原材料出口限制制度的研究—基于国际法与国内法的双重视角

发布时间：2018-02-25 07:32

本文关键词： 原材料出口限制案原材料出口限制 WTO　出处：《浙江工商大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：2009年6月23日,美国和欧盟就中国限制9种工业原料出口向世贸组织起诉。两个月之后,墨西哥提出类似请求。美国、欧盟、墨西哥指控中国对出口进行数量限制,对出口征收额外出口税,设定最低出口价格体系和合同审查制度、没有按规则公布特定条件和措施。专家组在对案件进行审理后,对中国针对9项原材料采取的出口关税、出口配额、出口许口证、最低出口价格等作出了初裁决定。判定中国的部分出口限制措施与GATT1994的相关规则以及《中国加入议定书》的相关承诺不符。 “美国、欧盟、墨西哥诉中国原材料出口限制措施案”发生在经济全球化、贸易全球化和国际金融危机的历史背景下,并且成为奥巴马总统上台以后,美中之间的第一例自然资源出口争端案。因此引起了国际社会对原材料出口限制制度的热议。本文试图从国际法与国内法的双重视角对原材料出口限制制度进行研究。本文除了引言和结论以外主要由以下几个部分组成：第一部分,原材料的概念及在国际贸易中的地位。美欧墨的起诉文件、中国的书面陈述以及专家组的报告中,将9项原材料称为"raw material"和‘'natural resource"。该部分对这两个概念的范围进行了区分,并通过介绍原材料的特点——用途广泛性、不可再生性、环境相关性、分布区域性和价格波动性,来说明原材料本身的重要性。原材料的重要不仅仅体现在它的独特性上,其在国际贸易中的地位也是举足轻重的,正因为如此,不论是国内法还是国际法都对其进行保护。原材料的保护已经被纳入国家自然资源主权和环境主权的范围。第二部分,与限制原材料有关的WTO规则。一国的出口限制权利要受到国际规则的约束。按照WTO规则,数量限制措施是被普遍禁止的,但是,在例外情形下,成员方的出口限制措施也是被允许的。中国在《中国加入议定书》中,也作出了有关出口限制的承诺。该部分在分析了原材料的重要地位及限制出口的一般规则的基础上,进一步诠释了GATT第20条(b)项和(g)项的适用条件以及WTO成员方实施出口限制的具体措施。第三部分,部分国家原材料出口限制的法律与实践。我们在了解WTO关于出口限制的规定后,有必要认识其他国家的相关法律与实践。因此,本部分详细介绍了欧美国家的原材料战略和从出口限制措施中获益的部分发展中国家。欧盟出台《原材料倡议》,积极部署从发展中国家获取廉价原材料,并确定对其经济发展至关重要的战略性原材料名单。欧盟的原材料战略还包括其紧锣密鼓地与一系列国家和组织进行自由贸易协定的谈判,要求发展中国家开放市场。美国虽然没有战略性原材料名单,但也通过了一系列法案来振兴稀土和重要原材料。与此相反,一些发展中国家,为了发展国内产业或者保护资源环境,采取出口税和出口禁令等方式限制出口。本文列举了阿根廷、肯尼亚和蒙古三个国家,说明出口限制措施对一些发展中国家的促进作用。第四部分,我国现有的有关原材料出口限制的法律与实践。该部分从我国对原材料出口采取的出口许可证、出口关税等具体措施入手,根据专家组裁定,分别将其与WTO规则和国内法进行对比。在中美欧原材料出口限制案中,中国虽然在初裁时被认定为部分措施与GATT1994以及《中国加入议定书》的承诺不符,但是中国仍然应该据理力争,展示其维护国家主权的坚定立场。另一方面,中国需要从该案件中吸取经验教训,调整我国的资源发展战略,完善我国的资源法律体系。
[Abstract]:In June 23, 2009, the United States and the European Union Chinese Limited 9 industrial raw materials exports to the WTO sued. Two months later, Mexico made a similar request. The United States, the European Union, Mexico accused China number of restrictions on exports, the imposition of additional export tax on export, set the minimum export price system and contract review system, did not disclose the specific conditions and measures according to the a group of experts in the rules. The case for trial, the export quota of export tariffs, Chinese take on 9 of raw materials, export license, the minimum export price has made a preliminary decision. The related rules of some export measures to limit the GATT1994 and Chinese and Chinese < commitments related to the protocol of accession > inconsistent.
"The United States, the European Union, Mexico v. Chinese raw materials export restrictions case occurred in the economic globalization, the globalization of trade and international financial crisis background, and become president Obama came to power, the first case of exports of natural resources dispute between the United States and China. This caused the international community to export restrictions on raw materials of the hot system. To study the export restrictions on raw materials system this paper attempts from the dual perspective of domestic and international law.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper mainly consists of the following parts:
The first part, the concept of raw materials and the position in the international trade. The United States and Europe ink prosecution documents, China written statements and the report of the expert group, the 9 items of raw materials is called "raw material" and "'natural resource". The part of these two concepts are differentiated, and through the introduction of characteristics of raw materials, widely used, non renewable, environment, regional distribution and price volatility, to illustrate the importance of the raw material itself. The important raw materials is not only reflected in its uniqueness, its position in international trade is very important, because of this, whether it is domestic law or international law for their protection. The protection of raw materials have been included in the scope of state sovereignty of natural resources and environmental sovereignty.
The second part, with restrictions on raw materials related to WTO rules. The right to export restrictions by international rules. According to the rules of WTO, the number of restrictions is generally prohibited, but in exceptional circumstances, export restrictions members are permitted. China in < > Chinese protocol of accession also, make a promise about export restrictions. This part analyzes the general rules of the important position and the restrictions on the export of raw materials on the further interpretation of the GATT twentieth (b) and (g) the applicable conditions and specific measures of WTO member Fang Shishi export restrictions.
The third part, the law and practice of export restrictions on raw materials in some countries. We understand the WTO regulations on export restrictions, it is necessary to understand the relevant laws and practices of other countries. Therefore, this part introduces the strategic raw materials in Europe and the United States and limiting measures in part of the benefit of developing countries from the introduction of the EU exports. "Raw materials initiative >, actively deploying cheap raw materials obtained from developing countries, and to determine the strategic raw materials is of great importance to the list. The raw materials include the strategy of EU negotiations on a free trade agreement with the wildly beating gongs and drums in a number of countries and organizations, open up markets in developing countries. Although the United States has no strategic raw materials list, but through a series of bills to the revitalization of rare and important raw materials. On the contrary, some developing countries, in order to develop the domestic industry or They protect the resources and environment, take export tax and export ban to restrict exports. This paper lists three countries, namely Argentina, Kenya and Mongolia, to illustrate the promoting effect of export restrictions on some developing countries.
The fourth part is about the existing laws and practices on the export restrictions of raw materials in China. This part starts from the specific measures such as export license and export tariff adopted by our country on the basis of the export of raw materials, and compares them with the WTO rules and domestic laws according to the expert panel's ruling.
In the United States and Europe export restrictions on raw materials in the case, although in the preliminary China was identified as part of measures with GATT1994 and < Chinese > protocol of accession commitments inconsistent, but China should still argue, demonstrate its firm stance in safeguarding national sovereignty. On the other hand, Chinese need to draw lessons from this case, adjustment resource development strategy of our country, improve China's legal system.

【学位授予单位】：浙江工商大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996.1

【参考文献】