WTO法律解释的申诉方利益取向

发布时间：2018-06-05 03:51

本文选题：WTO + 有效解释原则　；参考：《现代法学》2013年05期

【摘要】：WTO争端解决机构的"法官"经常面临如何解释WTO规则的棘手难题。从表面上看,无论是WTO争端解决规则还是WTO争端解决机构作出的司法解释都强调应该秉持中立态度。但事实上,专家组或者上诉机构的"法官"在解释WTO法时并非完全中立,而是存在大量司法造法行为,在解释法律时常采用法律实用主义的方法,扩大WTO协定的涵盖范围,深化国际贸易自由,使诉讼结果有利于申诉方。一方面,有效解释原则为主、疑义从轻解释原则为辅的解释格局主导模糊性WTO规则的解释;另一方面,对被诉方据以辩解的国内法解释的效力进行严格限制。这些现象的发生可以用法律不完备理论、囚徒困境理论、国际贸易自行车理论和法官最高效用理论等进行解释。
[Abstract]:Judges of the WTO dispute settlement body often face the thorny question of how to interpret the WTO rules. On the surface, both the WTO dispute settlement rules and the judicial interpretation made by the WTO dispute settlement body emphasize the need for neutrality. But in fact, the "judges" of the panel or the appellate body are not completely neutral in interpreting the WTO law, but have a large number of judicial acts. In interpreting the law, they often adopt the method of legal pragmatism to expand the scope of the WTO agreement. Deepen the freedom of international trade, so that the outcome of litigation in favour of the claimant. On the one hand, the interpretation of fuzzy WTO rules is dominated by the principle of effective interpretation, supplemented by the principle of dubious interpretation; on the other hand, the validity of the interpretation of the domestic law on which the defendant justifies is strictly restricted. These phenomena can be explained by the theory of incomplete law, the theory of prisoner's dilemma, the theory of bicycle in international trade and the theory of supreme utility of judges.
【作者单位】：华东政法大学;
【基金】：2012年度国家社科基金青年项目“WTO争端解决机制的申诉方利益取向与对策研究”(12CFX110) 2013年度上海市教委科研创新项目“中国参与WTO诉讼模式改革”(13YS090) 2013年度中国法学会部级课题“中国参加WTO诉讼模式改革”(CLS(2013)D228)
【分类号】：D996.1

【参考文献】