UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION FOR TERRORISM CRIMES: A STUDY OF TERRORISM AS CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY

Categorizing terrorism as an international crime is not wrong, because the international elements of the crime have been fulfilled. Terrorist crimes involve more than one state, each possessing its own legal system and jurisdictional framework. A number of terrorist acts have been recorded as having disrupted international security stability, including those carried out by networks such as Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and others. In addition to these global terrorist groups, there are also well-known terrorist groups in the Southeast Asian region, namely the Abu Sayyaf Group. This legal research aims to examine universal jurisdiction over terrorism as an international crime, on the basis that terrorist acts may be considered to satisfy the elements of crimes against humanity, insofar as such acts are intentionally committed as part of a widespread attack, involve multiple actors, and target civilian populations at large. This research employs a qualitative normative legal method, utilizing a statute approach and a case approach, and drawing upon primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings indicate that the formulation of crimes against humanity constitutes the most appropriate legal basis for prosecuting terrorism under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The absence of a universally accepted definition of terrorism has resulted in terrorism not yet being included within the jurisdiction of the ICC. Furthermore, the failure at the regional level to effectively resolve issues related to terrorism underscores the need for a universally agreed definition of terrorism so that perpetrators may be prosecuted before international courts. Strengthened cooperation among states, both at the regional and global levels, is therefore necessary to ensure the effective eradication of terrorist crimes.