Choosing the right forum: competing jurisdictional competences in the sphere of international, transnational and national crime

Brookson-Morris, Katharine (2016). Choosing the right forum: competing jurisdictional competences in the sphere of international, transnational and national crime. University of Birmingham. M.Phil.

Preview

Brookson-Morris16MPhil.pdf
PDF - Accepted Version
Download (951kB)

Abstract

Legislative jurisdiction is held concurrently by States. There will be occasions when more than one State has established a lawful justification for criminalising the same set of conduct. If the States cannot agree which of them should proceed, there will be a dispute between them which the rules of jurisdiction themselves cannot resolve. Usually, by the time a dispute has arisen, it will concern the facts of a particular prosecution, with one State claiming that it is the more appropriate legal system to try the crime which has been lawfully established in each system. ‘Appropriateness’ will usually be asserted by reference to a range of factors, including the territorial locus of the conduct, the presence of key actors and the interests involved. The thesis argues that international law has established no standards of sufficient certainty to provide a practical resolution to many of the conflicts which will arise. There is little customary international law can do to resolve conflicts of jurisdiction and many solutions may serve only to mitigate the consequences between States of a dispute about criminal jurisdiction. However, analogies between other areas of law and this one can be drawn, and institutions exist which may, given the right circumstances, be resorted to, to help serve to ease differences which arise about the exercise of criminal jurisdiction. Comity, rather than as yet unrealised rules, may encourage sufficient respect and cooperation between legal systems.

Type of Work:

Thesis (Masters by Research > M.Phil.)

Award Type:

Masters by Research > M.Phil.

Supervisor(s):