Extraterritorial jurisdiction in transboundary marine environmental governance: article 3 of China’s ecological and environmental code and its positioning in the global context

Article 3 of the Ecological and Environmental Code establishes, for the firs t time at the level of a fundamental environmental law, China’s extraterritorial jurisdiction over transboundary marine environmental harm. By adopting the possibility of causing har m as the triggering condition for protective jurisdiction, the provision translates the precaut ionary principle into a concrete jurisdictional rule. However, significant structural challenge s arise when transforming this provision from a “rule on the books” into a “rule in actio n.” These challenges stem from the asymmetry among legislative jurisdiction, judicial juris diction, and enforcement jurisdiction in extraterritorial contexts. Their interaction and mutua l reinforcement give rise to a threefold dilemma: the ambiguity of the “possibility of causi ng harm” standard, difficulties in obtaining evidence across borders, and obstacles to the r ecognition and enforcement of judgments. To address these issues, China should draw upo n its existing institutional resources and establish an integrated framework consisting of a t iered risk-assessment standard, a diversified and collaborative mechanism for cross-border e vidence collection, and a progressive pathway for judgment enforcement. Such a framewor k would promote both the jurisprudential legitimacy and the practical operability of extrate rritorial jurisdiction in the field of marine environmental protection.