查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 論國際環境法架構下之國家主權意涵
- Issues on Sovereignty after Taiwan Joins the WTO
- 海洋生物多樣性與國際法
- 從國際組織法觀點分析聯大第二七五八號決議
- 國家領空主權行使與防空識別區
- 論公共衛生議題在國際法之發展與趨勢
- Legal Implications of Obligations Erga Omnes and the Relevance on Enforcing Marine Endangered Species Protection under the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention
- 從1986年尼加拉瓜案探討國際法上應對武裝衝突之對策
- 淺析國家主權豁免的發展趨勢
- 環境影響評估作為國際法上的義務:國際法院判決評析
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論國際環境法架構下之國家主權意涵=The Legal Interpretations of State Sovereignty Under the Structure of International Environmental Law |
---|---|
作 者 | 蔡慧君; | 書刊名 | 臺北大學法學論叢 |
卷 期 | 55 2004.12[民93.12] |
頁 次 | 頁1-54 |
分類號 | 571.16 |
關鍵詞 | 國際環境法; 國家主權; 國際法; International environmental law; State sovereignty; International law; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 國家主權之意涵,隨著時代與國際關係變動而更形豐富。國家主權理論亦不斷推陳出新。傳統的絕對主權、限制性主權到晚近剩餘主權之論述,反映出國際法演進之歷程、國際關係之需求與全球化趨勢。主權概念之所以必須變化,乃在於絕對主權權能之排他特性,於各國國際往來中,一方面提供各國不受干涉而享有最高的、獨立的、全面的國內領域與資源之管轄權限;另一方面,絕對主權之行使往往造成國與國之間合作的壁壘,影響人類共同利益之達成。 即使如此,主權國家的確為國際往來之基礎,亦是國際社會規範之主體,其存在之必要性已然確立。因之二十世紀以降,主權絕對性與其調和或限制之攻防戰,只能進退於其正當性與合法性之論辯。從國際法之觀點而言,其正當性來自全球集體的利益,而其合法性基礎係各國之同意與國際實踐之確認。其中,又以國家同意為核心要件。而國家之所以同意,往往基於國家利益之目的考量。職是之故,主權之旗號為執政者或為國家利益而高高昇起,卻因距離太遙遠而只見執旗者不見旗上之圖騰。 因此為了辨識現代主權之面目,本文以國際環境法為研究客體,試圖從國際實踐及國際法學說理論中,呈現主權之意涵。因為國際環境法為國際法新興之分支;而國際環境法中有關人類生態與環境保護之國際合作,牽涉公共財之管理、領土主權行使之限制、自然資源永久主權之讓渡等等問題,往往基於全球利益,限制各國國內主權之行使。本文以此出發,試圖從歷史上之主權論述與國際環境法發展軌跡中,分析主權概念之演變,提出新成型之國家主權特性。 本文包含以下幾個部分。第一部份針對主權論辯中,主要的論點及歷史發展提出說明。第二部分則分析國際環境法發展中主權概念之變化,最後提出國際環境法對於主權行使之限制與國家主權之新意涵。 |
英文摘要 | According to the principle of sovereignty laid down in the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance With the Charter of the United Nations of 1970, every nation has the right to exercise its sovereignty and such a right shall be respected by all other nations on an equal basis. Based on this rationale, sovereignty has been regarded as the foundation of national development and international communications. As an academic theory originated from the Mid Ages, sovereignty was once used as the sword to defy the tyranny, the empire and the popery. As of today, sovereignty is still a major topic in international law, even though the contents of which has been eventually evolved due to the development of political, social and economic environment of the international society. From absolute sovereignty to limited sovereignty, and to residual sovereignty, each theory will only focus on a specific aspect of sovereignty to explore the nature and function thereof. The incompatibi1ity of absolute sovereignty not only provides an ultimate, independent, and universal jurisdiction over the territory of a nation and the resources thereof without interference from others, but also constitutes the barrier among the nations, which may cause the obstacle to the promotion of common welfare for all humans. Due to the development of environmental ideology and international environmental laws in recent years, the definition of sovereignty has been substantially changed. From stressing the independent and ultimate characteristics to advocating the international cooperation and responsibility, the evolvement of the definition of sovereignty reflects the past, the present and the future of globalization. Nevertheless, this paper is not to redefine the traditional idea of sovereignty (although the research agenda revealed such an intent). The purpose of this paper, however, is to explore the definition of sovereignty under the structure of international environmental law. In other words, the picture of sovereignty as applied to the international environmental law will be precisely demonstrated in this paper. This paper, therefore, will present the following four parts. The first part is to discuss the traditional concepts of state sovereignty, including its content, origins and relevant international law principles, also in the first part, this paper intend to present the challenges from various fields against the traditional concepts of sovereignty. The challenges from international realities, the rules of law in international law and the international cooperation to solve global environmental problems will be also explored as well. The second part will lead to the pathway of international environmental law’s development based on a review and analysis of landmark international environmental instruments. Following the above analysis, the third part will provide a legal interpretation of state sovereignty from the sources of international environmental law. The paper will then conclude. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。