Personal jurisdiction is the broadest formulation behind the charter of interior rights — the right to deny access to oneself. A participant may say no, you may not have access to this part of me — their attention, body, private information, beliefs, time, creativity, or labor — unless another legitimate standing creates a sufficiently strong competing obligation.
The word presumption is doing the work. It means the model begins from the participant holding authority over access to themselves, and then asks where relationships legitimately qualify it — the opposite of a system that assumes access and makes the person argue their way out. This inverts the default of a surveillance ecology: access must be justified, not refused. It is the interiority counterpart to how jurisdiction works everywhere in the model — authority is bounded and must answer for itself — turned inward to the person, and it is qualified only by the proportionate harm threshold that limits every interior right.