WTO反倾销协议法律适用的困惑——反倾销协议第17．6（ii）条探微

反倾销争端案件向来是WTO争端解决机制面对的主要挑战之一.世界贸易组织反倾销协议第17.6(ii)条规定了争端解决小组处理反倾销争端案件法律适用的"审查基准",允许当事方对WTO反倾销协议的义务在可被允许的范围内进行解释.但是这样规定似乎存在着逻辑上的矛盾,以至于将大大限制争端解决小组处理争端案件法律争点的能力.     

试论WTO争端解决机构的法律解释权

根据WTO的规定,部长会议和总理事会拥有对WTO协定和多边贸易协议进行解释的专有权力;而专家组与上诉机构也可以在解决具体争端过程对WTO涵盖协议进行解释。作为争端解决报告的一部分,专家组与上诉机构的法律解释对争端当事方具有约束力。但由于WTO不存在严格的"遵循先例"原则,因此争端解决机构在特定案件中作出的法律解释在法律上也不具有先例效力;然而却具有事实上的先例效果。由于争端解决报告在事实上的先例效力,引发了关于争端解决机构"造法"的问题,有必要采取措施防止争端解决机构超越权限进行法律解释。     

替代性纠纷解决程序之研究

替代性纠纷解决程序(ADR)是目前西方国家热门的民商事争议解决方法,我国当前经济社会的发展也到了全面兴起ADR的时候,从分析国外ADR兴起的背景和已经使用的方式入手,论述了我国发展和完善ADR的必要性和可行性,并从国外的经验出发指出了完善有中国特色的ADR的相关建议。     

论民间法与纠纷解决

一切规范的存在,都是为给纠纷解决预备一套方案,民间法也不例外。文明时代的纠纷解决方式,一般分为三种：一种是司法诉讼方式,其规范运用的特点是以法律为主,以民间法为辅,即使在司法调解中,也保持这一特点。另一种是诉讼替代性纠纷解决方案,如调解、仲裁等,其规范运用的特点是在法律、民间法的选择上,难分彼此,说不上谁主谁辅,在这种纠纷处理中,当事人本身具有规范适用的选择权和权利处分的选择权,这就使规范的运用要灵活得多,更多时当事人之间还通过主持人自己协商处理规范——制定纠纷解决协议。第三种是私力救济,它可以分为启动形式合法的私力救济和启动形式非法的私力救济。在私力救济中,其规范运用反倒是以民间法为主,国家法最多只为辅助。如上情形的出现,乃是因为司法的目的是为了判断是非,而诉讼替代性纠纷解决方案以及私力救济解决纠纷的目的,主要是为了平息矛盾。     

Alternative dispute resolution and mediation of complaints against police in Australia and New Zealand

ABSTRACT

This study assessed the role of alternative dispute resolution options in the complaints management systems of the eight policing jurisdictions in Australia and the single jurisdiction of New Zealand. The available literature shows that a large proportion of complainants would like to participate in mediation, and that both complainants and police who experience mediation report much higher rates of satisfaction than those experiencing traditional adversarial investigative and adjudicative processes. Experiences with informal dispute resolution or ‘conciliation’ options are more mixed, and they are susceptible to tokenism and misuse as a convenient administrative means of disposing of complaints. Despite this situation, the data obtained from police and oversight agency sources in this study showed that options were limited to informal resolution conducted by senior officers, with an ostensible focus on behavioral improvement but with no meaningful publicly available data on outcomes. The paper concludes by advocating for a best practice complaints management system that includes mediation within a consultative framework focused on behavioral improvement.     

WTO争端解决程序中的证据问题

WTO争端解决程序中举证责任和证据的可接受性问题具有重要的实践意义。除了各国都普遍接受的“谁主张谁举证”的原则之外,文章还分析了下列情况下的举证责任分配问题:被申诉方援引例外条款时、争端涉及具体协定时、争端双方关于执行报告的期限有争议,以及双方就败诉方的执行是否符合专家组和上诉机构报告的争议。关于证据的可接受性问题,提交证据的主体、证据的种类和提出时间问题是最关键的方面。     

Wheat from chaff: Third‐party monitoring and FEC enforcement actions

Regulatory theory suggests that providing agencies with multiple sanctioning options allows them to dispose promptly of less serious matters and thereby conserve resources to pursue serious offenders. However, agencies dependent on third‐party monitoring may have their enforcement agendas skewed toward more trivial violations. We consider these competing expectations by analyzing enforcement actions at the US Federal Election Commission (FEC) from 1999 to 2004 . The FEC – an agency heavily dependent on third‐party monitoring – expanded its enforcement options in 2000 by creating two new programs to pursue low‐level offenders, while leaving its monitoring strategy unchanged. We hypothesized that more sanctioning options would allow the FEC to allocate its resources more efficiently, and thus deal more effectively with the skew created by third‐party monitoring. We found instead that although the FEC disposed more promptly of low‐level infractions, it was no more effective at focusing on serious violations. Our results suggest that for many agencies, expanding enforcement options without addressing monitoring has limited ability to resolve enforcement problems.     

建立健全农村土地承包纠纷仲裁解决机制的思考

以家庭承包经营为基础、统分结合的双层经营体制是我国农村的基本经营制度。近年来,土地承包经营纠纷呈多发趋势,已经成为影响农村和谐稳定的因素之一。《仲裁法》规定,农村集体经济组织内部农业承包合同纠纷的仲裁另行规定;《农村土地承包法》规定,因土地承包经营发生纠纷的,当事人可以向农村土地承包仲裁机构申请仲裁。但是,由于《仲裁法》、《农村土地承包法》的规定都比较原则,各地在农村土地承包经营纠纷仲裁工作中存在机构设置不统一、工作程序不规范、裁决执行不及时等问题,以至于造成许多土地承包纠纷得不到合理及时的解决。面对日益复杂的土地纠纷,我国目前仍没有制定出一部有关农村土地承包合同仲裁的单项法律,使大量的农业承包纠纷不得不采取诉讼程序,增加了纠纷的解决难度。因此,为了切实维护农民的土地承包合法权益,以低成本、高效率解决农村土地承包纠纷,促进农村社会的和谐与稳定,建立和健全农村土地承包纠纷仲裁解决机制,就显得十分迫切和必要。     

ADR适用于解决行政纠纷的合宪性论证

ADR应用于行政纠纷解决领域,不但关涉公共资源配置和公民利用司法的权利问题,更涉及行政权、司法权和立法权之间的分权关系以及法治原则等重要宪法原则,必然会引发关于合宪性的关注与审视。ADR合宪性命题的证成是推广应用ADR的必经之路。在法律移植层面上,作为一种在不同的法律秩序中完成同一功能的规则,美国行政纠纷解决中ADR合宪性之确立,为学界探究我国多元化行政纠纷解决机制提供了一种比较与借鉴的视角。