摘　要国际刑事司法机构的管辖权问题，一直是专家和学者们争议最为激烈的问题。卢旺达国际刑事法庭（以下简称卢旺达国际刑庭）的管辖权包括以下内容：一是卢旺达国际刑庭的属地管辖权涵盖卢旺达的领土，包括其地面和领空以及卢旺达公民严重违反国际人道主义法行为所涉邻国领土在内；二是属人管辖权仅限于自然人；三是管辖的罪行包含灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪和违反《日内瓦公约》的共同第3条和《第二附加议定书》的行为；四是属时管辖权涵盖自1994年1月1日起至1994年12月31日止。 本文内容除去前言和结语共分四部分：第一章卢旺达国际刑庭建立。本文首先阐述了卢旺达国际刑庭建立的背景，其次分析了建立该法庭的法律依据。分析了卢旺达国际刑庭建立的前提条件及建立的必然性和合法性。第二章卢旺达国际刑庭管辖权的效力范围。本章首先阐述了卢旺达国际刑庭管辖权和国家主权的关系，指出卢旺达国际刑庭的管辖权，从国家主权角度来说，是来自卢旺达国家主权的让渡。然后阐述了卢旺达国际刑庭管辖权的效力范围：属地管辖权、属人管辖权、属事管辖权和属时管辖权。第三章卢旺达国际刑庭管辖权的性质。通过与国际刑事法院、前南斯拉夫国际刑事法庭（以下简称前南国际刑庭）的对比论述了卢旺达国际刑庭管辖权的并行性和优先性。第四章卢旺达国际刑庭优先管辖面临的挑战。本章从卢旺达国际刑庭向国内司法机关移送案件和实践中普遍管辖权的应用两个方面来探讨卢旺达国际刑庭优先管辖面临的挑战，并从中得出结论认为，从国际刑庭规则的发展和实践上看，卢旺达国际刑庭管辖权的行使更趋向于并行性管辖，乃至补充管辖。

ABSTRACTThe jurisdiction of the international criminal justice agencies has been the most controversial issue among various experts and scholars. The jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) includes four parts: First of all, the territorial jurisdiction of ICTR shall extend to the territory of Rwanda including its land surface and airspace as well as to the territory of neighbouring States ; Second, personal jurisdiction which is limited to natural persons; The third one is substantive jurisdiction , including genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of Article 3 common to the Ceneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol Ⅱ; Forth, the temporal jurisdiction of ICTR shall extend to a period beginning on 1 January 1994 and ending on 31 December 1994. There are four parts in the thesis besides the Introduction and Concluding Remarks.Chapter One: The establishment of ICTR. Two issues are discussed in this chapter .First, explore the background and legal basis of ICTR. Second, the prerequisite, necessity and legality to create ICTR are analyzed through historical survey.Chapter Two: The scope of validity of ICTR. This chapter first describes the relationship between the jurisdiction of ICTR and national sovereignty, and concludes that the jurisdiction of ICTR is the result of the transfer of Rwandan sovereignty . And then describes the scope of validity of ICTR: territorial jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, substantive jurisdiction and the temporal jurisdiction. Chapter three: The nature of the jurisdiction of ICTR. Compared with the International Criminal Court, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia International Tribunal for Rwanda , the jurisdiction of ICTR has the parallelism and priority. Chapter Four: The challenge for priority jurisdiction of ICTR. The transfer of cases to national judicial authorities and the application of universal jurisdiction in practice are the two challenges for priority jurisdiction. And then we can conclude that because of the development of the International Criminal Tribunal, the jurisdiction of ICTR has become a tendency of parallelism, and even complementary jurisdiction.