Terrorism, Domestic

Domestic terrorism is a common description of a type of extremely violent activity against a [Page 941]population for domestic political or religious purposes. There is no common precise delineation of it. It is held to be illegitimate. In the following text, the definition, significance, and justification of terrorism are discussed and examples are presented.

Definition

Although the notion of terrorism and derivative expressions, such as terrorists, are frequently used, both in professional frameworks and in daily discourse, there is no commonly accepted, adequate definition of that notion. Definitions of terrorism were abundant long before September 11, 2001, and the proclaimed War on Terror. For example, by 1988 one publication enumerated 109 different definitions of that concept.

There are several reasons for the multiplicity of definitions. First, international conventions have been formulated, signed, and often ratified, banning activities of certain types. Therefore, the notion of terrorism has been used with respect to certain types of such activity, rather than all of them. The first international convention in 1963 was on “offences and certain other acts on board aircrafts,” a 1988 international convention was “for the suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of maritime navigation, a 1997 international convention “for the suppression of terrorist bombings” was related to using explosives and other lethal devices in public places, and a 2005 international convention “for the suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism” was related to nuclear reactors and power plants.

Second, new forms of activity sometimes appear that constitute cases of terrorism. Hence, the 2006 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, for example, defined the term terrorist offense as an offence defined under any of the international conventions on terrorism that is in force.

Third and perhaps most important, definitions of terrorism have been proposed that would exclude certain types of activity on grounds of political or ideological considerations. The notion of being a terrorist is universally understood to be pejorative. Hence, when facing a definition of terrorism in terms of certain kinds of actions or activities, attempts are often made to exclude from the definition some cases that fall under the term as defined, but involve favored parties. The 1999 United Nations General Assembly resolution 49/60, “Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism,” defined terrorism in terms of “criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes.” It goes on to state that such acts are “unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.” People who hold the view that acts of the described nature are justifiable on, say, some religious grounds, will oppose that resolution and try to exclude from its application whatever they believe is religiously justifiable. The 1994 Code of Conduct for the Fight against Terrorism, adopted by the Organization of Islamic Conference, during the 7th Islamic Summit in Casablanca, Morocco, added to an ordinary depiction of terrorism a proviso with respect to the rights of people under occupation to struggle for independence and selfdetermination. A similar condition is mentioned in Article 3 of the 1999 African Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism, accepted by the Organization of African Unity during a meeting in Algiers, Algeria. The combination of a definition of terrorism with a restriction imposed on its application is tantamount to proposing an alternative definition of the notion.

...