伤害外国人的国家责任有关问题研究

一国的国民在他国受到损害,需要向东道国寻求损害赔偿,首先要解决东道国的国家责任问题。国家行为对外国人造成损害与私人行为对外国人造成损害,其行为的可归责性是不同的。要判断东道国对外国人的行为是否违反其国际法上的义务,不能单纯依据东道国国内法的规定,还应该从国际法的层面来考察。在私人行为造成损害的情况下,只要东道国没有"运用相当注意",它就要承担损害赔偿责任,但这种责任是有限的。一国的国民在外国遭到损害时,个人(包括法人)利益与国家利益之间的密切关系是国家代为提出外交求偿的基础。     

《保护的责任》对"不干涉内政原则"的影响

2001年12月,"干预与国家主权委员会"发布了《保护的责任》的研究报告.报告提出了这样的中心观点,即一个国家有责任保护本国国民免受可以避免的灾难,具体说就是免遭大规模屠杀、强奸和饥饿.如果这个国家没有能力或者不愿意履行它的这种责任,那么国际社会就应当对此进行干预,从而代替这个国家履行这种保护的责任.这种观点强调了尊重人权的重要性,这本是无可厚非的.但是,这种观点同时也对国际法的基本原则,特别是不干涉内政原则造成了冲击.这引起了包括中国在内的国际社会的注意.     

在国内武装冲突中履行“保护的责任”的规范依据及其适用

“保护的责任”要求主权国家保护其人民免遭灭绝种族、战争罪、族裔清洗和危害人类罪之害,以及在其他各种情形下承担人权保护责任,当一国不能或不愿履行这一责任时,国际社会将有责任介入并采取相应的保护行动。在国内武装冲突中,容易发生对平民的生命财产以及民用设施的侵害,但是,主权国家应当怎样实施军事行动等行为才能符合人权保护责任的要求,对此,“保护的责任”本身并没有提供明确具体的标准和依据。为防止评估确认上的主观随意性,避免“保护的责任”被滥用成为干涉他国内政的工具,国际社会应当以国际人权法与国际人道法为基本依据,并主要通过对人道法规范在具体情势下的解释适用,来评估确认政府军事行动是否符合人权保护责任上的特定要求,以及是否构成不能或不愿履行“保护的责任”的严重情形,从而确定国际社会是否应当介入以及应采取的适当措施与方式。     

Due Diligence Obligations of Conduct: Developing a Responsibility Regime for PMSCs

Abstract

As non-state actors, PMSCs are not embraced by traditional state-dominated doctrines of international law. However, international law has itself failed to keep pace with the evolution of states and state-based actors, to which strong Westphalian notions of sovereignty are no longer applicable. It is argued that these structural inadequacies stand in the way of international regulation of PMSCs, rather than defects in international human rights and humanitarian law per se. By analyzing understandings of legal responsibility, where such structural issues come to the fore, it is argued that, rather than attempting to resolve the essentially ideological dispute about the inherent functions of a state, regulatory regimes should focus on the positive obligations of states and PMSCs, and the interactions between them. Applying the results of this analysis, current and proposed regulatory regimes are evaluated and their shortcomings revealed.     

劳动职业伤害的企业社会责任主体分析——以“毒苹果”为例

苹果公司供应商联建科技使用有毒化学原料正己烷导致百名员工中毒的案例引出一个法律难题——间接职业伤害主体的责任问题。本文从"毒苹果"事件提出的法律问题、职业伤害间接责任主体承担企业社会责任的依据,以及间接责任主体承担企业社会责任的途径等方面进行了论述,提出职业伤害间接主体应承担扩大的企业社会责任;间接责任主体承担企业社会责任应从企业自身监督、利益相关者参与治理及政府监管等方面进行。     

企业社会责任国际标准及其实施——兼论我国劳工权益的保护

经济全球化背景下,国际市场的激烈竞争,使企业社会责任逐渐成为世界各国广泛关注的问题,与此相应,衡量企业社会责任的国际标准也相继问世,并在国际范围内的不同行业广泛推行。虽然企业社会责任国际标准的实施只是企业出于自愿原则的一种选择,其责任承担形式也不具有强制执行力,但其在规范公司责任,保护劳工权益方面有其独到之处。借助于企业社会责任国际标准在国际社会的推广,我们必须建立多层次的约束和监督机制,落实我国相关法律,切实维护劳动者的权益。     

国家的人权保障责任与国家人权机构的建立

在主权国家日渐向国际社会开放其边界的全球视野中,国家的人权保障责任具有了国际与国内两个维度。在人权普适价值的指引下,人类找到了在谅解、宽容、平等的基础上和平对话、共促社会正义实现的新的可能性。建立促进和保护人权的国家机构是将这种可能性向现实性推进的重要措施之一。在中国建立国家人权保护机构是我国应履行的大国责任,此机构的建立有利于我国履行人权保障责任、促进人权事业的发展。     

董事多元化与公司社会责任

当今各国公司制度中,已形成董事多元化的格局。董事多元化是弥补公司社会责任理论欠缺可操作性的一项积极的举措,它反映了“公司强行法理论”向“公司合同理论”的转变。在公司合同理论的基础上,辅之以制度经济学理论,对与公司存有利害关系的利益集团代表做具体的分析,看是否应该和如何将其引入董事会,从而使公司的社会责任落到实处。     

Advancing Direct Corporate Accountability in International Human Rights Law: The Role of State-Owned Enterprises

Resorting to the immensely state-centric international legal system to regulate corporate human rights abuses is often viewed as inadequate. Among many proposals aiming at filling the international regulatory gaps, imposing international human rights obligations directly on corporations is a bold one, which, due to profound doctrinal and practical challenges, is yet to be materialized. However, state-owned enterprises (SOEs), given their prima facie “state–business nexus” that blurs the traditional public–private divide, might provide a renewed opportunity to push forward the “direct international corporate accountability” campaign. This study investigates whether SOEs represent a golden chance for direct corporate accountability in the international legal regime. This study provides a legal analysis supported by case law, and by comparative and empirical research when appropriate. After providing a definitional account of SOEs, it examines the legal status of SOEs under international law. Then, in the reverse direction, it proceeds to explore if the state–business nexus of SOEs as non-state actors could render the argument toward direct international corporation accountability more convincing. Major findings reveal that SOEs, to a limited extent, represent a renewed opportunity to rethink direct corporate accountability under international law.     

On the Use of Criminal Law Notions in Determining State Responsibility for Genocide

On the face of it the 1948 Convention on Genocide appears tobe a treaty that on the one hand obliges contracting statesto criminalize and punish genocide in their domestic legal systemsand, on the other, arranges for interstate judicial cooperationfor the repression of genocide. The International Court of Justice(ICJ), in the Bosnia v. Serbia judgment, has instead held thatthe Convention, in addition to providing for the criminal liabilityof individuals, also imposes on contracting states as internationalsubjects a set of obligations (to refrain from engaging in genocide,to prevent and punish the crime, and also to refrain for allthose categories of conduct enumerated in Article III: conspiracy,incitement, attempt, complicity). This approach raises two questions:(i) is it warranted so to broaden states' responsibility? (ii)when applying such Article III categories to state responsibility,should an international court such as the ICJ that pronounceson interstate disputes rely upon criminal law categories toestablish whether a state incurs responsibility for conspiracy,complicity, and so on? Or should it instead forge autonomouslegal categories better suited to state responsibility? Theauthor sets forth doubts about whether it is appropriate totranspose criminal law categories to the corpus of internationallaw of state responsibility. In particular, his misgivings relateto the category of ‘state complicity in genocide’as set out by the Court: once the Court decided to transplantthis criminal law category to state responsibility, arguablyit should have relied upon the rigorous concept of complicity,as derived by international criminal courts from case law andthe relevant practice of states, rather than apply a notionthat finds no basis in international criminal law, in comparativecriminal law or in state practice.     

国际投资仲裁机构对涉及人权问题的投资纠纷的审理

国际投资仲裁的当事人在仲裁中提出人权方面诉求的情况在最近十几年里缓慢地增加了,仲裁庭只有在仲裁管辖条款能够覆盖人权问题,并且当事人所选择的适用法能够为人权问题的解决提供指引的情况下,才能就与投资有关的人权纠纷做出裁决。现有的国际投资仲裁机构自身存在很多缺陷,不适宜作为审理与投资有关的人权问题的理想场所。我国应该支持与投资有关的人权问题主要通过东道国的司法途径进行救济。     

国际航空犯罪法人刑事责任及其国内立法转化研究

2010年《北京公约》和《北京议定书》首次规定了国际航空犯罪法人责任,法人责任以法人的高级管理人员代表法人实施劫持航空器等国际航空犯罪为要件,法人为此承担刑事、民事或行政责任。公约对法人犯罪及其责任的立法需要转化为国内法才能适用。世界各国国内法对法人犯罪及其责任的态度差别较大,英国、加拿大、法国等国刑法规定有航空犯罪的法人刑事责任,德国国内法规定有航空犯罪的法人行政责任,意大利刑法规定有航空犯罪的法人民事责任,我国仅在个别航空犯罪中规定有法人犯罪及其刑事责任。我国法人犯罪及其刑事责任的立法和理论具有较强的包容性,可在我国刑法中取消法人犯罪法定化限制,全面规定包括航空犯罪在内的法人犯罪及其刑事责任。     

空间碎片造成空间环境污染的国际责任

空间碎片是人类发射空间实体在外空留下的太空垃圾,其造成空间环境污染是一特殊种类的环境污染问题.空间实体发射国在外空留下空间碎片违背了其应承担的国际法义务,在外空的空间碎片无法辨认其归属的情况下,清扫外空的空间碎片和预防产生新的空间碎片应该是国际社会所有的空间实体发射国的共同国际责任.     

Varieties of Responsibility and Organizational Crime

Data from interviews at the head offices of Japanese companies are used to illustrate the highly varied ways in which large organizations hold individuals and subunits responsible for corporate wrongdoing. Noblesse oblige, captain of the ship responsibility, nominated accountability and fault-based responsibility are identified as important types of individual accountability all of which can be unjust and ineffective when decisionmaking is more or less collective. In the face of immense diversity in varieties of responsibility for organizational crime, different strategies for bringing law and organizational culture into alignment are tentatively evaluated.     

Bad Torture -- Good Torture?: What International Criminal Lawyers May Learn from the Recent Trial of Police Officers in Germany

The author discusses whether a state agent who applies tortureagainst a suspect in order to prevent the death of one or moreinnocent persons can successfully plead a ground for excludinghis or her criminal responsibility under national (in particular,German) law as well as international law. The author examinesthe judgment of a German court, which recently found two policeofficers guilty of threatening to use violence against a suspectedkidnapper, but refrained from punishing them on account of theirmotivation to save the life of the hostage. The author maintainsthat the court's ‘guilty, but not to be punished’verdict could provide guidance for the resolution of comparablecases under international criminal law. He submits that thetension between the absolute ban on torture under internationalhuman rights law and the availability of defences even to crimesof torture under international criminal law should be resolvedthrough a human rights-oriented interpretation of the latter.The author concludes that criminal responsibility for tortureunder international criminal law cannot be excluded by the factthat the torturer acts to save innocent life; however, his orher altruistic motivation may be taken into account in determiningthe sentence.     

A Case Against Crippling Compensation in International Law of State Responsibility

The obligation of States to provide full reparation for internationally wrongful acts, including by full compensation, is one of the bedrock principles of international law. The article challenges this principle for cases where compensation is crippling for the responsible State or its peoples, which can occur when State responsibility is implemented before international courts and tribunals. The International Law Commission's decision not to qualify full reparation for instances of crippling compensation in its influential Articles on State responsibility was an unpersuasive legal position to adopt in 2001, and its rationale has aged badly. However, the failure by States and other actors to challenge it in the following two decades signified its endorsement by the international legal process. Nevertheless, the case against the permissibility of crippling compensation in modern international law can still be made, both on a case-by-case basis and at the level of customary secondary rules of State responsibility.     

企业社会责任视域下的劳动者工作环境权保护

企业社会责任是劳动权实现的保障与推动力.本文认为,传统的企业雇员责任仅指企业的经济责任和法律责任,现代企业雇员责任还应包含更高层次的道德要求.企业社会责任视域下的雇员责任,应当以工作环境权的保护为核心,通过法律建立起工作环境权的独立体系,完善劳动者工作环境权制度,落实和保障劳动者享有的实体性和程序性权利,鼓励职工参与企业的经营决策,从而真正地改善劳动环境,落实企业社会责任.     

The role of prosecutors in promoting and strengthening the rule of law

At the institutional core of governance systems based on the rule of law is not only a strong independent judiciary but also an effective prosecution service committed to upholding the rule of law and human rights in the administration of justice. There are many aspects in the responsibility of prosecutors to promote and strengthen the rule of law, including their duty to combat impunity and ensure the lawfulness of State actions. This paper reviews some of the challenges that prosecutors can anticipate in performing their responsibility to uphold the rule of law. It also touches upon some of the issues that have emerged in recent years in relation to the performance of that important function in the context of emergency situations (e.g. counter-terrorist activities), within the global regime of international cooperation in criminal matters and in the context of post-conflict reconstruction and peace-building initiatives.     

The impact of international human rights norms—a “law undergoing evolution”

Abstract

In this paper, the author outlines the history of, and reasons for, the growing impact of international human rights jurisprudence upon the work of judges in New Zealand, Australia, England and elsewhere in the Commonwealth of Nations. Formerly, international and domestic law were virtually entirely separate. But now, there is increasing legal authority to support the use of international human rights jurisprudence in domestic judicial decision‐making. It can be done in the application of constitutional or statutory provisions reflecting universal principles stated in international treaties. But, according to the Bangalore Principles, it can also be done where there is a gap in the common law or where a local statute is ambiguous. The judge may then fill the gap or resolve the ambiguity by reference to international human rights jurisprudence which will ensure that domestic law conforms, as far as possible, to such principles.

In its decision in Tavita, the New Zealand Court of Appeal declared this to be “a law … undergoing evolution”. The author outlines some of the impediments and problems for the evolution. But he also collects the reasons why it is a natural and inevitable phase of the common law in the current age. He suggests that judges should be aware of the developments. In appropriate cases, they should inform their decisions with relevant international human rights jurisprudence. That will at least ensure that they develop domestic human rights law in a principled way, consistently with international law, and not in an idiosyncratic fashion “discovering” new fundamental rights which may otherwise be criticised as mere judicial invention.     

Chinese Practice in Public International Law: 2006 (I)

This part of the Survey covers materials reflecting Chinesepractice in 2006 relating to: I. Subjects under discussion atthe ILC (Shared natural resources; responsibility of internationalorganizations; reservation to treaties; unilateral acts of states;effects of armed conflicts on treaties; obligation to extraditionor prosecution; fragmentation of international law); II. Internationalhuman rights law (general commitment on human rights; collectivehuman rights, including right of self-determination, right todevelopment; civil and political rights, including freedom ofreligion, freedom of expression, issue of organ transplants;economic, social and cultural rights, including right to food,right to health; human rights of aliens, including freedom ofpress of foreign correspondents, rights of refugees; human rightsof special groups, including rights of ethnic minorities, rightsof indigenous peoples, rights of women, rights of children,rights of immigrants, rights of persons with disabilities, rightsof older persons; implementation of international human rightslaw, including the establishment of UN Human Rights Council,review of mandates and mechanisms of UN Human Rights Council,the implementation of human rights instruments, human rightsdialogue and corporation; human rights situation in foreigncountries, including Myanmar, Middle East; human rights andinternational trade); III. International humanitarian law.