Report comment

Where a person is based here and is alleged to have committed their crime here, then they should be tried here and found guilty or not guilty according to the law here, the place where they are alleged to have committed the crime.

That ought to be obvious.

It is a particularly important point to make as regards the United States which has shown itself to regard itself as having some sort of universal jurisdiction.

If it is alleged that the crime, under the law here, has been committed against a foreign government, there is a very simple procedural solution. I don't know why no one seems to have been suggesting it, because it too ought to be obvious.

Unlike some foreign legal systems, the law of England and Wales allows prosecutions to be brought by people other than the official prosecutors. All that needs to happen is for the US Ambassador to be authorised to bring the prosecution here, in our courts on behalf of his/her country.

This would have two other advantages. First, by bringing the prosecution, the foreign state would be required to waive diplomatic immunity in respect of that case - essential for the prospect of a fair trial. Second, since the prosecution is to further the enforcement interests of the foreign state, the foreign government would then be responsible for paying for it.