WTO争端解决机制上诉机构的“咨询意见”问题探析  

Analysis on the"Advisory Opinions"of the Appellate Body of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

作　　者：刘天舒 LIU Tian-shu(School of International Law,China University of Political Science and Law,Beijing 100088,China)

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学国际法学院,北京100088

出　　处：《齐齐哈尔大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2022年第10期93-97,共5页Journal of Qiqihar University(Philosophy & Social Science Edition)

摘　　要：美国长期控诉WTO上诉机构在裁决中发表“咨询意见”属于司法越权行为,将对WTO争端解决机制造成损害。从性质上看,WTO上诉机构发表的“咨询意见”既不是国际性司法机关基于咨询管辖权所出具的法律意见,也不是英美法系中的“附带意见”。上诉机构裁决中是否真的存在“不必要”的结论意见,该问题本身没有绝对客观的标准答案,应当赋予上诉机构自由裁量权。另外,即使部分上诉机构裁决中存在对于解决争端不必要的分析与结论,也不会产生“造法”的后果,不存在美国所说的越权风险。而对于超期审理的风险,可以为DSU第17条第12款增加“在解决争端所必需的程度内”的限定语,并先在MPIA框架下有所回应和试行,最终恢复上诉机构的正常运作。The United States has long complained that the issuance of"advisory opinions"by the WTO Appellate Body in its decisions is an act of judicial ultra vires,which will damage the dispute settlement mechanism of the WTO.In nature,the"advisory opinions"issued by the WTO Appellate Body are neither legal opinions issued by international judicial bodies based on advisory jurisdiction,nor"obiter dicta"in the common law system.There is no absolutely objective standard answer to the question whether there is really an"unnecessary"conclusion in the Appellate Body’s decisions,so that discretion should be given to the Appellate Body.In addition,even if there are unnecessary analysis or conclusions in some of the Appellate Body’s decisions,it will not lead to"law-making"consequences,and there will be no risk of ultra vires as claimed by the United States.As for the risk of exceeding the time limit for hearing,the qualifier"to the extent necessary to resolve the dispute"can be added to Article 17.12 of the DSU,and a response and trial under the MPIA may be made at first until the Appellate Body is again fully functional.

关 键 词：临时上诉仲裁安排 咨询意见 咨询管辖权 附带意见 司法越权 

分 类 号：D996.1[政治法律—经济法学]