国际能源投资相关条约中的“非排除措施”条款研究

发布时间：2018-02-12 18:08

本文关键词： 能源投资规制权非排除措施条款 BIT 投资条约　出处：《南京大学》2014年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：中国面临着严重的能源危机,政府采取了国内、国外两方面的应对之策。一方面实施“走出去”的能源战略,开展海外能源投资与合作；另一方面开放能源行业,开发新能源,提高能源利用效率,开发深海能源。这些努力都卓有成效,但也面临着严重的风险。海外能源投资的成功引起东道国的不安和嫉妒,招致其种种盘剥,也引来当地民族主义者的仇视和破坏,投资安全成为迫在眉睫的棘手难题；国内吸引外资和技术以及国际能源合作中,缺少相关法规,使得国家能源主权裸露在国际石油巨头面前,保护能源主权成为不可回避的课题。 “非排除措施”(NPM)条款对解决以上课题具有重要价值。它具有明显的东道国价值取向,其拟定的初衷在于维护东道国主权利益,将东道国合理规制成本转嫁给外国投资者,在东道国和外国投资者利益之间求得再平衡。随着NPM条款的进一步完善和细化,其防范东道国滥用规制权,限制东道国在投资条约外寻找抗辩籍口,规制仲裁庭在NPM条款解释、审查中的自由裁量权的功能逐渐彰显出来,这就对国际能源投资者提供了一种有力的保护。包括中国在内的许多国家,在国际能源投资领域都具有双重身份。充分发挥NPM条款保障能源主权和保护投资安全两方面的功能,并求得这两种功能的协调是这些国家关注的焦点。平衡点就在于公平、合理和正当。NPM条款维护东道国的能源主权,符合价值位阶理念；若东道国滥用NPM条款,以能源主权为幌子侵害投资者的利益,就会受到NPM条款的防范和限制。中国依靠NPM条款保护自身正当的能源主权,同时运用条款反对东道国滥用能源规制权,保护本国能源投资者的合法权益。 NPM条款功能的发挥离不开条款解释和适用审查。其解释要遵守《维也纳条约法公约》第31、32条构建的解释框架,条约的解释依据首先来自条约本身,其次是条约筹备、谈判和拟定的相关资料,还有缔约方的惯常做法,最后才是国际惯例。对NPM条款的适用审查要区分条款的属性采用不同的审查标准。对于NPM条款适用的法律后果学界颇有争议,笔者支持免除条约实体义务的观点。东道国依NPM条款成功抗辩后便不承担赔偿责任,投资者也不能寻求其它救济途径；若东道国援引NPM条款抗辩失败,又以主权豁免原则对抗ICSID裁定的执行,则投资者可申请其投资母国启动外交保护或向国际法院提起诉讼。由于深受德式BIT的影响,并强调吸引外资,中国签署的130多个BITs中仅有8个含有NPM条款,而且不具连贯性。在NPM条款缺位的情形下,中国的能源主权就沦为一种裸露的权力。中国的海外能源投资者遭受东道国的主权侵害时,只能依赖于投资条约中的稳定条款和损害赔偿条款主张赔偿。由于二者固有的缺陷,投资者的合理诉求很难得到回应。作为世界第二大利用外资和第三大对外投资体,为维护中国能源主权,保护海外能源投资安全,中国修改完善NPM条款势在必行。依据中国能源投资的现实,中国的NPM条款应坚持单一范本原则,采用“以总为主,总分结合”的格局,不明确条款的自我判断属性,内容要充实、细化。在实践中采取限缩解释的立场。
[Abstract]:China is facing a serious energy crisis , and the government has adopted the policy of domestic and foreign policy . On the other hand , the energy strategy of " going out " is put into operation , the overseas energy investment and cooperation are carried out ; on the other hand , the energy industry is open , new energy is developed , energy utilization efficiency is improved , and deep - sea energy is developed . It has significant value in solving the above subject . It has obvious host country value orientation . The original intention is to safeguard the sovereign interests of the host country , transfer the reasonable regulation cost of the host country to foreign investors , and seek the rebalancing between the host country and the foreign investor . With the further refinement and refinement of the clause , the function of preventing the host country from abusing the regulation right and regulating the discretion of the host country outside the investment treaty is gradually revealed , which provides a powerful protection for international energy investors . Many countries , including China , have double identities in the field of international energy investment . The full play of the functions of both aspects of energy sovereignty and protection of investment security is the focus of these countries . The balance point is to protect the interests of the host country under the guise of fair , reasonable and justifiable . The balance point is to protect the interests of the investors under the guise of fair , reasonable and just . China relies on the clause to protect the legitimate energy sovereignty of the host country , and to use the provisions against the host country to abuse the power of energy regulation and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the domestic energy investors . The interpretation of the clause should be subject to the interpretation of articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties . The interpretation of the treaty is based on the treaty itself , followed by the treaty preparation , negotiation and elaboration of relevant information , as well as the customary practice of the Parties . The author supports the exemption from the obligation of the treaty entity . In the event of the failure of the host country to defend the legal consequences of the provisions of the treaty and the enforcement of the ICSID decision by the principle of sovereign immunity , the investor may apply for its investment home country to initiate diplomatic protection or bring a lawsuit to the International Court of Justice . China ' s energy sovereignty is reduced to an exposed power due to the influence of the German BIT , and China ' s energy sovereignty is reduced to an exposed power . In the absence of the clause , China ' s energy sovereignty is reduced to an exposed power . As a result of the inherent deficiencies , the legitimate demands of investors are difficult to respond . As the world ' s second largest foreign investment and third - largest foreign investment body , it is imperative to safeguard China ' s energy sovereignty and protect the safety of overseas energy investment . According to the reality of China ' s energy investment , there should be a single - model principle in China , which should be based on the pattern of " total principal and total division combination " , and the self - judgment attribute of the clauses should be enriched and refined . In practice , the position of restraint and explanation should be adopted .

【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D996.4

【参考文献】