货物贸易与服务贸易中公共道德比较研究——兼论中美文化产品争端案中公共道德问题

发布时间：2018-05-09 15:21

本文选题：公共道德 + 货物贸易　；参考：《大连理工大学学报(社会科学版)》2011年03期

【摘要】：WTO货物贸易协定(GATT)第20条和服务贸易协定(GATS)第14条均涉及到公共道德问题,各国可依据公共道德的理由而豁免该国在GATT或GATS下承担的部分义务。通过条约解释的一般规则进行分析,可以看出两个协定下公共道德的含义不尽相同,GATS中公共道德的含义及适用条件都要严格于GATT关于公共道德的规定,将两者等量齐观,有失偏颇。在涉及货物贸易的中美文化产品争端一案中,WTO专家组将涉及服务贸易的美国博彩服务案中对GATS第14条(a)"公共道德"的界定复制适用,认为GATT与GATS中的公共道德含义相同,这给中国在该案中援引GATT第20条(a)"公共道德的例外"为文化产品进口争议措施进行辩护造成困难。
[Abstract]:Article 20 of the WTO Agreement on Trade in goods and Article 14 of the Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) both deal with the issue of public morality. Countries may exempt part of their obligations under GATT or GATS on the grounds of public morality. Through the analysis of the general rules of treaty interpretation, we can see that the meaning of public morality under the two agreements is different. The meaning and applicable conditions of public morality in GATT should be strictly compared with the provisions on public morality of GATT. It is biased. In the case concerning Sino-American Cultural Product disputes involving the Trade in goods, the WTO panel applied the definition of "public morality" to the definition of "public morality" in the case of "GATS article 14" in the case concerning trade in services in the United States, and considered that the meaning of "public morality" in GATT and GATS was the same as that in GATS. This makes it difficult for China to invoke GATT article 20 "exceptions to public morality" in the case to defend the measures involved in disputes over the import of cultural goods.
【作者单位】：河南农业大学文法学院;
【基金】：国家哲学社会科学规划项目(11CKS018) 教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目(10YJC710040)
【分类号】：D996.1

【共引文献】