WTO「資訊科技協定」(ITA)於1996年底通過後成效彰顯，為多邊貿易體系部門別自由化方案之典範。然而當前快速的科技發展帶動新興資訊科技產品持續問世，以致該等產品究否屬於ITA通過當時所規範零關稅之產品範圍產生爭議，問題殊值深究。ITA生效以來首宗爭端解決個案即屬適例。按該案係我國、美國與日本於2008年間共同指控歐盟在機上盒、多功能事務機與液晶顯示器等三項資訊科技產品之課稅措施，違反WTO關稅減讓之規範。WTO爭端解決機制如何就科技發展實況解讀ITA產品範圍，對於ITA未來的執行成效具關鍵地位。 有關前揭個案之WTO適法性研究，本文認為WCO/HS公約稅則歸列見解可為參據，另可依據維也納條約法公約(VCLT)第31條與32條之解釋規則，考量全部或是多數會員對於系爭產品關稅待遇的「共同意願」。具體而言，基於VCLT第31條揭示的「本文內容」、「目的與宗旨」、「上下文脈絡」、「後續實務措施」與「相關國際法規範」等，通盤考量解讀歐盟關稅減讓表意涵，倘據此解讀後仍舊模糊難定，則依據VCLT第32條揭示的「條約協定的相關準備工作」與「完成當時的情境」等為輔助判斷。 鑑於此類爭議將演變為體制性問題，本文提出二項建議方案。第一，採行ITA委員會通知處理機制尋求通案解決，討論過程納入貨品貿易規範在其他領域敘及之「同類產品」的認定要素，基於創新產品變動並參照當前科技發展等市場實務進行考量，合理擴張ITA產品範圍。第二，爭取在當前杜哈回合談判通過相關部門別自由化方案擴大ITA產品範圍，建構零或低關稅的資訊科技產品貿易環境，其落實將有助於全球資訊科技產業之發展，亦可強化多邊貿易體系之整體運作。 / Information Technology Agreement (hereinafter ITA) has made significant contribution to the free trade in IT products since its conclusion at the end of 1996. It has been recognized as a successful model of sectorial trade liberalization in the WTO multilateral trading system. However, with the rapid advent of new technology, challenges arising from the determination of tariff treatment on newly innovated IT products become outstanding. Indeed, whether those innovated products are subject to the duty-free treatment of ITA merits intensive considerations. As demonstrated in the first dispute specifically on the prodcut coverage of ITA, where Taiwan, United States and Japan filed against the European Communities in 2008 for three IT products, i.e. set-top box, multi-functional office machine and LCD monitor, how the disptue settlement institutions respond to the applicability of the ITA in the context of techonogical develpment would be critical to the effectiveness of future ITA. In this study, the author argues that relevant factors to be taken into account by the panel adjudicating the ITA dispute include the tariff classification principle embodied in the Harmonized System Convention of the WCO, as well as the “common intention” of all or a great majority of ITA participants pursuant to Article 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). Specifically, an examination of the EC’s commitments under schedules of tariff concession by virtue of text (ordinary meaning), object and purpose, context, subsequent practice and relevant rules of international law as stipulated in Article 31 of the VCLT are of importance. Furthermore, looking at elements as to preparatory work and circumstances of the conclusion of the EC’s schedule in accordance with Article 32 of the VCLT is also relevant. On systemic issues, the author proposes two solutions. First, the inclusion of a new notification mechanism into the ITA Committee could be feasilbe. By adopting the concept of “like products” applicable to other fields of trade in goods, the ITA’s product coverage can be reasonably expanded on the basis of the modification of innovated products and advent of modern technology in the market. Second, achieving the consensus on sectorial liberalization of expanded IT products under on-going Doha Round would contribute to establish zero (or low) tariff environment for IT products, which would benefit not only to the global IT industry but also to the multilateral trading system as a whole.

由於全球貿易自由化，食品的流通也漸趨便利。各國為避免或減少因食品貿易流通而導致外來動植物疫病蟲害入侵、或蔓延之機會，及防範食品、飲料或飼料中之添加物、污染物等的潛在風險，以保護境內國民及動植物的生命或健康，及維護自然生態環境，會對進口食品採取相關規範與措施。當會員基於主權制定相關措施時，可能會因這些措施對於貿易活動之限制性效果，而損及其他會員在WTO下之貿易利益，因而會造成其他國家的關切，甚至訴諸WTO爭端解決機制。 本文將介紹國際間常受其他會員關切的食品管制措施類型，主要以在WTO SPS委員會之會議上受到關切，或當事國向WTO提出控告的個案，來進行探討。藉由個案研究，以從中了解WTO重要條文及所涉議題之內涵與重要原則，並作為我國對進口食品管制措施管理之借鏡。我國自2002年加入WTO後，進口食品的值與量明顯增加，我國食品輸入管理機制也越顯重要。自2011年3月11日福島核災發生，大量放射性物質外洩對整體環境、人類及生物健康造成危害，故各國紛紛對日本食品實施管制程度不等的進口管制措施，以防止遭到輻射汙染之食品輸入。我國自日本輸入食品種類與數量皆甚多，因此亦對日本食品採取特定管制措施。針對此我國此管制措施，本文將以國際經貿法的觀點，依據 WTO協定中與檢驗措施密切相關的SPS協定規範、過往案例之裁決及相關文獻，分析我國針對日本輸入食品輻射管制措施之適法性，並判斷該措施將來是否存在遭非難之可能，希冀能對於我國日後政策走向提供一實質性之參考及展望。 / Global trade in agricultural and food products has grown rapidly in recent decades, with countries becoming more engaged in cross-border trade, whether as exporters or importers. All countries maintain measures to ensure that imported food is safe for consumers, and to prevent the spread of pests or diseases among animals and plants. These sanitary and phytosanitary measures can take many forms, such as requiring products to come from a disease-free area, inspection of products, specific treatment or processing of products. Sanitary and phytosanitary measures, by their very nature, may result in restrictions on trade. After the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami damaged the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, radiation was released into the environment near the plant. Growing concerns over radiation cause several countries, such as Korea and China to impose restrictions on the import of Japanese products. Taiwan, one of Japan's key food export markets, also imposed regulations in order to secure the safety of people. However, in 2015 Japan has filed a dispute against Korea at the World Trade Organization (WTO) over import restrictions that Japan found the measures inappropriate and against the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS Agreement). It also demonstrats that countries which impose import restrictions could be facing international adjudication through the WTO. Therefore, this essay staying with the view of international trade law, in particular the SPS Agreement under WTO, tries to analyze the consistency of Taiwan’s import regulations on Japanese Food Products with the rules and norms of the WTO in order to assess the legitimaticy of Taiwan’s trade policy.

No description available.

No description available.

關貿總協於一九四八年成立以來、已成為規範世界貿易最重要的 協定。而中共為全球第十五大貿易國、因此自然不應被排除在外 中共之情況特殊、引發一些法律上以及經濟上的問題、使其入蟫藆撬繺祭蛂C共入會案之法律問題主要來自其「恢復原會籍」之要求。此一起祖父條款、入會費、與排除條款之適用上的問題。另外、中籍亦對香港、澳門之會籍有重大影響。經濟問題則是起因於中共之非市場經濟體制以及其要求享受開家之優惠。雖然中共以進行大幅的經濟改革、但主要締約國仍經濟制度不夠自由。另外、由於中共龐大的出口潛力、使各締願給予其開發中國家所享有的優惠。於中共加入關貿總協對雙方皆有正面意義、因此預料兩方面都度的妥協以求問題之解決。實上、中共已經以「新加入」的方式與關貿總協展開談判、因恢復會籍」之要求並無任何實質意義、至於入會條件方面、關同意中共可以以關稅減讓的方式入會、但中共卻無法避免歧視限制以及特別防衛條款。

「雙邊投資協定」是「發展中國家」為積極引進外國資本，與「已開發國家」為有效保護本國投資者間之互惠保障機制。於1990年代以來，因跨國企業數擴大而增加投資活動，因此也擴大投資的規模，故而對投資規範之需求必要性愈來愈增加。「雙邊投資協定」作爲目前最通用的國際投資規範，最近全世界所簽訂之雙邊投資協定的數量為約2,700多個(約180個國家)，惟由於世界上就雙邊投資協定内容還沒統一的形態，而且協定規定上缺乏具體性基準，針對協定内容，已開發國家與發展中國家之間見解往往相左。 其中「徵收條款」是理論解釋上最引起爭論的領域之一。不過迄今與徵收有關協定之實踐過程中，資本輸出國（已開發國家）和資本輸入國（發展中國家）間之理解有很大的差異，即在於絕對多數的雙邊投資協定中，對於徵收條款沒有判斷標準（如間接徵收）、補償標準（如赫爾規則）、補償額價格估價方式（如公平市場價格）之具體基準。 本論文基於雙邊投資協定之現行趨勢，想要研究雙邊投資協定的一般概念與徵收的相關具體内容，尤其為準備臺灣與韓國間簽訂雙邊投資協定的可能性，先觀察最近韓國、臺灣與各國所簽訂的雙邊投資協定之現況，其次則想要比較該協定的徵收條款，進一步嘗試關於未來臺、韓兩國之雙邊投資協定徵收條款之制定方向提出若干意見。

Due to the globalization of economy, the protection of intellectual property rights becomes very important, not only on a national and local basis but also on an international basis. The evidence is coming from the negotiation and ultimately the inclusion of the TRIPS Agreement, or Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, into the World Trade Organization. In the TRIPS Agreement, one of the protections to a local intellectual property on an international level is the protection of geographical indications, and such protection can be found in Articles 22 through 24 of the TRIPS Agreement. Geographical indications identify goods as originating in a particular territory or region, and also indicate quality by letting consumers know that the goods come from an area where a given quality, reputation, or other characteristic of the goods is essentially attributable to their geographical origin. The protection of geographical indications has always been on the table and been mentioned in various international treaties, and eventually came together under the TRIPS Agreement. The different ways for geographical indications protection is examined in order to understand the different national regulations used in various countries as a tool to protect the geographical indications, hence, to protect intellectual property rights. The major issue regards the scope of protection is the extension of the TRIPS Article 23; diverse opinions and suggestions are coming from US and EU, the two biggest sovereignties. This also can be seen in the result of the WTO dispute case of EC – Trademarks and Geographical Indications. The future developments such as the negotiations for a multilateral system of register for geographical indications, the progress of developing countries toward protection of geographical indications and the involvement of the traditional knowledge, all play very crucial roles on the enforcement of geographical indications protection. This paper will explore all these matters.

1998年在全球各地環保團體、消費者團體、社會正義團體等非政府組織跨國串聯反對下，擊敗了正在經濟合作暨發展組織為了一致化外國直接投資規則進行的多邊投資協定談判，這是非政府組織成功在全球經濟治理領域發揮影響力的重要案例。本論文的研究目的在於探討：第一、反對多邊投資協定談判的非政府組織跨國倡議活動為什麼成功及如何成功；第二、他們反對的理由是什麼；第三、從這個案例來看非政府組織倡議活動正在或將對國際政治經濟決策過程帶來何種程度的衝擊。這個個案研究使用Margaret E. Keck與Kathryn Sikkink的跨國倡議網絡（transnational advocacy network, TAN）理論，分析公民反抗行動如何成功影響在全球層次的政治決策，TAN理論強調議題共鳴、網絡密度、與目標對象脆弱性三種因素的重要性。本論文除了用這三種因素檢視反多邊投資協定運動過程，並發現非政府組織的倡議活動是否能夠與政府力量取得連結的重要性，作為TAN理論的補充。其次，本論文發現反多邊投資協定運動策略性地轉變為以國內為基礎的運動，透過國內爭議政治的傳統反抗手法向政府表達公民的訴求，以避開國際組織對非政府組織不利的政治機會結構，呈現出與TAN理論的「迴力鏢效果」相對立的發展。最後，這個個案研究發現反多邊投資協定運動更接近基於民族主義的傳統政治，而不能說是一種世界主義政治的發展。世界主義論者預期在一個形成中的全球公民社會中國家的角色正在消退，在這個案例中顯然並無法獲得足夠的證明。 / In 1998, a transnational NGO coalition of environmentalist, consumer rights, and social justice activists helped to defeat the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), a draft treaty to harmonize rules on foreign direct investment under the aegis of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). This dissertation addresses why and how the transnational NGO advocacy sank the MAI negotiation, what are their advocacy reasons, and to what extent the transnational NGO advocacy activities will influence and are influencing the international decision making process. This case study uses Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink’s transnational advocacy network (TAN) theory, which stresses the importance of issue resonance, network density, and target vulnerability, to explore how citizen’s resistance struggle succeed in influencing policy at global level. First, in supplementing Keck and Sikkink’s TAN theory, the work suggests whether the NGO advocacy links with its governmental power is also at stake. Second, contrary to the “boomerang effect” from their TAN theory, the work finds that the transnational NGO campaign against MAI strategically shifted to country-based campaigns to address citizen’s claims through traditional repertoire of contention politics, in bypassing unfavorable political opportunity structure in international arena. Finally, the anti-MAI campaign was found to be much closer to traditional politics in a view of nationalism than the alleged cosmopolitan politics, which expects the role of state has eroded in an emerging global civil society.

文化是一種民族精神、社會價值、生命哲學與生活方式的體現，而創意是人類文化定位的重要成份，而以各式各樣的形式表現，兩者皆能透過產業流程與全球分銷去複製、推廣。文創產業是「那些以無形、文化為本質的內容，經過創造、生產與商品化結合的產業」，因此文創產業不僅涉及文化與創意，也包含由創意衍生之「文化商品及服務」（cultural goods and services）的經濟價值與商業運作。 我國為使發展文創產業之政策制度在施行上於法有據，經濟部乃多次召集會議邀請各部會及學者專家討論研擬《文化創意產業發展法》（以下簡稱《文創法》），並於92年9月24日函報行政院審核修訂，經過多年的推動與研議，該法終於2010年1月7日三讀通過，完成立法程序，並於2月3日以華總一義字第09900022451號總統令制定公布，相關子法亦陸續公布施行。 然而《文創法》內立意甚佳的產業措施，因台灣加入世界貿易組織(World Trade Organization, WTO)而不得不受到WTO相關協定的規範。作為掃除關稅與非關稅貿易障礙、確保自由貿易之WTO，經由多回合的貿易談判逐步開放市場，並藉由對關稅與補貼之約束以及服務業市場准入、國民待遇之承諾等建立市場開放之可預測性。文化商品與服務在其規範下並無例外，同樣必須接受WTO上述原則，即最惠國待遇、國民待遇與市場准入等義務的檢驗。鑑於《文化創意產業發展法》所具備產業扶植之本質，及其涵蓋之16種文化創意產業多屬服務部門，本文遂將檢驗重點聚焦在該法之獎補助及租稅優惠措施與GATS的互動關係上，尤其是《文創法》在服務業補貼暫行定義、第17條國民待遇、國內規章第6.1條與第23.3條非違反協定控訴之適法性分析，以作為日後執法或修正之參考。 但值得注意的是，相對於WTO以降低貿易壁壘，促進貿易自由化為職志，文化商品與服務之雙重特質在WTO無法獲得特殊之待遇或保障，2005年10月UNESCO通過之《保障及促進文化表現多樣性公約》(以下簡稱《文化多樣性公約》)卻主張國家有促進與保護文化表現多樣性之權利，並具有採行其認為適當之政策與措施達成該目的之主權。若《文創法》有其適用《文化多樣性公約》之可能，則我國在採行諸多文創產業推展措施卻有違WTO內括協定所涉及之貿易原則或義務時，是否得根據《文化多樣性公約》正當化該等爭議措施? 當《文化多樣性公約》與WTO內括協定產生規範衝突時，兩者之適用與解釋是否有互補或調和之可能? 在文化產業與貿易活動上，《文化多樣性公約》若能正當化違反WTO規範之政策措施，則我國《文創法》所擬定之政策措施在GATS框架下之解釋與義務即有所不同。因此在檢驗《文創法》與GATS之互動關係前，本文將先簡單介紹《文化多樣性公約》之優劣特性，及公約與WTO規範競合之解決與適用結果。 關鍵字：文化創意產業發展法、世界貿易組織、文化多樣性公約、國民待遇、非違反協定控訴 / Culture is the embodiment of a national spirit, social values, people’s worldview and life style, while creativity in all its manifestations presents an essential constitution of human culture. By way of industrialization and global distribution, the two are allowed to copy repeatedly and promote worldwide. Cultural and creative industries are “those industries that combine the creation, production and commercialization of contents that are intangible and cultural in nature”, which involve not only abstract culture and creativities but also material economic value and commercial operations of cultural goods and services derived from human ingenuity and originality. To make sure the policy and measures implemented in Taiwan to promote and flourish cultural and creative industries are legally based, the Ministry of Economic Affairs had invited the relevant ministries, scholars and experts in the field to deliberate and prepare the Cultural and Creative Industry Development Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") since mid-‘90s, and finally submitted the draft Act to the Executive Yuan for review and approval on September 24, 2003. After years of promotion and negotiations, the Act was passed its third reading in the Legislative Yuan on January 7, 2010 and promulgated on February 3 by Presidential Decree Hwa Zong Yi Zi No. 09900022451. The related rules and regulations were also proclaimed in effect one after another ever since. However, as a WTO (World Trade Organization) member, it is our duty to keep the deliberately constructed measures set in the Act in line with the WTO-related disciplines. WTO, acting as an international forum calling for free trade, vows to eliminate tariff and non-tariff trade barriers, facilitate further market opening by multiple rounds of trade negotiations, and increase the predictability of market dynamics through the establishment of binding tariff rates, subsidy disciplines, specific commitments and various requirements such as most-favored-nation treatment, market access and national treatment. The same principles and obligations mentioned above apply to goods and services with culture in nature equally with no exception. In this regard, the paper will examine how the Cultural and Creative Industry Development Act, especially its subsidy and tax preference measures legally interact with the articles related including Article 15 Subsidy, Article 17 National Treatment, Article 6.1 Domestic Regulation and Article 23.3 Non-violation complaints (in view of the measures adopted in the Act are industry-supportive oriented and most industries categorized in the same act are belonging to service sector) in General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) for reference of law enforcement and further amendments in the future. But it is worth noting that, while WTO (the organization and covered agreements) are dedicated to exterminate trade barriers, promote trade liberalization and ignore cultural goods and services have both an economic and a cultural nature, the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Cultural Expressions (hereinafter referred to “the UNESCO Convention”) adopted by the General Conference of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESC) on October 20, 2005 recognizes member countries have their sovereign right to formulate and implement their cultural policies and to adopt measures to protect and promote the diversity of cultural expressions when necessary. If the rules and principles of the UNESCO Convention apply to the Cultural and Creative Industry Development Act, then is it possible for the Convention to justify the measures we adopt to nourish the cultural industries, but somehow in violation of WTO principles and obligations? And if the answer is “Yes”, all the interpretation and obligations derived from the Act will not be the same as those covered by GATS only. Therefore, the potential conflicts and the harmonization between the UNESCO Convention and WTO covered agreements (GATS in particular) will be explored before the legal relationship between the Act and GATS is examined. Keywords: Cultural and Creative Industry Development Act, World Trade Organization, UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Cultural Expressions, National Treatment, Domestic Regulation, Non-violation complaints

自兩岸於1987年開放探親以來，隨著兩岸頻繁的交流，跨兩岸性的犯罪活動，如販毒、詐欺、人口販運等犯罪亦日趨嚴重，特別是近年來出現有別於以往傳統詐騙手法的新型態詐欺犯罪—以電話、網路為中介物的「電信詐欺犯罪」，大肆橫行於兩岸，為害兩岸治安最深，是類犯罪不斷翻新手法，巧藉各種名目詐騙民眾獲取不法暴利，造成極嚴重的社會成本付出。過去，兩岸共同打擊犯罪機制，僅有「金門協議」及其他非正式管道，以為合作打擊犯罪的依據，因「金門協議」的內涵不足致使成果有限。隨著政治氛圍的改變，兩岸終於2009年4月簽署「海峽兩岸共同打擊犯罪及司法互助協議」，為兩岸共同打擊犯罪奠定了新里程碑，惟分析其內容並與「駐美國台北經濟文化代表處與美國在台協會間之刑事司法互助協定」比較，可以發現尚有許多問題亟待解決。本研究藉由分析現行兩岸共同打擊犯罪機制，並提出問題及建議，以強化兩岸共同打擊電信詐欺犯罪的力道。 / Since 1987 Taiwan and Mainland China allowed people visited opposite side, cross-strait crimes such as smuggling drugs, fraud and human trafficking have become more and more serious as both parts frequently contacting with each other. Recently, new type fraud which is different from traditional fraud spread around and critically damage social security, especially telecom fraud by telephone and internet being the mediators. By using multiform excuses, these kinds of crimes continuously renovate to cheat innocent people and obtain huge illegal money, so that they cause a great loss of social. In the past, there were only Kinmen Agreement and the other unofficial channel as the basis in the cross-strait crime-fighting mechanism. However, Kinmen Agreement was too narrowed its coverage to limited in its results. With the political atmosphere changes, each part finally signed “Cross-Strait Agreement on Joint Crime-Fighting and Judicial Mutual Assistance” in April, 2009. This is the new milestone of cross-strait crime-fighting cooperation mechanism. As analyzing it and comparing it with “Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office and the American Institute in Taiwan”, we found there are still some obstacles need to be resolved. This study offers some questions and advises in order to strengthen the cross-strait telecom fraud crime-fighting cooperation mechanism.