Generally, criminal law are territorial in nature but due to rise of globalization and new forms of criminal activities, it is need to consider the other forms of criminal jurisdiction.

1. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
Lecturer, Vijay Jayshwal
Kathmandu University School of Law,
Nepal

2. CRIMINAL JURISDICITON AS SUCH
 Criminal jurisdiction is a term used in constitutional
law and public law to describe the power of courts to hear
a case brought by a state accusing a defendant of the
commission of a crime.
 It is relevant in three distinct situations:
1. to regulate the relationship between states, or between
one state and another;
2. where the nation is a federation, to regulate the
relationship between the federal courts and the
domestic courts of those states comprising the
federation; and
3. where a state only has, to a greater or lesser extent, a
single and unified system of law, it is the law of criminal
procedure to regulate what cases each classification of
court within the judicial system shall adjudicate upon.
People must be tried in the same state the crime is

3.  The word “jurisdiction” is basically a legal term for
power, literally the power to “speak the law.” It
derives from the Latin jus or juris (law) plus dicere
(to speak).
 Jurisdiction is not a monolithic concept. it
comprises at least three different aspects,
ordinarily referred to as prescriptive jurisdiction,
adjudicative jurisdiction, and enforcement
jurisdiction.

4.  Jurisdiction over criminal offenses means the
power of a given court to inquire into and
determine whether or not an alleged offense has
been committed by a designated accused
person," and to apply the penalty for an offense
so determined.
 Jurisdiction is the power or authority of the court
to try and to punish the accused for a violation of
a government’s penal (or criminal) code.

5. FOUR FORMS OF CRIMINAL JURISDICITON
 TERRITORIAL JURISDICITON
 EXTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICITON
 UNIVERSAL JURISDICITON
 PERSONAL JURISDICITON

6. TERRITORIAL JURISDICITON
 Territorial jurisdiction refers to jurisdiction over
cases arising in or involving persons residing
within a defined territory.
 It can also be the territory over which a
government, one of its courts, or one of its
subdivisions has jurisdiction.
 If a court does not have territorial jurisdiction over
the events or persons within it, then the court will
not be able to bind the defendant to an obligation
or adjudicate any rights involving them.

7.  The territorial theory takes the position that criminal
jurisdiction depends upon the place of perpetration.
That is, the nation on whose territory the crime was
committed has jurisdiction of the offense.
 The perpetrator, rather than the place of perpetration,
is the determinant under the Roman theory.
 The territorial commission theory of jurisdiction over
criminal offenses is based upon an examination into
the location of the offense.
 The rule applied is this: Every offender must be
prosecuted for his offense in the place where the
offense was committed; and he cannot be prosecuted
in any place where the offense was not committed.
 The locus of the offense fixes jurisdiction.

8. FOUNDATIONS OF TERRITORIAL
COMMISSION THEORY
 A. The Historical Foundation
 The historical foundation consists of three elements. These
are
 (i) the survival of primitive religious idea,
 (ii) notions of community responsibility for the activities of a
member of the community, and
 (iii) early methods of procedure, by the community,' against
the individual offender.
 It is the place where the deed is done which makes the
deed an offense. If the deed was done within the territory
where the deity lived, or over which he had extended his
protection (in the later development of religious ideas) the
doer was amenable to the wrath of the outraged deity. But
if the deed occurred outside such territory the deity was
not concerned in the matter.

9.  B. The Metaphysical Foundation
 One sovereign will not enforce the penal laws of
another sovereign.

10. EXTRA-TERRITORIAL
JURISDICTION
 It obviously indicates something along the lines of
“beyond . . . territorial limits.
 Extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) is the legal
ability of a government to
exercise authority beyond its normal boundaries.
 The term ‘extraterritoriality’ is generally
understood to refer to exercises of jurisdiction by
a nation state over conduct occurring outside its
borders.
 As Gillian Triggs observes, jurisdiction is ‘a
manifestation of state sovereignty through its
courts, legislature and executive.

11.  Law has recognizes the right of states to protect
themselves and their subjects against threats and
damage from within their territory and outside.
 In the international sphere, the means and
methods of national protection are restricted by
the extraterritorial jurisdiction of courts and the
laws they enforce.
 Criminal justice today is being confronted on an
ever increasing scale by international criminal
offenses that impinge on domestic concerns:
drugs, securities and financial manipulations,
money laundering, and terrorism,

12. UNIVERSAL JURISDICITON
 Universal jurisdiction allows states or international
organizations to claim criminal jurisdiction over an
accused person regardless of where the alleged
crime was committed, and regardless of the
accused's nationality, country of residence, or any
other relation with the prosecuting entity.
 Crimes prosecuted under universal jurisdiction are
considered crimes against all, too serious to
tolerate jurisdictional arbitrage.
 The concept of universal jurisdiction is therefore
closely linked to the idea that some international
norms are erga omnes, or owed to the entire world
community, as well as the concept of jus cogens –
that certain international law obligations are binding

13.  SIMILARLY, “universal jurisdiction” refers to the idea
that a national court may prosecute individuals for any
serious crime against international law — such as crimes
against humanity, war crimes, genocide, and torture —
based on the principle that such crimes harm the
international community or international order itself,
which individual States may act to protect.
 For example, New Zealand’s International Crimes and
International Criminal Court Act 2000 defines war crimes,
crimes against humanity, and genocide in accordance
with the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute, and
its section 8(1)(c) provides that individuals may be
prosecuted in New Zealand for these crimes regardless
of “
(i) the nationality or citizenship of the person accused; or
(ii) whether or not any act forming part of the offence
occurred in New Zealand; or
(iii) whether or not the person accused was in New Zealand
at the time that the act constituting the offence occurred
or at the time a decision was made to charge the person
with an offence.”

14.  Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act of
2000 OF Canada. For genocide, crimes against
humanity, or war crimes as defined in the Act,
section 9(1) provides that proceedings may
commence in any territorial division in Canada for
those offenses “alleged to have been committed
outside Canada for which a person may be
prosecuted under this Act […], whether or not the
person is in Canada.”

15. Universal Jurisdictions cases
 the United Kingdom’s consideration of Spain’s
request to extradite former Chilean dictator
Augusto Pinochet
 U.S. prosecution of the former Liberian
president’s son, Chuckie Taylor
 Spanish prosecution of Guatemalan officials in
the Guatemalan genocide case
 Spanish prosecution of El Salvadoran officials for
the murder of six Jesuit priests
 Spanish prosecution of an Argentine naval
officer for crimes against humanity during the
Dirty War

16. Personal Jurisdiction
 Personal jurisdiction gives a court the authority to
determine the rights and liabilities of a person or
entity, such as a corporation or partnership,
involved in a lawsuit.
 Personal jurisdiction or in personam jurisdiction is
the jurisdiction, over the person of the defendant,
which can be acquired only by service of process
upon the defendant in the state to which the court
belongs or by his voluntary submission to
jurisdiction.
 The court must have in personam jurisdiction over
a person in order to try a case against that
specific individual.

17.  Personal jurisdiction rules determine whether a
court has power over a particular defendant,
whereas subject matter jurisdiction establishes
the court's power to hear the kind of case a
lawsuit involves.
 Personal Jurisdiction -- The Four Basic Types
 Presence
 Domicile/Place of Business
 Consent
 Minimum Contacts

18. Thank you