仲裁作为WTO替代性争端解决机制可行性分析
Analysis of the Feasibility of Arbitration as an Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism in the WTO
摘要: 自WTO上诉机构停摆危机出现,WTO和成员一直在探索缓解僵局之法。其中利用《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解》(DSU)第25条“速效仲裁”进行上诉替代的方案备受瞩目。2020年,欧盟、中国等WTO成员据此建立了《多方临时上诉仲裁安排》(MPIA)。事实上,DSU第25条在MPIA建立之前鲜有人注意,MPIA的建立使人们开始注意到这一条款。MPIA运行至今,取得了一些成果,但也有缺陷浮现,需要我们多加关注,及时调整。
Abstract:
Since the emergence of the WTO Appellate Body suspension crisis, the WTO and its members have been exploring ways to ease the deadlock. Among them, the option of using Article 25 of the Understanding on Dispute Settlement Rules and Procedures (DSU) on “quick-impact arbitration” for appellate substitution has attracted a lot of attention, and in 2020, the European Union, China and other WTO members established the Multi-party Interim Appellate Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA) on the basis of the Arrangement. As a matter of fact, little attention was paid to Article 25 of the DSU before the establishment of the MPIA, but the establishment of the MPIA has drawn people’s attention to this provision. The operation of the MPIA has achieved some results so far, but there are also shortcomings emerging, which require us to pay more attention to and make timely adjustments.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
World Trade Organization. Farewell Speech of Appellate Body Member Prof. Dr. Hong Zhao. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/farwellspeechhzhao_e.htm
|
|
[2]
|
任媛媛. WTO争端解决机制中的仲裁制度研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 上海: 复旦大学, 2012.
|
|
[3]
|
USTR (2020) Report on the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization Office, 47.
|
|
[4]
|
The Latest Iteration Was the US-EU-Japan Joint Statement of 14 January 2020. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2020/january/joint-statement-trilateral-meeting-trade-ministers-japan-united-states-and-european-union
|
|
[5]
|
房东. 解决WTO上诉机构危机: 启动投票制度的初步设想[J]. 国际经济法学刊, 2019(4): 17-23.
|
|
[6]
|
孔庆江. 一个解决WTO上诉机构僵局的设想[J]. 清华法学, 2019, 13(4): 197-207.
|
|
[7]
|
Andersen, S., et al. (2017) Using Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU to Ensure the Availability of Appeals. Centre for Trade and Economic Integration Working Papers, CTEI-2017-17.
|
|
[8]
|
Pauwelyn, J. (2019) WTO Dispute Settlement Post 2019: What to Expect? What Choice to Make? SSRN Electronic Journal, 302-303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[9]
|
彭德雷. 十字路口的世贸组织上诉机构: 改革观察与最新实践[J]. 国际经贸探索, 2020, 36(9): 88-102.
|
|
[10]
|
(2019) Statement on a Mechanism for Developing, Documenting and Sharing Practices and Procedures in the Conduct of WTO Disputes. JOB/DSB/1/Add.11.
|
|
[11]
|
杨国华. WTO上诉仲裁机制的建立[J]. 上海对外经贸大学学报, 2020, 27(6): 29-38.
|
|
[12]
|
彭德雷, 周围欢, 胡加祥. 国际经贸争端解决路径的新实践及其时代价值——基于WTO上诉仲裁第一案的考察[J]. 国际贸易, 2023(5): 38-47.
|
|
[13]
|
Jacky, D. (2008) The Integration of Article 25 Arbitration in WTO Dispute Settlement: The Past, Present and Future. Australian International Law Journal, 15, 247-250.
|
|
[14]
|
刘瑛. WTO临时上诉仲裁机制: 性质、困境和前景[J]. 社会科学辑刊, 2021(4): 80-89.
|
|
[15]
|
刘瑛. MPIA: WTO上诉审议机制改革的规则和实践试验[J]. 法学评论, 2023, 41(3): 174-186.
|