中国拥有钓鱼岛主权的证据链构造

传统上,对于钓鱼岛主权归属问题,我国学界通常以历史证据和地图证据主张作为论证的逻辑起点,缺乏结合证据规则进行的论证。在论证钓鱼岛主权归属问题时,应当对证据主张的逻辑与证据链构造逻辑予以区分,并可借鉴国际法院适用的证据分量大小认定规则,确立“历史证据/相关条约”作为论证钓鱼岛归属中国的逻辑进路,辅之以其他层级关键证据,赋予其决定性分量,以构造出拥有钓鱼岛主权层级结构分明、环环相扣的完整证据链,历史证据与《开罗宣言》《波茨坦公告》等国际条约共同确证了钓鱼岛主权回归中国,构筑证明钓鱼岛主权属中国所有的总证据链的第一子证据链;中国对钓鱼岛进行有效管辖及其相关证据构成第二子证据链;中国、日本和第三方证明钓鱼岛主权归属中国的地图等证据,构成第三子证据链。

The Establishment of a Chain of Evidences to Prove China’s Sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands

analysis on basis of the evidence rules.When conducting argumentation on the issue of sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands,China should distinguish between the logic of what the evidence can prove and the logic of establishing the evidence chain,draw lessons from the rules on determining the weight of evidence adopted by the International Court of Justice,establish the logic approach of using"historical evidences/relevant treaties"to prove China's sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands,gain support from key evidences at other levels,give"historical evidences/relevant treaties"decisive weight,thus establishing a distinct-hierarchy,interlocked and complete chain of evidences on the sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands.Namely,historical evidences and international treaties such as Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation jointly prove that the sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands has been returned to China,which constitutes the first sub-chain of evidences;effective jurisdiction over Diaoyu Islands by China and its relevant evidences constitute the second sub-chain of evidences;maps and other evidences from China,Japan and other parties proving China's sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands constitute the third sub-chain of evidences.