Hijacking a plane in Australia
When facing serious aircraft offences in Australia, advice from our best aviation lawyers is critical.
Early steps affect the outcome.
or
Choosing the best hijacking an aircraft lawyer in Australia
Being investigated or charged with hijacking a plane is among the most serious allegations that can be made under Australian criminal law.
These offences are prosecuted under Commonwealth legislation, often involve the Australian Federal Police, and can carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Hijacking charges are highly technical. They turn on precise statutory definitions of control, intimidation, flight status, and jurisdiction. In many cases, the factual circumstances fall close to the boundary between hijacking and other aviation offences.
It is critical to obtain urgent advice from an experienced criminal defence lawyer.
Key facts about aircraft hijacking charges
Aircraft hijacking offences are contained in Part 2, Division 1 of the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 (Cth). That Act gives effect to Australia’s obligations under international aviation conventions, particularly the Hague Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (1970).
In summary:
hijacking is an indictable Commonwealth offence
it applies to conduct on board an aircraft
it can apply to conduct inside or outside Australia
jurisdiction can arise even where the flight is not purely international
the maximum penalty is life imprisonment
life imprisonment is not mandatory
What is hijacking a plane in Australia?
The legal definition of hijacking is found in section 9 of the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 (Cth).
A person hijacks an aircraft if, while on board the aircraft, the person seizes, or exercises control of, the aircraft:
by force
by threat of force, or
by any other form of intimidation
Attempting to seize or exercise control is sufficient. The offence does not require a successful takeover or diversion of the aircraft.
This definition is deliberately broad. It captures conduct ranging from armed takeovers through to intimidation that realistically interferes with the authority of the flight crew.
If you are charged or being investigated, seeking early advice will make a difference to the outcome.
Call us, or fill in our Quick Enquiry form to receive a link to our free guide, 16 Things You Need to Do Now if Charged with a Criminal Offence.
When is hijacking a criminal offence?
Flights and aircraft covered by the law
Under section 13 of the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 (Cth), hijacking is an offence if, at the time it occurs:
the aircraft is in flight within the meaning of the Hague Convention and Australia is required to criminalise the conduct
the aircraft is engaged in a prescribed flight
the aircraft is a Commonwealth aircraft
the aircraft is a visiting government aircraft
Only one of these needs to apply.
Hijacking outside Australia
Australian law also applies extraterritorially.
A person commits an offence if:
the hijacking occurs outside Australia
the person is an Australian citizen
the aircraft would be considered “in flight” under the Hague Convention
This prevents Australian citizens from avoiding prosecution by committing hijacking overseas.
When is a plane considered ‘in flight’?
For hijacking offences, an aircraft is “in flight” from:
the moment the external doors are closed after embarkation
until the doors are opened for disembarkation
This definition is critical. Conduct occurring:
before boarding will not amount to hijacking
after landing but before doors open can still amount to hijacking
after doors open cannot amount to hijacking, although other offences may apply
Courts have accepted that conduct commencing earlier may still amount to hijacking if it continues into the flight period.
What behaviour can amount to hijacking?
Hijacking does not require:
a weapon
physical injury
a successful diversion
What matters is whether the conduct involved force, threats, or intimidation capable of exercising control.
Examples that have supported serious aviation charges include:
threats to detonate a bomb or device
statements inducing fear in flight crew
producing weapons or objects presented as weapons
actions disrupting the authority of the pilot
Threats made from the ground, or conduct not occurring on board the aircraft, will generally fall outside the hijacking offence but may still constitute other serious aviation crimes.
What police must prove in a hijacking case
To establish hijacking, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that:
the accused was on board an aircraft
the accused seized or attempted to seize control of the aircraft
force, threat of force, or intimidation was used
the aircraft fell within one of the jurisdictional categories
the conduct occurred while the aircraft was in flight
If any of these elements is not established, the hijacking charge cannot succeed, although alternative aviation offences may still be pursued.
Does hijacking law apply to domestic flights?
Although hijacking law is grounded in international conventions, Commonwealth jurisdiction applies to almost all aviation security offences, including many domestic flights.
The distinction between domestic and international travel does not prevent prosecution where:
the aircraft is required to be regulated federally
the offence engages international obligations
Australia is required to assert jurisdiction under convention law
This is why hijacking charges can arise on flights entirely within Queensland.
Penalties for hijacking a plane
The maximum penalty is life imprisonment.
However, courts assess:
the degree of control exercised
the level of danger created
whether weapons were involved
mental health and intent
whether the conduct was impulsive or planned
Sentences vary widely depending on the circumstances.
How hijacking charges are defended?
A successful defence to a hijacking charge depends on the facts and evidence relied on for each case. Arguements which could arise include:
whether control was actually seized or attempted
whether intimidation met the statutory threshold
whether the aircraft was legally ‘in flight’
jurisdictional challenges under the Act
mental health considerations
Early legal advice from an experienced criminal defence lawyer specialising in serious offences in Australia is critical.
What to do if police accuse you of hijacking a plane
Hijacking offences are among the most complex and severe in Australian criminal law. They combine strict statutory definitions, international treaty obligations, and very high penalties. When facing such charges, you should:
not answer police questions without legal advice
not publish any photographs, messages, comments, or other content on social media or online which could be used as evidence against you
preserve communications and evidence to provide to your lawyer
seek urgent legal advice from lawyers experienced in Commonwealth criminal law
Because the consequences are extreme and the law is technical, early and experienced legal representation from our best criminal defence lawyers is critical.
Key cases on aircraft hijacking in Australia
Sillery v The Queen (1981) HCA 34
This is the leading Australian authority on hijacking penalties.
Mr Sillery attempted to seize control of a commercial aircraft flying between Queensland ports by threatening crew with a firearm. He was originally sentenced to life imprisonment on the basis that the penalty was mandatory.
The High Court overturned that approach and held:
life imprisonment is a maximum, not mandatory penalty
sentencing courts must retain discretion
the offence definition covers conduct of varying seriousness
This case remains fundamental to sentencing for hijacking offences and confirms that punishment must be proportionate to the actual conduct involved.
R v Hildebrandt [1964] Qd R 43
This pre-Convention case highlighted the jurisdictional gaps that existed before modern aviation legislation.
The accused threatened crew with a firearm and claimed to have a bomb on a Sydney–Brisbane flight. His conviction was quashed due to uncertainty about where the offence occurred, illustrating why Commonwealth aviation laws were later expanded to cover aircraft in flight regardless of state borders.
Lilico v Meyers [2003] QCA 16
This case involved a passenger stating he would hijack the plane and pull a knife. Although he had no intention of doing so, the Court confirmed that:
threats inducing fear in flight crew are taken seriously
deterrence is an important sentencing factor
even brief statements can constitute serious aviation offences
The case demonstrates how words alone, in the aviation context, can attract criminal liability.
R v EQ [2021] QCA 257
This case involved bomb threats and intimidation at an airport, resulting in charges under the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991 (Cth). The Court emphasised:
the extreme seriousness of aviation threats
the risk to public safety even where no device exists
the overlap between hijacking-related offences and terrorism-style conduct
Our criminal defence lawyers are available now
Fill in a Quick Enquiry form to receive a link to our free guide, 16 Things You Need to Do Now if Charged with a Criminal Offence.