Spelling suggestions: "subject:"doha ministerial conference"" "subject:"doha ministerial konference""
1 |
「法庭之友」參與WTO爭端解決程序問題之解構—以法律與政策面向為主軸 / Deconstruction of the Controversy of Amicus Curiae’s Participation in the WTO Disputes Settlement Proceeding—From the Perspective of Law and Policy鄭富霖, Cheng , Fu-Lin Unknown Date (has links)
2001年11月世界貿易組織召開杜哈部長會議,重啟檢討爭端解決規則與程序瞭解書(DSU)之新回合談判,其中「法庭之友」議題頗受注目,已開發國家與開發中國家立場截然不同,幾無共識。DSU之本文與其附件皆未提及「法庭之友」一詞,歷經幾次關鍵性案件之裁決,上訴機構逐漸發展出一套規則,認為DSU第13條、第17.9條與上訴審查作業程序第16(1)條可資引用為小組與上訴機構接受與考慮「法庭之友」書面意見之法律基礎。本文首先從法律面向著手,將現行條文加以適當之解釋,認為目前上開條文之規定並無法為「法庭之友」提供一合理之法律基礎,上訴機構向來有關之裁決並不正確。
本文繼而從政策面向分析,主張未來世界貿易組織應適度突破傳統國際公法之限制,讓公民社會之成員有機會以「法庭之友」的身份,「間接」、「例外」地參與WTO爭端解決程序,以爭取全球民眾對世界貿易組織之支持與認同。為解決「法庭之友」之爭議,世界貿易組織會員應以修正DSU條文或另外做成決議之方式,明確釐清此一高度爭議問題,而非繼續任其模糊不清,徒增紛擾。 / The World Trade Organization (WTO) convened the Doha Ministerial Conference and restarted the review of provisions of Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) in November 2001. Inter alia, the issue of ‘amicus curiae’ was very controversial, opposite positions were raised during the DSB Special Session between the developed countries and developing countries. Since there are no words about amicus curiae in DSU and its annex, the Appellate Body concluded in some Appellate Body reports that Article 13 and 17.9 of DSU and 16(1) of Working Procedures for Appellate Review could be constituted as proper legal basis for Panel and the Appellate Body to accept and consider the amicus curiae briefs.
This article starts with interpreting the existing provisions of DSU from the legal perspective, and concludes that the provisions mentioned above could not be regarded as a legal basis to for Panel and the Appellate Body to accept and consider the amicus curiae briefs and therefore, the Appellate Body’s decisions might not be appropriate. This article then suggests from the policy perspective that the WTO release itself from the restriction of traditional international public law in the future, allowing the members of civil society to present their submission in a ‘indirect’ and ‘exceptional’ way by the name of ‘amicus curiae’ in the WTO dispute settlement proceedings. At last, it also recommends that the WTO members revise some provisions of DSU or make a decision to solve this controversial problem manifestly, instead of leaving it ambiguous for a long time.
|
Page generated in 1.263 seconds