This article provides a historical account of the application of universal jurisdiction to piracy jure gentium and details the nexus requirement. Prior work by Kontorovich and Art noted an increase in the application of universal jurisdiction concurrent with the rise of piracy off the coast of Somalia, yet did not address the historical case for the attribution of nexus to its application. This appears to be a non-sequitur, as the vast majority of scholars suggest that by definition the exercise of universal jurisdiction does not require a nexus. I argue that any presupposition of a lack of connection in the application of universality should be questioned, as not only is there a normative connection between the seizing and the adjudicating state, but that historically this has always been the case until just prior to the advent of third-party jurisdictional piracy courts in Kenya and the Seychelles that address Somali piracy, and only Somali piracy.

中文翻译：

---

在将普遍管辖权适用于海上海盗行为中存在Nexus要求的社会历史案例

本文提供了关于将普遍管辖权应用于盗版法系黑胶唱片的历史说明，并详细说明了联系要求。Kontorovich和Art的先前工作指出，普遍管辖权的适用范围不断增加，而索马里沿海的海盗活动却不断增加，但并未解决历史性的将其归属归因于这种情况的情况。这似乎是不合逻辑的，因为绝大多数学者认为，按照定义，普遍管辖权的行使不需要联系。我认为，在普遍性应用中缺乏联系的任何前提都应受到质疑，因为不仅在扣押状态与审判状态之间存在规范联系，