ABSTRACT

This article investigates the shifting nature of the concept of extraterritoriality at particular junctures in history from the Italian city states to contemporary visions of floating micro-sovereignties. Extraterritoriality is the exercise of the jurisdiction by one state or non-state actor within the territory of another state. Since extraterritoriality is a challenge to the fundamental principle of sovereignty, it is by definition an exception in relation to sovereignty. As sovereignty evolved and changed over time, so did extraterritoriality – and, in the discussed cases, it changed primarily to be able to fulfil the needs of agents of global capital. The article discusses the privileges granted to the Italian city states by the Byzantines and the Ottoman capitulations, extraterritoriality on the colonial frontier, private investments in the Middle East and the proliferation of ideas of micro-sovereignty by Libertarian politicians and Silicon Valley billionaires. The article makes three distinct arguments: first, extraterritoriality has to be understood in relation to shifting notions of sovereignty. Secondly, extraterritoriality emerged within the context of colonial and imperial inequality and any extraterritorial relations contain the echoes of these structures of inequality. Finally, extraterritoriality is often driven and shaped by the needs of global capital, trying to avoid specific sovereign structures.

摘要

本文研究了域外概念在历史上的特定时刻从意大利城邦到当代浮动微型主权愿景的转变性质。治外法权是一国或非国家行为者在另一国领土内行使管辖权。由于治外法权是对主权基本原则的挑战，因此根据定义，它是与主权相关的例外。随着主权的演变和变化，治外法权也随着时间的推移而变化——在所讨论的案例中，它的变化主要是为了能够满足全球资本代理人的需求。文章讨论了拜占庭帝国和奥斯曼帝国投降赋予意大利城邦的特权、殖民边界的治外法权、中东的私人投资以及自由主义政治家和硅谷亿万富翁的微观主权思想的扩散。这篇文章提出了三个不同的论点：首先，必须将治外法权与主权观念的转变联系起来来理解。其次，治外法权出现在殖民和帝国不平等的背景下，任何治外法权关系都包含这些不平等结构的回声。最后，治外法权通常是由全球资本的需求驱动和塑造的，试图避免特定的主权结构。必须结合主权观念的转变来理解治外法权。其次，治外法权出现在殖民和帝国不平等的背景下，任何治外法权关系都包含这些不平等结构的回声。最后，治外法权通常是由全球资本的需求驱动和塑造的，试图避免特定的主权结构。必须结合主权观念的转变来理解治外法权。其次，治外法权出现在殖民和帝国不平等的背景下，任何治外法权关系都包含这些不平等结构的回声。最后，治外法权通常是由全球资本的需求驱动和塑造的，试图避免特定的主权结构。