Next Article in Journal
Law’s Autonomy and Moral Reason
Previous Article in Journal
Legal Capacity and Supported Decision-Making: Lessons from Some Recent Legal Reforms
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

The Evolving Common Law Jurisprudence Combatting the Threat of Terrorism in the United Kingdom, United States, and Canada

Head of McLaughlin College, Associate Professor, School of Public Policy and Administration, York University, 224 McLaughlin College, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada
Received: 13 October 2018 / Revised: 24 December 2018 / Accepted: 1 February 2019 / Published: 14 February 2019
Full-Text   |   PDF [440 KB, uploaded 26 February 2019]

Abstract

Terrorism is a concept that defies a simple and straightforward legal definition. Therefore, it is not surprising to find that there is no Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism with a universally accepted definition of what constitutes “terrorism.” Consequently, States have devised their own definitions of what constitutes terrorism that are typically found in their criminal law. This raises the fundamental question of whether there is a convergence or divergence in jurisprudential trends on what constitutes terrorism among States? Presumably, a convergence in jurisprudential trends is more likely to contribute to combatting the threat of terrorism at the international and national levels. Accordingly, this article comparatively analyzes the definition of terrorism in three common law jurisdictions: the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada. It finds that although there are a number of similarities in the definition of terrorism in these three States, they have significantly different definitions of what constitutes terrorism. The UK definition, ostensibly, has the broadest definition of terrorism of the three States. The US has, undoubtedly, the most unique, with separate definitions for “international terrorism” and “domestic terrorism.” Additionally, Canada has the most international definition of terrorism, drawing on 13 functional terrorism Conventions to define offenses such as hijacking, hostage taking, and bombing, etc. The second part of the article comparatively analyzes seven of the leading Supreme Court cases on terrorism in these three States. From the ratio or rationes decidendi in each of these cases, it draws out the twelve legal principles that underlie these judgements and finds that they are similar and overall consistent. The conclusion reached is that there is, at least in these three common law jurisdictions, an apparent convergence in jurisprudential trends in the law of terrorism. This augurs well for the development and emergence of a common definition of what constitutes terrorism at the international and transnational levels, as well as more rigorous and effective counter-terrorism laws and policies within and across States. View Full-Text
Keywords: terrorism; terrorism law; defining terrorism; comparative legal analysis; common law jurisdictions; leading superior court judgements; comparative jurisprudential analysis; ratio or rationes decidendi; legal principles; jurisprudential trends terrorism; terrorism law; defining terrorism; comparative legal analysis; common law jurisdictions; leading superior court judgements; comparative jurisprudential analysis; ratio or rationes decidendi; legal principles; jurisprudential trends
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Simeon, J.C. The Evolving Common Law Jurisprudence Combatting the Threat of Terrorism in the United Kingdom, United States, and Canada. Laws 2019, 8, 5.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Laws EISSN 2075-471X Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top