Title page for etd-0113114-141840


[Back to Results | New Search]

URN etd-0113114-141840
Author Ming-fu Chen
Author's Email Address No Public.
Statistics This thesis had been viewed 5345 times. Download 0 times.
Department ICAPS
Year 2013
Semester 1
Degree Ph.D.
Type of Document
Language zh-TW.Big5 Chinese
Title Resolving Cross-Strait jurisdictional Conflict: Based on the Principles of International Criminal Jurisdiction
Date of Defense 2013-12-27
Page Count 230
Keyword
  • Conflicts of Jurisdiction
  • Rational Standards
  • Sovereignty
  • Principle of No Double Jeopardy
  • Agreement on Mutual Jurisdictional Assistance
  • Principles of Universal Jurisdiction
  • Principles of Protective Jurisdiction
  • Principles of National Jurisdiction
  • Criminal Jurisdiction
  • Principles of Territorial Jurisdiction
  • Abstract Taiwan and Mainland have been under two separate administrations since 1949. Since then, each side has developed its own economic and legal system. Over time, as cross-strait restrictions have been lifted, crimes such as transnational smuggling, drug trafficking, and fraud have increased. At the beginning of 2011, a gang including Chinese and Taiwanese used a telephone scam to cheat people of their money in mainland China. Soon after, 14 Taiwanese suspects were deported from the Philippines to stand trial in China, triggering public debate. Which side shall have jurisdiction over this criminal case based on the international conventions? Some experts in our country insisted on our jurisdiction over this case. However, is it rational or just for populist sentiments? The purpose of this thesis is to study the jurdisdictional conflict between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait and to find the solution. What is the actual content of principles of international criminal jurisdiction, such as territorial jurisdiction, national jurisdiction, protective jurisdiction and universal jurisdiction? What are the domestic and international practices of foreign-related criminal cases? This thesis discusses the issues in such cases arising from a conflict of jurisdiction, including the cause, type, rational standards as well as dispute settlements for conflict resolution. All of these provide good examples for resolving cross-strait criminal jurisdiction conflicts.
    Today neither side of the Strait recognizes the other’s sovereignty, and both deny each other’s administrative powers. Both believe that their jurisdiction extends over the areas where the other side has sovereignty. This belief is supported by legal statutes and the court opinions of both sides. As people on both sides of the strait begin to call for an application of “No Double Jeopardy”, accompanying with trends in offense diversification, it is natural to assume that numerous jurisdictional disputes will occur. This thesis analyzes the cause, scope, feature and definition of conflicts of law between Taiwan and mainland China, and tries to suggest a concrete method to reconcile the conflicts arising from issues of cross-strait criminal jurisdiction. The conclusion from this paper is that the best resolution for cross-strait criminal jurisdiction conflicts is to sign an agreement on mutual jurisdictional assistance. Possible agreement clauses are provided for future policy reference and decision making.
    Advisory Committee
  • Chen, Tzu-Chiang - chair
  • Jenq-rong shyu - co-chair
  • none - co-chair
  • Hsien-chao Chang - advisor
  • Wen-Cheng Lin - advisor
  • Files
  • etd-0113114-141840.pdf
  • Indicate in-campus at 99 year and off-campus access at 99 year.
    Date of Submission 2014-02-13

    [Back to Results | New Search]


    Browse | Search All Available ETDs

    If you have more questions or technical problems, please contact eThesys