Research Handbook on International Law and Terrorism
Show Less

Research Handbook on International Law and Terrorism

Edited by Ben Saul

This Handbook brings together leading scholars and practitioners to examine the prolific body of international laws governing terrorism. It exhaustively covers the global response to terrorism in transnational criminal law, the international law on the use of force, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, the law of State responsibility, the United Nations Security Council, General Assembly, UN specialised bodies, and regional organisations. It also addresses special legal issues in dealing with terrorism such as gender, religion, victims of terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and customary law.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 40: The legal response of the Organisation of American States in combating terrorism

Mirko Sossai


The initiatives taken by the Organisation of the American States (OAS), presently comprised of 35 member states, to counter the manifestations of terrorist violence in the Americas can be divided into three main periods. The first historical phase culminated with the adoption by a Conference of foreign ministers in 1971 of the Convention to Prevent and Punish Acts of Terrorism Taking the Form of Crimes against Persons and Related Extortion that are of International Significance (1971 OAS Convention), in response to the multiple episodes of kidnapping of diplomats by revolutionary groups to obtain political concessions from governments. The paradigmatic example was the kidnapping and murder of Count Karl Von Spreti, the West German Ambassador to Guatemala, in 1970. In line with the crime-specific approach taken by the universal counter-terrorism treaties of that time, the 1971 OAS Convention accordingly sought to safeguard certain protected persons. The adoption of that international legal instrument was characterised by polarised positions among the OAS member states. While some delegations favoured a more comprehensive treaty instead of a one covering a specific issue, others feared that its provisions would infringe excessively on state sovereignty. As a result, only a narrow majority of states voted in favour of the Convention and signed it.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.