RCEP争端解决机制中的特殊与差别待遇条款研究

Study on Special and Differential Treatment Clauses in RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

国际法学院

作者:

母茜梅

摘要:

特殊与差别待遇条款是各种旨在扶持发展中国家(包括最不发达国家)经济和贸易发展的特殊条款,其实施关系到最不发达国家的切实利益。《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》(RCEP)考虑到不同经济体发展水平的差异,在其争端解决机制中明确规定了特殊与差别待遇。在当今世界多边经济贸易体制面临巨大挑战,WTO进行新一轮改革的背景下,RCEP协定重申特殊与差别待遇的重要国际法地位,对于中国及其他发展中国家积极参与区域一体化有着极其重要的现实意义。为此,正确理解 RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的内涵,辩证思考特殊与差别待遇条款的不足,探究相关有效的解决路径,完善相关规则,是促进RCEP更高质量地健康发展的必然要求,对促进国际贸易发展以及推动世界各国经贸共同繁荣具有重要作用。本文主体包括五个部分。第一部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇的理论概述”。主要厘清WTO特殊与差别待遇的产生、发展阶段,探究其蕴含的理论基础以及特征,并且引出RCEP争端解决机制中的特殊与差别待遇条款内容。目的在于为后面的研究内容铺垫知识背景。第二部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的一般规则”。包含对RCEP争端解决机制中涉及特殊与差别待遇条款内容的介绍,包括适用对象、磋商程序和有关最不发达国家的特殊与差别待遇等内容,并与DSU的相关内容进行比较分析,在了解二者差异的基础上来凸显RCEP自身的特点。第三部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的解释规则”。由于RCEP的联合委员会具有解释权,不仅约束缔约方,对争端解决的各方均有约束力,这是不同于WTO的独特之处。同时争端解决本身主要涉及对相关条款的适用与解释,因此,对此内容单独成章进行解读十分必要。第四部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的问题分析”。包括特殊与差别待遇条款规则缺乏确定性,用语模糊,包括权利主体范围模糊、适用程序规定不明,导致条款缺乏强制约束力,可执行不高。在条款解释方面,条件解释缺乏可预见性,国际公法解释的习惯规则难以满足需求,WTO争端解决机构所作出的相关解释参考价值也不明确,可能导致专家组作出不利于最不发达国家的解释。此外,由于最不发达国家寻求救济的能力有限以及补偿规则属于自愿,不具有强制性,导致面临专家组报告不被有效执行的风险。第五部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的完善”。从增强RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的准确性、细化RCEP争端解决机制的解释规则以及增强救济措施的有效性三个方面分别进行探讨,力求为RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇的有效落实提供思路。此外,中国作为世界上最大的发展中国家以及RCEP的缔约方,在特殊与差别待遇的适用上也应该有自己的立场,在坚持发展中国家地位的同时,更多承担大国责任,为特殊与差别待遇的完善贡献中国智慧。

语种:

中文

学科:

国际法学

提交日期

2024-06-16

引用参考

母茜梅. RCEP争端解决机制中的特殊与差别待遇条款研究[D]. 西南政法大学,2024.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • RCEP争端解决机制中的特殊与差别待遇条款研究
  • dc.title
  • Study on Special and Differential Treatment Clauses in RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20210301090985
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 母茜梅
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 国际法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法学硕士学位
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2024
  • dc.contributor.direction
  • 国际经济法
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 岳树梅
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 国际法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • RCEP,争端解决,特殊与差别待遇,解释规则
  • dc.subject
  • RCEP; Dispute Settlement; Special and Differential Treatment; Rules of Interpretation
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 特殊与差别待遇条款是各种旨在扶持发展中国家(包括最不发达国家)经济和贸易发展的特殊条款,其实施关系到最不发达国家的切实利益。《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》(RCEP)考虑到不同经济体发展水平的差异,在其争端解决机制中明确规定了特殊与差别待遇。在当今世界多边经济贸易体制面临巨大挑战,WTO进行新一轮改革的背景下,RCEP协定重申特殊与差别待遇的重要国际法地位,对于中国及其他发展中国家积极参与区域一体化有着极其重要的现实意义。为此,正确理解 RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的内涵,辩证思考特殊与差别待遇条款的不足,探究相关有效的解决路径,完善相关规则,是促进RCEP更高质量地健康发展的必然要求,对促进国际贸易发展以及推动世界各国经贸共同繁荣具有重要作用。本文主体包括五个部分。第一部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇的理论概述”。主要厘清WTO特殊与差别待遇的产生、发展阶段,探究其蕴含的理论基础以及特征,并且引出RCEP争端解决机制中的特殊与差别待遇条款内容。目的在于为后面的研究内容铺垫知识背景。第二部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的一般规则”。包含对RCEP争端解决机制中涉及特殊与差别待遇条款内容的介绍,包括适用对象、磋商程序和有关最不发达国家的特殊与差别待遇等内容,并与DSU的相关内容进行比较分析,在了解二者差异的基础上来凸显RCEP自身的特点。第三部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的解释规则”。由于RCEP的联合委员会具有解释权,不仅约束缔约方,对争端解决的各方均有约束力,这是不同于WTO的独特之处。同时争端解决本身主要涉及对相关条款的适用与解释,因此,对此内容单独成章进行解读十分必要。第四部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的问题分析”。包括特殊与差别待遇条款规则缺乏确定性,用语模糊,包括权利主体范围模糊、适用程序规定不明,导致条款缺乏强制约束力,可执行不高。在条款解释方面,条件解释缺乏可预见性,国际公法解释的习惯规则难以满足需求,WTO争端解决机构所作出的相关解释参考价值也不明确,可能导致专家组作出不利于最不发达国家的解释。此外,由于最不发达国家寻求救济的能力有限以及补偿规则属于自愿,不具有强制性,导致面临专家组报告不被有效执行的风险。第五部分“RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的完善”。从增强RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇条款的准确性、细化RCEP争端解决机制的解释规则以及增强救济措施的有效性三个方面分别进行探讨,力求为RCEP争端解决机制中特殊与差别待遇的有效落实提供思路。此外,中国作为世界上最大的发展中国家以及RCEP的缔约方,在特殊与差别待遇的适用上也应该有自己的立场,在坚持发展中国家地位的同时,更多承担大国责任,为特殊与差别待遇的完善贡献中国智慧。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Special and differential treatment (SDT) clauses are special clauses aimed at supporting the economic and trade development of developing countries (including LDCs), and their implementation has a bearing on the practical interests of LDCs. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) takes into account the differences in the level of development of different economies, and has explicitly provided for special and differential treatment in its dispute settlement mechanism. In today's world, when the multilateral economic and trade system is facing great challenges and the WTO is undergoing a new round of reform, the RCEP Agreement reaffirms the important international law status of SDT, which is of great practical significance for China and other developing countries to actively participate in regional integration. In this regard, a correct understanding of the connotation of the special and differential treatment provisions in the RCEP dispute settlement mechanism, a dialectical reflection on the inadequacy of the special and differential treatment provisions, and the exploration of relevant and effective solution paths and improvement of the relevant rules is an inevitable requirement to promote the healthy development of the RCEP with higher quality, and it is of great importance to the promotion of international trade and the economic and trade prosperity of all countries in the world.The main body of this paper includes five parts. The first part of the "RCEP dispute settlement mechanism in the theory of special and differential treatment overview". The main clarification of the WTO special and differential treatment of the emergence, development stage, explore its theoretical basis and characteristics, and lead to the RCEP dispute settlement mechanism of special and differential treatment provisions. The purpose is to pave the knowledge background for the following research content.The second part is "General Rules of Special and Differential Treatment Provisions in the RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism". It contains an introduction to the RCEP dispute settlement mechanism involving special and differential treatment provisions, including the applicable objects, consultation procedures and special and differential treatment for the least developed countries, and a comparative analysis with the relevant contents of the DSU, so as to highlight the characteristics of the RCEP on the basis of the understanding of the differences between the two.The third part is "Rules of Interpretation of Special and Differential Treatment Provisions in the RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism". As the Joint Committee of RCEP has the power of interpretation, not only binding on the parties, but also binding on the parties to the dispute settlement, which is different from the WTO's unique features. At the same time, the dispute settlement itself mainly involves the application and interpretation of the relevant provisions, so it is necessary to interpret this content in a separate chapter.The fourth part of the "RCEP dispute settlement mechanism in the special and differential treatment provisions of the problem analysis". Including the lack of certainty in the rules of special and differential treatment provisions, the use of vague terms, including the scope of the subject of the right is vague, the application of the provisions of the procedure is unclear, resulting in the lack of mandatory binding effect of the provisions, the enforceability of the provisions is not high. With regard to the interpretation of the provisions, the lack of predictability in the interpretation of the conditions, the difficulty in meeting the needs of the customary rules of interpretation of public international law, and the unclear reference value of the relevant interpretations made by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body may lead to the Panel's unfavorable interpretation of the provisions in favor of the LDCs. In addition, due to the limited ability of LDCs to seek remedies and the fact that the rules on compensation are voluntary and not mandatory, there is a risk that the Panel's report will not be effectively implemented.The fifth part is "Improvement of Special and Differential Treatment Provisions in the RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism". It discusses the three aspects of enhancing the accuracy of the special and differential treatment provisions in the RCEP dispute settlement mechanism, refining the rules of interpretation of the RCEP dispute settlement mechanism, and enhancing the effectiveness of the remedial measures, and seeks to provide ideas for the effective implementation of the special and differential treatment in the RCEP dispute settlement mechanism. In addition, China, as the world's largest developing country and a party to RCEP, should have its own position on the application of special and differential treatment, and, while adhering to its status as a developing country, assume more responsibilities as a great power and contribute Chinese wisdom to the improvement of special and differential treatment.
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2024-06-05
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2024-06-01
回到顶部