摘要： 因刑事管辖权兼具国际法与刑事法、程序法与实体法的多重属性,跨国犯罪刑事管辖权冲突的成因与协调方法均体现出显著特殊性。除国际惩治性公约的推动作用外,“域外管辖属地化”的扩张与刑事“合法性原则”的缺位,更直接促进了国家间刑事管辖权积极冲突的形成。无论是刑事诉讼法的“一事不再理原则”、国际公法的“礼让原则”、还是国际刑法的“管辖权分级”、国际私法的“外国法适用”,乃至晚近实践中的“跨国协同解决”等方法,均不能充分应对此类冲突。在我国跨国犯罪活动持续增多的背景下,需综合考量并合理运用相关协调方法,通过修订《刑事诉讼法》等制度安排,为我国在与他国的刑事管辖权冲突协调中做好“竞争”与“合作”的双重准备,进而坚定维护并妥当行使我国的刑事管辖权。

关键词: 刑事管辖权冲突, 域外管辖属地化, 涉外刑事诉讼, 跨国一事不再理原则, 跨国协同解决

Abstract: Since criminal jurisdiction enjoys the multiple attributes of international law and criminal law, as well as procedural and substantive law, both the causes of jurisdictional conflicts between states and the methods for their coordination exhibit notable particularities.In addition to the driving role of international suppression conventions, the expansion of “territorializing of the extraterritorial” and the absence of the “principle of legality” have more directly contributed to the emergence of positive jurisdictional conflicts among states.Neither the “non bis in idem” principle from criminal procedure law, the “principle of comity” from public international law, the concept of “jurisdictional hierarchy” in international criminal law, the “application of foreign law” in private international law, nor the recent practice of “transnational coordinated resolution” can fully resolve such conflicts.Against the backdrop of the continuous rise in cross-border criminal activities involving China, it is essential to comprehensively assess and appropriately employ relevant coordination mechanisms.Through institutional arrangements such as revising the Criminal Procedure Law, China should prepare for both “competition” and “cooperation” in coordinating foreign criminal jurisdictional conflicts, thereby effectively safeguarding and properly exercising its criminal jurisdiction.

Key words: Conflicts of Criminal Jurisdictions, Territorialization of the Extraterritorial, Foreign Related-Criminal Proceedings, Transnational Non Bis In Idem, Transnational Coordinated Resolution