討論國際經貿規範的法制化過程,無法規避國際法與國家間的權力運作問題,更不能忽視國際社會不存在最高權威之國際無政府狀態的事實。國際社會存在國家資源暨地位的不對稱差異,使強權得以操縱國際經貿議程,建構符合強權利益的國際經貿規範。形式上,國際經貿規範的法制化,係參與者基於對等地位,透過雙邊暨多邊談判後所建構而成的法律,但其實質內容,仍反映強權國家在不對等的基礎上,操縱談判議程,鑲嵌強權利益,扭曲平等正義,強化本國優勢,限制對手經貿發展機會之事實。
觀察國際經貿法中「市場擾亂」概念的法制化過程發現,強權通常透過 「內生模式」的議程設定手段,在國際制度中植入符合強權利益的規範概念,並透過國際制度之正當程序,法制化該等利於強權的國際經貿概念。是項國際經貿規則,在程序上未必違反國際制度,但實質內涵,卻不必然切合國際制度的精神與宗旨。而當該等國際經貿概念面臨更迭甚或終止時,強權國家仍可藉議程設定手段,將之植入另一項國際制度,繼續運用於特定領域或特定國家,維繫並保障強權之特定利益。
It is hard to neglect neither the fact of power competition nor the anarchic character of the international society as scholar researches the context and the practice of international law. The asymmetric distribution of international resources enhances the possibility for powerful states to manipulate the agenda of International Economic law legalization processes, which are therefore constructed in according with the interests of the international Powers. Formally, international economic laws are instituted through bilateral or multilateral dialogue on basis of equality, but in reality, they reflect that under an unbalanced foundation, powerful states maneuvering agendas to strengthen self-interests.
Observing the development of the Market Disruption rules demonstrates that powerful states could use agenda-setting strategy to fulfill their goal in the process of International Economic law. Powerful states initiated the agenda, presented the draft, legalized certain rules and leave no chance for others the possibility to modify or change the rules in their favor. The strategies, in theory, may not necessarily disobey international order, but in practice, they could disturb the dictum and spirit of international order. Furthermore, when the concept of international economy ceased to be, powerful states could still, through agenda-setting, continue to install the orders into different states or region, thus secure certain privileges of the powers.
現有國際關係研究對於霸權主導國際制度已有一定之發現,不過對崛起強權參與建構國際制度的行為傾向,則附屬於霸權的相關討論,而未獲得一定之重視。霸權論一般認為,崛起強權在未發生霸權戰爭前,只能被迫遵循霸權主導 下的國際制度,唯有在崛起強權取得霸權地位之後,方能展示是創建國際制度的領導能力。霸權論由相對物質權力層面探索的崛起強權描述,僅能凸顯霸權戰爭的爆發,未必能勾勒出崛起強權的全面行為,亦未能解釋霸權繼承者的條件。 發生霸權更迭之前,並非沒有發生崛起強權參與建構國際制度的案例,例如德意..
The exploration of the rising power has been subordinated to the arguments of hegemony and revisionist states. The Hegemonic Stability Theory and Power Transfer Theory have argued that the rising power has to follow international instructions set according to the hegemonic interests before the break out of hegemony war through which the rising power revolts the status quo hegemon. This approach might describe the reasons of hegemonic war; however, it might not be able to explain the overall behavior patterns of rising power in the construct..
國際憲政主義概念固然有待精確定義,但有關世貿規約憲政主義化的見解,已然成為國際法學界討論國際憲政主義概念的藍本。國際憲政主義概念的演化暨發展方向,可能影響到國際社會法律體系的建構,以及國家未來在國際社會所受到的司法制約程度。展望未來,世貿規約憲政主義化的經驗進程,是否會對國際法其它面向的法理論證造成影響,繼續將人權概念置入永績發展、國際環境保護、氣候變遷機制與海洋環境保育等議題的論證當中,並以人類社群整體福祉之極大化為前提,為沒有參與締約的第三方創造國際責任與義務,值得吾人深入並且持續的..
Despite debates addressed among constitutionalists, the concept of international constitutionalism has caused legal consequences to the sovereignty base of international law, and thus mutates the concept of the status of the states. Nowadays, trade scholarship is particularly preoccupied with questions of constitutionalism. The constitutionalization of WTO regulations has triggered a debate on the future of global constitutionalism. Some scholars of the International Public Law believe that WTO, as an institution of global governance, would..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.