CO129-534-9 Law of Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 1-4-1931 - 20-4-1932 — Page 28

28

normally possess. They therefore exercise jurisdiction in

respect of piracy jure gentium, wherever committed, over all

persons irrespective of nationality. This jurisdiction, how-

ever, is not exercised in the case of other offences, created

by Statute, which may be akin to piracy jure gentium.

་་

for

The Admiralty were recently advised that an indict-

ment under section 1 of 12 and 13 Vict. c 96, would probably have succeeded; but we did not agree with this since we thought it

must be assumed that the jurisdiction of a British Court to try

offences thereunder is" municipal", except in so far as the offence

charged is jure gentium and consequently justiciable anywhere;

and the Admiralty's suggestion involved the proposition

which no authority could be found that a conspiracy to act

piratically was an offence jure gentium. The Statute could

give no jurisdiction to British Courts to try foreigners commit-

ting offences (not clothed with the characteristics given to

piracy jure gentium by the comity of nations) against its pro-

visions outside territorial waters; only nationals would, so far

as areas outside the territorial limits of the Court's jurisdic-

tion are concerned, be within its ambit.

It seems clear that similar considerations would

apply to offences committed in contravention of the provisions

of 7 will. 4 and 1 vict. c.88 (an Act to amend certain Acts

relating to the crime of piracy); and I am afraid, therefore, that