谁解决了查戈斯群岛的主权争端?——“毛里求斯与马尔代夫海洋划界案”初步反对主张判决评析  

Who Resolved the Sovereignty Dispute over the Chagos Archipelago?——A Note on the Preliminary Objections Judgment in the Mauritius/Maldives Case

作　　者：高健军[1] Gao Jianjun

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学国际法学院

出　　处：《国际法研究》2021年第5期3-17,共15页Chinese Review of International Law

摘　　要：国际海洋法法庭特别分庭在"毛里求斯与马尔代夫海洋划界案"中面对的是一个同时涉及陆地主权归属和海洋划界问题的"混合争端"。然而,查戈斯群岛的主权归属争端竟未能阻止分庭行使对海洋划界争端的管辖权。"查戈斯仲裁裁决"和"查戈斯咨询意见"没有解决查戈斯群岛的主权争端。分庭以一种暗度陈仓的方式移除了这一行使管辖权的障碍。分庭在查明查戈斯群岛主权争端是否存在的过程中评估并否定了当事一方主张的有效性,从而得出主权争端不复存在的结论。分庭的做法超出了查明争端是否存在的管辖权的正当界限,已然构成了对主权争端的解决。鉴于该主权争端涉及第三方,分庭的做法还违反了公认的"货币黄金案原则"。The Special Chamber of the ITLOS in the Dispute concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean Case faces a mixed dispute involving both the land sovereignty issue and the maritime delimitation question. However, the dispute over the sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago did not prevent the Chamber from exercising the jurisdiction over the dispute of maritime delimitation. Both the Chagos arbitral award and the Chagos advisory opinion did not resolve the sovereignty dispute over the Chagos Archipelago. The Chamber in the Case removed the obstacle to its exercise of jurisdiction in a covert way. The Chamber, in discerning whether the sovereignty dispute over the Chagos Archipelago still exists, evaluated and denied the validity of the claim of one party and therefore concluded that the sovereignty dispute did not exist any more. However, the doings of the Chamber exceeds the proper limits of jurisdiction for verifying whether a dispute exists and constitutes a resolution to the sovereignty dispute actually. Furthermore, given the sovereignty dispute involves a third party, the doings of the Chamber also violates the recognized Monetary Gold principle.

关 键 词：“毛里求斯与马尔代夫海洋划界案” 查戈斯群岛 争端的存在 “货币黄金案原则” 主权争端 

分 类 号：D993.5[政治法律—国际法学]