NCJ Number
147033
Journal
Journal of Criminal Justice Volume: 21 Issue: 6 Dated: (1993) Pages: 583-594
Date Published
1993
Length
12 pages
Annotation
Five principles of international law are discussed that permit nations to exercise jurisdiction over aliens who commit criminal offenses against its citizens or interests outside its borders. United States court cases that have addressed the extraterritorial application of the United States Constitution and the right of police officers to act outside the U.S. borders are analyzed.
Abstract
This article deals with the jurisdiction of U.S. courts and the application of U.S. law beyond the territorial borders of the United States. Legal doctrine that gives nation-states the authority to prescribe penal and regulatory rules and to enforce them through the American court system are presented. This has become increasingly important as criminal offenses, including drug trafficking, financial manipulation, money laundering and terrorism, have become international in scale. Five principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction recognized by international law in criminal cases are covered. Those principles are identified as the territorial, nationality, passive personality, protective and universality principles. Under the territorial theory, nations can claim jurisdiction over acts occurring within their borders. Through liberal application of this rule, nations have gained jurisdiction over cases in which no criminal acts occurred within their borders but the effects of criminal acts occurred in the country. The nationality theory rationalizes that jurisdiction should be based on the nationality of the perpetrator regardless of where the crime occurs. The passive personality theory bases jurisdiction on the nationality of the victims of criminal acts. Under the protective principle, nations may claim the right to take jurisdiction over cases they determine to be damaging to specific national interests. Universality allows nation-states to take jurisdiction over offenders whose acts are particularly heinous or harmful to mankind. U.S. courts have added the requirements of intent to cause a substantial effect within the United States and reasonableness of the assertion of jurisdiction. The question of whether the Constitution affords protection to foreigners who are tried in U.S. courts for acts committed outside country is addressed. A summary is provided of court cases that have interpreted the principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction and the extraterritorial application of the Fourth Amendment.