Author:

Abstract

This paper argues that the current means of prescribing criminal jurisdiction in outer space are inadequate. The Outer Space Treaty and Intergovernmental Agreement – the main international law instruments that prescribe criminal jurisdiction in outer space - fail to account for many potentially common scenarios in outer space. It would also be impractical to fully transplant the means of prescribing criminal jurisdiction on Earth to apply in outer space too. This paper argues that, although it is customary international law to not have a hierarchy of prescriptive criminal jurisdictions on Earth, the best approach for outer space would be to amend Article VIII of the Outer Space Treaty to allow for a hierarchy of prescriptive criminal jurisdictions there. In descending order of priority, the jurisdictions should be based on territoriality, active nationality, passive personality, universality, and protectivity. Such a hierarchy would respect the underlying principles governing human activity in outer space, while providing greater certainty to countries about whose criminal laws apply under which scenarios in outer space than the current regime provides for.

Keywords: "Criminal Law", "Criminal jurisdiction", "International law", "Outer space", "Treaty"

How to Cite: Persad-Ford, A., 2022. Houston, We Have a Problem - Jurisdictional Issues of Criminal Law in Outer Space. LSE Law Review, 8(1), pp.1–36.