远东国际军事法庭享有管辖权的新论证  

Redemonstrating the International Military Tribunal for the Far East Enjoys Jurisdiction

作　　者：管建强[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学国际法学院 [2]华东政法大学东方毅军事法研究中心

出　　处：《法学评论》2015年第4期95-108,共14页Law Review

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目<构建中国特色军事法治体系的核心问题研究>(项目批准号:14ZDC035)的首席专家。此文为该项目的阶段性成果

摘　　要：日本右翼势力以及保守派长期以来一直借管辖权问题抹黑远东军事法庭对日本战犯的审判,鼓吹法庭审判违背了法律不能溯及既往的原则,违反正义原则。虽然法庭对此类主张进行过驳斥、国内也有学者撰文发表批判过这类观点,但是反驳的理由大多比较原则、笼统,有的甚至还从抽象的自然正义的角度进行争辩。本文从历史史实之实证的角度揭露了日本右翼虚构战争罪惩罚性规范的存在,以此来否定侵略罪的适用;论证了无论是战争罪的禁止性规范还是破坏和平罪的禁止性规范,它们都蕴含着惩罚性;阐述了国际法的效力是来自当事国的共同意志。同盟国与战败国之间依据既有的禁止性规范、创造性地对破坏世界和平的战犯进行惩治,恰恰符合了国际法的基本特征。Japanese conservatives and right--wingers have long used the jurisdiction problem to discredit the International Military Tribunal for the Far East for the trial of Japanese war criminals, advocating that the trial violated the principle of non --retroactivity of law and the principle of justice. Although the court had dismissed such claims and the domestic scholars have also published articles to criticize this opinion, the reasons for rebutting were mostly fundamental and too general, and some arguments even came from the perspective of abstract nature justice. This paper has made an empirical study of historical facts to expose the japanese right--wingers have fictionized the existence of punitive norms for war crimes in order to deny the appli- cability of the crime of aggression. Demonstrating both the prohibitive norms of war crimes and crimes against peace are puni- tive. The article describes the legal effect of international law comes from the common will of the parties. Punishment was crea- tively inflicted on war criminals who had destroyed the world peace based on the existing prohibitive norms between the allies and defeated, which was exactly in accordance with the basic features of international law.

关 键 词：侵略罪 破坏和平罪 东京审判 远东军事法庭 法律不溯及既往 

分 类 号：D995[政治法律—国际法学]