The legal basket
The relationship between jurisdiction and the Internet The relationship between jurisdiction and the Internet has a built-in ambiguity, since jurisdiction rests predominantly on the geographical division of the globe into national territories. Each state has the sovereign right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory. However, the Internet facilitates considerable cross-border exchange, difficult (although not impossible) to monitor via traditional government mechanisms. The question of jurisdiction on the Internet highlights one of the central dilemmas associated with Internet governance: how is it possible to ‘anchor’ the Internet within existing legal and political geography?7 Jurisdiction – basic techniques Three main considerations are important when thinking about jurisdiction: 1 2 3
Which court or state authority has the proper authority (procedural jurisdiction). Which rules should apply (substantive jurisdiction).
How to implement court decisions (enforcement jurisdiction).
The following principal criteria establish jurisdiction in particular cases:
Territorial Principle – the right of the state to rule over persons and property within its territory. Personality Principle – the right of the state to rule over its citizens wherever they might be (nationality principle).
Effects Principle – the right of the state to rule on economic and legal effects on its territory, stemming from activities conducted abroad.
Another important principle introduced by modern international law is that of universal jurisdiction.8 The concept of universal jurisdiction in its broad sense [is] the power of a state to punish certain crimes, wherever and by whomsoever they have been committed, without any required connection to territory, nationality, or special state interest.9 Universal jurisdiction covers such crimes as piracy, war crimes, and genocide.
87