Abstract
Although universal jurisdiction over piracy has long existed in customary international law and international conventions, such as the Convention on the High Seas (HSC) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the piracy situation has been changing. The subsidence of Somali piracy provides an opportunity for rethinking how to strengthen universal jurisdiction for maritime piracy trials to enhance a sustainable anti-piracy legal system. The incidents of Somali piracy have resulted in some new developments in exercising universal jurisdiction: the separation of seizing, prosecuting, and imprisoning States; the consideration of creative piracy prosecution mechanisms; the increased focus on land-based facilitation of piracy; enhanced international cooperation; and expanded universal jurisdiction. This leads to several main challenges in existing legal frameworks, including weaknesses in UNCLOS, the disharmony among international instruments, and defects in domestic piracy legislation. In order to sustain and improve the anti-piracy legal system, universal jurisdiction over piracy should be incrementally strengthened to support the prosecution of pirates by States. To address the trends and challenges, this article explores how the legal system can be enhanced in two respects: adjusting the basic provisions of universal jurisdiction over piracy and refining the relevant measures in exercising that jurisdiction to prosecute pirates.
Highlights
One scholar believes that Korea does not recognize universal jurisdiction, and only when the suspected pirates are Korean nationals or the piracy takes place on a Korean ship can they be prosecuted for piracy in its domestic courts [120]
Other scholars regard the trial as a typical case in which Korea exercised universal jurisdiction over piracy [19]. This issue is important because if there is a positive conflict of jurisdiction, the jurisdiction principles the State applies may affect the priority of different jurisdictions because universal jurisdiction is often considered to be subsidiary [121]
The international law of piracy has a long history, and it has developed in response to challenges across hundreds of years
Summary
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. The practical application value of the provisions on piracy in UNCLOS was not prominent at the time of its enactment, since piracy activities have increased significantly and are still at a high level These provisions contribute to the integrity of UNCLOS as a maritime regime, but they play the role of guiding and regulating the international law basis for anti-piracy actions, which have proven to be successful in countering Somali pirates. It is still necessary to build a sustainable anti-piracy legal system, especially in the areas that need long-term and large investment, such as legislation, law enforcement, prosecutions, and trials relating to universal jurisdiction over piracy. This implies that the universal jurisdiction over piracy is still an essential part of a sustainable anti-piracy legal system
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
