【作者】 刘彬；

【导师】 徐崇利；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 国际法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 当代区域贸易协定(RTAs)大量涌现,给WTO带来了严峻挑战。如何理顺两者之间的关系,维护国际贸易法治秩序的宏观稳定,为国际经济法学界所持续关注。传统学术理念多侧重于研究GATT第24条等法条的完善,旨在加强WTO对RTAs的法律约束,使RTAs成为WTO的有益补充。但这种研究进路对全球化与区域化并行的国际社会宏观背景关注不足,主观色彩较强,有脱离实际之嫌。本文认为有必要结合法哲学的思想观点来研究这一问题。惟有分析国际贸易法治秩序的社会基础,才能对该问题作出有效的法学回应。除绪论和结论外,本文的基本结构共分五章,安排如下:第一章名为“当代国际贸易法的后现代主义法学视角”。本章认为当代国际贸易法领域出现了明显的后现代主义特征,存在“权力”和“知识”的紧密结合,后现代法学思潮对此具有很强的解释力。将所有希望寄于WTO一身,指望这一“公正无偏私”的“理性主体”能够发挥最高立法者的作用,通过不断完善关于RTA的纪律规范来加强对RTAs的法律约束,事实证明是极为困难的,而且也未必真正符合广大发展中国家的利益。纽曼和昂格尔的“政治化的法律方法”因此就有了用武之地。尽管后现代法学思潮不足以取代现代主义法学本身,但可以为我们提供认识问题的一种有用思路。第二章名为“GATT第24条法律功能的重新定位”。本章在分析了GATT第24条在运行中的法律实效状况,并对学界各种改革意见作了介绍后,认为第24条的内容设计和预期的法律功能之间存在矛盾,因此需要对其法律功能进行重新解释。将第24条视为“软法”有一定道理,但第24条的“软”归根到底在于我们将其法律功能定位过高。本章在主要运用赖斯曼的“三要素立法观”和富勒的“法的内在道德”思想的基础上,立足于国际社会的政治现实,对第24条的法律功能进行了重新阐释。这是国际贸易法治秩序现代性重建的第一步。第三章名为“国际贸易法治秩序的多元化控制论”。本章认为,国际贸易法治秩序的基本运行规律既不是“完全的碎片化”,也不是“竞争性自由化”,更不是“联邦主义宪政化”,而是在主权国家单边意志的基础上,多边主义与“少边主义”这两种基本治理方式之间一种持续的张力平衡。天平会不断摇摆,但绝不会完全倒向任何一边。在这种张力平衡下,国际贸易法治秩序呈现出民族国家单边主权行为、WTO、RTAs三种要素协同实行多元化控制的总体格局,其中民族国家单边主权行为是基础要素,WTO和RTAs是制度要素。这种多元化控制格局形成了自由主义法学所主张的“自生自发秩序”或“无需法律的秩序”。第四章名为“国际贸易法治秩序中的沟通主义法律观”。本章认为,国际贸易法治秩序三要素之间的制度性互动以一种“沟通主义”的法律观展开。沟通主义法律观的哲学基础是哈贝马斯的“沟通理性”和交往行为理论,面对法的自治性和正当性的张力问题,将自治性改造为循环的自治性,将正当性改造成沟通的正当性,强调立法者与法律受众、不同法律系统之间的联系和互动。国际贸易法治秩序中的具体沟通活动,将以纽曼的政治协调进路和鲍威林的规范主义进路展开,并以纽曼的政治协调进路为主。本章对于其中若干具体问题进行了较多的制度分析,旨在展示国际贸易法治秩序的总体沟通图景。“沟通权力的制度化”至关重要,其基本内涵主要是一种程序性质的国际协商机制建设,旨在促进信息交流和立场沟通,实现“弹性整合”。第五章名为“国际贸易法治秩序中WTO的‘适度控制’”。本章认为,WTO毕竟是当今全球贸易领域权威性最强的普遍性国际组织,其制度优势是普通RTA难以比拟的。既然WTO为世人提供了一个现阶段所能利用的最好的多边主义合作平台,那么在整合各种国际贸易协定宏观关系的工作方面,就没有理由浪费这一宝贵的制度资源。“适度控制论”的基本立足点是前四章的分析结论,另外还有行政治理理论中的“管理主义终结”和“服务型行政”的观点。完善WTO法中的RTA纪律规范,名为“规制”,实为“协调”。“适度控制论”的基本内涵是在“技术性合作”的背景下加强RTAs透明度机制和CRTA协商机制的建设,并认为在实体性方面第24条等条文目前仍宜维持“简约”特征。另外,还有其它若干重要问题,如DSB的作用问题、公众参与问题、WTO与RTAs的平等合作之可能性等等,也归属于“适度控制论”的范畴。更多还原

【Abstract】 Nowadays the proliferation of regional trade agreements(RTAs) forms a serious challenge against WTO. It is all along a hot issue in international economic law academe to explore how to deal with the relationship between WTO and RTAs so as to maintain the stability of the legal order of international trade community. The traditional academic spirit tends to study how to perfect GATT Article XXIV and other provisions of WTO law to enhance WTO’s legal rulings on RTAs and make RTAs a beneficial supplement for WTO. However, this approach pays little attention to the macro background of the coexistence of globalization and regionalism in international society, which makes itself unpractical and full of improper subjectivity. This dissertation argues that it is necessary to employ jurisprudential theories and views to explore this problem. Only by analyzing the social foundation of the legal order of international trade community can we produce an effective jurisprudential response on this problem.Besides the Preamble and the Conclusion, There are five chapters in this article which are arranged as the following:The heading of the first chapter is "Postmodern jurisprudential perspective on contemporary international trade law". This chapter believes that there are obvious characters of postmodernism with the close combination of "power" and "knowledge" in contemporary international trade law, for which postmodern jurisprudence has a strong interpretative capacity. People usually pin their hope on WTO itself, imagine WTO as a just and impartial "rational subject" and the "top legislator" in international trade law, and expect WTO to establish more perfect and clearer disciplines on RTAs. But this proves to be very difficult in practice, and is not necessarily consistent with the benefits of developing countries. Therefore, a political legal way by Neumann and Ungel finds its position in this area. Although postmodern jurisprudence is not able to replace modem jurisprudence, it can still provide us a useful thinking way to understand the situations of international trade law.The heading of the second chapter is "New definition on the legal function of GATT Article XXIV". After analyzing the operating effect of GATT Article XXIV and giving an overview of the various academic reforming opinions, this chapter believes that there is a true contradiction between the design of the content and the prospective legal function of GATT Article XXIV, of which the legal function needs to be re-interpreted. In a certain extent, Article XXIV can be seen as a "soft law", but its softness must be attributed to the over-high tune of the traditional definition on its legal function. By using Reisman’s view of "the three elements in international law-making" and Fuller’s theory of "internal morality of law", this chapter takes a new definition on the legal function of GATT Article XXIV based upon the political reality of international society. This is the first step towards the re-construction of the modernity of the legal order of international trade community.The heading of the third chapter is "Theory of multi-control in the legal order of international trade community". This chapter argues that the fundamental mechanism of the legal order of international trade community is a continuous and pendulous balance between multilateralism and minilateralism based upon sovereign states’ unilateral will, not being "complete fragmentation", nor "competitive liberalization", or even "federalist constitutionalism". Under such a balance, the macro picture of the legal order of international trade community exhibits a co-control of the three elements of sovereign states’ unilateral legal action, WTO and RTAs. Among them, sovereign states’ unilateral legal action is the basal element, and WTO and RTAs are the institutional elements. This situation of multi-control forms the "spontaneous order" or "order without law" argued by liberalism jurisprudence.The heading of the fourth chapter is "Communicative legal view in the legal order of international trade community". This chapter argues that the institutional interaction among the three elements in the legal order of international trade community operates by the communicative legal view. Based philosophically on Harbermas’ Communicative Nous and Communicative Behaviour Theory, the communicative legal view transforms the autonomy of law into circulatory autonomy, and legitimacy of law into communicative legitimacy. It emphasizes the communication and interaction between legislators and the regulated, and communication and interaction among different legal systems. The concrete communicative activities in the legal order of international trade community operate on Nuemann’s approach of political coordination and Pauwelyn’s approach of normativism, and Nuemann’s approach of political coordination is the main and primary one. This chapter takes much institutional analysis in order to exhibit the macro picture of the legal order of international trade community. "institutionalization of communicative power" is a very important job, of which the basic meaning lies mainly in the procedural construction of international deliberative mechanism to enhance information exchange and opinion communication for an "elastic conformity".The heading of the fifth chapter is "WTO’s moderate control in the legal order of international trade community". This chapter argues that WTO is still the most prestigious universal international organization in international trade community and it owns special institutional advantages over any RTAs. Since WTO provides us the best multilateral platform for cooperation that we can utilize at the present, there is no reason to ignore this precious institutional resource on the work for conformity of international trade agreements. The view of "moderate control" is based upon not only the conclusions of the former four chapters but also the viewpoints of "the end of managerialism" and "service administration" in administrative governance theory. It is apparently "regulation" but virtually "coordination" to perfect the WTO normative discipline on RTAs. The basic meaning of "moderate control" is to improve the transparency mechanism of RTAs and the construction of the deliberative mechanism in CRTA. As to the substantial aspect, it is proper for GATT Article XXIV and other provisions of WTO law relating to RTAs to maintain "simple" features at the present. In addition, there are also some other important issues belonging to the spectrum of "moderate control" such as the function role of DSB, the public participation and equal cooperation between WTO and RTAs.更多还原