<P>' Terrorism' currently lacks the precision, objectivity and certainty demanded by legal discourse . Criminal law strives to avoid emotive terms to prevent prejudice to an accused, and shuns ambiguous or subjective terms as incompatible with the principle of non-retroactivity . If the law is to admit the term, advance definition is essential on grounds of fairness, and it is not sufficient to leave definition to the unilateral interpretations of States . Legal definition could plausibly retrieve terrorism from the ideological quagmire, by severing an agreed legal meaning from the remainder of the elastic, political concept . Ultimately it must do so without criminalizing legitimate violent resistance to oppressive regimes--and becoming complicit in that oppression . </P> <P> Diaz - Paniagua has noted that, to "...create an effective legal regime against terrorism, it would be necessary to formulate a comprehensive definition of that crime that, on the one hand, provides the strongest moral condemnation to terrorist activities while, on the other hand, has enough precision to permit the prosecution of criminal activities without condemning acts that should be deemed to be legitimate . Nonetheless, due to major divergences at the international level on the question of the legitimacy of the use of violence for political purposes, either by states or by self - determination and revolutionary groups, this has not yet been possible ." In this sense, M. Cherif Bassiouni notes: </P> <P> to define' terrorism' in a way that is both all - inclusive and unambiguous is very difficult, if not impossible . One of the principal difficulties lies in the fundamental values at stake in the acceptance or rejection of terror - inspiring violence as means of accomplishing a given goal . The obvious and well known range of views on these issues are what makes an internationally accepted specific definition of what is loosely called' terrorism,' a largely impossible undertaking . That is why the search for and internationally agreed upon definition may well be a futile and unnecessary effort . </P> <P> Sami Zeidan, a Lebanese diplomat and scholar, explained the political reasons underlying the current difficulties to define terrorism as follows: </P>

Essay on terrorism in pakistan in easy words