国际争端解决机制碎片化问题分析—以投资领域为视角
On the Fragmentation of International Dispute Settlement Mechanism—In Perspective of International Investment
DOI: 10.12677/DS.2017.31001, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 1,619  浏览: 3,373 
作者: 叶兴平:深圳大学法学院,广东 深圳;深圳大学国际经济法律与政策研究所,广东 深圳
关键词: 碎片化国际争端解决投资仲裁Fragmentation International Dispute Settlement Investment Arbitration
摘要: 国际法碎片化起因于国际关系专门领域出现、自成一体的国际层面立法失控和非国家角色的地位增强等因素。而国际争端解决机制碎片化是国际法碎片化的体现,在实践中已经暴露出很多不容忽视的问题。特别是在投资领域,争端解决机制的碎片化倾向对法律和程序的公正性和权威性提出挑战。尝试在现有一些争端解决机制中设置上诉机构,重视先例的作用,推进国际法法典化工作以及强化国际法院在国际司法中的中心地位和扩大其管辖权范围,有助于缓解碎片化中的国际争端解决机制在理论和现实中面临的日益严重的困境。
Abstract: Due to the nearly increasing special fields in international relations, the out of control of lawmaking on global Level, and the strengthening trend of non-state actors, the fragmentation of international dispute settlement mechanism has arisen. As the concrete manifestation of international law fragmentation, international dispute settlement is confronted with serious and severe challenges. Such endeavors as the following would help alleviating the dilemma that international dispute settlement mechanism is faced with: setting the Appellate Body, attaching importance to the role of precedents, promoting the work of international law codification, and upgrading the central status of IJC in international justice.
文章引用:叶兴平. 国际争端解决机制碎片化问题分析—以投资领域为视角[J]. 争议解决, 2017, 3(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.12677/DS.2017.31001

参考文献

[1] William, W. and White, B. (2005) International Legal Pluralism. Michigan Journal of International Law, 25, 969.
[2] William, W. and White, B. (2005) International Legal Pluralism. Michigan Journal of International Law, 25, 967.
[3] http://www.icty.org/case/tadic/4, 2016-6-9.
[4] Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission (2006) Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/L.682.
[5] 联合国贸发会议. 1992年世界投资报告[R]. 1992: 77. http://unctad.org/en/Docs/wir1992_en.pdf, 2016-6-9.
[6] 联合国贸发会议. 2012年世界投资报告[R]. 2012: 84. http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2012_embargoed_en.pdf, 2016-6-9.
[7] ICSID Case No.ARB/01/2. Decision on Jurisdiction of 6 August 2003. https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&reqFrom=Main&actionVal=OnlineAward, 2016-12-3.
[8] Report of the ILC on the Work of Its Fifty-third Session (2001) Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts. Article 25.
[9] Reinisch, A. (2007) Necessity in International Investment Arbitration—An Unnecessary Split of Opinions in Recent ICSID Cases? Comments on CMS and LG&E. The Journal of World Investment and Trade, 8, 191-214.
[10] 日本国际法学会, 编. 国际法辞典[Z]. 北京: 世界知识出版社, 1985: 522.
[11] 詹宁斯•瓦茨, 修订. 奥本海国际法: 第一卷, 第一分册[M]. 王铁崖, 译. 北京: 中国大百科全书出版社, 1995: 62.
[12] 詹宁斯•瓦茨, 修订. 奥本海国际法: 第一卷, 第一分册[M]. 王铁崖, 译. 北京: 中国大百科全书出版社, 1995: 64.
[13] 劳特派特, 修订. 奥本海国际法: 下卷, 第一分册[M]. 王铁涯, 陈体强, 译. 上海: 商务印书馆, 1972: 43.