Extraterritoriality In East Asia

Extraterritoriality in East Asia examines the approaches of China, Japan and South Korea to exercising legal authority over crimes committed outside their borders, known as ‘extraterritorial jurisdiction’. It considers themes of justiciability and approaches to international law, as well as relevant examples of legislation and judicial decision-making, to offer a deeper understanding of the topic from the perspective of this legally, politically and economically significant region.

Extraterritoriality in East Asia examines the approaches of China, Japan, and South Korea to exercising legal authority over crimes committed outside their borders. It considers examples of legislation and judicial decision-making and offers a deeper understanding of the topic from the perspective of this legally, politically, and economically significant region. Beginning with a foundational overview of the principles of jurisdiction in international law, as well as identifying current challenges to those principles, subsequent chapters analyse the ways in which extraterritorial jurisdiction operates and is regulated in China, Japan, and South Korea. Danielle Ireland-Piper contextualizes contemporary issues within a historical narrative of each country and concludes by exploring areas of convergence and divergence between them. This book will be of particular interest to scholars and students of comparative, criminal, constitutional, and international law, as well as international relations, especially in the context of East Asia. Law-makers and practitioners, such as criminal lawyers and prosecutors, will also find its contemporary analysis useful.

Perhaps more than anywhere else in the world, the 19th century encounter between East Asia and the Western world has been narrated as a legal encounter. This book explores extraterritoriality and the ways in which Western power operated in East Asia from the 1820s to the 1920s.

Perhaps more than anywhere else in the world, the 19th century encounter between East Asia and the Western world has been narrated as a legal encounter. This book explores extraterritoriality and the ways in which Western power operated in East Asia from the 1820s to the 1920s.--Résumé de l'éditeur.

Legal Imperialism examines the important role of nineteenth-century Western extraterritorial courts in non-Western states. These courts, created as a separate legal system for Western expatriates living in Asian and Islamic coutries, developed from the British imperial model, which was founded on ideals of legal positivism. Based on a cross-cultural comparison of the emergence, function, and abolition of these court systems in Japan, the Ottoman Empire, and China, Turan Kayaoglu elaborates a theory of extraterritoriality, comparing the nineteenth-century British example with the post-World War II American legal imperialism. He also provides an explanation for the end of imperial extraterritoriality, arguing that the Western decision to abolish their separate legal systems stemmed from changes in non-Western territories, including Meiji legal reforms, Republican Turkey's legal transformation under Ataturk, and the Guomindang's legal reorganization in China. Ultimately, his research provides an innovative basis for understanding the assertion of legal authority by Western powers on foreign soil and the influence of such assertion on ideas about sovereignty.

By detailing the extent of foreign domination and privilege in China in the period between the first and second world wars, when the 'unequal treaty' system of the nineteenth century persisted in the face of burgeoning Chinese nationalism, John Carter Vincent helps us to understand the sources of Chinese Communist resentment and conduct.

"At the root of Britain's requirement for extraterritorial rights was its need, as a commercial and trading power, for British subjects to be able to trade on a publicly available set of legal rules which were applied consistently and fairly by an indepedent judiciary and to ensure that British subjects in foreign countries were not subject to a capricious or arbitrary criminal law system. As Western powers had expanded into Asia from the seventeenth century onwards, their economic and military power had enabled them to impose their demands for extraterritoriality upon Asian countries in a form of legal imperialsim. So, when they came to Korea at the end of the nineteenth century, they simply continued in this fashion--as had Japan in 1876 when, as part of its march to achieve parity of status with the Western powers, it had insisted upon extraterritoriality for itself and its subjects in Korea"--Page xxv of Preface.