WTO规则体系下我国自主创新立法及行政措施合法性研究

发布时间：2018-02-09 06:41

本文关键词： 政府采购自主创新立法及行政措施 GPA　出处：《华东政法大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：自主创新立法及行政措施对我国自主创新能力的提高有着战略性的作用。实践也表明自主创新立法及行政措施推动了我国自主创新能力的发展。自主创新立法及行政措施应当继续执行，并且不断发展和改进，发挥着其应有的作用。但是外国企业和政府对我国自主创新政策横加指责，想要我们停止自主创新立法及行政措施的执行。他们不止对我国政府施加压力，并且还准备利用WTO争端解决制度迫使我国停止执行自主创新立法及行政措施。研究我国自主创新立法及行政措施与WTO规则体系关系的意义在于应对美国和欧盟可能提起的针对自主创新立法及行政措施的WTO诉讼，并在以后的诉讼中取胜。虽然目前美国和欧盟还没有提起诉讼，，我们应该做好应对的准备。中国现在还不是《政府采购协定》的签字方，不承担在政府采购领域内给予外国货物和服务市场准入和非歧视待遇的义务。但是作为世界贸易组织的成员，中国自主创新立法及行政措施仍然要符合《中国加入世贸组织议定书》和《中国加入工作组报告书》以及其他WTO协议，如1994《关贸总协定》（GATT1994）、《补贴与反补贴措施协议》（SCM）、《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》（TIRPS）等。本文针对外国企业和政府对自主创新立法及行政措施的指控，详细地分析了涉及到的WTO规则，论证了自主创新立法及行政措施在WTO体系下的合法性。在第三章中，笔者表述了外国企业和政府对自主创新立法及行政措施的公布缺乏透明性的看法，也发表了笔者认为中国只应承担不存在秘密法规的义务的看法。自主创新立法和行政措施都在官方网站上公布，做到了这一点就没有违规之嫌；而外国企业和政府认为自主创新产品认定工作中专家组组建和评审过程可能出现不公正，违反妥善行政义务，笔者认为妥善义务只涉及法规的“实施”，而不涉及法规的“本身”，外国企业和政府提出的是关于自主创新立法及行政措施本身的问题，此指责也不成立；中国承诺加入GPA,使得外国企业和政府存在合法的期待利益，中国的情况适用非违反之诉，笔者认为在《加入工作组报告书》和《加入议定书》中的关于政府采购的条款中没有表明给予外国供应商国民待遇，并且披露了《政府采购管理暂行办法》这一与国民待遇不符的歧视性措施存在与适用，没有给予外国政府和企业可以合法期待的利益，非违反之诉不适用于中国自主创新立法及行政措施。在第四章中，笔者表述了外国企业和政府对自主创新立法及行政措施使得外国知识产权产品进入中国政府采购市场受到歧视的，迫使外国企业向中国企业转移知识产权，违反了TRIPS国民待遇规定和可取的专利的事项规定的看法，但是根据印尼汽车案专家组报告，笔者认为将TRIPS国民待遇义务解释成防止国内企业获得政府优先采购造成外国企业出口更加困难是不合理的，中国自主创新立法及行政措施没有违反TRIPS协议。在本文的最后，笔者对加入GPA前的自主创新政策在透明性和评审程序方面提出了修改意见。
[Abstract]:There is a strategic role in legislative and administrative measures to improve the independent innovation capability of China's independent innovation. The practice indicates that independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures to promote the development of China's independent innovation capability of independent innovation. The legislative and administrative measures should be carried out continuously, and the continuous development and improvement, playing its due role but. Foreign enterprises and the government of China's independent innovation policy to accuse, we want to stop the independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures implemented. They not only put pressure on our government, but also use the WTO dispute settlement system to force our country to stop the implementation of independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures. The research on the relationship between China's independent innovation and administrative legislation measures and WTO rules system is to deal with the United States and the European Union may be filed for independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures of the WTO procedure, and in the future Victory in the lawsuit. Although the United States and the European Union have not yet instituted a lawsuit, we should be prepared to deal with it.
China now is not the "Government Procurement Agreement > signature does not assume, for foreign goods and services market access and non discrimination in the field of government procurement obligations. But as a member of the world trade organization, China independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures still must comply with the Chinese < > and < China protocol to join WTO to join the working group report > and other WTO protocols, such as 1994< GATT > (GATT1994)," agreement on subsidies and countervailing measures (SCM) >, < > intellectual property agreement on trade related (TIRPS).
Aiming at the accusation of legislation and administrative measures of foreign enterprises and governments, this paper analyzes the WTO rules in detail, and demonstrates the legitimacy of independent innovation legislation and administrative measures under the WTO system.
In the third chapter, the author describes the foreign enterprise and government announced on the independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures of the lack of transparency, the author thinks that China also published should only bear no secrets regulations views. The independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures are published on the official website, do it no violation is suspected; and foreign enterprises and the government that the confirmation of independent innovation products working group of experts set up and review process may be unfair, in violation of proper administrative obligation, the author thinks that the compulsory regulations involving only properly enforced, without involving regulations "itself", foreign enterprises and government was proposed for independent innovation the legislative and administrative measures of the problem itself, this criticism is not established; China commitment accession to the GPA, foreign enterprises and government makes the existence of a legitimate expectation interest, the situation for non China Violation complaint, the author believes that in the "accession to the working group report" and "add on government procurement in terms of protocol > show no foreign suppliers give national treatment, and disclosure of the" Interim Measures for the management of government procurement > this inconsistent with national treatment measures of discrimination in and apply, not to foreign the government and the enterprise can expect legal interests, non violation complaint does not apply to the legislative and administrative measures China independent innovation. In the fourth chapter, the author describes the foreign enterprise and government China into the government procurement market discrimination on the independent innovation of legislative and administrative measures to make products of foreign intellectual property rights, forcing foreign companies to transfer intellectual property to Chinese enterprise, in violation of the provisions of the TRIPS national treatment and desirable patent matters stipulated views, but according to the case of the expert group report Indonesia automotive, the author believes that the country TRIPS It is unreasonable to explain that the duty of people's treatment is to prevent domestic enterprises from getting preferential government procurement, which makes foreign enterprises export more difficult. China's independent innovation legislation and administrative measures do not violate the TRIPS agreement.
At the end of this paper, the author puts forward some amendments to the transparency and review procedure of the independent innovation policy before the entry of GPA.

【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996

【参考文献】