[1]周忠学,周艳云.GATT1994安全例外条款适用的内在限制—以中美DS544案为例[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2021,22(04):17-29.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2021.01.003]
　Zhou Zhongxue,Zhou Yanyun.The Inherent Limitations on the Application of the Security Exception Clause in GATT1994: Taking the US DS544 Case as an Example[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2021,22(04):17-29.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2021.01.003]
点击复制

GATT1994安全例外条款适用的内在限制—以中美DS544案为例()
分享到：

常州大学学报(社会科学版)[ISSN:2095-042X/CN:32-1821/C]

卷:
第22卷
期数:
2021年04期
页码:
17-29
栏目:
政治·法学研究
出版日期:
2021-08-25

文章信息/Info

Title:
The Inherent Limitations on the Application of the Security Exception Clause in GATT1994: Taking the US DS544 Case as an Example
作者:
周忠学; 周艳云
Author(s):
Zhou Zhongxue; Zhou Yanyun
关键词:
安全例外条款;  适用限制;  美国“232措施”
Keywords:
Security Exception Clause;  limitations on application;  the US 232 Measures
分类号:
DF96
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2021.01.003
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
在中国诉美国钢铝产品特定措施案(DS544)中,美国适用GATT1994第二十一条安全例外条款是否合法和正当的问题成为双方争议的焦点。WTO成员方适用GATT1994安全例外条款是否符合条款内含的应然限制是判别此适用行为是否合法和正当的关键。各成员方对GATT1994安全例外条款的限制性适用基准尚存分歧与争议,GATT1994安全例外条款适用的应然限制的廓清成为WTO争端解决机构和国际经济法学界亟待解决的问题。
Abstract:
In the specific measures of steel and aluminum products case(DS544), China v. United States, the issue of whether the application of the Security Exception Clause by the United States is legitimate and justified has become the focus of the dispute between the two sides. Whether the application of the Security Exception Clause in GATT1994 by WTO member states conforms to the limitations contained in the clause is the key to judging whether the application is legitimate and justified. There are still differences and disputes among member states on the standard of restrictive application of the Security Exception Clause in GATT1994. The clarification of the limitations on the application of the Security Exception Clause in GATT1994 has become an urgent issue to be solved by the WTO dispute settlement body and the international economic jurisprudential circle.

参考文献/References:

[1]黄志瑾.论国家安全审查措施在WTO中的可诉性[J].河北法学,2013,31(12):121-128.
[2]EMMERSON A. Conceptualizing security exceptions: legal doctrine or political excuse?[J]. Journal of international economic law,2008,11(1):135-154.
[3]MATHIS J H. The world trade organization: legal, economic and political analysis[J]. Management international review,2006,6(2):149-154.
[4]丁伟,朱榄叶.当代国际法学理论与实践研究文集:国际经济法卷[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2002:128-256.
[5]MAVROIDIS P P C. The WTO legal system: sources of law[J].The American journal of international law,1998,92(3):398-413.
[6]COTTIER T,DELIMATSIS P. Article xivbis gats: security exceptions [J]. WTO-trade in services, 2008,12(1):329-348.
[7]AKANDE D,LIEFLAENDER T. Clarifying necessity, imminence, and proportionality in the law of self-defense[J]. The American journal of international law,2013,107(3):563-570.
[8]周艳云.中美贸易摩擦中反制的正当性及其实施基准[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2020,21(2):11-21.
[9]BOREK J, AUST A. Modern treaty law and practice[J]. The American journal of international law, 2001,95(2):468.
[10]BORRMANN A,KOOPMANN G.The WTO compatibility of the economic partnership agreements between the EU and the ACP countries[J].Intereconomics,2006,41(2):115-120.
[11]KONTOROVICH E. The Arab league boycott and WTO accession: can foreign policy excuse discriminatory sanctions?[J]. Chicago journal of international law,2003,4(9):3-22.
[12]SCHLOEMANN H L,OHLHOFF S.“Constitutionalization” and dispute settlement in the WTO:national security as an issue of competence [J].The American journal of international law,1999,93(2):424-451.
[13]HAHN M J. Vital interests and the law of GATT: an analysis of GATT’s security exception[J]. Microchemical journal intl L,1991,3(2):117-142.
[14]KITHARIDIS S. The unknown territories of the national security exception: the importance and interpretation of article xxi of the GATT[J]. Australian international law journal,2014,5(2):11-21.
[15]MACDONALD R S J, CHENG B. General principles of law as applied by international courts and tribunals[J]. University of toronto law journal,2007,12(1):106.
[16]MASON S.Evidence,proof and fact-finding in WTO dispute settlement by michelle T grando[J].International and comparative law quarterly,2011,60(2):566-568.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介:周忠学,法学博士,常州大学史良法学院讲师; 周艳云,法学博士,常州大学史良法学院讲师。 基金项目:国家社会科学基金重点项目“WTO争端解决中的中国现象与中国问题研究”(14AFX027); 常州大学科技项目“美国对华‘232措施’的WTO违规性及中国应对研究”(ZMF20020079); 司法部法治建设与法学理论研究部级科研项目“美国基于国家安全的贸易限制措施的违法性析证及中国因应策略研究”(20SFB4067)。
更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01