条约法上的目的与宗旨原则研究

发布时间：2018-08-22 18:27

【摘要】：条约法上的目的与宗旨原则于上世纪五十年代在国际法院判例中得到确立,并在六十年代末被编纂进《维也纳条约法公约》。目的与宗旨原则是条约法的一项重要原则,在内容与适用范围上都不同于传统的目的论解释方法。它规制的条约行为,除条约的解释与保留之外,还包括其他条约行为,如修改、终止等。长期以来,学界对该问题的研究仅限于条约的解释与条约的保留。2011年《对条约的保留的实践指南》案文的通过,不仅标志着条约保留专题研究上的巨大成就,同时也对条约法上的目的与宗旨原则的研究具有重大指导意义。本文除“引言”和“结语”外,正文由以下三章组成：第一章阐释了条约法上的目的与宗旨原则的涵义与特征。其中重点论述了三个问题：1.条约的目的与宗旨的概念；2.条约法上的目的与宗旨原则的涵义；3.条约法上的目的与宗旨原则的特征。本文认为,条约的目的与宗旨是个整体的概念,是条约存在的理由。它表征的是条约的价值目的和缔约意图。条约法上的目的与宗旨原则是一种要求,即条约主体在实施条约行为时必须与条约的目的与宗旨相一致。它体现了目的与宗旨在条约中的核心地位。目的与宗旨原则既具模糊性与灵活性,又有确定性与客观性。一方面,目的与宗旨原则是一种标准性规则,需经解释方可适用。在该原则的适用中,评估条约行为合目的性的主体又具有多元性,因此它具有一定程度的模糊性。另一方面,目的与宗旨原则在1969年与1986年《维也纳条约法公约》中涉及八个条款、两个层面的解释,都需要运用公约第31条至33条的条约解释规则。条约解释规则的多种客观要素是目的与宗旨原则确定性与客观性的来源。第二章是对条约法上目的与宗旨原则的证成。论证分为两个过程：1.目的与宗旨原则的法理证成；2.目的与宗旨原则的法律证成。在法理证成中,通过阐释自然法学、社会法学、分析法学在“法律的目的”这一问题上的不同观点和二战后它们的相融趋势,本文指出,法律是实证主义与价值目标相结合的产物。追求确定性与实现价值目标看似相互矛盾,但它们又真实地结合在一起。法律是规范与价值的辩证统一,这是目的与宗旨原则的理论基础。国际社会缔结的条约是国际法上的各种价值目标的体现,这些价值目标对促进国际社会的安全、稳定与繁荣具有重要意义,它们在条约中居于核心地位。这是目的与宗旨原则的现实依据。在对目的与宗旨原则进行法律证成时,本文在阐释分析《维也纳条约法公约》涉及的相关条款后认为,公约虽然对条约行为合目的性的要求只作了框架性规定,但从国际实践、国际法文件中,都能找到目的与宗旨原则具有确定性的依据。第三章论述了目的与宗旨原则的适用。主要说明三个问题：1.目的与宗旨原则的适用前提；2.条约目的与宗旨的确定；3.条约行为与条约目的和宗旨一致性的评估。本文认为,目的与宗旨原则的适用以尊重既有规则的确定性为前提。在约文清晰明确而存在逻辑关系时,不得凌驾于条约规则之上关于目的与宗旨的确定方法,按国际法委员会的指导意见,适用《维也纳条约法公约》中的条约解释规则。参照条约约名、约首、约文、嗣后实践等客观因素进行循环论证是较为可行的方法。缔约国或缔约组织、争端解决机构、条约监督机构有权评估条约行为的合目的性。他们之间是互补而非对抗的关系,彼此之间的尊重有利于形成一致的评估结果。条约行为合目的性的评估可以通过合议制程序进行集体评估,也可以提交国际司法机构裁决。在条约行为与条约的目的和宗旨不符时,在不同的条约行为下会产生不同的法律后果。如,在保留与条约的目的和宗旨不符时,保留是非法的,也是无效的；而在修改多边条约违背了条约的目的和宗旨时,修改是非法的,却是有效的。最后,论文得出以下结论：条约法上的目的与宗旨原则在《维也纳条约法公约》中具有统领性,它规制着多种条约行为,是条约法的一项重要原则。它是战后实证主义与价值取向法理学在条约法领域结合的产物,体现出模糊性与确定性的双重特征。只强调条约目的与宗旨的价值追求而不以尊重条约规则为前提,不利于条约权利义务的确定性；相反,只重视条约规则的逻辑分析而排除了条约追求的价值目标又将使条约成为徒具形式的躯壳。对条约法上目的与宗旨原则的合理把握取决于两种倾向间的合理平衡。
[Abstract]:The principle of purpose and purpose in treaty law was established in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice in the 1950s and codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in the late 1960s. The principle of purpose and purpose is an important principle of treaty law, which differs from traditional teleological interpretation in content and scope of application. In addition to the interpretation and reservation of treaties, treaty acts also include other treaty acts, such as modification and termination. For a long time, academic research on this issue has been limited to the interpretation of treaties and reservations to treaties. It also has great guiding significance for the study of the purpose and principle of the treaty law.
Besides the "Introduction" and "epilogue", the text consists of the following three chapters:
The first chapter explains the meaning and characteristics of the principle of object and purpose in treaty law, which focuses on three issues: 1. the concept of the object and purpose of a treaty; 2. the meaning of the principle of object and purpose in treaty law; 3. the characteristics of the principle of object and purpose in treaty law. The principle of purpose and purpose in treaty law is a requirement that the subject of a treaty must act in accordance with the object and purpose of the treaty. It embodies the core position of purpose and purpose in the treaty. On the one hand, the principle of purpose and purpose is a standard rule, which can only be applied by interpretation. In the application of this principle, the subject assessing the purpose of the Treaty Act is pluralistic, so it has a certain degree of fuzziness. On the other hand, the principle of purpose and purpose was in 1969. In 1986 and 1986, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties covers eight articles, and both levels of interpretation require the application of the rules of treaty interpretation in Articles 31 to 33 of the Convention.
The second chapter is the proof of the principle of purpose and purpose in treaty law. The proof is divided into two processes: 1. the legal proof of the principle of purpose and purpose; 2. the legal proof of the principle of purpose and purpose. This paper points out that law is the product of the combination of positivism and value goals. The pursuit of certainty and the realization of value goals seem to contradict each other, but they are really combined. Law is the dialectical unity of norms and values, which is the theoretical basis of the principle of purpose and purpose. The manifestation of various value objectives in international law is of great significance to the security, stability and prosperity of the international community, and they are at the core of the treaty. This is the realistic basis of the principle of purpose and purpose. According to the relevant provisions of the treaty, although the convention only provides a framework for the requirement of the purposefulness of treaty acts, the principle of purpose and purpose can be found in international practice and documents of international law on the basis of certainty.
The third chapter discusses the application of the principle of purpose and purpose.It mainly explains three issues:1.the premise of application of the principle of purpose and purpose;2.the determination of the object and purpose of a treaty;3.the evaluation of the consistency between the act of a treaty and the object and purpose of a treaty. When the text of the treaty is clear and logical, the method of determining the object and purpose of the treaty shall not be above the rules of the treaty. According to the guidance of the International Law Commission, the rules of treaty interpretation in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties shall be applied. It is more advisable to conduct a circular demonstration according to the objective factors such as the title, the head, the text and subsequent practice of the treaty. States Parties or contracting organizations, dispute settlement bodies, and treaty monitoring bodies are empowered to assess the purposefulness of treaty acts. They are complementary rather than confrontational, and respect for each other is conducive to the formation of consistent assessment results. Assessment of the purposefulness of treaty acts can be carried out collectively through collegial procedures. It may be submitted to an international judicial body for adjudication. When a treaty act is inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty, different legal consequences may arise under different treaty acts. For example, when a reservation is inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty, the reservation is illegal and invalid; and when a multilateral treaty is amended against the object and purpose of the treaty, the reservation is amended. It is illegal but effective.
Finally, the paper draws the following conclusions: the principle of purpose and purpose of treaty law is the dominant principle in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which regulates various treaty acts and is an important principle of treaty law. It is the product of the combination of postwar positivism and value-oriented jurisprudence in the field of treaty law, reflecting fuzziness and certainty. It is not conducive to the certainty of treaty rights and obligations to emphasize the value pursuit of the object and purpose of a treaty without respecting the rules of a treaty; on the contrary, only paying attention to the logical analysis of the rules of a treaty and excluding the value pursuit of the treaty will make the treaty a bare-form body. The reasonable grasp depends on the reasonable balance between the two tendencies.
【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】：D993.8

【共引文献】