国家公共秩序还是国际公共秩序——服务贸易总协定中公共秩序的定位  

National Public Order or International Public Order:The Identification of Public Order in the GATs

作　　者：陈儒丹[1] 

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学国际金融法律学院,上海201620

出　　处：《国际经贸探索》2012年第10期90-101,共12页International Economics and Trade Research

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目(12CFX110);上海市教委科研创新项目(13YS090);华东政法大学2011年度校级科研项目"WTO案件申诉方胜诉率的实证研究"的阶段性成果

摘　　要：各国服务贸易发展不平衡与国际服务贸易自由化的矛盾使《服务贸易总协定》的公共秩序例外制度成为重要的"缓冲地带"。具有贸易限制效应的争议措施意欲保护的公共秩序的范围认定就成为必须解决的关键问题。WTO司法实践认定为国际社会的公共秩序,而有学者认为是贸易限制措施实施国一国的公共秩序。进一步的研究发现WTO文本规定、相关欧盟司法实践、演进式解释历史等WTO法律解释因素和立法交易成本、国际贸易自行车理论、法官最大化自身利益的理性选择等经济政治因素共同决定国际公共秩序观点更具法理依据,也更合理。但是,国际公共秩序观点的确存在过度压缩成员自治权空间的弊端,有必要对其进行一定程度的软化。The conflict between WTO members＇ uneven development of trade in services and the liberalization of international service trade makes the system of public order exception in the ＂General Agreement on Trade in Services＂ become an important ＂buffer zone＂. The range identification of public order which is intended to protect by the controversial measures with trade restrictive effect becomes the primary key problem. WTO judicial practice recognizes it as the international public order, but scholars believe that it should be classified as the respondent country＇s public order. The further study finds that the view of determining the international public order by the two types of factors together, namely, the WTO legal interpretation factors such as the provisions of the WTO text, the relevant EU judicial practice as well as the evolutionary interpretation history, and the economic and political factors such as the legislative transaction costs, the theory of international trade bike as well as the judges＇ rational choice to maximize their own interests, has a legal basis and are also more reasonable. However, the international public order view does have the drawback of excessive compression of the members＇ autonomy so that some measures should be adopted to soften it to a certain extent.

关 键 词：服务贸易 公共秩序 定位 国际 

分 类 号：F744[经济管理—国际贸易]