国际投资法律体制下的东道国人权保护困境及其应对

发布时间：2018-03-24 18:52

本文选题：国际投资法律体制　切入点：东道国　出处：《吉林大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：国家负有尊重、实现与保护国民人权的义务。已发生的许多案件表明，当因外国投资者的不当行为侵害东道国国民人权时，当今自由化倾向显著的国际投资法律体制不利于东道国人权义务的履行。高标准的投资保护义务极大地限制了东道国为公共福利行使管理的权利，再加上国际投资仲裁实践中普遍存在着过度偏向投资者的倾向，导致东道国陷入无论是否采取措施都将违反人权义务的两难境地。本文在提出东道国在当前国际投资法律体制下将面临人权保护困境这一问题的同时，对其产生原因加以分析，并尝试提出解决这一问题的应对措施，包括现有实践的介绍、理想模式的设想、以及解决问题的现实路径。最后提出中国在当前国际投资法律体制中角色的转变以及该问题上的立场。吸引外资是一国经济发展政策的重要组成部分。显然，外资增长对推动一国经济发展、促进福利水平提升具有重大作用，但同时外国投资者的不当行为也往往导致东道国国民基本生活水平以及健康、环境、发展等人权遭受侵害。由于国家负有尊重、实现与保护本国国民人权的义务，，当其国民人权遭受侵害时东道国应当有所作为，即应当采取必要的规制措施。然而在国际投资自由化背景下，现行国际投资条约中高标准的投资保护义务，特别是普遍规定地投资者—国家仲裁条款极大地限制了东道国为实现公共福利及保证人权采取规制措施的权利，导致东道国在面对由外国投资造成的人权侵害时，采取与不采取规制措施往往在结果上并无二致，最终都将违反其对国民应当承担的人权义务，因而说在当今国际投资法律体制下东道国陷入人权保护的困境。导致此种局面的原因主要可归纳为两个方面，国际投资条约的高保护标准与自由化倾向是困境产生的根本原因，而国际投资仲裁实践中偏袒投资者的倾向则是困境产生的直接原因。20世纪90年代以来，发达国家采取各种手段主导国际投资条约向高保护标准、自由化方向发展，在内容上强调对外国投资者的保护，赋予投资者以广泛权利，而对东道国为公共利益采取规制措施的权利则赋之阙如。投资条约中模糊的实体条款、高度自由化的待遇标准，对于国际投资仲裁的无条件接受等，都为后来被诉于国际投资仲裁庭并承担败诉的后果埋下了伏笔。在国际投资仲裁中，仲裁员惯于采用一般商事仲裁中所强调的私有财产神圣不可侵犯的价值取向，其所做的解释也往往偏向于私人投资者，而甚少考虑东道国公共利益的正当性。对于东道国为保护人权而采取的规制措施多数判定其承担赔偿责任，直接威胁东道国政府为保护公共利益，通过创新政策应对不断变化的社会、经济和环境条件的能力，令其无法正常履行保护与实现本国国民人权的义务。通过以上分析，本文得出了现有国际投资法律体制不利于东道国人权保护并且这一困局亟待扭转的结论，对此本文重点探讨了应对东道国人权保护困境的措施。从解决东道国人权保护困境的现实中已有的实践、理想模式与现实路径三个方面入手，以期对于解决东道国人权保护困境有所助益。文章主要使用了实证分析方法与跨学科的分析方法，结合国际投资条约、国际仲裁机制与人权理论，通过对诸多涉及东道国人权问题的国际投资案例加以分析，从理论到实践两个层面进行论证。当前，中国在国际投资中的地位发生了显著变化，表现为中国逐渐从主要作为吸引外资的东道国向对外投资增长的大国转变，在对外签订国际投资协定时广泛接受自由化倾向显著的条款内容。然而，跨国公司在华侵犯人权事件的频发，以及普遍接受高标准的投资保护义务将导致我国面临人权困境的现实对我国提出了警示——必须在经济发展、国际投资中角色转换的过程中认清我国主要作为发展中东道国所应当坚持的立场，以及日益作为母国所应当承担的责任，这既是为了保护国家利益，也是中国作为负责任大国的应有之义。
[Abstract]:The country has to respect, realize and protect the national human rights obligations. Many cases have demonstrated that due to improper behavior when foreign investors against the host country national human rights, the legal system of international investment liberalization tendency was not conducive to the host country to fulfill human rights obligations. The high standard of investment protection obligations greatly restrict the exercise of management of host country right for the public welfare, coupled with the international investment arbitration practice common tendency to excessive bias towards investors, resulting in the host country regardless of whether the measures will be a violation of human rights obligations two difficult position. In this paper the host country in the current international investment legal system will face the plight of the protection of human rights issues at the same time, the causes of the the analysis, and try to put forward the measures to solve this problem, including the existing practice, the ideal model of the design to, In the end, the change of China's role in the current international investment legal system and the position on this issue are put forward.
To attract foreign investment is an important part of a country's economic development policy. Obviously, growth of foreign investment to promote the economic development of a country, has an important role to promote the welfare level, but at the same time the improper behavior of foreign investors also tend to lead to the host country of the basic living standard and health, environment, development and human rights violations. The state has to respect for. To realize and protect their national human rights obligations, when the human rights of its citizens against the host country should make a difference, namely they shall take the necessary regulatory measures. However, in the background of international investment liberalization, investment protection obligations of high standards of the current international investment treaties, especially the general provisions of state investor arbitration clause has greatly restricted the host country for the realization of public welfare and guarantee human rights to take regulatory measures right, causing the host caused by foreign investment in the face of human rights The violation, take and take regulatory measures often results in the same, will eventually be in violation of its national human rights obligations shall bear, therefore said to fall into the protection of human rights in international investment legal system of the host country. This situation causes difficulties mainly can be divided into two aspects, high standards of protection and liberalization tendency international investment treaties are the fundamental reasons for the dilemma, which tends to favor investors in the international investment arbitration practice is the plight of the causes of the.20 century since 90s, developed countries adopt various means to dominate the international investment treaty standards to high protection, free development, emphasis on protection of foreign investors in the content, giving investors with extensive rights, but not to the host country for the public interest to take regulatory measures right. Fu investment treaty fuzzy entity terms, A high degree of liberalization of the treatment standards for international investment arbitration unconditional acceptance, was later sued in international investment arbitration tribunal and bear the consequences of losing foreshadowed. In the international investment arbitration, the arbitrator used by that general commercial arbitration in the private property of the value orientation of sacred and inviolable. The explanations are often biased in favor of private investors, and seldom consider the legitimacy of the public interest of host country. For the majority of regulatory measures for the protection of human rights and the host to determine its liability, a direct threat to the host government for the protection of public interests, constantly changing through innovation policy to deal with the social, economic and environmental conditions and ability. It can not perform properly to achieve national protection of human rights and obligations.
Through the above analysis, this paper concluded the existing international investment legal system is not conducive to the protection of human rights in the host country and this dilemma to be reversed the conclusion, this paper focuses on the plight of human rights protection measures to deal with the host. It has been solved from the host country of the protection of human rights predicament in reality, three aspects of ideal and realistic path model, in order to the host country to solve the predicament of the protection ofhuman rights help. This article mainly uses the empirical analysis method, analysis method and interdisciplinary, combined with international investment treaties, international arbitration mechanism and human rights theory, through analyzing many human rights issues involving host international investment case, demonstrates two aspects from theory to practice.
At present, significant changes Chinese position in international investment, turn to China gradually from the main to attract foreign investment to the host country as foreign investment growth of the country, widely accepted free tendency terms in a significant sign of international investment agreements. However, the frequent violations of human rights of transnational corporations in China and the event. The generally accepted high standards of investment protection obligations will cause our country facing human rights dilemma this warning must be in the economic development of our country, the process of transformation in international investment in China as the main to the developing countries should adhere to the position, and increasingly as the country should assume the responsibility, this is in order to protect the interests of the state, but also Chinese as inherent responsible power.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996.4

【参考文献】