企业社会责任和国际法

<正>绪论这篇文章设法回答以下问题:企业社会责任(CSR)是国际公法的一项特殊法律规范吗?如果答案是肯定的,那么它可以在何种程度上约束一个国家和企业?广泛认为,私人企业承担社会责任是一种自愿行为,不受法律的约束,比如企业社会责任行为守则;经济合作与发展组织的跨国企业指南也是没有法律约束力的国际公约。并且企业社会责任的宗旨和法律的宗旨也是不同的。但是,企业社会责任在法律上的影响和效力对私人企业有相当大的重要性。如     

INCORPORATION OF UNCITRAL MODEL LAW ON INTERNATIONAL

Globalization has enabled China to rationalize and institutionalize its economic and political system. China has been quite successful in accommodating globalization in its legal reform. As China becomes one of the important trade players in the international market, the commercial disputes between Chinese companies and foreign trade-partners to be resolved through the arbitration are arising substantially. To an extent, China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) has sped up its legal reform in the past decades. However, there are some deficiencies with respect to the mechanism and legislation of China’s arbitration law that arguably is not responsive to the norms of the United Nations Commission on International Trade (UNCITRAL) Model Law (1985) and its Amendment (2006). This paper provides an overview of arbitration in China from the legislative and practical perspectives, covering the arbitration’s evolution history and problems before and after 1994. The paper focuses on some important issues in China’s Arbitration Law (“CAL”), evaluating its legislative defects which are inconsistent with the Model Law and its Amendment, clarifying how the Model Law was incorporated into China’s CAL. Some legislative amendments are recommended for CAL’s modernization and its practices, to align it with international arbitration norms in the future.     

AN OVERVIEW OF CHINESE LAW ON FOOD SAFETY

This article reviews the evolution of Chinese law on food safety and the concerned system defined by the Food Safety Law (2009) and other related laws. Although being improved by this law, in comparison with the Food Hygiene Law (1995), food safety still remains severe today. In analysing the food safety problems in China, it is found that the issues, such as tension between security and safety, problems in agricultural products, difficulties in administration and supervision etc., cannot be solved by this law in the near future.     

THE EVOLUTION AND THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS OF CHINESE CONFLICTS LAW FOR TORTS

The legislation of choice-of-law rules for torts has a long history in China. General Principles of the Civil Law of the People＇s Republic of China of 1986 （GPCL）, Maritime Act of the People＇s Republic of China of 1992 （Maritime Act） and Act of the People＇s Republic of China on Civil Aviation of 1995 （Civil Aviation Act）provide respectively the choice-of-law rules for general tort, maritime tort and limitation of liability for maritime claims as well as tort arising out of civil aircraft. The Act of the People＇s Republic of China on the Application of Laws in Foreign-Related Civil Relations of 2010 （PIL-Act） not only brings developments and changes to conflict rules for tort in general, but also provide choice-of-law rules for product liability, infringement of the right of personality via the internet and liability arising from an infringement of intellectual property rights, which marks that Chinese conflicts law has entered into a new developmental stage and taken on several new trends： （1） Chinese conflicts law system for torts has been basically set up; （2） Chinese choice-of-law rules for torts are becoming more and more diversified,＂ （3） the prineiple of party autonomy has been fully introduced to tort liability; and （4） judicial interpretations issued or to be issued by the Supreme People＇s Court will still play an important role in judicial practice.     

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE RULE OF LAW： UNIVERSALITY,SPECIALTY AND ITS EVALUATION

On May 24, 2014, Renmin University Law school hosted an international symposium on “The Rule of Law Assessment： Universality and Particularity.” The speakers and participants came from Mainland and foreign universities, Chinese judicial divisions and govemment branches and the focus of discussions was the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index 2014 and particularly the assessment of the rule of law in moderu China. It was a busy and detailed programme and the following report deals with some of the highlights.     

STRIKING CONSISTENCY AND PREDICTABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

The fragmentation of international investment law into bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and other international investment agreements (IIAs) made it impossible as a system of law. In addition, the potential for inconsistent and conflicting decisions (especially against developing countries) in investment treaty arbitrations are abundant. The causes of this situation are two-fold and concern both substantive law and procedural law. Concerning the substance, the fragmentation of sources of international investment law plays a significant role in disaggregating coherence. Due to the large number of BITs, a state measure might be assessed differently under the two existing investment treaties, with each treaty specifying different standards of investment protection, even varying with the nationality of the investor affected. Inconsistent decisions can also result from the possibility of having multiple proceedings, in the same or different form, relating to an identical set of facts that can arise from independent claims. For developing countries, who face investment law disputes more frequently than developed countries, an ideal solution would be a global investment treaty or a plurilateral investment agreement under the World Trade Organization (WTO) and use its dispute settlement system to resolve investment disputes.     

法律与文学:可能性及其限度

<正>找那不可能的东西,绝望中练一身技艺。——燕卜荪:《最后的痛苦》一、引论法律与文学(Law and Literature)是发源于美国法学院的一场学术运动,并演变成为一个法学流派或者领域。法律是一门历史悠久的学科,然而自1960年代以来,其学科自主性在美国逐渐走向衰落。法律与经济学、社会学、政治学、女权主义、种族理论等交叉学科研究("Law-and")蓬勃兴起,而且硕果累累。四十多年来,法律交叉学科研究中声望最高、影响最大的莫过于如今     

REFLECTIONS ON EU INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW: AN INTROSPECTIVE VIEW

This article presents three main arguments: First, shared competence exists between the national and supranational levels within the European Union (EU) because EU Member States do not trust the European Commission in the external relations law of the EU. Second, the EU will have greater bargaining power in international negotiations if it speaks in a single voice. Within the EU-27, we have compatible values, overlapping interests, shared goals, as well as economic, social and political ties. Therefore, there is a presumption of collective action in the EU’s external relations. However, EU Member States disagree on many issues before they start negotiations, while trying to define a mission together as partners of the European project. Third, Member States confer specific negotiating powers on the EU only when it is in their own national interest to have a common European position on international negotiations.