Doctrinal Study of the Evolution of Universal Jurisdiction and Ways of Strengthening it in the Near Future: Prospects and Challenges

Abstract

This thesis analyses how far the concept of universal jurisdiction (UJ) has evolved and explores what should be done to enhance it further in the near future. Thus, the research has sought to discuss the most important points related to where this doctrine stands today. This includes, the definition of UJ, the scope of this jurisdiction and the preconditions for UJ that are required in accordance with states' practice. The study shows that UJ is not absolute over international crimes. Rather, there are a number of conditions that must be met to exercise UJ. These include the presence of the accused in the territory of the state that will exercise UJ. This is because there is no legal basis that supports the legality of UJ in absentia. Therefore, neglecting the preconditions for UJ will make it a jurisdiction that can be selectively misused. In general, it is observed that although UJ is broadly accepted across states, there remains some ambiguity surrounding the exercise of UJ. Accordingly, the research discusses the possibility of exercising UJ under unified international guidance such as a draft article that codify UJ. In this regard, the research assesses the position of states on UJ in order to provide a proposal that summarises the concept and scope of UJ. The research aims to put this proposal in the hands of the International law commission in order to help them draft articles on UJ.