国际法院解决领土争端中的关键日期问题——中日钓鱼岛列屿争端关键日期确定的考察  

Critical Date Ascertained by the International Court of Justice in Settling Territorial Disputes: Determining the Critical Date of Diaoyu Islands Dispute between China and Japan

作　　者：张卫彬[1] 

机构地区：[1]安徽财经大学法学院,安徽蚌埠233030

出　　处：《现代法学》2012年第3期121-131,共11页Modern Law Science

基　　金：教育部人文社科规划青年基金项目"国际法院解决领土争端中的证据问题研究"(11YJC820169);中国太平洋学会重大课题"东;南中国海诸岛中有争议岛屿的史地考证及相关问题研究"(2200214)

摘　　要：国际法院在解决领土争端的实践中,基于国家主权平等的要求,坚持当事方提供证据自由原则。但是,这并不意味着其不加甄别地采纳所有的证据。鉴于领土争端案件的复杂性和重要性,国际法院针对个案特殊情况,对证据可采性隐含适用了一些限制条件。关键日期一般决定着证据的可采性。对于在关键日期之后当事方的行为,国际法院通常不予考虑,除非该行为是先前行为的正常继续。而且,国际法院强调,在关键日期之后的当事方提供的利己证据,同样不具有可采性,并不存在分量大小的问题。关键日期证据排除规则对于解决钓鱼岛列屿争端具有重要意义。在关键日期之后,日本为了巩固对我国钓鱼岛列屿主权要求而采取的利己措施或试图取得有效统治之证据不具有可采性。While settling territorial disputes,the International Court of Justice,in view of equal sovereignties,always holds the principle of free production of evidence,which,however,does not mean all evidences produced should be admitted.Given complicity and significance of the territorial disputes,the Court may impose certain restraints on admissibility of evidence in specific cases.Critical date is closely concerned with admissibility of evidence and the Court usually does not take into account actions taken after the critical date unless they are normal continuation of prior ones.Further,the Court stresses that evidence produced by the party after the critical date that serves his selfish interest is inadmissible no matter what weight it has.The exclusionary rule related to critical date is of great significance to the settlement of the Diaoyu Islands dispute.Evidence submitted by Japan is inadmissible which is after the critical date and self-serving,designed in vain to strengthen or even establish its claim to the sovereignty of Diaoyu Islands.

关 键 词：关键日期 证据可采性 钓鱼岛列屿 国际法院 

分 类 号：D813.4[政治法律—国际关系]