由案例比较视角论中菲南海仲裁案之应对  

Response Strategy to the South China Sea Arbitration—From the Aspect of Case Comparison

作　　者：张晏瑲[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]山东大学法学院 [2]山东大学海洋海事法研究所

出　　处：《边界与海洋研究》2016年第2期98-107,共10页Journal of Boundary and Ocean Studies

基　　金：中国法学会自选课题(CLS[2015]D148)

摘　　要：国际间至少可以找到14个被告不到庭的案例,而此种趋势正在增加中,所以我国在中菲南海仲裁案中选择不到庭并非单一个案。透过案例比较可以得知,仲裁庭应顾及我国在南海海域的历史性权利,争端方在法院判决之后协商签订双边协定以明确彼此的法律地位,应该是可以考虑的选项。仲裁庭应该考虑与案件相关的所有信息,而我国亦可以在仲裁结果发布后找出其错误之处。此外,透过第三方的外交斡旋亦能达到最终解决争端的效果。作为应对,我国可以考虑根据《联合国海洋法公约》附件五来成立调解委员会,以解决判决执行问题与后续争端。There are at least 14 international cases referring the non-appearance ol the respondent and the tendency is increasing. China,s non-appearance in the South China Sea Arbitration is not the only case con-cerned. Based on case comparison, it is lair to suggest that the South China Sea Arbitration Tribunal should take into account the historical rights enjoyed by China. It is a suitable option to conduct bilateral negotiation and conclude agreement in order to settle the disputes, even after the result ol the Arbitration comes out. The Tribunal should also take all relevant information into account. In response, China could find out the errors in the proceeding and raise protest against these errors. In addition, the third party diplo-matic mediation is a way forward to settle disputes. China may consider setting up the Conciliation Committee in accordance with Annex V of UNCLOS in order to further dealing with enforcement and dispute issues.

关 键 词：案例比较 南海仲裁案 不到庭 应对措施 

分 类 号：D993.5[政治法律—国际法学]