摘要(Abstract)：
在WTO新一轮谈判中,争端解决机制中的补偿是一个极具争议性的议题。补偿所具有的功能性缺陷及其文本规定上的内在不足使其倍受指责。为此,WTO成员当局和学者提出了许多关于改进DSU补偿措施的对策。本文对这些对策作了详尽的分析,并结合我国实际提出了我国理论与实务界应采取的因应策略。
关键词(KeyWords)： DSU;补偿措施;争端解决机制
Abstract:
Keywords:
基金项目(Foundation):
作者(Author): 蒋新苗
Email:
参考文献(References)：
- ① 有关成员为专家组或上诉机构的建议所针对的争端方。
- ② DSU第3条第7款;DSU第22条第1款;DSU第22条第2款。
- ③ David Palmeter & Petros C. Mavroidis, "Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization: Practice and Procedure ", Kluwer law International, 1999, p.167
- ④ 杨国华等著:《WTO争端解决程序详解》,法律出版社2004年版,第120页。
- (1) Patrio Grane, "Remedies Under WTO Law", Journal of International Economic Law, 2001, Vol. 4, No. 4, p.762.
- (2) Japan - Taxes on Alcohol Beverages, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R,4 October 1996.
- (3) David Palmeter & Petros C. Mavroidis, "Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization: Practice and Procedure", Kluwer Law International,1999, p.167.
- (4) Ian Browlie, "System of the Law of Nations-State Responsibility", Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983, pp.210- 222.
- (5) Alan O. Sykes, "The Remedy for Breach of Obligations under the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding: Damages or Specific Performance?" in M.Bronckers and R. Quick (eds.), "New Directions in International Economic Law", Kluwer Law International, 2000, pp.347-357.
- ① DSU第23条第1款规定,当成员寻求纠正违反义务情形或寻求纠正其他造成适用协定项下利益丧失或减损的情形,或寻求纠正妨 碍适用协定任何目标的实现的情形时,它们应援用并遵守本谅解的规则和程序。
- ② 杨国华等著:《WTO争端解决程序详解》,法律出版社2004年版,第405页。
- ③ 该草案于2000年通过二读程序,UN GA A／CN.4／L600 of 11 August 2000.
- ④ 补救(reparation)的表现形式主要包括两种,即复原(restitution)和补偿(compensation)。
- ⑤ Articles 31 and 35-40 of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility.这一点其实早在国际常设法院的判决就得以宣示。在Chorzow Factory 一案中,该法院指出:"不法行为所蕴含的基本原则就是,补救必须尽可能地消除不法行为所造成的影响,并重新建立起一种相当于 该不法行为未曾发生时的情形。"See PCIJ,Ser A,no.17(1928),p.47.
- ⑥ Allan Rosas, "Implementation and Enforcement of WTO Dispute Settlement Findings: An EU Perspective", Journal of International Economic law, 2001, Vol. 4, No. 1, p. 140.
- (1) Norway - Procurement of Toll Collection Equipment for the Gity of Trondheim, panel report, GPR/DS.2/R, adopted 13 May 1992.
- (2) Ibid,para.4.17.
- (3) U.S. - Import Measures on Certain Products from the EC, panel report, WT/DS165/R, 19 April 2000, para.6.
- (4) E, Vermulst and N. Komuro, "Antidumping Dispute in the WTO: Navigating Dire Straits", Journal of World Trade, 1997, Vol. 31, pp.25-31.
- (5) Australia - Subsides Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automobile Leather, Report of 21.5 panel, WT/DS126/RW, Jan. 21, 2000, para. 6.
- (6) Ian Brownlie, "System of the Law of Nations-State Responsibility (Part I)", Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983, p.223.
- (7) Pierre Pescatore, William J. Davey, and Andean F. Lowenfeld, "Handbook of WTO/GATT Dispute Settlement" (Vol. I), Kluwer Law International, 1997.
- (8) Patricio Grane, "Remedies Under WTO Law", Journal of International Economic Law, 2001, Vol. 4, No. 4, p.770.
- (1) Allan Rosas, "Implementation and Enforcement of WTO Dispute Settlement Findings: An EU Perspective", Journal of International Economic Law,2001, Vol. 4, No. 1, p. 140.
- (2) Ibid, p. 144
- (3)GATS第21条第3、4款以及执行GATS第21条的程序。
- (4) Uruguayan Recourse to Article XXIII, BISD3S/231.
- (5) John H. Jackson, William J. Davey, Alan O. Sykes, Jr., "Legal Problems of International Economic Relations", Third Edition, West PublishingCo., ST. Paul, MINN, 1995, p.347.
- (6) BISD 36S/93
- (7)赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第445页。
- (1) Mary E. Footer, "Developing Country Practice and WTO Dispute Settlement", Journal of World Trade, 2001, 35(1), p.98.
- (2) Edwini Kessie, "Enhancing Security and Predictability for Private Business Operators under the Dispute Settlement System of the WTO", Journal ofWorld Trade, 2000, 34(6), p. 16.
- (3) Macro C. E. J. Bronckers, "More Power to the WTO?", Journal of International Economic Law, 2001, Vol. 4,Issue 1, p.62.
- (4) WTO Document, TN/DS/M/3, 9 September 2002, paras. 15,32, 33,34.
- (5) International Financial Institution Advisory Committee Report, Mar. 2000, http://www.house.gov/jec/imf/meltzer.htm.
- (6) Kimberly Ann Elliott, "Fin(d)ing Our way on Trade and Labor Standard?" International Economic Policy Briefs, Apr., 2001, http://www.iie.com.
- (7) 关于DSB建议和裁决是否具有直接效力的问题,可以参考有关WTO协定是否具有直接效力的论述。在"葡萄牙诉欧共体"案中(C- 149／96 Portugal v.Council [1999]ECR I-8395),欧共体否定了个人和成员国直接援用WTO协定来判断欧共体法律的合法性的权利。 目前,贸易额在全球居于前20位的国家均无明文赋予WTO协定在其国内法律秩序中具有直接效力。所以DSB建议或裁决在国内 难以得到法院的承认和执行。See also John H.Jackson and A.sykes(eds.),"Implementing the Uruguay Round",Oxford University Press, 1997.
- (8) Patricio Crane, "Remedies Under WTO law", Journal of International Economic Law, 2001, Vol. 4, No. 4, p.772.
- (1) Proposed Amendment of the Dispute Settlement Understanding, WT/MIN (99)/8, communication from Canada, Costa Rica, Czech Republic,Ecuador, the EC and its member states; Hungary, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Slovenia, Switzerland, Thailand and Venezuela (16November 1999).
- (2) Proposed Amendment of the DSU, para. 5.
- (3) WTO Documents, TN/DS/M/1, 12 June 2002; TN/DS/M/2, 3 July 2002.
- (4) WTO Document, TN/DS/M/1, 12 June 2002, paras. 76, 77, 80, 84.
- (5) WTO Document, TN/DS/10, 21 June 2004.
- ① 参见http／／www.cacs.gov.cn／。外国对中国出口商品发起的贸易救济措施的典型案例还有:韩国对中国产糠醇反倾销案;美国对中国 缝制帽子反倾销案;美国对中国钢丝绳反倾销案;美国对中国碳化硅反倾销案;欧盟对巴西等国硅铁反倾销案;印尼对中国钢管的反 倾销案;欧盟对日本、中国等国打火机反倾销案;美国对中国、印度尼西亚漆刷反倾销案;中国应诉阿根廷草甘膦反倾销案;美国对中 国蜂蜜反倾销案等等。
- ② 中国对进口商品发起的贸易救济措施的案例,参见http／／www.cacs.gov.cn／,2004年7月23日。
- ③ 有学者批评说,WTO通过限制贸易的方式来促进贸易自由化实属"荒诞",就如世界卫生组织会因某国不合作而对该国散播病毒,又 如世界知识产权组织会以盗版打击盗版。See Steve Charnovitz,"Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions",American Joumal of Intemational Law, 2001,Vol.95,No.4,p.810.
- ④ Edwini Kessie, "Enhancing Security and Predictability for Private Business Operators under the Dispute Settlement System of the WTO", Journal ofWorld Trade, 2000, 34(6), p. 16.
- ⑤ WTO Documents, TN/DS/9,6 June 2003.
- ⑥ Donald Mcrae,"What is the Future of WTO Dispute Settlement? "Journal of International Economic Law, 2004, vol7, Issue 1,pp.3-21.
- (1) WTO Document, TN／DS／W／9,June 2002.
- (2)杨国华等著:《WTO争端解决程序详解》,法律出版社2004年版,第432-433页。
- (3)同②,第426页。
- ① 对于DSU中的补偿措施的研究必须将其与中美"钢铁磋商"中提出贸易补偿要求、欧盟东扩的贸易补偿等问题严格区分开来。此 外,也不得混淆WTO各阶段的补偿措施。
- ② WTO Document,Chairman's text,Job(03)／91／Rev.1,28 May 2003.该文本是主席根据成员向贸易谈判委员会提交的42份提案及相关讨 论基础上形成的。自多哈会议以来,成员就此轮谈判共提交了40多个提案,涉及到DSU的27个条款中的24个以及4个附件中的2 个条款,还有提议新增加的条款和附件,具体内容包括时间框架、第三方权益、透明度、程序、机构设置、执行、发展中成员特殊和差别 待遇等问题。鉴于该主席文本仓促而成,很多条款并非建立在各方一致意见之上,因此各成员对于其反映不尽相同,有成员表示支 持,但也有不少成员表示不满和失望。实际上,从目前情况来看,主席文本的内容仍然只代表部分讨论成果,虽然可以作为一个谈判 的基础,但是并不意味着未列入主席文本的就不能够继续讨论,也不意味着成员不能再就新问题提出建议。
- ① 杨国华等著:《WTO争端解决程序详解》,法律出版社2004年版,第405-406页。
