Terrorism or not terrorism? Whose money are we looking for?

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the counter-terrorism financing regime provides a solid platform for a better understanding of who should be considered terrorists or what forms terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist groups, the financing of which is the subject matter. In the absence of an internationally agreed definition of terrorism, the question which needs to be posed is whether there is a clear and common understanding of what constitutes terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist groups, the financing of which needs to be stopped. That is, from a criminal law perspective, whether the Terrorist Financing Convention, as the backbone of the counter-terrorist financing regime, clarifies what types of conduct, by who, in what circumstances and when, against whom (targets or victims) and with what intention or motivation should be considered terrorism? Design/methodology/approach - – It will be explained how and why it has been difficult to reach an agreement on the definition of terrorism. The endeavour of the drafters of the Terrorist Financing Convention and others involved in countering terrorist financing to establish a general definition of terrorism will be examined. Findings - – The record of attempts to define the elements of terrorism proves that it is hardly possible to reach an agreement on a generic definition of terrorism because the concept of terrorism is elusive and subject to various understandings. Even the definition provided by the Terrorist Financing Convention, is not convincing. Originality/value - – With regard to the findings, this paper calls for further research on the legal consequences of the implementation of the terrorist financing-counter measures, while the scope of terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist organizations have been left vague.