Currently, a crucial issue faced by China is how to construct a theory on extraterritorial jurisdiction and build a system of extraterritorial application of domestic laws and the key to address this issue is the proper demarcation between extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction and extraterritorial judicial jurisdiction. For both jurisdictions, the distinction between public law and private law lays a foundation for theoretical and practical pursuits. The principle of territoriality has not been strictly followed by various states in legislative or judicial jurisdictions. The basic methods for extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction are unilateralism and multilateralism, while those for the extraterritorial judicial jurisdiction are general and specific jurisdictions. Because of the lack of uniform and systematic standards, the extraterritorial application of public law is a hard problem to tackle, and public international law cannot provide coherent principles or standards except for some external limitations. Public international law, including customary law, however, imposes no similar restrictions on the extraterritorial jurisdiction of private law. The system of extraterritorial jurisdiction should not be constructed in a top-down manner according to a unified principle. The appropriate way is to develop different rules for the extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction of private law, for the extraterritorial judicial jurisdiction of private law, and for the extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction of public law. Extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction and extraterritorial judicial jurisdiction pursue different legal aims and perform different legal functions, and they do not take value uniformity as their common objective. |