0

I want to ask whether a country can try a citizen (or a PR) for a crime not committed under their jurisdiction, provided that such country has no extraterritorial jurisdiction over its own citizens or PRs and in the case whether the act is a crime either in the citizen's country, country it's been committed in or both. I'm assuming that the country's citizen has no explicit law on extraterritorial jurisdiction, otherwise all the premise of this question would just crumble.

I'm not talking about extradition, since I'm not mentioning it and since I'm assuming not occurring in that case, but rather I'm assuming if the citizen's country knows that such person committed a crime elsewhere and extradition doesn't occur, and provided also the condition above (no extraterritorial jurisdiction), is the country allowed to try such a person theoretically? (I know that the practice is very different, maybe international laws would be ignored an bypassed by the principle of sovereignity and internal affairs when it comes to a citizen and blah blah)

I'm asking under general principles of international law, and moreover I'm asking under circumstances that erase completely the mileage of cases that may result for every different couple of countries (so " it depends on the countries involved" is not an answer) AND the theoretical chance of getting condemned in the other country, which are no extraterritorial jurisdiction and no extradition occurring, but just reporting signalation and nothing more, not even the requesting country asking for a trial to the host country against the perpetrator.

  • "Can a country can try a citizen for a crime not committed under their jurisdiction?" Isn't that pretty much the definition of "jurisdiction"? The answer appears to be a trivial "no". The rest of the question is just adding confusion upon confusion. – MSalters Nov 20 at 14:56
  • Trivially it is supposed to be a blunt "no", but it usually happens otherwise. – abdul Nov 20 at 15:29
0

No, there is no International Convention that is binding for all in this matter.

There are Multi-National agreements (European Union as one sample) and individual National laws concerning this area.

How these are implementated is specific to the agreement or national law.

A common scenario (but by all means not valid for all) when:

  • Citizen X, in Country A is charged with a crime commited in Country Z

    • the charge is also a crime in Country A
    • no extradition is requested or possible
  • Country A can, but is not required, to charge and try Citizen X

    • if it is deemed to be in (it's) public interest
      • the law of Country A will be applied

Many National laws of the 18th Century contained such rules

  • since crime was considered a common enemy
  • Ok, but with which laws A will try X, with Z's laws or its own one? Because it could be that X is in a country in which the act committed in Z is liable to death penalty in A (such as offending the King or the president). – abdul Nov 20 at 14:15
  • if a person happens to be for tourism, in a country, whose president is always mocked over by this person online, and they do that in an other country, and assuming that that country enacts death penalty for such an offense, what can that country do, since I assume that it has no extraterritorial on its citizens, let alone other ones. I may understand that every country has its laws, but they can't be valid upon other people who commit legal things outside that country which are illegal in their own country. – abdul Nov 20 at 14:23
  • @abdul since it must also be a crime in Country A, the law of Country A apply in the above given scenario. It is very rare that a Judge A will use the laws of Country Z (but has happened). But since you have excluded country specifics, not part of the answer. – Mark Johnson Nov 20 at 14:40
  • Ok, but 2nd comment raised a slighlty other scenario. What if the country the act has been committed in is not a crime but in the other country the person is currently in is such, knows the fact because of internet and they DO want to condemn him (assuming they're not a citizen or a PR under extraterritorial jurisdiction)? – abdul Nov 20 at 14:46
  • 1
    @abdul haven't you read my answer? There is no International law for this area. Please learn to one question coherently and stop asking 20 sub questions withe different variations. – Mark Johnson Nov 20 at 15:01
0

A prosecutor can always assert jurisdiction

The defendant can always challenge that assertion.

A court will decide if it has jurisdiction and, if it does, which countries law applies.

Some laws are extraterritorial explicitly(e.g. terrorism). Some are extraterritorial implicitly (e.g. drug trafficking). Some are not extraterritorial implicitly (e.g. driving offenses). A very small number are explicitly not extraterritorial.

In addition, there are many, many crimes that can be committed in the territory of the country by someone who is not in that territory (e.g. computer hacking).

  • "In addition.....who is not in that territory" but in that case the crime is considered to be committed in the country of the victim entity because if the place of offence and enduring do not coincide, the jurisdiction place if the victim's one, hence this is not the case of my question since the latter it's just like being in that country and commit a crime just there. That's a different scenario. My scenario regards committing an act in A that is not a crime in country A but it is in B and the person is in B but is not a citizen or PR of B. – abdul Nov 21 at 11:16
  • the jurisdiction place is* the victim's one. – abdul Nov 21 at 13:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.