Abstract
This study explores the principles of domestic criminal jurisdiction under international law, focusing on universal jurisdiction. It analyzes the contentious nature of universal jurisdiction, particularly its application by international judicial organs post-human rights and international criminal law developments. The research scrutinizes the Rome Statute's provisions, debating whether it implicitly or explicitly endorses universal jurisdiction over non-party state nationals. It also examines the complementarity principle within the Statute, arguing that it safeguards state interests by prioritizing national jurisdiction. The findings affirm universal jurisdiction's recognition under international law and its potential activation under the Rome Statute, while complementarity balances states' interests against the jurisdiction of international courts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
