Abstract
AbstractThe sovereignty of states is reflected in the notion of jurisdiction, empowering them to enact and enforce laws and regulations, and to adjudicate disputes in court. The jurisdiction of states and the exercise thereof is primarily territorial, limiting the exercise of state authority to their respective national territories except in specific situations. However, in an increasingly globalized and interconnected world, it would be hard to maintain that a state should be denied the right to exercise its sovereign powers beyond national borders when there are reasonable grounds for doing so. Consequently, the exercise of extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction has become more accepted, although it is limited to particular situations and circumstances. These have to do with the exercise of jurisdiction over nationals, vessels and aircraft registered in or pertaining to the legislating state, as well as certain activities aimed at undermining the state’s security or solvency or which constitute crimes under international law. However, in principle it is not allowed to regulate activities of foreign nationals or entities operating wholly outside the legislating state’s territory. One area where this has become increasingly prevalent is through the exercise of export controls over foreign nationals and legal persons. The United States (US) has long been engaged in the exercise of this type of extraterritorial jurisdiction and is, without doubt, the state that is most proactive in doing so. This chapter considers US extraterritorial claims with respect to its export control and sanctions legislation and explores the limits of this practice under public international law.
Highlights
This type of sanctions is referred to as extraterritorial or secondary sanctions, as they are not aimed at the target state but instead subject foreign nationals and business entities to United States (US) legislative actions without a clear nexus with the US affecting the relations between third states and the target state
The sovereignty of states is reflected in the concept of jurisdiction which encompasses the powers of a state to make laws applicable to persons, property, or conduct, to exercise its powers to compel compliance with the law, and to apply laws to persons or thing through the processes of its courts or administrative tribunals
The ongoing globalization, including the increasing interdependency of national economies, make it impossible to keep national jurisdictions fully separated. States can exercise their legislative powers extraterritorially based on the principles of jurisdiction, which express a genuine link between the legislating state and the subject of the legislation
Summary
Limits on the Extraterritoriality of United States Export Control and Sanctions Legislation. J. Voetelink of foreign nationals or entities operating wholly outside the legislating state’s territory. Voetelink of foreign nationals or entities operating wholly outside the legislating state’s territory One area where this has become increasingly prevalent is through the exercise of export controls over foreign nationals and legal persons. The United States (US) has long been engaged in the exercise of this type of extraterritorial jurisdiction and is, without doubt, the state that is most proactive in doing so. This chapter considers US extraterritorial claims with respect to its export control and sanctions legislation and explores the limits of this practice under public international law. Keywords International law · export control · sovereignty · extraterritorial jurisdiction · sanctions · principles of jurisdiction · European Union · United States · Blocking Regulation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
