An Empirical Examination of Universal Jurisdiction for Piracy

Abstract

This essay presents a systematic study of the incidence of universal jurisdiction (UJ) prosecutions for the international crime of piracy. Using data on the number of piracies committed in a twelve-year period (1998-2009) obtained from international agencies and maritime industry groups, we determined the percentage of these cases where nations exercised universal jurisdiction. Studies of the worldwide use of UJ prosecutions for other crimes simply count how often universal jurisdiction has been exercised but do not attempt to determine the rate of prosecution. Simply counting cases does not allow one to appreciate the significance of universal jurisdiction in relation to the total problem. While the expressive or symbolic value of universal justice may be satisfied by a small number of isolated prosecutions, the deterrent effect depends on its incidence relative to the number of perpetrated crimes.

Domestic courts, transnational law, and international order

“…Better identifying these scope conditions is crucial to our understanding of international order, particularly as more countries seek to break up the oligopoly enjoyed by London and New York (Bookman, 2019). We expect that the biggest gains will come from scholars deeply investigating the relationship between a specific legal system and global governance, as Putnam (2016) has done with the US case, or through an investigation of the same type of domestic decision-making across countries as scholars of universal jurisdiction have carried out (Kontorovich and Art, 2010; Macedo, 2006). This will require a new domain of empirical work, drawing on the comparative politics literature on the diversity of domestic courts to systematically analyze how their differences shape trajectories of legal and institutional change globally.…”

Maritime piracy operations: Some legal issues

“…The second element of the UNCLOS definition requires the act of piracy to be committed on the high seas; as the act of piracy is closely linked with the concept of universal jurisdiction (Sterio 2017;Kontorovich and Art 2010). Interestingly, both the contiguous zone and the exclusive economic zone are considered as high seas for piracy (by virtue of Article 33 and Article 58 UNCLOS) (Paige 2013).…”

Finding out the 'Achilles' Heels': Piracy Suppression under International Law and Chinese Law

“…Internationally, and contrary to the expectations of many, a recent empirical study conducted by Eugene Kontorovich and Steven Art suggests that domestic courts, at least prior to the outbreak of piracy of the coasts of Somail, rarely exercised universal jurisdiction in prosecuting pirates. 113 When commenting on such situation, they have stated that:…”