3. For the purposes of article 16, paragraph 10, of this Convention, each State Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences covered by this Convention when the alleged offender is present in its territory and it does not extradite such person solely on the ground that he or she is one of its nationals.
4. Each State Party may also adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences covered by this Convention when the alleged offender is present in its territory and it does not extradite him or her.
5. If a State Party exercising its jurisdiction under paragraph 1 or 2 of this article has been notified , or has otherwise learned, that one or more other States Parties are conducting an investigation, prosecution or judicial proceeding in respect of the same conduct, the competent authorities of those States Parties shall, as appropriate , consult one another with a view to coordinating their actions.
6. Without prejudice to norms of general international law, this Convention does not exclude the exercise of any criminal jurisdiction established by a State Party in accordance with its domestic law.
(39) 日本政府代表は、第11回起草委員会の審議で、適切に、これに関連する議論を提起している。注(27)の文献、para. 117.
(40) 田中利幸・「国際法益と国内刑事管轄」・『国際法と国内法』(山本草二先生還暦記念)425頁以下(1991年)。Toshiyuki Tanaka, "Implementation of International Criminal Law", 38 The Japanese Annual of International Law 65 (1996).田中利幸・「刑事裁判管轄の国際化と国内法的履行・国際法的履行」・『国家管轄権』(山本草二先生古稀記念)603ページ以下(1998年)。
(41) 本体条約に規定される罪の一つである贈賄と共通点を有する、国際商取引における外国公務員に対する贈賄の防止に関するOECD条約の形成過程でも、普遍主義による管轄権設定の義務づけが検討されたが、少なくともわが国では、本文のような立場から慎重な検討がなされ、結局、条約でも見送られ、属地主義と属人主義を限度とすることで落ち着いた。
