policy which re-merit examination in the context of modernization of the 1952 Rome Convention,
unpublished Aide Memoire.
85Caron (1998, pp. 109, 153–154) cited in Becker (2006, p. 155).
86Grotius (1646, pp. 523–526).

A. State Responsibility
deliver him to justice whether by subjecting him to local justice or by extraditing him.87
This view was to be followed and extended by the British jurist Blackstone a few years later who went on to say that a sovereign who failed to punish an offender could be considered as abetting the offence or of being an accomplice.88

A different view was put forward in an instance of adjudication involving a seminal instance where the Theory of Complicity and the responsibility of States for private acts of violence was tested in 1925. The case89
involved the Mexico– United States General Claims Commission which considered the claim of the United States on behalf of the family of a United States national who was killed in a Mexican mining company where the deceased was working. The United States argued that the Mexican authorities had failed to exercise due care and diligence in apprehending and prosecuting the offender. The decision handed down by the Commission distinguished between complicity and the responsibility to punish and the Commission was of the view that Mexico could not be considered an accomplice in this case.
The Complicity Theory, particularly from a Vattellian and Blackstonian point of view is merely assumptive unless put to the test through a judicial process of extradition. In this Context it becomes relevant to address the issue through a discussion of the remedy.
III.  Mechanisms for Extradition of Offenders: The Lockerbie Case
At present, the issue of extradition could be settled through the United Nations and its Organs such as the Security Council90
and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).91
Of noteworthy practical relevance with regard to the complicity theory, particularly on the issue of extradition and whether one State can demand the
87De Vattel (1916, p. 72).
88Blackstone (2001, p. 68).
89Laura M.B. Janes (USA) v. United Mexican States (1925) 4 R Intl Arb Awards 82.
90The Security Council is the branch of the United Nations charged with the maintenance of

international peace and security. Its powers, outlined in the Charter of the United Nations, include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization for military action. The Security Council’s power are exercised through its Resolu-tions. The Permanent members of the Security Council are the United States of America, United Kingdom, France, the Russian Federation and the Republic of China.
91The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946. The Court’s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. The Court is composed of 15 judges, who are elected for terms of of.ce of 9 years by the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council. It is assisted by a Registry, its administrative organ. Its of.cial languages are English and French.
extradition of offenders in another State is the opinion given by the ICJ92
on the
explosion over Lockerbie, Scotland on 21 December 1988 of PAN AM Flight 103. The explosion is believed to have been caused by the detonation of a plastic explosive concealed in a portable cassette player/radio. The ICJ was encumbered with the discussion as to whether the Court had jurisdiction over a United Nations Security Council Resolution on the issue.
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Aviation Security Law 航空安全法(34)