The difficulty in defining terrorism is that it is caught up with the notion that it can be, in particular circumstances, legitimate to use violence. From George Washington to Nelson Mandela, most struggles for independence from colonialism and claims of self-determination have resulted in some form of violence that can be (and have been) described as terrorism. At the same time, an overly broad definition of terrorism can be used to shut down non-violent dissent and undermine democratic society. The first ill-fated attempt to define terrorism in an international instrument was in the 1937 Geneva Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, which defined terrorism as “all criminal acts directed against a state and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or the general public.” This definition was criticized for its lack of precision, and the Convention never entered into force as it did not receive the necessary number of ratifications. Nonetheless, ensuring an appropriate definition of terrorism is key to an effective international approach to combating terrorism. This is not just because of the political and moral connotations that accompany the term, but also because there are significant legal consequences. Terrorism occurs in many different contexts and takes different forms. Without seeking to define terrorism here, we can consider some of its consistent features including: • its organized nature (whether the organization involved is large or small); • its dangerousness (to life, limb and property); • its attempt to undermine government in particular (by seeking to influence policy and law-makers); • its randomness and consequential spreading of fear/terror among a population. A prevailing characteristic of acts of terrorism is that they are crimes even if they have an additional quality that requires that they be considered “terrorist” in nature. Terrorist acts are criminal acts and subject therefore to the normal rigours of criminal law. It does not make a difference to the applicability of human rights standards whether the issue under review is deemed to be a terrorist act as opposed to any other serious criminal act. The draft Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism The draft Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism currently being considered by the UN attempts to define terrorist action. The definition of terrorism in the current draft of the Convention is controversial. It states in Article 2:16 Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person, by any means, unlawfully and intentionally, causes: (a) death or serious bodily injury to any person; or (b) serious damage to public or private property, including a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system, an infrastructure facility or the environment; or (c) damage to property, places, facilities, or systems referred to in paragraph 1(b) of this article, resulting or likely to result in major economic loss, when the purpose of the conduct, by 16 UN General Assembly, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee established by General Assembly Resolution 51/210 of 17 December 1996, Sixth session (28 January-1 February 2002), doc. A/57/37. Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights 23