Criminal Jurisdiction Over Armed Forces Abroad

This book brings into focus the legal status of armed forced on foreign territory within, inter alia, the context of multi-national exercises and a variety of so-called crisis management operations. When it comes to criminal offences committed by military personnel while abroad it is important to know whether such offences fall under the criminal jurisdiction of the Sending State or that of the Host State. The book analyses this question from two different perspectives, namely traditional public international law and military operational law. Taking his readership through two hundred years of international practice the author arrives at the current practice of laying down the status of forces deployed abroad in so-called Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs). Having looked at SOFAs from the two different law perspectives the author proposes the development of a “Status of Forces Compendium” to serve as a kind of guideline for future SOFAs. The author’s intention in proposing this idea is to instigate further discussion on the subject in public international law and criminal law circles and among armed forces’ legal advisors. Joop Voetelink is an Associate Professor of Military Law at the Netherlands Defence Academy.

Rain Liivoja explores why, and to what extent, armed forces personnel who commit offences abroad are prosecuted under their own country's laws. After clarifying several conceptual uncertainties in the doctrine of jurisdiction and immunities, he applies the doctrine to the extraterritorial deployment of service personnel. Comparing the law and practice of different states, the author shows the sheer breadth of criminal jurisdiction that countries claim over their service personnel. He argues that such claims disclose a discrete category of jurisdiction, with its own scope and rationale, which can be justified as a matter of international law. By distinguishing service jurisdiction as a distinct category, the analysis explains some of the peculiarities of military criminal law and also provides a basis for extending national criminal law to private military contractors serving the state. This book is essential for scholars and practitioners in international and criminal law, especially in military contexts.

The peace time stationing for collective security purposes of large numbers of military personnel of one country in the territory of an other country constitutes one of the most significant developments of postwar international relations. The United States, for example, has stationed nearly one half of its active military forces in over seventy 1 countries since the Korean War broke out. Stambuk noted that al though the theories rationalizing this situation have changed, "the overseas bases and forces remain. "2 As a direct result of this stationing of large numbers of troops in foreign countries numerous bilateral and multilateral status of forces agreements have been put into force. One aspect of these agreements which has attracted considerable attention is the provisions dealing with the right to exercise criminal juris 3 diction. As might be expected, a host of jurisdictional problems has arisen concerning whether jurisdictional rights lie with the states sending or the states receiving military personnel, the accompanying civilian component, and their dependents. As Snee and Pye have pointed out: "For the first time in the modern era, the sometimes radically different systems of law of two sovereign nations are operating within the same territory and in respect to the same individuals. "4 Thus a situation has arisen in which the relationships between the military authorities of the 1 George Stambuk, American Military Forces Abroad (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State Vni versity Press, 1963), pp. 3-4.

Rain Liivoja explores why, and to what extent, armed forces personnel who commit offences abroad are prosecuted under their own country's laws. After clarifying several conceptual uncertainties in the doctrine of jurisdiction and immunities, he applies the doctrine to the extraterritorial deployment of service personnel. Comparing the law and practice of different states, the author shows the sheer breadth of criminal jurisdiction that countries claim over their service personnel. He argues that such claims disclose a discrete category of jurisdiction, with its own scope and rationale, which can be justified as a matter of international law. By distinguishing service jurisdiction as a distinct category, the analysis explains some of the peculiarities of military criminal law and also provides a basis for extending national criminal law to private military contractors serving the state. This book is essential for scholars and practitioners in international and criminal law, especially in military contexts.