国际法院咨询管辖权初探

从常设国际法院到国际法院,其咨询管辖权和“司法性”之间的协调一直是一个难题。要想满意地解决法院当前面临的困境,不必急于扩大有权寻求咨询意见的机构的范围,而必须确保各机构在利用国际法院的咨询管辖权时,更多的是出于解决法律问题的目的而非政治目的。     

Regarding/Disregarding: The Judicial Rhetoric of President Barak and the International Court of Justice's Wall Advisory Opinion

In Mara'abe v. Prime Minister of Israel (September 2005), Israel'sHigh Court addressed the effect which it should give to theInternational Court's Legal consequences of the constructionof a wall in Occupied Palestinian Territory advisory opinion.This had declared the wall illegal but, while affirming thatit shared the International Court of Justice's normative rulings,the High Court reiterated that it thought the wall a lawfulsecurity measure. Rather than dissect the substantive treatmentof the issues involved, this article examines the structureand rhetorical techniques employed by President Barak in hisleading judgment in Mara'abe. He effected a skilful practicaldisregard of the International Court's normative findings throughan elision of argument by relying on the doctrine of res judicata—aconcept that has no relevance whatsoever to advisory opinions.     

国际法院与WTO争端解决机构法律解释比较

一、国际法院的法律解释规则——充分运用各种解释方法 作为联合国的主要司法机关，国际法院于1945年6月根据《联合国宪章》设立，以实现联合国的一项主要宗旨：“以和平方法且依正义及国际法之原则，调整或解决足以破坏和平的国际争端或情势”。国际法院受理的案件有两类，一是依照国际法解决各国向其提交的法律争端，二是就正式认可的联合国机关和专门机构提交的法律问题提供咨询意见。而法律解释则贯穿于这两项工作中。     

Reforming the United Nations: What About the International Court of Justice?

In September 2005, the UN General Assembly adopted an ambitiouslist of reforms of the UN structure, mandate and agenda. Ifimplemented, it is going to be the most radical reform of theUN to date. Yet, the International Court of Justice, the principaljudicial organ of the organization, has been largely ignored.This Report suggests that States should take advantage of thereform-mood at the UN to consider also some essential reformsof the ICJ. These include: Should the Security Council be enlarged,then UN member States should consider expanding the membershipof the ICJ, too; judges should not be allowed to be re-electedand their tenure should be increased to 12 years; age limitsshould be introduced; the number of female candidates to beelected should be increased; intergovernmental organizationsshould have capacity to be a party in contentious proceedings;the new Human Rights Council and certain international courtsand tribunals should be given the power to request advisoryopinions.     

An Exercise in Legal Honesty: Rewriting the Court of Justice and the Bundesverfassungsgericht

This article contains an urgent plea for the re‐establishment of legal honesty in Europe. European law is a victim of European economic crisis. The emergence of the concept of conditionality within national and European jurisprudence, or the judicial imposition of a market discipline upon national budgets, is also a part of a chronicle foretold given in the face of the volatile power of international finance markets. Yet, in rewriting the judgements given by the Court of Justice in the case of Thomas Pringle and by the German Constitutional Court in its matching jurisprudence on the European Stability Mechanism, this article seeks to overcome the destruction of constitutionality within Europe, the foreclosure of a European space for the politics of alternatives and the condemning of individual Europeans to lasting suffering within a perpetual austerity regime.     

民间组织合法性问题的法律学解析——以民间法律援助组织为视角

民间组织之概念和范围应当对应于我国现行立法之规定与行政管理体制。所称谓之合法性问题,是指民间组织的合法律性。民间组织的合法性问题可以从宗旨合法性、活动合法性和组织合法性三个角度加以分析。因法律规范效力等级的差异,对我国民间组织的组织合法性可作不同解读;在法理上,“非法”与“违法”具有不同含义;依现行立法,我国民间组织取得组织合法性存在现实法律障碍,需要探讨解决之策。     

国际核安全合作法律机制研究

核武器扩散、核能利用安全、核恐怖主义问题是当前国际核安全领域急需解决的热点问题,亦是关乎世界和平与安全的重大命题.解决该问题需要各国超越政治制度的差异和意识形态的分歧,实现真诚的谅解和持久的合作,建立国际核安全法律机制.现有的国际核安全合作法律机制是以限制核能军用、促进核能民用的国际法律文件为基础、以国际原子能机构为组织核心辅以多边及双边实践的初具规模的体系,然而该体系仍有诸多不足.完善国际核安全合作法律机制需要:改善核安全机制的法律基础;优化国际原子能机构的效能;建立稳定、合作与互信的国际安全大环境;在集体安全的框架里,加强国际社会的团结合作.     

Dispute Settlement under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Article 119 and the Possible Role of the International Court of Justice

This paper examines the dispute settlement procedure establishedby Article 119 of the Rome Statute of the International CriminalCourt, with particular attention paid to whether that provisioncreates any relationship between the International CriminalCourt and the International Court of Justice. The paper firstdiscusses the jurisdictional reach of Article 119, detailingthe types of disputes addressed in its two subsections and themanner in which such disputes are to be handled. Secondly, itfocuses on the possibility of referral of disputes covered inArticle 119(2) to the International Court of Justice. Althoughthe provision expressly contemplates such a referral, it remainsunclear whether the provision adequately supports the jurisdictionof the International Court of Justice in accordance with theStatute of that Court. The paper goes on to suggest ways inwhich the International Criminal Court Assembly of States Partiescan take steps to improve the likelihood that such referralwould be deemed proper in order to enhance the possible andfinal settlement of disputes.     

Argumentation and Legal Interpretation in the Criminal Decisions of the Polish Supreme Court and the German Federal Court of Justice: A Comparative View

The subject of this study are the argumentation strategies applied by the Polish and German apex courts competent in criminal matters, namely the Supreme Court and the Federal Court of Justice, respectively. The investigation encompasses a total of 200 rulings issued by the criminal panels of these bodies. Particular focus was put on examining which arguments both courts apply to solve interpretation problems, and secondly, how these courts systematize the interpretation process. Methodologically, the examination utilizes, inter alia, the principles of qualitative research, without neglecting the legal dogmatic perspective. A crucial theoretical foundation underlying this study is the distinction between formalistic and substantive legal cultures. The examination reveals that neither the Polish nor the German legal culture is purely formalistic or value-oriented. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court of Poland shows greater affinity for formalistic arguments, whereas the substantive interpretation methods are more widespread in the judicature of the German Federal Court of Justice. In particular, the Polish Court prefers the linguistic interpretation, whereas the German Court favours the purposive approach.

     

“保护的责任”：国际法院相关司法实践研究

“保护的责任”自提出以来,迄今已在政治层面获得了广泛的国际共识。在法律层面特别是可操作性层面,国际法院通过对《灭种罪公约》及《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》的解释和适用,提出了“作为一种义务存在的干涉”这样一种新观念,强调了所有公约当事国所应承担的“预防责任”,间接地回应了《国家对国际不法行为的责任》条款草案第48条,也从法律实践的角度回应了“保护的责任”,特别是其中的“预防责任”。通过这种回应,就使国家基于“保护的责任”而采取的某些干涉行动具有合法性。这种回应,将会深刻地影响到国家的行为模式。面对这种新发展所带来的挑战,中国有必要调整自身外交策略。     

A Modest Notion of Coherence in Legal Reasoning. A Model for the European Court of Justice

Abstract. The aim of this article is to propose a theoretical theme to explain coherence in legal reasoning. The main argument that this paper wants to put forward is that theories of coherence in the legal system should be differentiated from theories of coherence in legal reasoning. These focus on arguments, and on how the given arguments are connected. In particular, the notion of coherence in legal reasoning proposed here is a modest one. The article applies this theme to the case‐law of the European Court of Justice in environmental matters. This provides an example of how to deal with conflicts between incommensurable goods, and how to promote coherence by justifying decisions.

相似文献   

The Caribbean Court of Justice and the Legal Profession: Promoting a Caribbean Jurisprudence*

The author submits that the main purpose in the establishment of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is to promote the development of a Caribbean jurisprudence, based on the Commonwealth Caribbean's common historic, political, economic and cultural experiences and mutual history.

The article examines the role of final appellate courts, noting that judges of such courts must often choose between alternatives which are perfectly capable of being defended as rational, reasonable and consistent with ‘the law’. Factors such as life experiences, socialisation, and backgrounds all play a role in determining the choices that are ultimately made. This is why, the author underscores that ‘it is so important to have a diverse Bench, to have Judges from different backgrounds’.

For judges to come close to steering the right course they must have an understanding of the society that gives rise to the legal disputes. They must be grounded in that society. In this respect, the author argues, it is remarkable that the evolution of certain landmark judgments relating to human rights, particularly capital punishment, have been rendered by British judges, sitting and residing in England.

The article, which draws on a wealth of jurisprudence, proceeds to examine the original jurisdiction of the CCJ and the role of the Bar in defending the integrity of the Court and the justice system as well as in enhancing the quality of judgments.

Finally, it emphasises the need to promote Caribbean jurisprudence and access to local judgments. In this regard, it is lamented that many truly outstanding judgments of Caribbean judges do not receive the recognition they should because, if there is an appeal, they become almost automatically buried beneath the judgments of the higher court.     

Lowering the Bar: Privileged Court Filings as Substitutes for Press Releases in the Court of Public Opinion

In the civil lawsuit against Kobe Bryant for sexual assault, the judge admonished lawyers for engaging in “public relations litigation”—the use of pleadings to attract media attention and try cases in the court of public opinion. This article examines the legal ramifications of such practices and the doctrines of law that encourage some lawyers and litigants to use pleadings as a form of press release. These include the law of republication and the fair report and judicial privileges as well as the power of judges to gag trial participants. The article concludes that courts have adequate tools to control such practices, and lawyers and public relations professionals can responsibly use court documents to communicate with the public, so long as they do not abuse the judicial process.     

冲突与协调:安理会与国际法院的关系新论

《联合国宪章》对安理会与国际法院的职责作出了明确规定,由于两个机构在组成与性质方面的差异,在处理共同管辖的国际争端时,两个机构的解决方式有时存在分歧,而且安理会决议与国际法院裁判对《联合国宪章》条文的解释也存在矛盾。因此,在《联合国宪章》的框架内重新构建安理会与国际法院的关系,有迫切的需要。在产生共同管辖时,国际法院应当适当照顾安理会决议的意见,同时,为制约安理会日益扩大的权力,应当肯定国际法院对安理会决议的司法审查权。     

The Humanization of Consular Law: The Impact of Advisory Opinion No. 16 (1999) of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on International Case-law and Practice

This paper first introduces the process of the humanizationof international law and then analyses one specific aspect ofthis development: the humanization of consular law, with specialreference to the Advisory Opinion No. 16 (1999) of the Inter-AmericanCourt of Human Rights. The paper focuses on three specific points:(1) Consular Law beyond the purely inter-State outlook; (2)the right to information on consular assistance in the frameworkof the guarantees of the due process of law and (3) the humanizationof Consular Law in contemporary international practice.