe commune
d'enquête ;
4° Demander au procureur général ou au juge d'instruction de lui communiquer les
informations issues de procédures judiciaires qui sont nécessaires à l'accomplissement de
ses tâches.
Article 695-6
Lorsque le procureur général ou le juge d'instruction saisi ne donne pas suite à une
demande de l'unité Eurojust, il l'informe dans les meilleurs délais de la décision intervenue
et de ses motifs.
60
Toutefois, cette motivation n'est pas obligatoire pour les demandes mentionnées aux 1°,
2° et 4° de l'article 695-5, lorsqu'elle peut porter atteinte à la sécurité de la Nation ou
compromettre le bon déroulement d'une enquête en cours ou la sécurité d'une personne.
Article 695-7
Lorsqu'une demande d'entraide nécessite, en vue d'une exécution coordonnée,
l'intervention de l'unité Eurojust, celle-ci peut en assurer la transmission aux autorités
requises par l'intermédiaire du représentant national intéressé.
HUNGARY
5.) Yes, Hungary has entered into relevant conventions on countering terrorism, the
Criminal Code was amended (last in 2007) in the light of the Framework Decision of 13
June 2002 on combating terrorism (see e.g. the definition).
As far as I know there has not been any terrorism case relating to Hungary before
Eurojust.
ITALY
A5. As to the international conventions ratified by Italy in respect of the fight against
terrorism, reference can be made to the following: Act no. 718 dated 26 November 1985,
ratifying the international convention against the taking of hostages as signed in New York
on 18 September 1979; Act no. 719 dated 26 November 1985, ratifying the European
convention on terrorism as signed in Strasbourg on 27 January 1977; Act no. 720 dated 26
November 1985, ratifying the European convention for the suppression of terrorism as
signed in Dublin on 4 December 1979; Act no. 210 dated 12 May 1995, ratifying the
international convention against recruiting, use, financing and training of mercenaries as
adopted by the UN General Assembly on 4 December 1989; Act no. 7 dated 27 January
2003, ratifying the New York convention of 9 December 1999 as adopted by the UN
General Assembly for the suppression of the financing of terrorism (see point A. above);
Act no. 34 dated 14 February 2003, ratifying the international convention for the
suppression of terrorist bombings using explosives as adopted by the UN General
Assembly on 15 December 1977. - The following should additionally be mentioned in this
connection: Act no. 41 dated 14 March 2005, containing Provisions to implement decision
2002/187/JHA of the EU Council of 28 February 2002, setting up the EUROJUST; Act no.
69 dated 22 April 2005, containing provisions to bring domestic law into line with
framework decision 2002/584/JHA of the Council of 13 June 2002 relating to the European
arrest warrant and the procedures for the surrender of individuals between Member
States; Act no. 146 dated 16 March 2006, ratifying the UN Convention and protocols
against transnational organised crime as adopted by the UN General Assembly on 15
November 2000 and 31 May 2001. - Reference should also be made to legislative decree
no. 109 dated 22 June 2007, containing Measures to prevent, counter and suppress the
financing of terrorism and the activities of countries threatening international peace and
security, which transposed directive 2005/60/EC. The latter decree is especially significant
in view of the fight against the financing of terrorism, as it sets up (section 3) the Financial
Security Committee at the Ministry of Economy and Finance. The Committee is in charge
of a valuable data collection activity in co-operation with judicial and other law enforcement
authorities and can put forward proposals to the Ministry of Economy, in agreement with
61
the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, in view of adopting orders and decrees for the freezing of
funds and economic resources held by specific natural or legal persons. - As for the
activities related to the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), it should be pointed out that the
Ministry of Justice, in its capacity as the central authority, provides continued practical and
administrative assistance to national judicial authorities, which are competent - pursuant to
the new allocation of competences as per Act no. 69/2005 - for issuing and enforcing EAW
requests; requests concerning terrorism are included in a separate category. - Regarding
the relationships with EUROJUST, Italy appointed specific correspondents for terrorism.
The correspondents are in charge of providing the national member in EUROJUST with
the information referred to in the Eurojust decision by the EU Council dated 28 February
2002. Based on the latter decision, Eurojust is in charge of co-ordinating investigations
and co-operating in criminal prosecution. The obsolete horizontal co-operation model,
based on bilateral agreements between States, was replaced by a vertical co-operation
approach whereby certain functions were committed to a supranational judicial body. It is
exactly the information forwarded by national authorities to Eurojust that makes up the
valuable information repository held by the new judicial body in question.
LITHUANIA
Yes. Lithuania is a party to these Conventions:
I Multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations:
1. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally
Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, New York, 14 December 1973
2. International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, New York, 17 December 1979
3. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, New York, 15
December 1997
4. International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, New York, 9
December 1999
5. International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, New York,
13 April 2005
II Multilateral treaties deposited with the Council of Europe:
1. European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, Strasbourg, 27 January 1977
2. Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, Warsaw, 16 May 2005
(*signed, not yet ratified)
III Multilateral treaties deposited with other depositaries:
1. Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, Tokyo, 14
September 1963 (ICAO)
2. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, The Hague, 16
December 1970 (ICAO)
3. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation,
Montreal, 23 September 1971 (ICAO)
4. Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, Vienna, 3 March 1980
(IAEA)
5. Protocol on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving
International Civil Aviation, supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, Montreal, 24 February 1988 (ICAO)
62
6. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime
Navigation, Rome, 10 March 1988 (IMO)
7. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms
located on the Continental Shelf, Rome, 10 March 1988 (IMO)
8. Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection, Montreal,
1 March 1991 (ICAO)
IV Bilateral treaties:
1. Countering terrorism is also emphasized as a priority area with regard to cooperation in
the field of combating international organized crime under bilateral treaties with, inter alia,
Belarus, Germany, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Poland, Turkey, Ukraine (not yet in
force) and Uzbekistan:
- Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Lithuania and the Government of
the Republic of Belarus on Cooperation in Combating Organised Crime, Illegal Drug and
Psychotropic Substances Trafficking, Terrorism and Other Primes (ratified in 2007.06.26)
- Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Lithuania and the Government of
the Republic of Kazakhstan on cooperation in combating organised crime, illegal drug and
psychotropic substances trafficking, terrorism and other primes (ratified in 2001.07.10)
- Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Lithuania and the Government of
the Republic of Turkey on cooperation in combating terrorism, organised crime, illicit
circulation of (trafficking in) narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and other major
primes (ratified in 2004.06.29)
- Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Lithuania and the Government of
the Republic of Hungary on cooperation in combating terrorism, illicit drug trafficking,
organized crime and other major primes (ratified in 2002.10.01)
- Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Lithuania and the Government of
the Federal Republic of Germany on the cooperation in combating organised crime,
terrorism and other major primes (ratified in 2002.05.07)
MALTA
MALTA is a party to the conventions in the attached Annex ‘A’. The MALTA Security
Service co-operates with its foreign counterparts in so far as intelligence sharing is
concerned and for purposes of co-ordinated activity should this become necessary. The
MALTA Police, through its specialised unit, is also enabled to offer assistance and
information to its counterparts. In terms of Art.12 of the Eurojust Decision, MALTA has
appointed a national correspondent for terrorism matters who holds periodic meetings with
the National Member for Eurojust.
NETHERLANDS
Answers a5-b3 have been prepared by the Dutch public prosecutor
Pro memorie
63
POLAND
Poland is a party to the following conventions of the UN:
- Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft of 1963;
- Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft of 1970;
- Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation of
1971;
- Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally
Protected Persons of 1973;
- International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages of 1979;
- Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material of 1980;
- Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving
International Civil Aviation of 1988;
- Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime
Navigation of 1988;
- Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms
Located on the Continental Shelf of 1988;
- Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Identification of 1991;
- International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing of 1997;
- International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism of 1999.
Poland is a party to the abovementioned conventions and based on Article 9 of the Polish
Constitution is it bound by those conventions. Provisions of such international agreements,
however, cannot be directly applied in the Polish legal system and according to Article 87
of the Polish Constitution they must first be ratified. In addition to the ratification of
international agreements, parties (countries) are required to take necessary action to
implement in their domestic legal systems proper regulations reflecting the convention.
Poland has been adopting such measures for years.
Since Poland joined the European Communities, it is now bound by the bulk of the EU
legislation.
PORTUGAL
The conventions are those that were established among EU States.
ROMANIA
In December 2001, the Parliament of Romania adopted the Strategy on National Security,
with a view to comply with the requirements for accession to NATO and the EU, as well as
for multi-dimensional cooperation within the international community faced with new
security risks, including terrorist threats and attacks. Due to the special attention paid to
this phenomenon, a National Strategy for Preventing and Combating Terrorism has been
approved by the Supreme Council of National Defense, whereby the National System for
Preventing and Combating Terrorism has been organized.
64
According to the provisions of the National Strategy for Preventing and Combating
Terrorism, one of the objectives is to take part in all the international efforts of preventing
and combating terrorism in different geographical areas, by: Active contribution to the bi –
and multilateral initiatives meant to identify the most efficient political and diplomatic
actions, regulations and other legal instruments, as well as international cooperation
mechanisms, meant to prevent the development and the manifestation of terrorist acts, as
well as to counter its associated activities; Integrating into the national legal framework and
the activities supported by Romania the responsibilities assumed through international
agreements; Exchange of information;
Involvement of professional armed forces in multinational military operations, in
accordance with the UN Resolutions.
Romania had the opportunity to benefit from several activities of technical
assistance organized by United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime(UNODC) – seminars
organized since 2002.
Recently (July 2007) Romania was part of the Global Project on Reinforcing the
Judiciary System against Terrorism, project administrated by Terrorism Preventing Body
(TPB) from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
Romania ratified the international conventions and agreements on the prevention
and fights against terrorism.
Romania has ratified all 13 UN Conventions related to this matter4, as well as the
European Convention on the suppression of terrorism and its Amending Protocol.
On the 16th of May 2005, Romania was among the first 31 countries which had
signed in Warsaw the Council of Europe Convention on the prevention of terrorism and
among the 20 countries signing the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search,
Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing. The Council
of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism was ratified by Law 411/2006. The
Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the
Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism was also ratified by Law
420/2006.
The premises of Regional Centre for Countering Cross-Border are located in
Romania. This Centre – SECI -, set up within the South East European Initiative, provides
training on law enforcement and exchange of intelligence in order to counter cross-border
crime, including terrorism, in 12 countries in Central and Eastern Europe.
Romania is also part to the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Agreement on the
fight against organized crime.
Romania has concluded bilateral agreements on combating organized crime and
terrorism with most European states, as well as with countries in other geographical areas.
Law No. 302/2004 on international judicial co-operation in criminal matters complies
with the requirements of the Security Council Resolution no. 1373 (2001). Thus, extradition
for terrorist offences shall not be denied on the ground of political motivation. The law also
allows extradition from Romania of Romanian citizens, under certain conditions.
- The relevant multilateral Conventions ratified by Romania in the field of preventing and
combating terrorism and related to terrorism are presented in the Annex below
More information on this topic will be available in our further correspondence Late September 2005, Romania signed the 13th UN Convention in this field, for the Suppression of Acts of.
Nuclear Terrorism. This UN Convention was ratified by Law 369/2006.
4
65
SCOTLAND
The entering into of international agreements and conventions is a matter for the United
Kingdom and not for Scotland alone. Please see the response from the Judicial Council
for England and Wales.
66
a6. Are there national practices in place to finetune data collection, intelligence activities and as a consequence - investigations into acts of terrorism?
BULGARIA
At the end of 2007 the National Security Agency was created by a special statute.
According to Article 4, paragraph 1, point 11 of the Statute on State Agency “National
Security” the agency conducts activity for monitoring, detection, counteraction and
prevention of attacks against the national security, which have been contemplated or are
being prepared or accomplished in connection inter alia with international terrorism and
extremism. The practices of this new agency are yet to be seen. Pursuant to Article 9,
paragraph 1, point 9 the agency is to cooperate with similar services of other states and
with international organizations. The data collected can be statistical or related to concrete
suspects and acts.
CZECH REPUBLIC
A6. The disposal with the data collections (personal data including) in the criminal
proceeding is regulated by number international treaties or recommendations of Europol,
Interpol, NATO and by number of national legal Acts. At the European level, this filed is
regulated for example by Framework Decision on simplifying the exchange of information
and intelligence between law enforcement authorities (shall be implemented in 2008) or by
the Convention on mutual cooperation in criminal matters between member states of the
European Union (Art 23). As regard the Council of Europe level, the recommendation No.
98/15 on using personal data in police5 sector as adopted in 17th September 1987 at the
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is followed.
DENMARK
The Danish Intelligence Service is having the primary responsibility for investigations on
actions of terrorism. Presumably it includes collection of data and activities. The practices
of the Danish Intelligence Service are classified. Therefore we do not have access to this
kind of information.
At the homepage of the Danish Intelligence Service, www.pet.dk., one can find information
about the Intelligence Service in Danish as in English. For instance you can find the
annual reports of the Intelligence Service.
a7. What amendments to legislation and/or transnational agreements could be made in
order to more effectively counter the different types of terrorism?
b4. Are you aware of cases where major criminal facts (e.g. corruption and/or economic
crimes) have not become the subject of a judicial proceeding because of the explicit and/or
implicit intention not to prosecute such facts - on grounds unrelated to lack of evidence 5
Police as one of the authoritiy responsible for criminal proceedings
67
on the part of entities such as the judicial police and/or public prosecutors that are in
charge of bringing about and monitoring investigations?
ENGLAND & WALES
It is impossible to give a useful answer to this question, not least because the important
elements of data-collection and intelligence activities are highly confidential and are not
available to be distributed in a public document.
FRANCE
Par définition, étant classifiées, le ministère de la Justice et les magistrats n’ont
connaissance ni des informations recueillies par les services de renseignement français
ou étrangers, ni de leur mode de transmission entre les dits services.
Ces informations ne seront connues des autorités judiciaires que si elles sont
déclassifiées par les autorités administratives compétentes à leur initiative ou,
éventuellement, à la demande des autorités judiciaires à l’issue d’un processus complexe
de « déclassification » au cours duquel une autorité administrative indépendante (la
Commission Consultative du Secret de la Défense Nationale) émettra un avis.
Ainsi, les informations des services de renseignement peuvent :
- être intégrées dans les procédures judiciaires par le biais de procès verbaux
dressées par les services de police judiciaire constatant les éléments fournis en
citant le service qui en est à l’origine, voire en se contentant de viser un
« renseignement anonyme » sans réelle force probante ;
- être versées directement dans la procédure.
Ces informations permettront soit la mise en œuvre d’une enquête ou l’ouverture d’une
information judiciaire dont l’objet sera de confirmer ou d’infirmer la réalité des faits
contenus dans le renseignement, soit d’enrichir une procédure déjà ouverte.
En principe, les seules informations recueillies par les services de renseignement sont
insuffisantes pour fonder une condamnation si, par la suite, elle n’ont pu être
judiciairement confirmées, voire renforcées.
En France, cette intégration du renseignement dans les procédure judicaires est en
pratique facilitée par le fait que la Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire (DST) est à la
fois un service de renseignement et un service de police judiciaire, ce qui n’est le cas ni de
la Direction Centrale des Renseignements Généraux (DCRG), ni de la Direction Générale
des Services Extérieurs (DGSE).
Cette double compétence (judiciaire / renseignement) de la DST a fait la preuve de son
efficacité ces dernières années en permettant la neutralisation judiciaire de plusieurs
groupes et projets terroristes sur le territoire national.
Les Renseignements Généraux, pour leur part, n’ont pas directement vocation à rendre
compte de leurs informations aux magistrats en l’absence de compétence judiciaire
spécifique. Cependant, lorsqu'ils disposent d'informations à vocation judiciaire, ils
établissent un rapport à destination du directeur central de l'une des directions à
compétence judiciaire, en fonction des affaires traitées par ces dernières. Sa contribution
68
se traduit donc par des notes de transmission mais également par un échange régulier
avec des services de police judiciaire, notamment la Direction Centrale de la Police
Judiciaire. (DCPJ).
Les contacts entre l’autorité judiciaire et les services de la DGSE sont en théorie
inexistants. Néanmoins, la DGSE assure également l=échange de renseignements via la
diffusion de notes, transmises par voie de courriers officiels alimentant de manière ciblée
les interlocuteurs institutionnels et participe à des réunions périodiques.
Au niveau international, s’agissant de l’échange du renseignement, les restrictions mises
en place portent sur la protection absolue des sources humaines et la non utilisation des
renseignements sans l’accord du service émetteur, ainsi que l’interdiction de transmettre à
un service tiers les renseignements communiqués sans l’autorisation expresse du service
émetteur.
Par ailleurs, créée en 1984, l’Unité de Coordination de la Lutte Anti-Terroriste (UCLAT)
assure la nécessaire coopération opérationnelle entre services spécialisés. L’UCLAT est
rattachée au Directeur général de la police nationale et centralise les informations fournies
notamment par la DST, la DCRG, la DCPJ et la Gendarmerie Nationale (Bureau de la
Lutte Anti Terroriste). les réunions organisées au sein de l’UCLAT et auxquelles
participent ponctuellement un magistrat de la Direction des Affaires Criminelles et des
Grâces du Ministère de la Justice, permettent notamment un échange sur l’état de la
menace terroriste en France et à l’étranger.
Par ailleurs, le Comité interministériel de lutte antiterroriste (CILAT) permet au ministre de
l’Intérieur de définir une doctrine unique pour la circulation des informations entre services
spécialisés .
La création courant 2008 de la Direction Centrale du Renseignement Intérieur (DCRI),
regroupant globalement les moyens de la DST et de la DCRG, devrait à terme permettre
d’optimiser les outils existants en matière de collecte des renseignement. La DCRI
conservera les prérogatives judiciaires de la DST.
HUNGARY
6./ Yes, there are national practices in place to fine-tune data collection and intelligence
activities.
To attain the criminal prosecution objective and subject to a court permit, the Police shall
be entitled in the case of serious criminal acts to
a) secretly search a private home (secret search) and record its findings;
b) to observe and record the events taking place in a private home using technical
devices;
c) to get access to and record the information contained in letters, other postal sendings,
or transmitted through telephone lines or equivalent telecommunications systems;
d) to get access to and use data and information generated by E-mail messages
exchanged on the Internet or using other computer technology.
Information collected using the devices relating to persons obviously not affected by the
procedure on which the secret collection of information is based shall be promptly
destroyed and shall not be
69
processed and used any longer.
The Police shall be entitled to use the devices and techniques of secret information
collection according to the provisions set out therein for the purpose of finding a person
searched under the suspicion of a criminal act and if the criminal act not mentioned – inter
alia - is a terrorist act or act of terrorist type.
Detecting terrorist acts shall be the competence of the Police if the relevant report is
submitted to the Police or if it became known to the Police.
In order to discharge its crime prevention and crime fighting tasks set out in the law and its
public administration and law enforcement tasks at the central, regional and local levels,
the Police shall handle the personal data of, and other data relating to, persons suspected
of committing a criminal
act, involved in a criminal procedure, victims and other persons involved, the clients in
public administration procedures and other persons concerned.
The data necessary for discharging the tasks of the Police - as set out in Act XXXIV 1994
on Police - shall be handled by the designated units of the Police and the Ministry of the
Justice and Law Enforcement. The data processed by the police data handling
organisation shall be made available
for statistical purposes in a manner which makes it impossible to identify the individual
persons.
The data connected with criminal prosecution and public administration shall be handled
separately.
Personal data originating from the records and the underlying personal documents may be
disclosed for the purposes of the procedure, in addition to the person concerned, to the
proceeding authority in respect of a person subject to a procedure within the restrictions
set out in the law or to a foreign authority based on an international commitment. Data may
be disclosed from the police's data processing systems also to other organisations or
persons if their entitlement to requesting such data is certified.
In order to discharge its tasks, the Police may also retrieve data from other data
processing systems subject to specifying the purpose of using such data. The disclosure
of data shall be documented both at the organisation requesting and the organisation
disclosing such data.
Personal data collected and stored by the Police for criminal prosecution purposes shall
only be used for police or criminal prosecution purposes unless the law provides
otherwise.
The Police shall be entitled to have access to personal data handled by other
organisations for the purpose of discharging its criminal prosecution tasks in accordance
with the law provided that the data so obtained shall not be used for a purpose other than
criminal prosecution and shall not be forwarded to any third party.
During the handling of police data, data based on facts shall be distinguished from data
based on an assumption, opinion or estimate.
The head of the police data handling organisation shall take care of preventing
unauthorised access to, disclosure, modification or deletion of personal data and of the
technical and logical protection against unauthorised deletion.
In order to protect personal data, the police data handling organisation shall ensure that
70
a) the person concerned have access to, and exercise his/her right to modify or delete
his/her data handled by the data handling organisation unless the law provides to the
contrary;
b) the stored data be deleted if the reasons for their handling have ceased according to the
provisions of the law or if the deletion was ordered by a court during a data protection
procedure.
The duration of police registration shall not include the year in which the data was
recorded.
The police data handling organisation shall handle the natural personal identification data in the case of foreign nationals, also the nationality - of persons concerned, their address
and the criminalistic data connected with the criminal act in the case of criminal records. It
may use identification codes in accordance with the provisions of the law.
In discharging its investigating authority tasks, the Police may request the data from the
personal data and address registry for the criminal data handling purposes also by giving
the personal identifier and request the same for this purpose from the person concerned or
derive it from his/her documents, and disclose it to another investigating authority if the
conditions for data handling set out in the law are met also by that authority; request the
tax identifier from the Tax and Finance Control Office or other investigation authority subject to a prosecutor's permit - or from the person concerned, if knowledge of taxation
data based on this identifier is necessary for starting or
conducting a criminal procedure.
Special data can be handled only in direct connection with the concrete criminal act.
In order to discharge its tasks set out in the law, the Police shall be entitled to use the data
of records kept by public administration offices free of charge. Data may be requested
regardless of normal business hours from the National Personal Data and Address
Registration Office, the national basic vehicle and driving licence registry, the registry of
border traffic, the records of persons prohibited from crossing the borders and passport
data, the registry of persons convicted (by final verdict of the court) and the registry of
persons detained in penal institutions. Data requests shall be
satisfied even if data are missing or incomplete.
The head of the police department requesting data shall be liable for the retrieval of the
data from the organisations set out in paragraph (1) and the lawful use thereof by the
Police.
In order to discharge its criminal prosecution tasks set out in the law, the Police shall be
entitled to handle, or retrieve from the records of other organisations authorised to handle
data - inter alia -,
the data of persons convicted by final verdict of a court, the sentences and the measures
(criminal records) for the duration set out in a separate law;
the criminalistically relevant details of uncleared criminal cases until the perpetrator is
found or the expiration of punishability, whichever occurs first;
traces, residuals, devices and smell samples for the duration set out in paragraph b) and if the perpetrator is detected or known - the data, fingerprints, personal description, photo,
voice and smell sample of persons interrogated under grounded suspicion of committing a
wilful criminal act and the data of the criminalistic expert examinations, for 20 years after
the expiration of punishability of the criminal act or, if convicted, after exemption from the
sanctions for criminal history;
71
the criminalistically relevant details of the acts of persons interrogated under grounded
suspicion of committing, or convicted of, a wilful criminal act; until the expiration of
punishability of the criminal act or, if convicted, until exemption from the sanctions for
criminal history;
the data of persons detained by the Police, banned from leaving their home towns and for
whom placement of a bail was permitted; until the expiration of punishability of the criminal
act or, if convicted, until exemption from the sanctions for criminal history;
the data of wanted persons and searched vehicles and objects and of sales, until the
reason for recording such data ceases or the expiration of punishability;
with the exception of persons affected by secret collection of information including persons
cooperating with the Police and cover investigators and the results of the application; for
two years after concluding the secret collection of information if no criminal procedure was
started or if a criminal procedure was started until the expiration of punishability of the
criminal act or, if convicted, until exemption from the sanctions for criminal history, or for
up to 20 years, and in the case of cooperators and cover investigators, for 20 years after
termination of such cooperation or activity as cover investigator.
in the case of serious criminal acts or if the criminal act can be connected with crossborder crime;
is perpetrated in series or in an organised manner; is perpetrated with arms; seriously
disturbs public security.
based on an international commitment, the data of persons, and their acts and
connections against whom international criminal measures need to be taken until the
expiration of punishability or for the duration set out in the relevant international
convention.
ITALY
A6. With regard to the national practices aimed at finetuning data collection within the
framework of investigations into acts of terrorism, the following should be mentioned:
Public prosecutors in charge of terrorism take care to continuously co-ordinate their
activities with and circulate information to Eurojust; an IT project aimed at setting up a
centralised database at Eurojust is actually under way. - Additionally, the magistrates
attached to the individual district public prosecutor's offices co-ordinate their investigations
at domestic level, also via regular meetings and the exchange of documents and
information. A computerised database called SIDAT has been tested for about one year in
co-operation with the Ministry of Justice; it is intended to gather all the data entered by
district public prosecutor's offices in connection with proceedings related to terrorism.
These are the co-ordination mechanisms implemented so far, pending the creation of an
ad-hoc national organisation in charge of co-ordinating and fostering the investigations into
acts of terrorism - as called for by the CSM in its resolution dated 12 July 2006.
LITHUANIA
no answer
72
MALTA
The fact that Malta has a specialised body for intelligence and data collection (Malta
Security Service) constitutes good practice and has served its purpose well. Similarly the
fact that a unit headed by an Assistant Commissioner (International Relations Unit) is
entrusted with investigations and prosecutions into such offences is also considered as an
aid to more professional and focused results.
NETHERLANDS
At first, it is important to emphasise that intelligence activities and criminal investigations
are working strictly seperate from eachother. Each service has his own powers and tasks
and their goals differ at essential elements. Therefore, information gained by intelligence
activities is only under strict conditions available for criminal investigations.
Due to this strict separation between intelligence activities and criminal investigation there
are no national or rather said, combined practices regarding the fine-tuning of datacollection destined for intelligence activities or criminal investigations. When it comes to
the co-ordination between national organisations and international bodies involved in the
fight against terrorism, we refer to the national co-ordinator in the fight against terrorism
(NCTb). The NCTb was appointed to coordinate the efforts of the organisations involved in
combating terrorism in every area of counterterrorism in order to systematically improve
the effectiveness of their cooperation.
With regard to the coordination between the various organisations involved in combating
terrorism the National Public Prosecutor on Counterterrorism plays an important role,
particularly in those cases where criminal investigations and intelligence service
investigations coincide. The competencies of the National Public Prosecutor are based on
the Intelligence and Security Services Act. Article 38 subsection 1 stipulates that:
"If during the processing of information by...a service it appears that certain information
may also be relevant to the investigation or prosecution of offences, ...the head of a
service ...can give a written notification to the appropriate officer of the Public
Prosecutions Department."
The article is the first and only legal provision about the connection between the
intelligence services and the investigation services. Formally, the article leaves the
initiative for sharing information to the intelligence services and does not create the
obligation to share. In practice it turns out that the article results in a much increased
attuning and co-ordination between intelligence and investigation services from as early a
stage as the start of an intelligence investigation.
Furthermore, with regard to the contribution and use of intelligence in the proces of
criminal investigation, the bill on Protected Witnesses is of importance. This Bill offers the
opportunity to have officers of intelligence services in certain protected modalities heard by
the Examining Magistrate. It is expected that this will be relied on in future cases in order
to test the lawfulness of information used in investigations but proffered by intelligence
services. It is expected that this information will be admitted as evidence in a number of
instances, where this is not the case now. At the same time, as a result of this procedure
the period leading up to the trial of the substance of the case, the trial proper, will be
extended due to the hearing of a larger number of witnesses than before. In future, this will
have to be taken into account in the logistical planning of (major) terrorist investigations.
The crux of the amendments is the introduction of the modality for the hearing of protected
witnesses by the Examining Magistrate. It should be noted that only the Examining
73
Magistrate in the District Court in Rotterdam is allowed to hear witnesses whose identity
needs to be protected. Protecting the identity of witnesses means that the Examining
Magistrate may order that the suspect and/or his counsel are not allowed to attend the
hearing of the protected witness. In that case the Public Prosecutor is not allowed to
attend either. The defence and the Public Prosecutor will then be given the opportunity to
submit written questions which may be put to the witness by the Examining Magistrate.
The statement obtained in this way from a protected witness is included in the official
record drawn up by the Examining Magistrate. In drawing up this official record he must
make sure that the text of the official record laid down by him does not injure national
security. As only the General Intelligence and Security Service can assess fully whether
publication of certain information infringes national security, insertion of the official record
drawn up by the Examining Magistrate is only allowed on condition of the witness'
approval.
POLAND
It is not possible to provide details on information gathered, intelligence activities
undertaken and investigations conducted concerning terrorist acts, because those
activities are implemented by competent government agencies but mostly because they
are classified.
PORTUGAL
Not in the judicial system.
ROMANIA
We cannot speak of a practice regarding data collection, intelligence activities and
investigations.
The law provides in this respect that authorities and institutions must exchange data
and intelligence in the field of preventing and suppressing terrorism.
According to Law No.535/2004, the prevention and suppression of terrorism is
achieved in accordance with the international conventions on the suppression of terrorism,
to which Romania is a party, as well as with the international regulations and the national
legislation on human rights.
At a national level, the activity of prevention and suppression is organised and takes
place in a unitary manner, and the co-operation takes place within the National System for
the Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism (NSPST). This system is composed of
several institutions, listed in Art.6 para.(2) of Law No.535/2004.
The technical coordination of the NSPST is handled by the Centre for Anti-terrorist
Operative Coordination, set up within the structure of the Romanian Intelligence Service,
as a permanent structure.
Centre for Anti-terrorist Operative Coordination is the organisational and functional
structure that ensures continuity and coherence for the connection system that articulates
the components of the NSPST.
74
The Centre for Anti-terrorist Operative Coordination ensures the operative
exchange of data and intelligence between all the public authorities and institutions,
coordinates the activities that take place within the NSPST, integrates the data and
intelligence obtained, monitors terrorist activities and sends to the public institutions and
authorities that are members of the NSPST data and intelligence that require measures to
be taken according to their legal competences.
The National System for the Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism includes the
Prosecution Office of the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
As it has the competence to perform criminal prosecution for offences of terrorism,
according to Law No.508/2004, the D.I.O.O.C.T. has a representative in the Centre for
Anti-terrorist Operative Coordination.
The investigative work takes place according to special means of performing
criminal prosecution, according to each particular case, depending on the nature of the
offence, on the context and the complexity, and on the objective opportunities for taking
action.
Criminal investigation takes on specific features in situations that follow a terrorist
incident, when it is necessary to investigate the crime site, as part of a criminological
activity, within a criminal case, and the public prosecutor coordinates the work of a full
team, with well-defined solutions and tasks, according to the competences provided in the
law.
Such an investigation uses and takes into account actual and raw data and
intelligence which, when correlated, are likely to help the public prosecutor; also, any data
or intelligence obtained from international institutions may help the public prosecutor.
Essentially, the prevention and suppression of terrorism cannot take place in a
unitary manner, but through cooperation, collaboration and the sharing of intelligence and
data, both among national institutions and authorities, and with the institutions and
authorities of other States, either directly or through international institutions (EUROJUST,
INTERPOL, EUROPOL, SECI, etc.).
(v. anche allegato)
SCOTLAND
no answer
75