坚定维护“平等者间无管辖权”的国际法治原则——美国联邦法院驳回密苏里州滥诉中国案裁决述评  

Firmly Upholding International Rule of Law Principle of Par in Parem Non Habet Imperium——A Legal Review of U. S. Federal Court’s Ruling to Dismiss the Missouri v. China Case

作　　者：黄惠康 Huang Huikang

机构地区：[1]外交部国际法咨询委员会

出　　处：《国际经济法学刊》2022年第4期1-24,共24页Journal of International Economic Law

摘　　要：新冠疫情是近百年来人类遭遇的影响范围最广的公共卫生安全危机。密苏里州借疫情诬告滥诉中国是美国政客别有用心的“政治闹剧”,在任何良法善治的国家都不可能得逞。美国联邦地区法院驳回密苏里州对中国的诬告滥诉,在美国司法判例中具有定向标的意义。“密苏里州滥诉案”完全没有法律正当性,病毒起源地问题与国家责任问题无关,无论是涉及被告身份地位的属人管辖权,还是涉及争诉事项的属事管辖权,美国法院均没有管辖权。本案的法律问题复杂多样,如何依法审理、公正裁判,考验美国的司法制度和法官的法治精神。“平等者间无管辖权”的法治原则是国家间关系的重要基石之一,而依法裁判则是成熟的法治社会的重要标志。主审法官驳回原告滥诉的裁决与中国国际法学人和国际有识之士产生同频共振。该裁决判定,对于诬告滥诉案的司法文书,中方有权援引《海牙公约》的规定,拒绝接受送达。中国共产党属于美国《外国主权豁免法》意义上的“外国国家”,因而享有不受美国法院司法管辖的主权豁免地位。这是坚定维护国际法治原则的正义之举,也是公正司法的必然结果。本文拟就该裁决涉及的国家主权豁免原则,特别是其中最为关键、也最具挑战性的一个核心法律问题——中国共产党享有不受外国司法管辖的主权豁免地位——的论证逻辑和法律适用进行深入的法理探讨。Covid-19 pandemic is the most widespread public health crisis in the last century. It is a “political farce” that the State of Missouri used the pandemic to falsely accuse China with ulterior motives, which cannot succeed in any country with a sound legal system. The Federal District Court rejected Missouri’s false accusation against China, which has the directional significance in American judicial system. The Missouri case had no legal legitimacy at all. The place of origin of the virus had no bearing on the state responsibility, and U. S. Courts have no jurisdiction, either ratione personae in relation to the status of the accused or ratione materiae in relation to the subject matter at issue. The legal issues of this case are complex and diverse. How to conduct a trial according to law and give a fair judgment will test the judicial system and the professionalism of the judges in the United States. The doctrine of par in parem non habet imperium has become a universally accepted principle of international law, being one of the important cornerstones of inter-state relations, and fair justice is an important sign of a mature society ruled by law. The decision of the judge to reject the plaintiff’s abuse has firmly responded to the call for upholding international law and justice by international jurist home and abroad. The court’s conclusion is that all named defendants, including CPC,WIV and CAC, are deemed foreign states under the FSIA, and no exception to FSIA sovereign immunity applies. This is a just act and is an inevitable outcome of fair justice. This paper intends to discuss the principle of sovereign immunity of states involved in the ruling, in particular, the logic of argument and application of law of one of the most critical and challenging core legal issues—the Communist Party of China enjoys the status of sovereign immunity from foreign jurisdiction.

关 键 词：国际法治 中国共产党 主权豁免 司法管辖 美国法院裁决 

分 类 号：DD916.2[政治法律—国际法学] D994[政治法律—法学] D971.2