再平衡视角下条约控制机制对国际投资争端解决的矫正——《投资者国家间争端解决重回母国主义:外交保护回来了吗?》述论  

The Correction of Treaty Control Mechanism to the Settlement of International Investment Disputes from the Perspective of Rebalancing——Review on“The Return of the Home State to Investor-State Disputes:Bringing Back Diplomatic Protection?”

作　　者：林惠玲[1] Lin Huiling

机构地区：[1]上海WTO事务咨询中心法律政策分析部

出　　处：《政法论坛》2021年第1期150-160,共11页Tribune of Political Science and Law

基　　金：2020年度教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目“境外投资立法重大问题研究”(项目编号:20JZD018)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：近年来部分国际投资协定的缔约方采取限制适用范围、强调缔约方对条约的充分解释权、非争端缔约方参与等条约控制机制,由让渡隐身转向最大限度地控制ISDS的过程和结果,对公私利益进行再平衡。中国在中澳FTA和中加BIT中的最新实践体现其顺应潮流加强条约控制的缔约态度和缔约创新。在今后的缔约实践中,中国引入条约控制机制须注意设置兼顾实体和程序掌控的双重控制机制、审慎对待环境健康和安全等例外条款,并探索争端解决的多元化路径。In recent years,for the purpose of rebalancing public and private interests,some parties to international investment agreements have adopted treaty control mechanisms such as restricting the scope of ISDS’s application,emphasizing the parties’full right to interpret the treaty,and the participation of nondisputing parties,shifting from invisibility to the maximum control of the ISDS process and results.China’s latest practice in the China-Australia FTA and China-Canada BIT reflects its attitude and innovation in contracting in line with the trend to strengthen treaty control.In future contracting practices,China must pay attention to the establishment of a dual control mechanism that takes into account substantive and procedural control when introducing a treaty control mechanism,prudently treat exceptions such as environment,health and safety exception,and explore diversified paths for dispute resolution.

关 键 词：投资争端解决 缔约方 条约控制 

分 类 号：D996.4[政治法律—经济法学]