頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論「法庭之友」在WTO爭端解決程序下之實踐與制度建構=A Study on the Practice and the Constructed System of "Amicus Curiae" within the Dispute Settlement Procedure of WTO |
---|---|
作 者 | 楊志凱; | 書刊名 | 東吳法研論集 |
卷 期 | 2 民95.04 |
頁 次 | 頁69-133 |
分類號 | 558.2 |
關鍵詞 | 世界貿易組織; 爭端解決瞭解書; 法庭之友; 非政府間組織; 民間團體; 小組; 上訴機構; 爭端解決機構; World trade organization; WTO; Dispute settlement understanding; DSU; Amicus curiae; Non-governmental organization; NGO; Civil society; Panel; Appellate body; Dispute settlement body; DSB; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文將首先介紹「法庭之友」之概念與性質,其後分析非政府間組織、民間團體及個人專案以「法庭之友」身分參與WTO爭端解決程序之情形。「法庭之友」意見書迄今已被數個WTO小組與上訴機構接受。可是,仍有許多WTO會員繼續對前述實踐提出反對,並且若干會員進一步要求更明確之標準,以引導那些意見書之提出,因此。本文將討論在WTO爭端解決機制下「法庭之友」意見書所代表的意涵,並試圖徹底檢視所有小組及上訴機構之報告,以發覺諸多「法庭之友」相關爭議。在WTO爭端解決機制下「法庭之友」意見書之採納基本上係涉及制度之透明度及民主化議題,其中便隱含了高度之法治意義。接著,本文將簡述WTO爭端解決機構於處理前述爭議所採用之方法及其不同抉擇,並且強調其中所代表的內涵,及政策性論點與法律性論點之區別。若WTO部長會議未採取包裹式交易,那麼WTO決策機構所採取之一切行動將很難獲致成功。最後,本文相信在WTO爭端解決程序下仍舊需要建立一套調和性規則,並適用一致性實踐,以考慮「法庭之友」意見書,但不得影響WTO爭端解決機制之效率與程序正義。承認是國際法之基礎,並且屬於一項許久之前就已存在的制度。 |
英文摘要 | This article will initially make an introduction of the concept and nature of amicus curiae, and then analyzes the participation of the non-governmental organizations, Civil Society and individuals as amicus curiae within the WTO dispute settlement procedure. The amicus curiae briefs hitherto have been accepted by several WTO panels and the Appellate Bodies. However, many WTO members continuingly put forward the objections to this practice, and some members moved ahead to require more explicit criteria that guides the briefs offered. Therefore, this article will discuss the implications of amicus curiae briefs within the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, and try to througly look into the reports of the panel and the Appellate Body so as to find out all relevant issues of the amicus curiae. The admissibility of amicus curiae briefs within the WTO dispute settlement mechanism essentially concerns the questions of transparency and democratization of this mechanism, and these questions entail a high degree of legal significance. Moreover, this article will outline the different options for handling these questions by the WTO dispute settlement body, emphasize the complication thereof and draw a distinction between policy arguments and legal arguments. It would be less likely that actions taken by the decision making bodies of the WTO will succeed in it without a package deal at a ministerial conference. Finally, this article conceives that it would be still necessary to establish a consistent rule or to apply a uniform practice for the consideration of amicus curiae briefs in the WTO dispute settlement procedures, and however the efficiency and the procedural justice of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism should never be affected. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。