从“非正式帝国主义”到“法律帝国主义”:以近代中国的境遇为例  

From Informal Imperialism to Legal Imperialism: Taking the Encounter of Modern China as An Example

作　　者：李洋[1,2] LI Yang(Nanjing Normal University Law School;the Institute for ChineseLegal Modernization Studies)

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学法学院 [2]南京师范大学中国法治现代化研究院

出　　处：《法学家》2020年第1期77-89,193,共14页The Jurist

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目“英国巡回法庭的历史溯源及当代镜鉴”(15CFX009)的阶段性成果;江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助项目(PAPD)的经费支持

摘　　要：近代国际法理论框架下的"非正式帝国主义",由最初的"自由贸易"模式扩展至政治、司法等诸般间接控制样式。在"非正式帝国"的塑造中,合乎国际法规范的条约具备去疆界化与再疆界化的意义,即破除正式领土帝国的堡垒,重建非正式帝国的藩篱。法律无疑是实现"非正式帝国主义"不可或缺的重要支撑,而它本身也成就为"非正式帝国主义"的一种典型形式——"法律帝国主义"。以近代中国的境遇为例,法律帝国主义所表达的,正是在政策指引之下,借助条约规定方式,以治外法权为基本实践手段,通过司法机构的跨域构建以及法律职业人士的身体力行,以最终达成西方法播散的整体过程。对此,我们应有清醒的认识。Informal imperialism of modern international law system has endured a meaning transformation from free trade to political or judicial control indirectly.During the formation of informal empire, the treaty which is followed by modern international law, does have deconstruction and constructiveness meaning to deterritorialized and reterritorialized, which means to break down formal empire’s forts and rebuild informal empire’s barriers.In this process, law was the indispensable and fundamental element to turn the informal imperialism into reality, furthermore, it was achieved to be legal imperialism, a mode of informal imperialism.Taking modern China as an example, we would find that, by relying on the policy’s guidance, basing on the Sino-foreign treaties’ regulations, resorting to the extraterritorial rights’ application methods, the cross-fields’ construction of judicial institutions and the legal professions’ physical practices, legal imperialism finished the dissemination of western law in modern China.

关 键 词：非正式帝国主义 法律帝国主义 治外法权 近代中国 近代国际法 

分 类 号：D997[政治法律—国际法学]