All India Bar Examination (AIBE) 2-II Previous Year Question Papers with Answers

Practice Mode:
94.

D, a national of Country A, is wanted by the authorities of Country B on charges of having been involved in terrorist attacks in Country B. He is seized by Country B's special forces from his hideout in Country C. The Authorities of Country C were not contacted for consent. The correct legal position in international law would be :


Principal :

For certain grave crimes, a State is allowed to exercise universal jurisdiction.

A: It is a violation of Country C's territorial sovereignty.
B: It is not a violation of Country C's territorial sovereignty owing to the gravity of the crime, which allowed for universal jurisdiction.
C: International law does prohibit a State from exercising jurisdiction in respect of any case, which relates to acts that have taken place on its territory by a foreign national.
D: It is a violation of Country A's sovereignty as Country B did not seek its consent before seizing D from its territory.
E: It is a violation of Country A's sovereignty as D was a national of Country A.

The answer is: B

<< Previous Question
Next Question >>

Explanation

The correct legal position in international law in this scenario would be:

B: It is not a violation of Country C's territorial sovereignty owing to the gravity of the crime, which allowed for universal jurisdiction.

Explanation:

1. Universal jurisdiction is a principle in international law that allows certain crimes, especially grave crimes like terrorism, to be prosecuted by any state regardless of where the crime was committed or the nationality of the perpetrator. This is based on the recognition that some crimes are so serious that they are of concern to the international community as a whole.

2. In this case, D is wanted for charges related to terrorist attacks, which are considered grave crimes under international law.

3. While it is generally a violation of a country's territorial sovereignty to enter another country's territory without consent, the principle of universal jurisdiction provides an exception for certain crimes. When a state exercises universal jurisdiction over an individual suspected of committing such crimes, it is not considered a violation of the territorial sovereignty of the country where the individual is located.

Therefore, seizing D by Country B's special forces from Country C without Country C's consent is not a violation of Country C's territorial sovereignty in this context due to the gravity of the crime and the application of universal jurisdiction.

Option B correctly reflects this legal position.