Conflicts Of Jurisdiction Over Transnational Cybercrime A Case Study of China Approach

In the virtual space of the Internet, the boundaries of countries tend to be blurred, and the harmful results caused by criminal acts committed thousands of miles away may very likely be close at hand, and criminal acts committed in the territory of a country may be widespread all over the world, which can be said to be a global plague in the Internet era. As a starting point for the criminalisation of cyberspace crimes, Criminal jurisdiction, which is an important form of national sovereignty exercised by a state, is an important prerequisite for a state to exercise its penal power over cyberspace crimes. Many states, out of a desire to maximise their own national interests, have made constant efforts to expand the jurisdictional scope of application of their domestic laws, resulting in circumstances of positive conflict between two or more states. Exploring possible paths to solving the conflict of criminal jurisdiction over transnational cybercrime should begin by identifying why traditional criminal law is not well suited when entering cyberspace, and by examining the strengths and weaknesses of the legislative practices of more advanced jurisdictions with
regard to criminal jurisdiction over transnational cybercrime, the shortcomings of the relevant international law and the generally adopted jurisdictional principles, and the feasibility of the new international theories regarding the establishment of jurisdiction over cybercrime, as the main aspects of this study to disentangle the reasons behind the conflict in establishing criminal jurisdiction over transnational cybercrime.