Yurisdiksi - Yurisdiksi Perlindungan dan Yurisdiksi Universal

Summary

This video explores various jurisdiction theories in international law, focusing on territorial, personal, protection, and universal jurisdictions. The presenter discusses the differences between these types, explaining how each one applies to cases involving criminal acts. It covers controversial concepts like universal jurisdiction, which allows countries to prosecute international crimes such as war crimes and genocide, even if they occur outside their borders. The video also examines key cases, such as the prosecution of Nazi soldiers and military leaders, highlighting the importance of holding individuals accountable for crimes against humanity regardless of where they occur.

Takeaways

• 😀 The video discusses various theories of jurisdiction in international law, focusing on territorial jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, protection jurisdiction, and universal jurisdiction.
• 😀 Territorial jurisdiction allows a state to apply its laws to crimes committed within its borders, based on the principle of state sovereignty.
• 😀 Personal jurisdiction involves applying a state's laws to individuals based on their nationality, whether the crime occurs within the state or outside.
• 😀 Active personal jurisdiction applies when the perpetrator is a national of the state, regardless of where the crime occurs.
• 😀 Passive personal jurisdiction applies when the victim is a national of the state, regardless of the perpetrator's nationality or the location of the crime.
• 😀 Protection jurisdiction is applied when crimes committed by foreigners abroad threaten the state's security or integrity, justifying the state’s legal intervention.
• 😀 A key example of protection jurisdiction is the case of Joyce v. Director of Public Prosecutions (1946), where an American citizen broadcasting Nazi propaganda was prosecuted in the UK.
• 😀 The doctrine of the 'effect principle' in American law suggests that the U.S. can assert jurisdiction over actions committed abroad if they have significant effects on the U.S. economy.
• 😀 Universal jurisdiction allows a state to prosecute individuals for crimes considered to be of universal concern, like war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, regardless of where the crime took place.
• 😀 Universal jurisdiction is controversial but is justified by the need to address crimes that shock the global conscience and to prevent impunity for perpetrators, even if they are leaders or military officials.
• 😀 Cases like the prosecution of Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann in Israel and the legal actions taken against Indonesian military officials in the U.S. highlight the application of universal jurisdiction in practice.

Q & A

What is territorial jurisdiction in the context of law?

Territorial jurisdiction refers to a country's authority to apply its laws to actions or offenses that occur within its borders. It is a fundamental principle of sovereignty, allowing a country to regulate legal matters that happen within its territory.

How does personal jurisdiction differ from territorial jurisdiction?

Personal jurisdiction is based on the nationality or residence of the individuals involved, either the perpetrator or the victim. While territorial jurisdiction focuses on the location of the crime, personal jurisdiction applies the law to individuals based on their nationality or residency, irrespective of where the crime took place.

What is the concept of 'active personality jurisdiction'?

Active personality jurisdiction allows a country to exercise legal authority over a crime committed by one of its citizens, regardless of where the crime occurs. This means that a country can prosecute its nationals for crimes committed abroad.

What is passive personality jurisdiction?

Passive personality jurisdiction allows a country to prosecute crimes based on the nationality of the victim, rather than the perpetrator. This means that if a foreign national is harmed, the victim's home country may claim jurisdiction to prosecute the crime.

Why is protective jurisdiction considered controversial?

Protective jurisdiction is controversial because it allows a country to claim legal authority over actions that occur outside its borders, even when neither the perpetrator nor the victim is a national of that country. The justification for this jurisdiction is that the crime threatens the country’s security, sovereignty, or vital interests.

What is the 'effect doctrine' in international law?

The effect doctrine allows a country to assert jurisdiction over an act committed outside its borders if the act has a significant effect or impact within the country. The United States, for example, has used this doctrine to claim jurisdiction over actions affecting its economic interests, even if the actions take place in other countries.

What is universal jurisdiction and how does it differ from other types of jurisdiction?

Universal jurisdiction allows a country to prosecute individuals for certain international crimes, such as genocide or crimes against humanity, even if the crime did not occur within its borders, and the perpetrator or victim is not a national of that country. Unlike territorial or personal jurisdiction, universal jurisdiction is based on the nature of the crime rather than its location or the nationality of those involved.

What types of crimes are typically prosecuted under universal jurisdiction?

Crimes prosecuted under universal jurisdiction include war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and aggression. These crimes are considered so severe that they are subject to international prosecution regardless of where they were committed or the nationality of the perpetrator.

Why is universal jurisdiction important in preventing impunity?

Universal jurisdiction is essential for preventing impunity by ensuring that no individual, regardless of their status or position, is above the law. It allows for the prosecution of individuals who commit heinous crimes, such as genocide or war crimes, even if they are protected by national laws or political power.

Can a country exercise universal jurisdiction over crimes committed outside its borders?

Yes, a country can exercise universal jurisdiction over crimes committed outside its borders if those crimes are considered international crimes. This jurisdiction is based on the principle that certain crimes, such as genocide or war crimes, are so egregious that they threaten humanity as a whole and must be prosecuted wherever they are committed.