i i i i i i iA CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON CHICAGO CONVENTION 1944

By

Name of the Student: K.MEGHANA

Roll No: 2018LLB039

Semester: VII th

Name of the Program: 5 year (B.A., LL.B.)

Name of the Faculty Member

P.JOGI NAIDU

Date of Submission

31/12/2021

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYAPRASTHA “, SABBAVARAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM – 531035, ANDHRA PRADESH

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I heartfully express my special thanks to my subject teacher P.JOGI NAIDU for giving me the
opportunity to do the project on the topic ‘A Critical Analysis on Chicago Convention 1944’. It
helped me to know many things and gain knowledge. I also thank him for guiding me throughout
the project and responding for my doubts regarding the project.

I would also like to thank my University ‘Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University’ for
providing me with all the required materials for the completion of my project and I also came to
know many new things.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS :-

1. Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………04

2. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………….05

3. The History of ICAO & the Chicago convention ……………………………………05

4. Analysis on Chicago convention …………………………………………………….07

 Sources of International law

 The Chicago convention of 1944 has two principal functions
 Accomplishments Chicago conference

5. Basic principles of International Air law …………………………………………….10

6. State Duties …………………………………………………………………………..12

7. Principles of International law in the convention ……………………………………14

 Airspace Sovereignty
 Freedom of flight over the high seas
 Nationality of aircraft as transport instrumentalities
 Special limitations on flight of state aircraft

8. Do we need a new Chicago convention ? …………………………………………….21

9. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………….23

10. Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………….23

3
 ABSTRACT

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is a specialized agency of the United
Nations, created in 1944 to manage the administration and governance of the Convention on
International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention).

• ICAO has laid the groundwork for standards and procedures for peaceful global air navigation.
• With 193 Member States and industry groups, ICAO strives to achieve consensus on Standards
and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and policies for international civil aviation. SARPs are
important for a safe, efficient, environmentally friendly and economically viable civil aviation
industry.

• These SARPs and policies are used by ICAO Member States to ensure that their local civil
aviation operations and regulations comply with global standards, enabling more than 100,000
daily flights in the global network of l aviation to operate safely and reliably in every region of
the world.

• ICAO is governed by the ICAO Council, which is chaired by a President.

International Civil Aviation Day

International Civil Aviation Day was first celebrated in 1994 under the aegis of ICAO. It was
officially sanctioned by the United Nations in 1996. The objective of the day is to raise
awareness of international civil aviation and its importance for the economic and social
development of countries.1

Issues in News

Pakistan's recent incident denying the use of its airspace to India has been reported by the Indian
government to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

• India requested permission to fly over Pakistan to allow the Prime Minister's plane to fly to
Saudi Arabia on October 28, 2019.

1
https://www.icao.int/

4
 • Pakistan cited alleged human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir to deny request.

INTRODUCTION

The Chicago Convention of 1944

• The Convention on International Civil Aviation, better known as the Chicago Convention of
1944, of which Belarus is a signatory state, prohibits any illegal intervention against a civil
aircraft.

• At the same time, it contains several provisions under article 9 which allow a sovereign state
the right to impose restrictions.

• This includes forced landings at a designated airport in its territory, in “exceptional

circumstances or in times of emergency, or in the interest of public safety”.

• Once a flight has landed, Article 16 gives the host country the right to board / search the
aircraft.

• This is probably the clause which provided for local authorities to board Mr. Morales's plane in
Austria in 2013.

• But the Chicago Convention only applies to civil aircraft of the parties contracting2.

Other similar laws

• International law could also be examined in the light of the International Air Services Transit
Agreement (IASTA), also concluded in Chicago in 1944.

• Under this agreement, the contracting states agree to each other the freedom of air transit in
relation to scheduled international air services, or the privilege of overflying territories without
landing.

• Belarus is not a signatory to IASTA.3

The iHistory iof iICAO iand ithe iChicago iConvention i

World iWar iII iwas ia ipowerful icatalyst ifor ithe itechnical idevelopment iof ithe iaircraft.
iDuring ithis iperiod, ia ivast inetwork iof ipassenger iand ifreight itransport iwas icreated, ibut
2
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/treaties/en/icao-ca/trt_icao_ca_001en.pdf
3
https://skybrary.aero/articles/chicago-convention

5
ithere iwere imany iobstacles, iboth ipolitical iand itechnical, ito ithe ievolution iof ithese
istructures iand iroutes ito itheir inew icivilian ifunctions.4 i i i

Following iseveral istudies iinitiated iby ithe iUnited iStates, ias iwell ias ivarious iconsultations
iundertaken iwith iits imain iallies, ithe iUnited iStates igovernment iinvited i55 iStates ito
iattend ian iinternational icivil iaviation iconference iin iChicago iin i1944 i i iThese idelegates
igathered iat ia ivery idark itime iin ihuman ihistory iand itraveled ito iChicago irisking itheir
ilives. iMany iof ithe icountries ithey irepresented iwere istill ioccupied. iEventually, i54 iof ithe
i55 iinvited iStates iparticipated iin ithe iChicago iConference iand, iby iits iconclusion ion
iDecember i7, i1944, i52 iof ithem ihad isigned ithe inew iConvention ion iInternational iCivil
iAviation iwhich ihad ibeen iimplemented. i i iKnown iat ithe itime iand imore icommonly
itoday ias ithe i“Chicago iConvention,” ithis ihistoric iagreement ipaved ithe iway ifor istandards
iand iprocedures ifor ipeaceful iglobal iair inavigation.

iDue ito ithe iusual idelays iexpected iin ithe iratification iof ithe iConvention, ithe iChicago
iConference iprovisionally isigned ian iInterim iAgreement iwhich iprovided ifor ithe icreation
iof ian iInterim iICAO i(PICAO) ito iact ias ia itemporary iadvisory iand icoordinating ibody. i i
iThe iPICAO iconsisted iof ian iInterim iCouncil iand ian iInterim iAssembly, iand isince iJune
i1945 ithe iInterim iCouncil imet icontinuously iin iMontreal, iCanada, iand iconsisted iof
irepresentatives ifrom i21 imember istates. iThe ifirst iICAO iInterim iAssembly, ithe iprecursor
ito ithe imodern iICAO iTriennial iAssemblies, iwas ialso iheld iin iMontreal iin iJune i1946.5 i i
i

April i4, i1947, iafter isufficient iratification iof ithe iChicago iConvention i, ithe iprovisional
iaspects iof iICAO iwere ino ilonger irelevant iand ibecame iofficially iknown ias iICAO. ithe
ifirst iofficial iICAO iAssembly iwas iheld iin iMontreal iin iMay iof ithe isame iyear. i i iIn ithis
imarch iinto ithe imodern iage iof iaviation, ithe iannexes ito ithe iConvention ihave igrown iin
inumber iand ievolved ito inow iinclude iover i12,000 iInternational iStandards iand
iRecommended iPractices i(SARPs), iall iof iwhich ihave ibeen iagreed iupon. iby iICAO
iconsensus inow i193 imember istates. i i iThese iSARPs, ialong iwith ithe ienormous
4
iAmended i1977-09-30, ientered iinto iforce i1999-08-17.
5
ihttps://blog.ipleaders.in/international-civil-aviation-chicago-convention-1944/

6
itechnological iadvancements iand icontributions iover ithe ifollowing idecades iby iair
itransport ioperators iand imanufacturers, ihave ienabled ithe iachievement iof iwhat ican inow
ibe irecognized ias ia ikey idriver iof isocio-economic idevelopment iand ione iof ithe igreatest
icooperative iachievements iof imankind i- ithe imodern iinternational iair itransport inetwork.

Chicago iConvention
The iChicago iConvention i(also iknown ias ithe iConvention ion iInternational iCivil iAviation)
icreated ithe iInternational iCivil iAviation iOrganization i(ICAO), ia ispecialized iUnited
iNations iagency iresponsible ifor icoordinating iand iregulating iinternational iair itravel i. iThe
iConvention iestablishes ithe irules iof iairspace, ithe iregistration iand isecurity iof iaircraft, iand
idetails ithe irights iof ithe isignatories iin imatters iof iair itransport; iit ialso iexempts ijet ifuel
ifrom itaxation. iThe iConvention iwas isigned iby i52 istates ion iDecember i7, i1944 iin
iChicago, iIllinois, iUnited iStates, iand ientered iinto iforce ion iApril i4, i1947.6 i i

iThe iConvention iprovided ifor ithe isovereignty iof ithe iairspace iover ithe iterritory iof ieach
iState, ias iwell ias ifive ifreedoms i(later iextended ito inine iwith ithe iaddition iof ifour
iunofficial ifreedoms) igoverning ithe ifreedom iof istates ito ioperate iair itransport iflights
i(including ithe itransport iof ipassengers, icargo iand imail) ithrough i, iin iand iwithin ithe
iairspace iof iother iStates. iOnly ithe ifirst itwo iof ithese ifreedoms i(see ibelow) iautomatically
iapply ito isignatory istates, ithe iothers iare isubject ito ia inational iagreement.

Freedom Description

1st. Right ito ioverfly ia iforeign icountry iwithout ilanding

2nd. Right ito irefuel ior icarry iout imaintenance iin ia iforeign icountry

3rd. Right ito ifly ifrom ione's iown icountry ito ianother

6
ihttps://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx i

7
 4th. Right ito ifly ifrom ia iforeign icountry ito ione's iown

Right ito ifly ibetween itwo iforeign icountries iduring iflights iwhich ibegin ior
5th.
iend iin ione's iown

Right ito ifly ifrom ione iforeign icountry ito ianother ione iwhile istopping iin
6th.
ione's iown icountry

Right ito ifly ibetween itwo iforeign icountries iwhile inot ioffering iflights ito ione's
7th.
iown icountry

Right ito ifly ibetween itwo ior imore iairports iin ia iforeign icountry iwhile
8th.
icontinuing iservice ito ione's iown icountry

Right ito ifly iinside ia iforeign icountry iwithout icontinuing iservice ito ione's
9th.
iown icountry

The iConvention ialso iconcerns ithe iissue iand irecognition iof icertificates i(e.g. ian iaircraft's
icertificate iof iairworthiness i(C iof iA) ior ian iairline's iair ioperator icertificate i(AOC) iand
ilicences i(e.g. ipilot ilicensing ior icontroller ilicensing).

SOURCES iOF iINTERNATIONAL iLAW i

 Multilateral iConventions

 ICAO iStandards iand iRecommended iPractices

 Bilateral iAgreements i(e.g., iTraffic iRights, iSafety, iSecurity)

 Customary iInternational iLaw

 Intergovernmental idecisions iand iregulations i(e.g., ithose iof ithe iEuropean iUnion)

 National iLegislation iand iRegulation

8
  Administrative iPractice iand iProcedure

 Contracts i(e.g., iair icarrier ialliance iagreements, iairport iagreements)

 Judicial iOpinions; ijurisprudence iof icourts iinterpreting iall ithe iabove iin icases iand
icontroversies ibrought ibefore ithem

The iChicago iConvention iof i1944 ihas itwo iprincipal ifunctions:

I. THE iCHICAGO iCONVENTION iIS iA iSOURCE iOF iINTERNATIONAL iAIR

iLAW i(Articles i1-42)

II. THE iCHICAGO iCONVENTION iIS iTHE iCONSTITUTION iOF iAN

iINTERNATIONAL iORGANIZATION i(Articles i43-96) i- iICAO

The iChicago iConference iof i1944 i:-

54 icountries imet iin iChicago ifrom iNovember i1 ito iDecember i7, i1944 ito i"make
iarrangements ifor ithe iimmediate iestablishment iof iprovisional iglobal iair iroutes iand
iservices" iand i"to iestablish ia iprovisional icouncil ito icollect, iregister iand ito istudy ithe
idata iconcerning i"international iaviation iand ito imake irecommendations ifor iits
iimprovement".7

Accomplishments iof ithe iChicago iConference i:

 The iConvention ion iInternational iCivil iAviation ihas ibeen iconcluded iand iopened
ifor isignature. iThis iinstrument ihas ienabled ia icomplete imodernization iof ibasic
ipublic iinternational iair ilaw. iIt iwas iintended ito ireplace ithe iParis iConvention ion
iAir iNavigation iof iOctober i13, i1919, isince iits ientry iinto iforce ion iApril i4,
i1947.8 i

 iThe iConvention ialso iprovided ifor ithe icreation iof ia inew ipermanent iinternational
iorganization, iInternational iCivil iAviation iThe iorganization, ithat. i. i. iit ireplaced
ithe iformer ismaller iinternational iorganization, ithe iInternational iAir iNavigation
iCommission. i iIn ijust i37 idays, idelegates iin iChicago idrafted ithe ifollowing: i
7
ihttps://www.mcgill.ca/iasl/files/iasl/aspl_633-2015-dempsey_chicago_convention.pdf
8
ihttps://www.refworld.org/docid/3ddca0dd4.html

9
  iThe iInternational iAir iTransit iAgreement, icommonly iknown ias ithe iTwo
iFreedoms iAgreement, iwas iconcluded iand iopened ifor isignature. i.The
iInternational iAir iTransport iAgreement, icommonly iknown ias ithe iFive
iFreedoms iagreement, iwas ialso iconcluded iand iopened ifor isignature. i. i. i. i
iThe inumber iof iaccepting istates ireached ia imaximum iof i17, ibut iit iis inow
ideclining, i4 ihaving idenounced ithe iagreement. i

 iA imodel iform iof ibilateral iagreement ifor ithe iexchange iof iair iroutes ihas ibeen
idrawn iup iand irecommended iby ithe iConference ias ipart iof iits ifinal iact. i. i. i. i
iAn iinterim iagreement ion iinternational icivil iaviation ihas ibeen iconcluded iand
iopened ifor isignature.

 iIt ientered iinto iforce ion iJune i6, i1945, ithus iproviding ian iinterim ibasis ifor imany
istages iof iinternational icivil iaviation iand ia iconstitution ifor ithe iInterim
iInternational iCivil iAviation iOrganization. ithe iinterim iagreement iwas ireplaced
iwhen ithe iconvention ientered iinto iforce ion iApril i4, i1947.9

BASIC iPRINCIPLES iOF iINTERNATIONAL iAIR iLAW i

 Territorial isovereignty: i- iEach iState, ito ithe iexclusion iof iall iother iStates,
ihas ithe iunilateral iand iabsolute iright ito iauthorize ior irefuse ientry iinto ithe
iarea irecognized ias iits iterritory iand ia isimilar iright ito icontrol iall
imovements iwithin iit. iTerritory. i
 National iairspace: i- iThe iterritory iof ia isovereign istate iis ithree-dimensional,
icomprising iwithin ithat iterritory ithe iairspace iabove iits inational ilands iand
iits iinternal iand iterritorial iwaters. i i
 Freedom iof ithe iseas: i- iNavigation ion ithe isurface iof ithe ihigh iseas iand
iover iflight iof ithese iseas iare ifree ifor ithe iuse iof iall. i
 Nationality iof ithe iaircraft: i- iAircraft ihave ia icharacteristic iof inationality
isimilar ito ithat ideveloped iin imaritime ilaw iapplicable ito iships. iTherefore,
iaircraft inormally ihave ia ispecial irelationship iwith ia iparticular iState iwhich
ihas ithe iright ito iassert ithe iprivileges ito iwhich ithat iaircraft imay ibe
9
iInternational iCivil iAviation iOrganization i(ICAO), iConvention ion iCivil iAviation i("Chicago
iConvention"), i7 iDecember i1944, i(1994) i15 iU.N.T.S. i295

10
 ientitled iand ithat iState iis ialso imutually iresponsible ifor ithe igood
iinternational iconduct iof ithat iaircraft.

NATIONAL iSOVEREIGNTY iOVER iAIRSPACE i

 Article i1 iof ithe iChicago iConvention iof i1944 ireaffirms iArticle i1 iof ithe
iParis iConvention iof i1919, irecognizing ithe ipre-existing irule iof icustomary
iinternational ilaw, iaccording ito iwhich i“each iState ihas icomplete iand
iexclusive isovereignty iover iairspace iabove iits iown iterritory”. i i
 Territory iis idefined iby iArticle i2 iof ithe iChicago iConvention ias i“the iland
iareas iand ithe iterritorial iwaters iadjacent ito ithem iunder ithe isovereignty,
isovereignty, iprotection ior imandate iof ieach istate”. i i
 Article i3 iof ithe iConvention ion ithe iLaw iof ithe iSea iextends ithe
ijurisdiction iof icoastal istates ito i12 imiles, iwhile iArticle i38 iestablishes ithe
iright iof itransit ithrough ithe istrait ifor imilitary iand icommercial iaircraft.10

“Complete iand iExclusive iSovereignty”

Former iICAO iCouncil iPresident iAssad iKotaite iargued ithat iStates iwere iprepared
ito iconsent ito iintrusions iinto itheir i"complete iand iexclusive isovereignty":11 i i

States' iadherence ito iinternational ilaw iis ivoluntary iand inot idue ito iexternal
icoercion. iInternational ilaw iis iboth icompulsory i(when istates iaccede ito
iconventions iand itreaties) iand ivoluntary i(because istates iare ifree ito idecide ito
iadhere ito ithem). iThe iICAO ihas ino icoercive ipower, iso iin ia isense ithe iweakness
iof iinternal ilaw iis ialso iits istrength: iweakness ibecause ithere iis ino iauthority ito
iapply iit, ibut istrength ibecause ithis isituation irequires iStates ito ido ithings iin ithe
icommon iinterest, iunder ithe isame iconditions.12

Aircraft iNationality

a) Article i17 iof ithe iChicago iConvention istipulates ithat i“aircraft imust ihave ithe
inationality iof ithe iState iin iwhich ithey iare iregistered”. i i
10
ihttps://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/international-civil-aviation-organisation
11
ihttps://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/international-civil-aviation-organization-icao/
12
ihttps://www.civilsdaily.com/news/what-is-chicago-convention-of-1944/

11
 b) Article i18 iprovides ithat iaircraft imay inot ibe iregistered iin imore ithan ione iState,
ialthough ithe iregistration imay ibe ichanged ifrom ione iState ito ianother. i
c) iArticle i19 iprovides ithat iregistration iand irelated itransfers itake iplace iin
iaccordance iwith ithe iinternal ilaws iof ithe iState iof iregistration. i i
d) Article i83bis iallows ithe itransfer iof iregistration ifunctions ito ianother iState ibetter
iable ito imeet ithese iregulatory irequirements.13

STATE iDUTIES i

I. Article i12 iof ithe iChicago iConvention irequires iStates ito iensure ithat
iaircraft iflying iover itheir iterritory ior ibearing itheir inationality imark
icomply iwith iapplicable iflight irules iand iregulations. i i
II. iOn ithe ihigh iseas, ithe iregulations iin iforce iare ithose iestablished iby ithe
iConvention i(ie ithe iSARPs ipromulgated iby iICAO). i i
III. iUnder iArticle i21, ithe iState iof iRegistry imust ireport ito iICAO idata
irevealing ithe iownership iand icontrol iof ithe iaircraft iit iregisters. idemand. i i
IV. iBy ivirtue iof iArticles i31 iand i32, ithe iState imust iprovide ithese iaircraft
iwith ia icertificate iof iairworthiness, iand iissue icertificates iof icompetence
iand ilicenses ito ithe ipilots iand iflight icrew iof ithese iaircraft. i
V. Under iArticle i30, ithe iState imust ialso iissue ilicenses ifor iaeronautical iradio
iequipment. i iUnder isection i33, iother iStates, iin iturn, ihave ian iobligation ito
irecognize icertificates iof iairworthiness iand icertificates iof icompetence ifor
ipersonnel iand ilicenses ias ivalid, ibut ionly ias ilong ias ithe irequirements
iunder iwhich ithey iare iissued i"equal ito ior igreater ithan ithe iminimum
istandard iwhich imay ibe iestablished" iby iICAO.14

Duties iImposed iUpon iAircraft

iAccording ito iarticle i20, ieach iinternational iaircraft imust ishow iits inationality iand
iregistration imarks. i iIn iapplication iof iarticle i29, icertain idocuments imust ibe
ipresent ion iboard ithe iaircraft, iin iparticular iits iregistration icertificate, iits icertificate
iof iairworthiness, ithe ilicenses iof ieach icrew imember, iits ijourney ilog, iits iradio
13
ihttps://www.insightsonindia.com/2019/06/22/international-civil-aviation-organization-icao/
14
ihttps://www.icao.int/publications

12
 ilicense. i, ithe inames iand iplaces iof iembarkation iand ithe idestination iof iall
ipassengers ion iboard iand ia iclear iand idetailed ideclaration iof iany icargo ion iboard.

Airline iNationality

The inationality iof ithe iairline iis inot iaddressed ianywhere iin ithe iChicago
iConvention, ialthough iit ihas ibecome ian iimportant ielement iof ibilateral iair
itransport iagreements, ias iwell ias imultilateral itransit iand itransport iagreements,
iwhose irequirements i“ isubstantial iownership iand ieffective icontrol i”effectively
iprevented ithe iadoption iof ithe imaritime iregulations iof ithe ilegal inotion iof“ iflag
iof iconvenience i”in iinternational iaviation.

Aircraft iCategorization

 The iChicago iConvention idistinguishes ibetween icivil iand istate iaircraft,

imanned iand iunmanned i(or iunmanned) iaircraft, iand ischeduled iand inon-
scheduled iservices. i
 iBy ivirtue iof iArticle i3, ithe iChicago iConvention iexplicitly iapplies i“to
icivil iaircraft ionly” iand inot ito iState iaircraft, ialthough ithe idefinition iof
i“aircraft” iis inot idefined ianywhere iin ithe iConvention. iCertain itypes iof
iaircraft iwould ibe iState iaircraft, iin iparticular i"aircraft iused iin ithe imilitary,
icustoms iand ipolice iservices i...” i
 iArticle i3(d) iprovides ithat iin ienacting iregulations ifor iState iaircraft, ithe
iContracting iState i"shall itake idue iaccount iof ithe isafety iof inavigation iof
icivil iaircraft". iTraffic irights iare ilimited iby iArticle i3(c), iwhich iprovides
ithat iState iaircraft imay inot ifly iover ior iland iin ithe iterritory iof ianother
iState i"without iauthorization iby ispecial iagreement ior iotherwise, iand iin
iaccordance iwith ithe iterms iof iit”. i
 iArticle i3bis ireaffirms ithe iprinciple iof icustomary iinternational ilaw
iaccording ito iwhich i“each iState imust irefrain ifrom iresorting ito ithe iuse iof
iweapons iagainst icivil iaircraft iin iflight”, iwhile ibeing iable ito irequire ithat
icivil iaircraft ioverfly iits iterritory iwithout ipermission ito iland iat ia
13
 idesignated iairport. i“In ithe ievent iof ian iinterception, ithe ilives iof ithose ion
iboard iand ithe isafety iof ithe iaircraft imust inot ibe iendangered”.

Rights iof iOverflight iand iTraffic iRights

 Regular iplanes. iThe igeneral irule ion itraffic irights iis icontained iin iArticle i6
iof ithe iChicago iConvention: i“No ischeduled iinternational iair iservice imay
ibe ioperated ion ior iwithin ithe iterritory iof ia iContracting iState iexcept iwith
ithe iauthorization ispecial ior iother iauthorization iof ithat iState, iand iin
iaccordance iwith ithe iterms iof isuch ipermission ior iauthorization.”This
iprovision iis ithe ibasis ifor ithe inegotiation iof iair itransport iagreements
ibetween inations, ibecause iwithout iauthorization ito ifly iover ithe iterritory iof
ianother, ian iairliner imay inot ienter ithe iairspace iof ianother.
 i iNon-airliner iAlthough iregular iair ioperations iare ilimited, iunder iArticle i5,
iaircraft iused ifor inon-scheduled iflights ihave ithe iright ito ifly iover ior icross
ithe iterritory iof ianother iState iand ito istop ithere ifor inon-traffic ipurposes
i(first iand isecond ifreedom irights). iHowever, ithe iState ioverflow ihas ithe
iright ito irequest ilanding ifrom ithe iplane in ion ischeduled, iand ito ifollow ithe
iprescribed iroutes, ior ito iobtain ispecial iauthorization ifor isuch iflights. i
 iState iaircraft. iUnder iArticle i3, iState iaircraft imay inot ifly iover ior iland iin
ithe iterritory iof ianother iState i"without iauthorization iby ispecial iagreement
ior iotherwise, iand iin iaccordance iwith iits iconditions". i iUnmanned iaerial
ivehicle. iAccording ito iArticle i8, iunmanned iaircraft imay inot ifly iover ithe
iterritory iof ia iContracting iState i"without ispecial iauthorization iand iunder
ithe iterms iof isuch iauthorization". iSuch iflights imust ibe i"controlled ito
iavoid iany idanger ito icivil iaircraft".15

PRINCIPLES i iOF i iINTERNATIONAL i iLAW i iIN i iTHE i iCONVENTION

The i iConvention i ihas i iserved i ias i ia i iuseful i iand i ipowerful i ivehicle i ito i ire-
istate i icertain i iprinciples i iof i iinternational i ilaw i iapplicable i iworld-wide, i
iirrespective i iof i iICAO i imembership. i iThese i iare: i i(a) i isovereignty i iof i ieach
15
iFirst iedition. iSigned iat iChicago ion i7 iDecember i1944. i(Doc i7300)

14
 istate i iin i iits i iairspace; i i(b) i ifreedom i iof i iflight i iover i ithe i ihigh i iseas; i i(c)
inationality i iof i iaircraft i ias i itransport i iinstrumentalities; i iand i i(d) i
ispeciallimitations i ion i iflight i iof i i"state" i iaircraft.

A. i iAirspace i iSovereignty

Article i1 iof ithe iConvention istates ithat i“the iContracting iStates irecognize ithat
ieach iState ihas icomplete iand iexclusive isovereignty iover ithe iairspace iabove iits
iterritory”. iIt iwas ia ireformulation iof isimilar iprovisions iin ithe iParis iConvention iof
i1919 iand ithe iHavana iConvention iof i1928. iMy iopinion iis ithe ifollowing: iit iis
itrue ithat ibetween i1900 iand i1914, ithere iwere idoctrinal icontroversies. iexaggerated
ias ito iwhether i"the iair" iwas ifree. iBut iI ihave ilong ibeen iconvinced, iafter iyears iof
icareful ihistorical iresearch, ithat ithe istates iconcerned ibefore ithe iParis iConvention
ihad iin ifact iassumed ithat ithe inational iterritory iwas ithree-dimensional, iincluding
ithe iusable ispace iabove iits iland iand iits iland. iits iwaters. iThe icited iarticle imeans
ithat ieach iICAO iMember iState ihas iformally irecognized ithat ithe iairspace iabove
inational ilands iand iwaters iis ian iintegral ipart iof ithe iterritory iof ian iunderlying
iState, iwhether ior inot ithe ilatter iis ia imember iof ithe iState. ithe iState iof iICAO. iit
iwas isigned.

B. i iFreedom iof i iFlight iover ithe iHigh iSeas

The iprinciple ithat ithe iseas iare ia ihighway iopen ito iall inations iand isubject ito
iindividual isovereignty iis ione iof ithe ifoundations iof iinternational itransport ilaw.
ithe ihigh iseas ias iviewed iby iships ion ithe isurface. iFor iexample, ithe ireport iof ithe
ieditorial iboard ito ithe iParis iConference iof i1919 isaid: i"It iis ionly iwhen ithe
icolumn iof iair irests ion ia ires inullius ior icommunis, ithe isea, ithat ifreedom
ibecomes ithe irule iof iair. iThis iprinciple iis ifinally istated. iin iArticle i12 iof ithe
iChicago iConvention iwhich ideals iwith i"rules iof ithe iair". ion ithe ihigh iseas, ithe
irules iin iforce ishall ibe ithose iestablished iunder ithis iConvention. i

"The ilegal ieffect iis iclear. iMember iStates itherefore iadmit ithat ithey ihave ino
isovereignty iin ithe ispace iabove ithe ihigh iseas iand itherefore ino ipower ito iregulate
ithe iflight iof ian iaircraft iother ithan iits iown.They itherefore idelegated ito iICAO ithe

15
 iright ito iadopt irules iof ithe iair ithat iwill ibe iapplicable ito itheir iaircraft iin ithis
inon-sovereign iarea iwithout iexceptions ior ilimitations. iThese irules imust ibe
iobserved iby icivil iaircraft iof iall iICAO iStates. ihigh iseas ispace ihas isince ibeen
iformally ireaffirmed iin ithe i1958 i“Geneva iConvention ion ithe iHigh iSeas”. iThis
iincludes ithe i“freedom ito ifly iover ithe ihigh iseas” ias ione iof ithe ielements iof ithe
ifreedom iof ithe iseas. iIt ishould ibe inoted ithat ineither ithe iChicago iConventions
inor ithe iGeneva iConventions ilimit ithis ifreedom ito i“airspace”.

C. i iNationality iof i iAircraft ias i iTransport iInstrumentalities

Article i17 istates ithat i"aircraft ishall ihave ithe inationality iof ithe iState iin iwhich
ithey iare iregistered" iand iArticle i18 iprovides ithat ian iaircraft imay inot ibe ivalidly
iregistered iin imore ithan ione iState ibut ithat iits iregistration imay ibe imodified iby ia
iState iat iall itimes. i'Other. iThe iterm i"nationality" iis inot idefined ianywhere, ibut
ithe iterm ihas ilong ibeen iwell iknown iin iinternational imaritime ilaw. iA iship iflying
ithe iflag iof ia isovereign istate iis isaid ito ihave ithe inationality iof ithat istate. iThe
ilatter ithus iaccepts iresponsibility itowards iother iStates ifor ithe igood ipublic iconduct
iof ithe iship iand iis iinternationally iempowered ito iensure ithat ithe iship ienjoys ithe
irights iand iprivileges iit ienjoys ivis-à-vis iother iStates. i i i

Article i6 iof ithe i1919 iParis iConvention iis ivirtually iidentical ito iArticle i17 iof ithe
iChicago iConvention. iThe iprovisions ion iregistration iin ithe iChicago iConvention
iare ilegislative iand ieffective ibetween iICAO iMember iStates.

D. i iSpecial iLimitations ion iFlight iof i iState i iAircraft

The iConvention iby iTitle iand iMain iProvisions iestablishes ilegislative irules ifor
icivil iaircraft. iArticle i3 i(b) iprovides ithat iaircraft iused iin imilitary, icustoms iand
ipolice iservices iare i“aircraft iconsidered ito ibe iState”, ibut idoes inot isay ithat ino
iother iaircraft iused iby ia iState iis iconsidered ito ibe iPhone. iArticle i3 i(c) itherefore
iprovides: i i iNo iState iaircraft iof ia iContracting iState imay ifly iover ior iland iin ithe
iterritory iof ianother iState iwithout iauthorization iby ispecial iagreement ior iotherwise,
iand iin iaccordance iwith ithe iterms ithereof:

16
 iIt iis iargued ithat ithe iterm i“territory” ithus iused irefers ito ithe itechnical idefinition
iof iterritory icontained iin iArticle i2 iof ithe iConvention, iwhere iit iis idescribed ias
i“the iareas iand iterritorial iwaters iadjacent ito ithem” iand ithat ithe iprohibition
ishould ibe iunderstood ias iapplicable ito i"aircraft" iwhich ithey ifly iin i"airspace", ias
ithe iterms iwere ithen iintended.

THE i iGENERAL i iNATURE i iOF i iTHE i iINTERNATIONAL i iCIVIL i iAVIATION

iORGANIZATION i i(ICAO)

Among ithe imost iimportant iprovisions iof ithe iConvention iare ithose iestablishing
ithe iInternational iCivil iAviation iOrganization i(ICAO). iThe imiracle iis ithat ian
iinternational iconference ioperating iunder iconstant iand isometimes icontroversial
ipressure ibetween iNovember i1 iand iDecember i5, i1944 icould ihave iproduced ian
iorganization ithat iworked iso iwell. iThe ifinal ideclaration ion ipowers iand iduties
iwas iobviously ia icompromise. iIt iis inot ian iinternational i"Civil iAeronautics iBoard"
ias iproposed iby iGreat iBritain iand isupported iby iCanada iin ia imodified iform, ifor
ithe ipurpose iof igranting icertified iinternational iroutes iand iexercising igeneral
icontrol. ion icapacity, ifrequency iof iflights iand iprices. iI ihave ioften iwondered iwhat
ithe isituation iof iinternational itransport iwould ibe itoday iif ithis itype iof
iorganization ihad ibeen icreated.Strong itechnical iskills ihave ibeen iconferred ion
iICAO ias iwell ias ieconomic ifunctions igenerally iapplicable ito ithe ifield iof iadvice
iand iresearch. iAfter itwenty iyears, iI iam iconvinced ithat ithe idecisions itaken iin
iChicago iwere ivalid.16

16
iPaul iMichael iKrämer, iChicago iConvention, i50th iAnniversary iConference, iChicago, iOctober i31
i– iNovember i1, i1994. iZeitschrift ifür iLuft iund iWeltraumrecht i1995, iS. i57.

17
Prevention iof ithe idisease ispread

Today, ithe idisease i"Covid19" ihas ibeen ideclared iepidemic iand iin isuch icases, ithe
iContracting iState imust, iby iall imeans, iensure ithat iby iair inavigation, icommunicable
idiseases isuch ias icholera, ismallpox, iplague, ityphus i(epidemic) iand iyellow ifever ishould
inot ibe igeneralized. iThis icould ibe idone iby itaking iinto iconsideration ithe ivarious ibodies
iresponsible ifor iensuring iadequate isanitary iconditions ion ithe iaircraft. iIn ithis icase, iin ithe
ievent iof icorona idisease, ithe iDepartment iof iFamily iHealth iand iWelfare iacts ias ian
iorganization. i

1. iAir iservices isuch ias iradio iand imeteorological iservices iare iopen ito iall iContracting
iStates ifor ithe iregulation iof iair inavigation iand ithe iobservation iof isafety. iIn iaddition,
icharges ifor ithe iuse iof iairports ishould ibe iwell icommunicated ito iother iContracting
iStates. i i

2. iContracting iStates imay ifreely isearch iaircraft idisembarked iin itheir iState iand
idocuments irelating ito isuch inavigation imay ibe iinspected iby ithe iauthorities iof ithe iState
iconcerned.

Distress iManagement i:-

From itime ito itime ithe iaircraft ilanding iin ithe iterritory iof ianother iState imay ifind
ithemselves iin ian iemergency isituation irequiring iassistance. iThus, ithis iconvention
iprovides ifor irules ito ithis ieffect, ihe ispecifies, ithe iState ion iwhose iterritory ithe iaircraft
ihas ilanded imust iunder iits iauthority iensure ithat iall imeasures iare itaken iand ithat
iassistance iis iprovided ifor icome ito ithe iaid iof ithe iaircraft iin ithe ievent iof iproblems ior
idifficulties iof iany ikind. i iIn ithe ievent iof ithe iloss iof ian iaircraft, iStates ishould, ito ithe
iextent ipossible, iprovide ifor icooperation iin iaccordance iwith ithe irules iestablished iunder
ithis iConvention.

18
Investigating iaccidents

Accidents iare ithe ipossible iconsequences iof iany iongoing ioperation, iso ithis iconvention
igives ius ithe irules ithat imust ibe ifollowed iin ithe isame icircumstances. i iIf iany iaccident
iresulting iin ideath ior iinjury ioccurs, ior iany ikind iof itechnical ierror ioccurs, ithe iState iin
iwhose iterritory ithe iaccident ioccurred ihas ithe iright ito iinvestigate isuch iaccident iin
iaccordance iwith ithe irules iof ithe iInternational iCivil iAviation iOrganization. i iIn iaddition,
ithe iContracting iState iowning ithe iaircraft ihas ithe ioption iof iappointing iobservers iand
isending ithem ito ithe isurvey isite, iand ithe iState iof iInvestigation imust ialso isend ireports
iand iinformation ion ithe iState iowner.

Detention ior iseizure

For iexample, iif ian iaircraft iof ia iContracting iState iis idetained ior iseized iby ianother
iContracting iState iwhile ioverflying iits iterritory ifor ia ipatent iissue, ithe iseizure iwill inot
ibe iauthorized. iUnder ithis iConvention, ithe iContracting iState idoes inot ihave ithe iright ito
iseize ior idetain iaircraft iin iflight iwith ior iwithout ilanding, ifor ireasons irelating ito iany
imatter irelating ito iconstruction, imechanical iprocess, iparts iand iaircraft iaccessories,
iinfringement iof iany ipatent, ior imodel iand idesign.

Facilities iand istandard isystems

This iconvention iprovides ifor isome irules iregarding ifacilities ithat ihave ito ibe iadhered ito
iby iall icontracting istates. iThese ifacilities iinclude:

 Constructing iairports iand iair inavigation iservices.

 Providing iradio iand imeteorological iservices.

 Standard isystem iused ifor ilighting, icommunication, icodes, ietc.

 Aeronautics icharts iand imaps.

19
  License ito iall ithe icrew imembers.

Apart ifrom ithis, ithe iairplane ishould ionly ibe iequipped iwith ia iradio itransmission idevice
iif ithe ilicense ito iinstall ithis idevice iis iprovided. iThe iequipment ishould ionly ibe iused iby
icrew imembers iduly iauthorized ifor isuch iactivities. i iIn iaddition, ieach iaircraft imust ipass
ithe iairworthiness itest iwith ithe iattainment iof ian iassociated icertificate. iWith ihim, ithe
icrew imembers imust ibe iin ipossession iof ia icertificate iof icompetence iand ian iappropriate
ilicense iissued iby ithe icompetent iauthorities. i

The icertificate iof icompetency ishould ibe iissued ionly iby ithe iState iowning ithe iaircraft
iand ithe iauthorization iof ithe iState iowning ithe iaircraft iwill ibe ivalid iand iaccepted ionly
iby ithe iother iContracting iStates. iApart ifrom ithis, itravel idiaries imust ibe ikept ifrom itime
ito itime iand istates imay iprohibit iany iphotographic iequipment ion iboard ithe iaircraft. i
iConsidering imunitions iof iwar ias ia icommodity, iit iis itotally iforbidden ito icarry iout
ioperations ion ithe iterritory iof ianother iState.That iis iuntil ithe istate igives ithe iowner
ipermission ito ifly, itaking iinto iaccount iall ikinds iof irules iof irelevance iand iinformation.
iThe ipermit imust ibe igranted iwithout iprejudice ito inationality.17

International istandards iand ipractices

 All ithe istandards ilaid idown, iprocedures iand iregulations imade iregarding ithe
iair ifacility iand iauxiliary iservices ishould ibe iuniform iin iall iaspects ito
istrengthen iand iimprove ithe iair inavigation iservices iand ito ibring iuniformity.

 There iwill ibe iinternational istandards imade, iso iif iany icontracting istates iwant
ito ibring iin ia ichange iin iits iown ipractices ithat idiffer ifrom ithe iinternational
istandard, iit ishould iimmediately iinform ithe iInternational iCivil iAviation
iOrganization.

Let us see what matters have to be taken care of:

17
iConvention ion iInternational iCivil iAviation i(9th iedition)

20
 1. Communications channels and air navigation aids like ground marking; 

2. Information regarding the airports in each state and landing areas therein;

3. Regulations and rules of the air traffic control;

4. Providing license to the operating and mechanical crew;

5. Aircraft’s airworthiness and the identification marks;

6. Registration of aircraft;

7. Collecting and exchanging the meteorological Information;

8. Logbooks, aeronautical charts, and maps;

9. Customs and immigration procedures;

10. Knowledge regarding the aircraft in distress and complete report of the investigation
of accidents.18

Now, iif ithese istandards iare inot imet, ithe iaircraft ishould iendorse ithe idetails iof ithe ifail
iand iits icause ion ithe iairworthiness icertificate. iIn icase iof ipersonnel iwho ihave ifailed ito
iperform ihis iduties iproperly, ithe isame ithat iis ithe idetails iof ithe ifail iincluding iits icauses
ishould ibe iattached ito ithe icertificate iof ilicense.

The ipersonnel iand ithe iaircraft iwhich ihas ithe icertificate iof idetails iof ithe ifail iattached,
iwill inot ibe iable ito ioperate iuntil ithe istate ion iwhose iterritory ithey iare igoing ito ienter,
igives ithe ipermission ithat iis, iit iis iat ithe idiscretion iof ithe istate.

International Air Transport

We will now be learning about the rules under which the international airlines will function.

18
International Civil Aviation Organization, 2006

21
  The international airlines will have to give annual reports and financial statements i.e.
the cost incurred from time to time.

 The contracting states will have to specify the routes that may be used by the
international airlines within the territory of the contracting state.

 The services like radio and meteorological as well as the routes should be safe,
efficient and economical, so to make sure that the council on finding that any of these
not being met by the contracting states may try to find remedies and consult the state
for this.

 Note: if the contracting states do not comply with the recommendations passed by the
council, it will not be liable for an infraction.

 The state if it does not elect to bear the cost of the financing of the recommendation,
the council will itself bear all the cost for the financing.19

DO WE NEED A NEW CHICAGO CONVENTION? DON’T REPLACE IT, FIX IT!

To match our current interests. This mentality is strongly evident in discussions between
prominent members of academia and various players in the aviation industry over the usefulness
- or, for the more daring, the abolition - of the Chicago Convention. But what is the Chicago
Convention and what is it like. become the burning issue on the global aviation scene?
The Chicago Convention was concluded in 1944 with the aim of contributing to the
“development of international civil aviation in a safe and orderly manner”, as stated in its
preamble. It came into effect in 1947. Over the years the nascent aviation industry has grown
into one of the most dominant industries in the world, with the emergence of new technologies
many have started to question the effectiveness of the Convention and even its raison d'être. in
this new world order.Although it was previously described as the "constitution" of aviation law,

The Chicago Convention is viewed by some as inadequate, and we cannot fail to admit that most
of them are right. It has yet to address and / or regulate the reduction of aviation emissions, fair

19
The Postal History of ICAO : The Chicago Convention

22
and liberalized competition in a context of continued globalization of markets, or suborbital
flights - despite the Civil Aviation Organization working paper International of 2015, admitting
that they could eventually fall under this regime. In addition, the Chicago Convention's silence
on these and other issues has led to a plethora of bilateral air services agreements, which can
have destructive consequences for the uniformity of the air law regime..

Since neither abolishing the Convention nor keeping it as it is are viable solutions, where are we?

One possible answer can be found in the Convention itself. According to Article 94, any
proposed amendment is subject to the approval of two-thirds of the votes of the Assembly and
will therefore only be in force for those States which ratify it.That alone could cause even more
dangerous fragmentation than that already produced as a result of bilateral ASAs, leading to
further confusion. Fortunately, article 94 (b) provides a “safety net” in this case: it specifies that
“any State which has not ratified within a certain period of time after the entry into force of the
amendment then ceases to be a member of the Organization and a party to the Convention ”,
making ratification of the amendment almost compulsory, so that States are not marginalized. 20

To conclude, in the international legal order and according to the doctrine of international
paretism, ratification and accession to conventions is the cornerstone of State sovereignty In this
context, States renounce part of their sovereignty in order to assume obligations in exchange for
benefits. In view of the amendment procedure, it is at the discretion of states to decide
collectively whether the ambiguities and loopholes or whether the Chicago Convention is of such
importance as to prevent the fulfillment of its mandate. In this case, States should manifest and
implement this will, until their objective is finally and definitively achieved, that is to say until
the proposed and ratified amendments become a substantial component of the core of the
"constitution" of aviation law.21

20
 "What Is The Chicago Convention And Why Does It Matter?". Simple Flying. 2019-07-04.
Retrieved 2021-01-16.

21
This provision was extended by the ICAO Council in a 1999 Resolution, which states: “fuel ... taken on
board for consumption by an aircraft from a contracting state in the territory of another contracting State
departing for the territory of any other State shall be exempt from all customs or other duties ...”
Moreover, the Resolution broadly interprets the scope of the Article 24 prohibition to include “import,

23
CONCLUSION :-

The field of air navigation is evolving, where different countries are advancing with new
technologies to contribute to international civil aviation. Aviation has been the desirable form of
transportation these days and the need to improve it is a constant desire. Every country wants to
be good at it, which is why rules and regulations like the Chicago Convention are the way to
protect the interests of different countries. Organizations such as the International Civil Aviation
Organization are the body that strives to bring about growth and development in this area. The
greatest desire is the safety and protection of persons and of the Contracting States to the
conventions that this organization with its Chicago Convention has brought into force.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. www.lexisnexis.in

2. https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx 

3. https://www.icao.int/about-icao

4.http://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1934-22_0.pdf

5.https://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/7300_orig.pdf

export, excise, sales, consumption and internal duties and taxes of all kinds levied upon ... fuel”. (ICAO’s
Policies on Taxation in the Field of International Air Transport, ICAO Doc. 8632-C/968, 3d rd. 2000)

24
25