U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Hostage Rights - Law and Practice in Throes of Evolution

NCJ Number
Journal of International Law Volume: 15 Issue: 1 Dated: (Winter 1983) Pages: 61-125
H H A Cooper
Date Published
65 pages
This paper explores the feasibility of developing international and uniform standards for dealing with international hostage situations, with attention to the host government's responsibilities, the means available to end a hostage situation, and minimum standards for the treatment of hostages.
The paper examines semantic problems arising from the interchangeable use of the words hostage-taking and kidnapping and the legitimate expectations, claims, or interests of a hostage. A discussion of official obligations of governments and private obligations of hostage-takers owed to hostages notes that both are influenced strongly by status and relationships. The paper traces a shift in official responses to hostage-taking following the 1972 terrorist episode at the Munich Olympic Games. It focuses on the attack versus negotiation dilemma, the role of private individuals who have a special ability to influence the course of a hostage-taking, the hostages' right to self-defense, and legal limits on other tactics taken by hostages to help themselves. Also explored are the type of response and legal liability of police agencies involved in a hostage-taking situation, what hostages are potential litigants, identifying a defendant in such litigation, and the choice of a forum. Other sections of the paper review recent cases relating to the liability of government officials as well as the liability of private actors as illustrated by Curtis v. Beatrice Foods (1980). The paper includes 184 footnotes.