Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | The State and Cosmopolitan Responsibilities |
| Editors | Richard Beardsworth, Garrett Wallace Brown, Richard Shapcott |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press, USA |
| Chapter | 7 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9780198800613 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 13 Jun 2019 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Extraterritorial Criminal Jurisdiction and the Cosmopolitan : A Double-Edged Sword. / Ireland-Piper, Danielle.
The State and Cosmopolitan Responsibilities. ed. / Richard Beardsworth; Garrett Wallace Brown; Richard Shapcott. Oxford University Press, USA, 2019.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Research › peer-review
TY - CHAP
T1 - Extraterritorial Criminal Jurisdiction and the Cosmopolitan
T2 - A Double-Edged Sword
AU - Ireland-Piper, Danielle
PY - 2019/6/13
Y1 - 2019/6/13
N2 - The assertion of extraterritorial jurisdiction by nation states is not inherently cosmopolitan. Rather, it is a double-edged sword. This is because extraterritorial jurisdiction is capable of being wielded for both cosmopolitan and non-cosmopolitan purposes: for empowerment, but also oppression; for rescue, but also retribution; for protection, but also unilateral political gain. In that context, this chapter introduces the law of extraterritorial jurisdiction, considers why states might wish to exercise it, and then identifies arguments both for (such as universalism, and the avoidance of impunity) and against (such as the undermining of meaningful multilateralism and the rights of an accused) exercises of extraterritorial jurisdiction. Ultimately, this chapter concludes that extraterritorial jurisdiction can only be considered capable of furthering cosmopolitan ideals if certain criteria are met.
AB - The assertion of extraterritorial jurisdiction by nation states is not inherently cosmopolitan. Rather, it is a double-edged sword. This is because extraterritorial jurisdiction is capable of being wielded for both cosmopolitan and non-cosmopolitan purposes: for empowerment, but also oppression; for rescue, but also retribution; for protection, but also unilateral political gain. In that context, this chapter introduces the law of extraterritorial jurisdiction, considers why states might wish to exercise it, and then identifies arguments both for (such as universalism, and the avoidance of impunity) and against (such as the undermining of meaningful multilateralism and the rights of an accused) exercises of extraterritorial jurisdiction. Ultimately, this chapter concludes that extraterritorial jurisdiction can only be considered capable of furthering cosmopolitan ideals if certain criteria are met.
U2 - 10.1093/oso/9780198800613.003.0008
DO - 10.1093/oso/9780198800613.003.0008
M3 - Chapter
BT - The State and Cosmopolitan Responsibilities
A2 - Beardsworth, Richard
A2 - Brown, Garrett Wallace
A2 - Shapcott, Richard
PB - Oxford University Press, USA
ER -