• Title/Summary/Keyword: International Terrorism

Search Result 132, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

A Study on Responses of the Korean kidnapping Terror in overseas (한국인 해외인질납치테러 대응방안)

  • Jeong, Joon-Sik;Kim, Won-Ki
    • Korean Security Journal
    • /
    • no.20
    • /
    • pp.339-363
    • /
    • 2009
  • The 9.11 demonstrated that terrorist attack could be more serious problem than the war in our modern life. No countries in the world have evaded being a target for terrorists today. As well as South Korea, the whole world must share attentions and responsibilities for fighting against the terrorism. Since the international terrorist groups have expanded their targets from Western countries to Koreans, civilian hostages are no longer other's affair; it became a serious threat to public. Increased Korean investment, trade, missionary, and travel overseas also expanded activity regions worldwide. It also result increased terrorist threats and possible abduction. The number of kidnapping crisis has increased since the terrorists use it as an effective method of sending a message. Piracy refers to a broad range of violent acts at sea, and has traditionally been regarded as common enemies. Piracy constitutes a great threat to the security of navigation as well as to the safety of vessels and crews. Lessons from hostage issues such as Korean hostage crisis in Somalia and Afghanistan show that it can cause criticism on moral issues if armed rescue missions fail or hostages are killed, so the governments and related corporations try to solve it by paying ransom. Terrorists and use these advantages in order to put a huge pressure on the governments. In this study we will look at essential characteristics and types of hostage abductions and recognition of national safety, lessons and solutions to previous Korean hostage cases in overseas. At the same time, it provides a guidelines of the direction in the fighting against terrorist groups and Piracy.

  • PDF

The Meaning of Extraordinary Circumstances under the Regulation No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (EC 항공여객보상규칙상 특별한 사정의 의미와 판단기준 - 2008년 EU 사법재판소 C-549/07 (Friederike Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia) 사건을 중심으로 -)

  • Kim, Young-Ju
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.29 no.2
    • /
    • pp.109-134
    • /
    • 2014
  • Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation of assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights (Regulation No 261/2004) provides extra protection to air passengers in circumstances of denied boarding, cancellation and long-delay. The Regulation intends to provide a high level of protection to air passengers by imposing obligations on air carriers and, at the same time, offering extensive rights to air passengers. If denied boarding, cancellation and long-delay are caused by reasons other than extraordinary circumstances, passengers are entitled for compensation under Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004. In Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane SpA(Case C-549/07, [2008] ECR I-11061), the Court did, however, emphasize that this does not mean that it is never possible for technical problems to constitute extraordinary circumstances. It cited specific examples of where: an aircraft manufacturer or competent authority revealed that there was a hidden manufacturing defect on an aircraft which impacts on safety; or damage was caused to an aircraft as a result of an act of sabotage or terrorism. Such events are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and is beyond the actual control of that carrier on account of its nature or origin. One further point arising out of the court's decision is worth mentioning. It is not just necessary to satisfy the extraordinary circumstances test for the airline to be excused from paying compensation. It must also show that the circumstances could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. It is clear from the language of the Court's decision that this is a tough test to meet: the airline will have to establish that, even if it had deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would clearly not have been able - unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time - to prevent the extraordinary circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight.