【作者】 俞世峰；

【导师】 王虎华；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 国际法， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 国际法中的管辖权是一个国际法的基本理论。管辖权涉及国际法最核心的问题，即谁来管辖案件、谁来审判案件、谁来执行案件。在国际法的一般理论中，管辖权分为属地管辖权、属人管辖权、保护性管辖权和普遍性管辖权。在这一管辖权理论体系中，属地、属人和普遍管辖权在学术界研究得较多，但是对于保护性管辖权的研究却鲜见论著。保护性管辖权是属于国际刑事法律的范畴，其所针对的是具有涉外因素的犯罪行为。对具有涉外因素的犯罪，大多表现为外国人实施的犯罪行为位于外国境内，而犯罪结果或犯罪对象则是侵害了管辖国的国家或国民的利益。所以，一国国内的刑事法律规定了保护性管辖权，这有利于保护内国的利益免受来自外国犯罪行为的侵害。可是，保护性管辖权法律制度本身在国内立法中也显得比较原则化，并没有规定相应的具体措施。与这种情况有着相应联系的是，各国在其国内刑事法律的立法文件中，都对本国实施保护性管辖权做了规定。国际立法文件中也出现了关于保护性管辖权的规定，随着这些规定零星地分布在国际立法文件中，缺乏一种体系感，保护性管辖权在国际立法的具体规定中，只是起到了一种原则性的指引作用。具体如何界定保护性管辖权，如何认定保护性管辖权中的要件，如何具体实施保护性管辖权都没有具体的规定。因此，保护性管辖权虽然已有立法规范，但是其还是停留在管辖权原则的阶段，将此原则付诸具体实施的法律制度还是不够健全的，甚至是缺失的。本文写作的目的就在于将保护性管辖权做细致的分析，从管辖权的基本理论入手，补充保护性管辖权理论中的某些内容，在传统保护性管辖权理论的基础上，探讨保护性管辖权的实施机制。本文的导言从选题意义和角度、国内外研究现状、研究的主要方法三个方面进行论述。其一，从选题意义和角度出发，说明选择保护性管辖权作为论文选题的目的，是考虑到实施域外管辖的社会背景已经发生了极大的变化，越来越多的犯罪行为并不仅仅局限于一个国家的领域内，更多的犯罪行为其准备、实施以及犯罪后果都远远超越了国家之间的界限，因而涉外性质的犯罪活动成为了各国国内刑法针对的主要目标。薛捍勤女士在2006年于日内瓦召开的国际法委员会第五十八届会议上做了有关国家行使域外管辖权的专题报告，在其中她提到“当国家主张域外管辖权时，是在没有国际法有关规则的情况下试图以本国立法、司法或执行措施而管辖在境外影响其利益的人、财产或行为。在国内法的专门领域内，主要是刑法和商法，由于境外的人、财产或行为更可能影响其利益，所以一国行使域外管辖权具有更普遍的倾向”，所以作为域外管辖权中的一种，保护性管辖权也应该从法律的角度出发，将保护性管辖权予以具体化和制度化。论文将论证保护性管辖权行使的条件，以及如何将保护性管辖权进行实施作为重点，使得保护性管辖权并不流于形式，而是实实在在地将该管辖权制度落实到实处。其二，通过国内外研究现状的阐述，表明目前对于保护性管辖权的研究还不够深入。从中国研究该管辖权来看，有关这方面的论文与学术著作非常稀少，并且研究都局限于保护性管辖权的实施机制中，对于如何认定行使保护性管辖权的条件，是存在着研究空白的；从外国研究保护性管辖权来看，有关保护性管辖权的研究也是不系统与不全面的，因而对于保护性管辖权进行系统全面的理论研究是有必要的。其三，通过不同的研究方法对于保护性管辖权进行全面的阐述，例如通过文本研究的方法可以对保护性管辖权所依据的立法文件进行系统的梳理；通过案例研究的方法可以对保护性管辖权在实践中的表现有一个全面的了解，这也有利于对各类保护性管辖权实施措施进行有效的评价，通过比较的方法来分析各类措施的优劣，以此做出最好的判断。本文的第一章主要概述了保护性管辖权，分为三个方面的内容，即保护性管辖权的概念和特征、历史演变，保护性管辖权的依据、法律渊源和保护性管辖权与其他管辖权之间的区别。通过这三个方面的概述，起到如下三个作用：（1）介绍保护性管辖权的基本理论和法律依据，为国家行使保护性管辖权寻找合理的法律依据；（2）保护性管辖权在国际法机制中的地位，是依赖于保护性管辖权法律渊源的，通过列举和分析国际法文件中涉及到的保护性管辖权以及各国国内法中有关保护性管辖权的规定，对保护性管辖权法律渊源的认定可以有一个正确的认识；（3）保护性管辖权与属地管辖权、属人管辖权和普遍性管辖权之间存在着明显的区别，本章的第三节通过比较的方法，将保护性管辖权与另外三种管辖权进行了区分，明确了保护性管辖权在理论和内容上与这三种管辖权的界线。第一章是为之后论述保护性管辖权的构成和实施机制打下基础，只有在理论和法律渊源上加以认定才能使保护性管辖权在法律上站得住脚。本文第二章展开对保护性管辖权基本构成要件的阐述，结合刑法的基本理论剖析了保护性管辖权的基本要素，从犯罪地点、犯罪结果、犯罪主体、犯罪客体和指向的犯罪对象、犯罪罪行上的要求入手，构建起了保护性管辖权构成要素体系。在这一部分，犯罪地点分为犯罪行为发生地和犯罪结果发生地，着重分析了两个连接因素，找出犯罪行为发生地与犯罪结果发生地间存在的关系。接着对犯罪主体中的国籍问题展开论证，将不同的犯罪主体在保护性管辖权中的情况做了详细描述，例如论及当犯罪主体为双重或者多重国籍人时该如何认定和处理；例外，对“外国人”的概念做了扩展性的理解，将具有外国国籍的法人也纳入到犯罪主体的范围内来，这样做是为了有效扩展了保护性管辖权的适用范围，让国家面对来自外国的侵害时更有效地保护本国和本国公民的利益。本章中也论述了对犯罪罪行的要求，在保护性管辖权概念中提到只有当外国人的犯罪行为影响到内国的政治、经济安全等重大利益时，才可以适用该管辖权。因此保护性管辖权对犯罪罪行的要求与其他管辖权是有所不同的，所以从犯罪损害的客体和刑期的特定要求展开论述，以这两方面来说明保护性管辖权对于罪行的特殊要求是比较恰当的。论述保护性管辖权的要件是认定保护性管辖权的前提条件，即在何种情况下可以主张保护性管辖权。本文第三章主要从保护性管辖权在特殊领域内的表现形式做了细致的分析，本章在论述时始终贯穿前一章节中所论及的犯罪地点和犯罪主体。因为在某些特殊的领域内所能体现出的保护性管辖权与一般情形时是不同的，这里的特殊犯罪地点主要包括了航空器内的犯罪、海上犯罪，主要是领海之外的区域即毗连区、专属经济区、公海的保护性管辖权，此外还包括南北极地区和外层空间的保护性管辖权。特殊的犯罪主体主要包括了无国籍人和拥有豁免权人，当面对着此类犯罪主体时，行使保护性管辖权也与一般情形时不同。本章主要将保护性管辖权在一般情形以外的例外纳入到整个保护性管辖权体系中，这样就使保护性管辖权的理论趋于完整，并有利于进一步对保护性管辖权的深入研究。本文第四章主要论述保护性管辖权实施中的引渡措施，并与第五章的国家绑架行为相并列。在本章中，从传统引渡措施到引渡措施实施中的困难，目前困难的原因是多种的，例如：多以双边引渡条约为主的形式，使得引渡的实施只能采取国家对国家的形式，但不适合跨国性的刑事犯罪，因为其导致的直接后果就是涉案国家众多，不可能要求每一个国家与另外一个国家之间都签订双边引渡条约；另一个是政治的影响，使得被请求引渡的国家不愿意将罪犯交给对方受审，而希望由本国主张属地管辖权来受理、审判和执行。另外，本章还论述了当外国人在外国犯罪时，其又恰好拥有该国国籍的问题，即保护性管辖权与属人管辖权相冲突时的处理。这又需要对国民不引渡原则做更新的诠释和理解，在传统做法中，国民不引渡原则限制了保护性管辖权的行使，所以若要针对上述情况则要引入一些新的机制来解决，以扩大保护性管辖权的适用范围。本文的第五章主要论述保护性管辖权实施中的另一种措施，即国家绑架行为，目前这种行为被大多数国家和国际社会视为违反国际法基本原则，但在实践中也存在着相关的案例，并且美国在实施保护性管辖权时有时会采取这种措施。因而本章介绍了国家绑架行为的产生和发展过程，并对其是否具有国际法上的合法性做了论证。这一章从国家绑架行为产生的凯尔规则入手，分析了国家绑架行为的法律问题，并且通过凯尔规则以外的几个例外原则，例如特定罪名、条约明示和骇人行为原则来排除适用国家绑架行为。之后对于国家绑架行为合法性的分析，结合庇护国主张反对的权利，得出违法性的结论。此外还分析了国家绑架行为目前是否已经构成国际习惯法，对美国在以往所实施的国家绑架行为做出了评价。因为从美国实施的此种行为，虽然可以起到保护性管辖权本来的作用，但是事实是大多数国家和国际社会都反对美国采取这种行为，因为这种行为无疑会损害一个主权国家的属地与属人管辖权，滥用的话则会扰乱正常的司法程序，虽然保护性管辖权实施的措施从目前来看还是受到了较多局限，像美国这样的国家通过国内立法赋予国家绑架行为合法性，与国际社会对于此种措施的认知是相悖的，所以损害他国利益来保护本国利益的做法是不适合的，并且也不具有持久性的。更多还原

【Abstract】 The jurisdiction is a fundamental concept under international laws, for it refers tothe core issue, that is, who will control, adjudicate or execute cases. And thejurisdictions are categorized into territorial, nationality, universal and protectivejurisdictions in the common theories of international law. Meanwhile, the first threeare fully studied in the academic circles but the protective jurisdiction still lacksinadequate understandings in this theoretical system of jurisdictions. However, thecorresponding reasons to this phenomenon is varied, among which the state hardlytransfers its state power to the others on the basis of the sovereignty principle and theexecution measures difficult to realize also restrict the development of law institutionsrelated to protective jurisdiction.The paper reviews protective jurisdiction from a new view. And its main contentrefers to the criminal statutes so the author establishes the theoretical frames ofprotective jurisdiction on the basis of well-known criminal laws and international lawtheory. Furthermore, the protective jurisdiction is analyzed and described from subtlelegal elements with a new perspective in the paper.The paper starts with the fundamental theory of protective jurisdiction and themain content includes its basic concept and features. The protective jurisdiction in brief means that the sovereign state has jurisdiction over foreigners’ criminal actsoverseas if these acts directly or severely threatens the national or public’s interests inorder to protect the national rights such as politics, economy and society. Furthermore,the protective jurisdiction especially requires special conditions if applicable. Thus,generally speaking, the applicable territorial and nationality jurisdictions are usuallytaken into account before the protective one is considered.Moreover, it is found from the historical evolution of the protective jurisdictionthat though there are no specific international conventions provided for protectivejurisdiction at present, several articles under certain international conventions do referto this jurisdiction through the consideration of relevant development trend and thecombination with legal provisions under international laws and legislative normsamong the internal laws. However, the protective jurisdiction presents scraps withoutexpress system on the whole. But opposite to the conditions foresaid, the internal law,especially the domestic criminal law system usually takes a specific chapter undergeneral provisions for description of jurisdiction system where the protectivejurisdiction and the rest are all stipulated. Therefore, the form of protectivejurisdiction in the source of laws is believed to be an international customary law withspecific features.Next, the paper describes the basic elements of the protective jurisdiction. In thissection, the authors re-analyzes the basic elements integrating the basic theory ofcriminal law and establishes the relevant theoretical system of these elements from thediscussion on the requirements of guilty place, criminal consequences, criminalsubject&object, specific target and criminal acts so as to give certain theoreticalbasis for future application of protective jurisdiction. Furthermore, the authoremphasizes the analysis of two connecting factors, including act occurrence place andresult occurrence place as the guilty places are categorized into these two places.Therefore, the corresponding legal relations are concluded in this section between thetwo factors. And the nationality issue of the criminal subject is demonstrated in this section and the relevant roles in the protective jurisdiction, such as injuring andinjured parties, foreigner and countryman, are integrated together after multi-angledifferentiation and analysis. Moreover, the author also describes the solution to thecase as the criminal subject boasts dual or multiple nationalities. In addition, theimportant legal concept of “foreigner” is extended in the paper and the relevant scopealso covers the legal bodies with foreign nationalities. And the other elements such asthe requirements on the criminal acts are also described in this section. The authordissertates on the specific requirements of criminal object and prison term andintegrates the basic elements mentioned above in order to provide a solid theoreticalbasis for final execution of protective jurisdiction.And then the detailed analysis is performed on the protective jurisdiction inspecial fields and the relevant demonstration is unfolded from two special aspects ofguilty places and criminal subjects. The former mainly includes the guilty in theaircrafts extended to the aviation ground in addition to the sea, while the main contentstresses the execution issues of protective jurisdiction in the contiguous zone outsidethe territorial sea, exclusive economic zone or open sea. Beside the above, the initialexploration is performed for claiming the protective jurisdiction when the crime takesplace in the Polar Regions and outer space.The following two chapters describe the practical fulfillment of protectivejurisdiction and the execution under international law system. And the content isdeveloped from the two aspects of extradition measures and international kidnapping.First, the author describes the current implementation difficulties of traditionalextradition measures. The extradition measures are chosen mainly due to too manyuncertainties, such as political factor resulting in the requested state’s unwillingness ofhanding over the criminal to the requesting state for trial while the requested statemay claim territorial jurisdiction on receipt, trial and execution of the relevant case.However, this form goes against the requirement of transnational criminal offense because the relevant direct result is numerous involved states and it is impracticablefor entering into bilateral extradition treaty among the involved countries, or this maylead to high judicial cost. The no-extradition principle of nationals is challengednowadays in this section. For the case in which the foreigner constitutes the criminaloffense abroad but this foreigner rightly boasts that state’s nationality, the paperexplores the relevant solutions to such cases. But the original traditional practice isthat foreigner cannot be extradited to the requesting state due to his nationality of therequested state, and this condition directly restricts the applicable scope of protectivejurisdiction. Therefore, the author proposes to introduce the new mechanism andresolve the above issues.The last chapter describes the international kidnapping conduct usually appliedby USA government during exercise of protective jurisdiction. And the author drawslessons from this new American implementation mode of protective jurisdiction.Moreover, the author analyzes the common and basic legal issues behind theinternational kidnapping acts from American Ker Rules and emphasizes theintroduction and analysis of several famous cases after Ker case and these cases shapethe three applicable exceptions for Ker Rules, including specialty principle, expresstreaty provisions and shocking conduct, followed by the analysis on the legitimacy ofinternational kidnapping. Moreover, the illegality of international kidnapping isindirectly confessed on the basis of objection right by asylum states. In addition, theauthor also analyzes whether the international kidnapping constitutes the internationalcustomary law as an implementation method of protective jurisdiction. As a result,this international kidnapping act is regarded as illegal act concealed by legal coatthough America usually applies such acts. Though American law grants legitimacyreasons for exercising international kidnapping acts, the international society opposessuch American acts from the aspect of current international legitimacydocumentations, because this act severely damage the territorial and nationalityjurisdictions and national sovereignty principle of other states. If such acts areallowed to be legalized, the legal order of international society may be disturbed and the relevant legal mechanism is shaken for international laws.The paper is written under the background of very frequent transfer of personnelbetween countries and increasingly common transnational crime in the society withrampant transnational crime. Since the sovereign state is equipped with its ownterritory and people, the state will build a solid barrier to protect their own interestsand for effective jurisdiction of its citizens. However, in case that a foreigner commitscrime in countries except for his motherland, the territorial and nationality jurisdictionwill not be able to protect its own national interest and the rights of the person andproperty rights of the national people in an actual sense. Therefore, the protectivejurisdiction will be effective beyond the country. Even though in the opinion of somejurists, there may be some problems in the protective jurisdiction or jurists may beworried that the abuse of the jurisdiction will result in more sharp conflicts ofjurisdiction or even bad impact on international legal order. The paper aims to makean analysis of the theories and implementation mechanism of jurisdiction and theimportance of an appropriate implementation level of jurisdiction from the elementaryto profound aspect and from a side to a comprehensive aspect. Now there areprotective jurisdiction systems in the international legal documents and relatedChinese criminal laws and regulations, symbolizing that the base for putting thejurisdiction into practice. The author believes that the protective jurisdiction will beapplied to a larger degree in the future.更多还原