公平与公正待遇标准:国际投资法中的“帝王条款”?  

Fair and Equitable Treatment:An "Empire Clause" in International Investment Law?

作　　者：徐崇利[1] 

机构地区：[1]厦门大学法学院,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《现代法学》2008年第5期123-134,共12页Modern Law Science

基　　金：2004年度教育部"新世纪优秀人才支持计划"(NCET-04-0592)

摘　　要：在国际投资仲裁实践中,公平与公正待遇标准得到了最广泛的运用,并显现了极度扩张解释之势;同时,一些西方学者也将之与民商法中的诚实信用原则相提并论,实际上是尊奉该待遇标准为国际投资法中的"帝王条款"。但倘若如此,不仅将严重损害东道国管理外资的主权,而且,法理上也存在诸多疑点。公平与公正待遇标准对于国际投资条约的具体规定,并无"帝王条款"意义上的补缺、修正及解释之功能;同时,该标准应是"国家造法",而非"法官造法"的产物,其与"帝王条款"的实质也不相符。我国应转而支持以国际习惯法的具体规则来诠解该项外资待遇的内容。＂ Fair and Equitable Treatment＂ is now widely used in arbitrations designed to solve international investment matters and tends to be interpreted more liberally. At the same time, some western scholars compare the standard to the principle of Bona Fides in civil and commercial laws, considering it indeed an ＂empire clause＂ in international investment law. If so, it would . greatly impair the sovereignty of the host country over foreign investment. In fact, fair and equitable treatment renders no supplementation, amendment or interpretation to international investment treaties as the ＂empire clause＂ does. Furthermore, fair and equitable treatment derives from ＂state-making ＂empire clause. ＂ While fair laws＂ rather than ＂judge-making laws,＂ which is essentially different from the and equitable treatment is not recognized as an ＂empirical clause,＂ it is necessary for China to interpret it under specific international customary rules concerning foreign direct investment.

关 键 词：公平与公正待遇 国际投资条约 国际投资争端 国际仲裁 

分 类 号：D996.4[政治法律—经济法学] F272.92[政治法律—国际法学]