反制裁的国际合法性探析——以WTO安全例外条款为视角
A Probe into the International Legality of Anti-Foreign Sanctions—From the Perspective of WTO Security Exception Clause
摘要: 经济制裁是21世纪国家及国际组织惯常使用的非暴力强制手段。制裁方可借此迫使被制裁方顺从其政治目的,或敦促被制裁方遵守国际法律规范。而受制裁目的、是否有联合国授权等因素的影响,经济制裁的国际合法性始终存在争议。反制裁是被制裁方最有力的回应措施之一,但其本质上与经济制裁均系歧视性贸易措施,违反WTO法,且发动反制裁需以经济制裁这一先行为的不法性为前提,故反制裁的国际合法性不但存在较多争议,还受到制裁不法性判断的影响。故本文将在WTO法律框架下,厘清经济制裁与反制裁的关系,并探究WTO安全例外条款能否解除制裁的不法性。
Abstract: Economic sanctions can be regarded as a non-violent means of coercion customarily applied by states and international organizations in the 21st century. They can be utilized by a State to force another State to comply with the former’s political objectives or to urge the latter to comply with its international obligations. The international legality of economic sanctions has always been contro-versial, depending on the purpose of the sanctions and whether they have the authorization from the United Nations. Anti-foreign sanctions can be one of the most powerful response measures the sanctioned party is able to take. However, anti-foreign sanctions as well as economic sanctions are discriminatory trade measures which are in violation of WTO law. Moreover, the launching of an-ti-foreign sanctions is premised on the unlawfulness of economic sanctions, and thereby the inter-national legality of anti-foreign sanctions not only becomes more controversial, but also gets influ-enced by the judgment of the illegality of economic sanctions. Considering this, in the context of WTO legal framework, this paper will clarify the relationship between economic sanctions and an-ti-foreign sanctions, and explore whether the WTO security exception clause can preclude the wrongfulness of sanctions.
文章引用:赵后. 反制裁的国际合法性探析——以WTO安全例外条款为视角[J]. 争议解决, 2022, 8(4): 807-813. https://doi.org/10.12677/DS.2022.84109

参考文献

[1] 杜涛. 国际经济制裁法律问题研究[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2015: 19.
[2] U.S. Department of the Treasury (2022) Office of Foreign Assets Control - Sanctions Programs and Information.
https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/office-of-foreign-assets-control-sanctions-programs-and-information
[3] The White House (2021) Interim National Security Strategic Guidance.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/NSC-1v2.pdf
[4] U.S. Federal Communications Com-mission (2022) List of Equipment and Services Covered by Section 2 of the Secure Networks Act.
https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist
[5] 马光. 论反制裁措施的国际合法性及我国反制裁立法的完善[J]. 法治研究, 2022, 139(1): 151-160.
[6] 中华人民共和国外交部. 外交部发言人就中方决定对美有关人员和实体实施制裁答记者问[EB/OL].
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/fyrbt_673021/dhdw_673027/202107/t20210723_9171353.shtml, 2022-09-03.
[7] 中华人民共和国外交部. 外交部宣布针对佩洛西窜台反制措施[EB/OL].
https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/fyrbt_673021/dhdw_673027/202208/t20220805_10735604.shtml, 2022-09-03.
[8] 霍政欣. 《反外国制裁法》的国际法意涵[J]. 比较法研究, 2021(4): 143-157.
[9] 王冬. 美国域外管辖权问题研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 北京: 外交学院, 2022.
[10] 张虎. 美国单边经济制裁的法理检视及应对[J]. 政法论丛, 2020(2): 91-101.
[11] Lowenfeld, A.F. (2008) International Economic Law. 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press, Ox-ford, 850.
[12] Douhan, A. (2021) Unilateral Coercive Measures: Notion, Types and Qualification.
https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G21/175/86/PDF/G2117586.pdf?OpenElement
[13] Clyde Hufbauer, G., Schott, J., Kimberly, J., Elliott, A. and Oegg, B. (2007) Economic Sanctions Reconsidered. 3rd Edition, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington DC, 1-7.
[14] Matam Farrall, J. (2007) United Nations Sanctions and the Rule of Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 7-8.
[15] Carter, B.E. (2011) Economic Sanc-tions.
https://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1521?prd=EPIL
[16] 张辉. 单边制裁是否具有合法性: 一个框架性分析[J]. 中国法学, 2022(3): 283-304.
[17] 陈梦. 单边经济制裁和反制裁的法律规制——兼评《反外国制裁法》[J]. 经贸法律评论, 2022(4): 1-17.
[18] 朱磊. 论国际法上的反措施在网络空间的适用[J]. 武大国际法评论, 2019, 3(4): 136-157.
[19] Crawford, J. (2002) The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 168.
[20] Giegerich, T. (2020) Retorsion.
https://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e983
[21] World Trade Or-ganization (2019) Russia: Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit of Ukrainian Products - Report of the Panel.
https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/DS/512R.pdf&Open=True
[22] World Trade Organization (2018) United States: Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminum Products -Communication from the United States.
https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/DS/544-2.pdf&Open=True
[23] 徐程锦. WTO国家安全例外法律解释、影响与规则改革评析——对“乌克兰诉俄罗斯与转运有关的措施”(DS512)案专家组报告的解读[J]. 信息安全与通信保密, 2019(7): 38-51.
[24] U.S. Federal Communications Commission (2022) Non-Proliferation Sanctions.
https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/sanctions-programs-and-country-information/non-proliferation-sanctions
[25] 中华人民共和国外交部. 外交部回应美方新一轮对台军售[EB/OL].
http://new.fmprc.gov.cn/web/sp_683685/wjbfyrlxjzh_683691/202206/t20220609_10700903.shtml, 2022-09-03.
[26] Iryna Bogdanova (2021) Targeted Economic Sanctions and WTO Law: Examining the Adequacy of the National Security Exception. Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 48, 195-196.
[27] The White House (2022) No-tice on the Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/05/09/notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-the-stabilization-of-iraq-2/
[28] 凌冰尧. 美国次级制裁的合法性分析[J]. 武大国际法评论, 2020, 4(5): 106-119.