国际投资中间接征收法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-09-08 10:27

【摘要】：间接征收问题在国际投资领域既是热点也是难点。经济的全球化和投资自由化的发展使得间接征收案件不断涌现。间接征收的发展呈现出了扩大化的趋势，这一趋势使得原本具有模糊性、任意性和不确定性特点的间接征收规则引发了更多的法律问题，对投资者的过度保护和东道国权益的忽视使得间接征收规则中的权益失衡问题突出，资本输出国和资本输入国的不同立场也导致了间接征收规则的非统一性。这些法律问题使资本输出国和资本输入国都面临困境。间接征收规则是国际直接投资的内容之一，其发展直接影响着投资环境以及国际资本的流动，继而影响世界经济的发展。国际投资领域间接征收的法理基础是国家经济主权，间接征收规则存在的诸多问题是东道国国家经济主权与外国投资者私人财产权之间矛盾的集中体现。资本输出国和资本输入国的价值取向和理念的不同以及本国经济战略的差异使两类国家对待间接征收规则的态度不同。目前国际投资协定包括多边、区域性及双边投资协定，这些投资协定中几乎都涵盖了间接征收规则，但这三种投资协定对间接征收规则的主导地位有所不同。世界范围内的多边投资条约尚未达成，而双边投资条约先天的局限性加剧了间接征收规则的模糊性、不确定性和非统一性的特点。国际投资仲裁庭对外国投资者的保护性倾向在间接征收案件裁决中体现的淋漓尽致，削弱了东道国的外资管辖权，使得间接征收规则失衡的状况雪上加霜，且因仲裁庭本身的秘密性、不透明性、独立性等原因也使得间接征收案件的裁决结果不统一、不确定，引来了各界的强烈质疑，就连发达国家也开始着手对投资仲裁庭进行改革。对于我国这样的资本输入国和资本输出国双重身份的大国而言，对待间接征收规则的态度上处于两难境地，既要注重维护外国投资者的利益，创造更好的投资环境以吸引外资，促进我国国内经济的发展；又要在我国实施“引进来”和“走出去”战略的同时，加强保护我国海外投资者的权益。面对间接征收的扩大化、间接征收规则所导致的几重权益的失衡以及间接征收非统一性等主要法律问题，我国应当积极应对，坚持国家经济主权原则和公平公正等原则的前提下，努力限制和防止间接征收规则的无限扩大化趋势，适当平衡间接征收规则所涉及的几重权益并克服其非统一性。本文包括导论，正文和结语三个部分，共七章：第一章间接征收的基本问题。传统上，间接征收的概念、类型、特点和界定等问题是间接征收的基本问题。本章对间接征收进行追根溯源，交代概念不统一，条约实践和司法实践中都有各种不同的表述。西方国家从资本输出国的立场出发，任意扩大间接征收的范围，最大限度地限制东道国的国家经济主权。国际仲裁庭往往对间接征收案件做出有利于保护外国投资者的解释。二十世纪七八十年代间接征收案件的涌现直接引发了学界对这一问题的热议。间接征收与政府管制措施之间的界限是间接征收制度的重点和难点，对两者的界定要对各种因素进行综合考量，运用比例原则的方法来区分。第二章间接征收的法理依据。间接征收的法理基础是国家经济主权、外资管辖权和自然资源永久主权以及私人财产权保护理论。间接征收的最新发展直接侵害了东道国的自然资源永久主权和外资管辖权。南北国家仍存在巨大矛盾，东道国侧重把国家经济主权作为间接征收的理论基础进而要求尽量缩小间接征收的范围而保护东道国的主权。资本输出国则更侧重强调私人财产权保护理论作为法理基础对间接征收的范围进行扩张，从而高标准地保护其海外投资。发展中国家作为东道国，，应当以维护国家经济主权作为间接征收制度的法理基础。第三章间接征收的法律实践。对间接征收的司法实践和条约法实践进行考察会发现，间接征收规则存在很多问题，不同的国际仲裁庭对间接征收的界定观点不一致、方法不统一，对各种参考因素的考量侧重有所不同，从而使得间接征收案件结果不统一，也无法预测。然而，国际仲裁庭已经逐渐采纳欧洲人权法院的比例原则来确定间接征收是否发生。条约法当中的间接征收规则因国家立场的不同而标准不一。第四章间接征收扩大化及引发的法律问题。间接征收规则的扩大化表现在投资定义的扩大化、措施定义的扩大化、间接征收范围的扩大化等。形成这种扩大化趋势的原因包括仲裁庭对投资者的倾向性、资本输出国主导着间接征收规则的内容，而发展中国家未体现自己的利益诉求。这种扩大化导致东道国利益与投资者权益的失衡、东道国经济主权的削弱以及投资者的过度保护等法律问题。第五章间接征收中的权益失衡问题分析。从投资者与东道国、投资者与母国、东道国与母国三重权益失衡的角度全面体现了间接征收中的权益失衡问题。三者目标不一致、立场不同、手段和方法也不尽相同，在国际投资活动中的地位也不平等。间接征收立法与司法实践中均出现了片面保护投资者权益而忽视甚至削弱东道国国家经济主权的问题，从而使得东道国公共利益与外国投资者私人利益的失衡，影响着国际间的资本流动并阻碍经济全球化的发展，也使国家经济主权面临威胁和挑战。第六章间接征收规则非统一性问题分析。从各国所签订的双边投资协定、自由贸易协定以及区域性投资协定、多边投资协定对间接征收的规定进行比较；并对间接征收规则非统一性的深层次原因进行剖析，可以发现，由于各国立场不同、目标不一致等原因，出现了间接征收规则的非统一性。随着经济全球化的深入和国际投资法制的发展以及间接征收在实践中出现的各种问题，各国逐渐开始对间接征收规则进行调整，这些新的变化已经逐渐显现。第七章我国间接征收制度的立法现状及法律对策。我国作为资本输出国与输入国双重身份的大国，对间接征收规则的制定有现实的需求。间接征收的扩大化趋势使得我国面临两难困境。针对间接征收扩大化、间接征收规则导致的权益失衡、间接征收的非统一性这几个主要问题，从我国的立场和角度出发，在坚持发展中大国立场的前提下，对上述间接征收问题进行针对性的分析，提出我国的应对策略。统一国内法与国际条约对间接征收的规定，坚持国家经济主权原则、公平互利原则，限制间接征收的扩大化，平衡东道国与外国投资者的利益并体现我国双重身份大国的利益诉求，积极参与制定国际投资协定和贸易协定并争夺话语权。
[Abstract]:Indirect expropriation is a hot and difficult issue in the field of international investment. The globalization of economy and the development of investment liberalization make the cases of indirect expropriation emerge constantly. More legal problems, over-protection of investors and neglect of the rights and interests of the host country make the imbalance of rights and interests prominent in the indirect expropriation rules. The different standpoints of the capital exporting countries and the capital importing countries also lead to the non-uniformity of the indirect expropriation rules. Receiving and expropriating rules are one of the contents of international direct investment. Their development directly affects the investment environment and the flow of international capital, and then affects the development of the world economy.
The legal basis of indirect expropriation in the field of international investment is national economic sovereignty. Many problems in the rules of indirect expropriation are the concentrated reflection of the contradiction between the national economic sovereignty of the host country and the private property rights of foreign investors. The two types of countries have different attitudes towards indirect expropriation rules. At present, international investment agreements include multilateral, regional and bilateral investment agreements, almost all of which cover indirect expropriation rules, but these three kinds of investment agreements have different dominant positions on indirect expropriation rules. However, the inherent limitations of BITs aggravate the fuzziness, uncertainty and non-uniformity of indirect expropriation rules.
The protective tendencies of the international investment arbitration tribunal towards foreign investors are vividly reflected in the awards of indirect expropriation cases, which weakens the foreign capital jurisdiction of the host country and aggravates the imbalance of the indirect expropriation rules. Moreover, because of the confidentiality, opacity and independence of the arbitration tribunal itself, the awards of indirect expropriation cases are also made. The results were not uniform and uncertain, which aroused strong doubts from all walks of life. Even developed countries began to reform the investment arbitration tribunal.
As a big country with dual identities of capital importing country and capital exporting country, China is in a dilemma in dealing with the indirect expropriation rules. We should not only pay attention to safeguarding the interests of foreign investors, create a better investment environment to attract foreign capital and promote the development of China's domestic economy, but also implement "import" and "import" in China. At the same time of "going global" strategy, we should strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of our overseas investors.
Facing the main legal problems such as the expansion of indirect expropriation, the imbalance of several rights and interests caused by the rules of indirect expropriation, and the non-unity of indirect expropriation, China should actively respond to these problems, adhere to the principles of national economic sovereignty and fairness and justice, and strive to limit and prevent the trend of unlimited expansion of the rules of indirect expropriation, so as to be fair and proper. We should balance several interests involved in the rule of indirect expropriation and overcome its non uniformity.
This article consists of three parts: introduction, main body and conclusion. There are seven chapters.
The first chapter is the basic problem of indirect expropriation. Traditionally, the concept, type, characteristics and definition of indirect expropriation are the basic problems of indirect expropriation. International arbitral tribunals often interpret indirect expropriation cases in favor of protecting foreign investors. The emergence of indirect expropriation cases in the 1970s and 1980s directly triggered a heated debate in academic circles on this issue. The boundary between system and measure is the key and difficult point of indirect expropriation system.
Chapter 2: Legal basis of indirect expropriation. The legal basis of indirect expropriation is the theory of national economic sovereignty, foreign capital jurisdiction, natural resources permanent sovereignty and private property right protection. The latest development of indirect expropriation directly infringes the host country's permanent sovereignty over natural resources and foreign capital jurisdiction. Capital exporting countries emphasize the expansion of the scope of indirect expropriation on the basis of private property rights, so as to protect their overseas investment. As a host country, the Chinese nation should take the protection of the state's economic sovereignty as the legal basis for the indirect expropriation system.
Chapter III Legal Practice of Indirect Expropriation. A survey of the judicial practice and treaty law practice of indirect expropriation shows that there are many problems in the rules of indirect expropriation. Different international arbitral tribunals have different opinions on the definition of indirect expropriation, different methods, and different considerations of various reference factors, thus making indirect expropriation different. However, the international arbitral tribunal has gradually adopted the principle of proportionality of the European Court of Human Rights to determine whether indirect expropriation occurs.
Chapter Four: Expansion of indirect expropriation and legal problems arising from it. The expansion of indirect expropriation rules is manifested in the expansion of investment definition, measures definition and indirect expropriation scope. This enlargement leads to the imbalance between the interests of the host country and the interests of investors, the weakening of the economic sovereignty of the host country and the excessive protection of investors.
Chapter Five analyzes the imbalance of rights and interests in indirect expropriation.The imbalance of rights and interests in indirect expropriation is fully reflected from the perspective of the triple imbalance of rights and interests between the investor and the host country, the investor and the home country, the host country and the home country. Equality. In both legislation and judicial practice of indirect expropriation, the problem of one-sided protection of investor's rights and interests while neglecting or even weakening the sovereignty of the host country's national economy has arisen, resulting in the imbalance between the public interests of the host country and the private interests of foreign investors, affecting international capital flows and hindering the development of economic globalization, as well as the national economy. Sovereignty is facing threats and challenges.
Chapter VI: Analysis of the non-uniformity of indirect expropriation rules. Comparing the provisions of indirect expropriation in bilateral investment agreements, free trade agreements, regional investment agreements and multilateral investment agreements signed by various countries, and analyzing the deep-seated reasons for the non-uniformity of indirect expropriation rules, we can find that different countries have different standpoints. With the deepening of economic globalization and the development of international investment legal system, and various problems of indirect expropriation in practice, countries gradually began to adjust the indirect expropriation rules, and these new changes have gradually appeared.
Chapter 7: The legislative status and Legal Countermeasures of indirect expropriation system in China. As a big country with dual status of capital exporting country and importing country, China has a realistic demand for the formulation of indirect expropriation rules. From the standpoint and angle of our country and on the premise of adhering to the standpoint of a large developing country, this paper makes a pertinent analysis of the above indirect expropriation and puts forward our countermeasures. The principle of equality and mutual benefit restricts the expansion of indirect expropriation, balances the interests of the host country and foreign investors and reflects the interests of China's dual identity power, actively participates in the formulation of international investment agreements and trade agreements and competes for the right to speak.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D996.4

【参考文献】