Draft Article 7 of the UN Draft Convention regarding Crimes Against Humanity provides the terra firma for States to establish and exercise a range of jurisdictional bases, including universal jurisdiction, to be reinforced by State-to-State agreements regarding evidence-extradition for the benefit of downstream truth and justice seeking projects. Legal analysis demonstrates there persists an insistence on treaty regulation and clearly particularised laws at local and international levels to successfully pursue international criminal accountability. Draft Article 7 will give credence to universal jurisdiction, complement the International Criminal Court’s workings and counter its temporal limitations, and negate politically-motivated invocation of the doctrine. A case study involving Australian extradition proceedings highlights how evidence can be obtained efficiently on the basis of a pre-existing bilateral agreement between culturally distinct States. Formal arrangements regarding evidence-exchange will espouse a greater willingness by States to cooperate across borders and will strengthen universality by taking some of the guess-work out of its exercise.

联合国关于危害人类罪的公约草案第 7 条草案提供了土地各国建立和行使一系列管辖权基础，包括普遍管辖权，并通过关于证据引渡的国与国之间的协议得到加强，以促进下游真相和正义寻求项目的利益。法律分析表明，为了成功追究国际刑事责任，在地方和国际层面坚持条约监管和明确具体的法律。第 7 条草案将信任普遍管辖权，补充国际刑事法院的工作并反对其时间限制，并否定出于政治动机援引该学说。一项涉及澳大利亚引渡程序的案例研究强调了如何根据不同文化国家之间预先存在的双边协议有效地获取证据。有关证据交换的正式安排将支持各国更愿意进行跨境合作，并将通过排除一些猜测工作来加强普遍性。