Territorial jurisdictional implementation of the Criminal Code is the result of using powers stemming from the sovereignty of the state. Punitive power which is used to ensure the domestic legal order and the criminal justice system is a limited jurisdiction in its territory on principle. The jurisdiction is limited to territorial boundaries of the state. However, in some cases, the jurisdiction could be expanded with regard to crimes committed outside the country to ensure the rule of law and to protect the rights of citizens. A connecting point is a requirement for the justification of jurisdictional implementation of the Criminal Laws. While searching a connecting point, it is based on the principles such as the place where the crime was committed, citizenship and the protection of state's interests which are the principles in the scope of sovereignty of state. The main reasonable connecting points are: territoriality, protection, active personality, passive personality, universality, substitute jurisdiction, sharing of jurisdiction. There is a certain legal relationship between the state and the crime in many of these principles, nevertheless exceptionally, with respect to universality principle, it is accepted that the State has the jurisdiction even if there is no link between crime and criminal. Universal jurisdiction rules are generally based on the concept of protection of benefits of the states and the international community besides any single state. In this study, it was mainly addressed the problems related to the implementation of the principle of universal jurisdiction and criminal law in addition to the general rules for the territorial application of criminal laws.