Conflicts of Criminal Jurisdiction of States and Extradition Issues

Author Name(s): Alfiya R. Kaumova, Rimma I. Efremova
Author Email: alfiya_kaumova@inbox.ru

Abstract

The paper analyzes the issues of state jurisdictional competition, and also extradition issues. The authors consider in detail issues related to the conflict between jurisdictions, namely collisions between criminal jurisdictions, and the issues of extradition as a means of resolving collisions between criminal jurisdictions of states.

Introduction

The existence in international law of different legal bases for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction (principles of territoriality, active and passive nationality, protection and universal) necessarily implies a conflict or competition between the jurisdictions of States. O. S. Chernichenko determines competition of the jurisdiction of the States as “establishing at the same time the jurisdiction of the various States in relation to one and the same person (or persons) or objects, as well as the exercise or attempted exercise of its jurisdiction in relation to relevant person (s) or objects”. It also notes that competition of jurisdiction should be considered if each state concerned, when establishing or claiming to exercise its jurisdiction, does not go beyond the limits provided by international law, based on a particular jurisdictional principle (criteria).

Conclusion

Thus, the existence in international law of various legal grounds for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction necessarily implies competition between the criminal jurisdiction of States. The decisive factor in resolving conflicts of state criminal jurisdiction is always the actual location of the offender. A state may, within the framework of international law, exercise its jurisdiction over a crime committed both within and outside its own territory, regardless of the nationality of the object of jurisdiction, but in this case the jurisdiction will be prescriptive, substantive. Such jurisdiction in the absence of the accused (in absentia) is limited and negates the achievement of the main objective of the exercise of criminal jurisdiction – the inevitability of punishment. At the same time, the advantage of the territory does not exclude the existence of a conflict of criminal jurisdictions of States, inevitably entails the need to address many procedural issues, including extradition.

 

157 total views, 1 views today

Download PDF File

About the author: admin