Palomita Sharma, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad
Introduction
Territory is intractably related to sovereignty as one of the central elements of statehood. As a result, jurisdiction is essentially territorial in nature. Based on the principles of sovereignty of a territorial state, the powers afforded to such a state include the powers pertaining to legislative as well as judicial functions, while also including control over the executive action but only pertaining to matters taking place within the territory of such sovereign state. Otherwise, the government risks overlapping with the rights of other nation states, thus violating a few of Public International Law's most basic concepts of sovereignty and equality.
All assertions of sovereignty must be balanced against the territorial sovereignty of other nations, according to the concept of sovereign equality. That's why “the ability of a State to exercise authority over its own citizens living abroad is subordinate to the territorial capability of that State and other States.”1 A differentiation can be made as to the manner in which the traditional approach to the subject of Public International Law, laying maximum emphasis on sovereignty in dealing with matters of authority. On the other hand, in other manners, the concept of erga omnes2 (partes) and matters pertaining to human rights draw maximum importance. Human rights question conventional PIL and its shared, synallagmatic pillars by emphasizing the "legitimate mutual interests" they aim to secure. Similarly, the beneficial effect of their humane intent contributes to the so-called democratic deficit, if not the total humanization of the discipline. The issue of extraterritoriality for human rights abuses emerged in this case.
