Earticle

Abstract

중국어

“法律原则的效力高于具体规则” 这一基本法理在国际贸易领域中似乎行不通. 发达国家在国际 贸易实务中常将代表其利益的规则凌驾于国际法基本原则之上, 以保护其利益. “中国---与原材料 出口相关措施案” 即为一例；该案折射出 “环境保护和可持续发展”等国际法基本原则在贸易保护 主义者的意识及行为中远不及贸易规则有效. 为此, 中国等发展中国家应根据国际法基本原则与贸 易规则效力关系原理, 对现行规则进行分析, 利用国际法解释理论和辩诉技巧寻找突破口, 以最大 程度维护自身正当利益；当然,更为重要的是, 应根据国际法基本原则, 对现有规则的不合理、不 公平之处提出修改, 并在创制新规则中发出自己的声音.

영어

It seems impractical in the realm of international trade that the effectiveness of principle of law is higher than that of specific rule. In order to protect their interests, developed countries put rules representing their interests override the fundamental principles of international law in the practice of international trade. Raw material case is the one of cases concerning this matter. What reflects in this case is that the effectiveness of fundamental principles of international law, such as environment protection and sustainable development, is far lower than the trade rules when it refers to the conscience and behavior of trade protectionism. Therefore, based on principle regarding to relation of effectiveness between fundamental principles and trade rules, China and other developing countries should have an analysis of rules in force, and utilize the theory with regard to interpretation of international law and plea technique to protect our rightful interests to the most extent. Moreover, the most significant thing is that, we should make a proposal to modify the rules in force which are unfair and unjust based on fundamental principles of international law, as well as make our voice heard in the process of creating new rules.

Contents

摘要
 Ⅰ. 引言
 Ⅱ. “原材料案” 隐含的法律问题及其折射出的WTO法的本质
 Ⅲ. DSB “原材料案” 条约适用解释的不当：具体规则高于国际法律原则
 Ⅳ. “原材料案” 条约适用解释原则背后的本质
 Ⅴ. 结束语
 參考文獻
 

Authors

• 马忠法 [ 마충법 | 中国复旦大学法学院教授, 国际法学博士. ]

Reference