论文部分内容阅读
公平正义是法律尤其是国际法的基本价值取向,国际法中的公平正义应该包括四项原则:经济主权原则、平等自由原则、公平互利原则和有约必守原则。因此,有必要以公平正义为价值取向,针对当代BIT的种种弊端和不足进行变革。就2012年签署的中加BIT而言,笔者持有与哈顿教授不同的看法:中加BIT谈判双方在地位上是平等自由的;从内容上看,中加BIT相对比较公平;从总体上看,它较好地平衡了东道国和投资者的权利和义务。特别值得赞赏的是,它体现了公平正义中的差别原则,对中国和加拿大各自的特殊情况给予公平的特殊考虑和安排。但是,中加BIT对最惠国待遇适用于“公正公平待遇”的规定,有可能是加方有意陷中国于不利,这是不公平不正义的。加方明知这一点,却不提醒中方,其后果是,加拿大投资者在中国投资,可以援引中加BIT中的最惠国待遇条款适用中国在1994年1月1日之后生效其他BIT中笼统含糊的公正公平待遇条款,从而挑战中国的某些重大的内政措施。有了中加BIT的谈判经验和教训,今后中国在与美国和欧盟谈判BIT时,应当以国家经济主权为最高圭臬,既要坚持平等自由原则和权利义务平衡原则,又要坚持差别原则,考虑中国的特殊国情和要求,同时要特别小心避免中加BIT中最惠国待遇条款那样的陷阱。
Fairness and justice are the basic value orientation of law, especially international law. The fairness and justice in international law should include four principles: the principle of economic sovereignty, the principle of equality and freedom, the principle of fairness and mutual benefit, and the principle of the principle of necessity and necessity. Therefore, it is necessary to take fairness and justice as the value orientation and make changes in view of the drawbacks and deficiencies of contemporary BIT. In terms of China-Canada BIT signed in 2012, the author holds a different view from Professor Hatton: Both sides of the BIT negotiation between China and Canada are equal and free in status. In terms of content, the BIT between China and Canada is relatively fair. Generally speaking, Look, it better balances the rights and obligations of host countries and investors. What is particularly commendable is that it reflects the principle of difference in fairness and justice and gives fair and special consideration and arrangement to the special conditions of China and Canada. However, the BIT’s application of the Most-Favored Nation (MFN) treatment to the “fair and equitable treatment” may be that it is unfair and unfair for the Canadian side to intentionally trap China. As Canada is aware of this, it does not warn China that the consequence is that Canadian investors investing in China can invoke the MFN clause in BITs between China and Canada. Applying China’s General and Ambiguous Justice in Other BITs After January 1, 1994 Fair treatment clause, thus challenging some of China’s major internal measures. With the BIT negotiation experience and lessons learned from the Sino-Canadian BIT negotiations, China should hold the economic sovereignty of the country as the highest priority when negotiating BIT with the United States and the EU. In the future, China should adhere to the principle of equality and freedom and the principle of balance of rights and obligations while maintaining the principle of differentiation China’s special national conditions and requirements, with special care must be taken to avoid the pitfalls of the most-favored nation clause in BITs between China and Canada.