GUIDE ON ANTI-TORTURE LEGISLATION positive measures only when they exercise sufficient authority to be able to do so.”96 When providing for jurisdiction in legislation, it is important to remember that there are different ways to establish jurisdiction (see further below). The Madagascar anti-torture law provides for the territoriality and flag principle in article 18(1) to (3).97 The New Zealand Crimes of Torture Act provides for this type of jurisdiction: “No proceedings for an offence against any of the provisions of section 3 shall be brought unless (…) (c) the act or omission constituting the offence charged is alleged to have occurred in New Zealand or on board a ship or an aircraft that is registered in New Zealand.”98 In Uganda, this jurisdiction is also stipulated in the Prevention and Prohibition of Torture Act: “The Chief Magistrates Court of Uganda shall have jurisdiction to try the offences prescribed by this Act, wherever committed, if the offence is committed (a) in Uganda; (…); (i) in any territory under the control or jurisdiction of Uganda; (ii) on board a vessel flying the Uganda flag or an aircraft which is registered under the laws of Uganda at the time the offence is committed; (iii) on board an aircraft, which is operated by the Government of Uganda, or by a body in which the government of Uganda holds a controlling interest, or which is owned by a company incorporated in Uganda (…).”99 97 98 99 13. The Convention requires States parties to establish jurisdiction over any alleged case of torture committed by one of its nationals Another jurisdiction that States shall establish to consider cases of torture is when an act of torture is committed by one of its nationals. This is known as the active nationality principle, a well-established form of jurisdiction in criminal law. This obligation derives directly from article 5(1)(b) of the Convention that requires States to establish jurisdiction “when the alleged offender is a national of that State”. 100 101 102 The Madagascar anti-torture law provides for the active nationality principle in article 18(4).100 The New Zealand Crimes of Torture Act provides for the active nationality principle: “No proceedings for an offence against any of the provisions of section 3 shall be brought unless (a) the person to be charged is a New Zealand citizen (…).” 101 The Sri Lanka Convention against Torture Act also provides for this type of jurisdiction: “(1)(b) the person alleged to have committed the offence is a citizen of Sri Lanka (…).” 102 96 UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Interim report to the General Assembly, UN Doc. A/70/303 (7 August 2015), § 28. 97 Madagascar, Loi contre la torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants, op. cit. 22, articles 18(1) to 18(3). 98 New Zealand, Crimes of Torture Act of 1989, op. cit. 25, section 4. 99 Uganda, the Prevention and Prohibition of Torture Act, op. cit. 28, section 17(1)(a) and (b). Madagascar, Loi contre la torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants, op. cit. 22, articles 18(4). 100 101 New Zealand, Crimes of Torture Act of 1989, op. cit. 25, section 4. Sri Lanka, Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Act of 1994, op. cit. 39, article 4. 102 32