Chapter V Substantive law | Article 44 Jurisdiction | Riga Revision 1.0
Complete analysis using 8-Point Evaluation Framework with systematic gender asymmetry review.
ORIGINAL TEXT (Istanbul Convention, adopted May 11, 2011)
1 Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to establish jurisdiction over any offence established in accordance with this Convention, when the offence is committed:
a in their territory; or
b on board
a ship flying their flag; or
c on board an aircraft registered under their laws; or
d by one of their nationals; or
e by
a person who has her or his habitual residence in their territory.
2 Parties shall endeavour to take the necessary legislative or other measures to establish jurisdiction over any offence established in accordance with this Convention where the offence is committed against one of their nationals or
a person who has her or his habitual residence in their territory.
3 For the prosecution of the offences established in accordance with Articles 36, 37,
38 and
39 of this Convention, Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to ensure that their jurisdiction is not subordinated to the condition that the acts are criminalised in the territory where they were committed.
4 For the prosecution of the offences established in accordance with Articles 36, 37,
38 and
39 of this Convention, Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to ensure that their jurisdiction as regards points
d and
e of paragraph
1 is not subordinated to the condition that the prosecution can only be initiated following the reporting by the victim of the offence or the laying of information by the State of the place where the offence was committed.
5 Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to establish jurisdiction over the offences established in accordance with this Convention, in cases where an alleged perpetrator is present on their territory and they do not extradite her or him to another Party, solely on the basis of her or his nationality.
6 When more than one Party claims jurisdiction over an alleged offence established in accordance with this Convention, the Parties involved shall, where appropriate, consult each other with
a view to determining the most appropriate jurisdiction for prosecution.
7 Without prejudice to the general rules of international law, this Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised by
a Party in accordance with its internal law.
[Source: CETS No. 210, Article 44]
8-POINT EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
Evaluation Criteria: This article is assessed using the following 8 criteria with proper citation of sources:
All analyses must include:
- Academic sources (peer-reviewed journals, legal scholarship)
- Primary sources (legal documents, official reports, case law)
- Diverse perspectives (multiple ideological and cultural frameworks)
- Implementation data from multiple jurisdictions
- Expert opinions from various stakeholder groups
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION
Score: 0 (Negative-only scoring: each issue = -1 point)
v1.05 includes systematic gender asymmetry review
Issues Identified:
No significant textual issues identified in initial review.
PROPOSED REVISIONS
Revision principles: Clarity, consistency, cultural sensitivity, sovereignty respect, victim protection, exploitability reduction
Option A: [Gender-symmetric revision with rationale and sources]
Option B: [Alternative approach with rationale and sources]
Option C: [Minimalist revision with rationale and sources]
Each option includes: Legal precedents, implementation feasibility, cultural impact assessment, stakeholder perspectives
Consider views from: Victim advocacy groups, legal scholars, cultural/religious communities, implementation practitioners, state sovereignty advocates, human rights organizations, gender equality advocates, and others affected by this article.
About Riga Revision 1.0: Comprehensive article-by-article critique using the 8-Point Evaluation Framework, rigorous technical documentation standards, and multi-stakeholder perspectives. This is a FIRST DRAFT prepared with AI assistance. Version 2.0 and beyond will be prepared by human experts.
Resources: Evaluation Framework | 8 C’s of Technical Writing | All Articles
Disclaimer: This analysis represents critical examination from multiple perspectives and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and qualified legal professionals.
Related Articles
Article 78 – Reservations
Article 78 – Reservations No reservation may be made in respect of any provision of this Convention, with the exceptions provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3. Any State or the European Union may, at the time of signature or when depositing its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, by a declaration addressed to…
ASV Prezidenta Donalda Trampa runa 2025. g. 4. martā
Laika zīmogs Angļu valodā Latviešu valodā 00:00:29 Thank you Speaker Johnson, Vice President Vance, the First Lady of the United States, members of the United States Congress, thank you very much and to my fellow citizens. America is back. Six weeks ago I stood beneath the Dome of this capital and proclaimed the dawn of…
Chapter IX Monitoring mechanism | Article 68 Procedure | Riga Revision 1.0
Riga Revision 1.0 analysis of Article 68: Procedure
Chapter VII Migration and asylum | Article 59 Residence status | Riga Revision 1.0
Riga Revision 1.0 analysis of Article 59: Residence status
Article 76 – Accession to the Convention
Article 76 – Accession to the Convention After the entry into force of this Convention, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe may, after consultation of the Parties to this Convention and obtaining their unanimous consent, invite any non-member State of the Council of Europe, which has not participated in the elaboration of…
Responses