论国际投资仲裁中的异议意见制度  

Dissenting Opinions in International Investor-State Arbitration

作　　者：傅攀峰 Fu Panfeng

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院国际法研究所

出　　处：《国际法研究》2024年第3期114-130,共17页Chinese Review of International Law

摘　　要：与国际商事仲裁对异议意见制度的集体沉默不同,《华盛顿公约》项下的国际投资仲裁一开始便从规则层面引入了异议意见制度。这种原始引入主要是基于以下先验判断:作为言论自由的一种表达,异议意见能够促使持多数意见的仲裁员以更负责任的态度裁案,进而有利于优质裁决的产生;有助于提升当事人对仲裁程序的信任;有助于促进国际投资法的发展。然而,实践中,几乎所有异议意见都来自败诉方委任的仲裁员。国际投资仲裁的多年实践,并未印证异议意见制度引入国际投资仲裁的先验判断。从成因上看,联裁委任机制的道德风险是造成此种现象的首要原因。然而,废除联裁委任机制不仅无法根除裁判者的偏见,反而会动摇仲裁的合法性根基,导致国际投资争端解决机构日益官僚化。废除异议意见制度,又过于极端,且须在全球范围内就《华盛顿公约》等一系列国际法律文件的修订达成共识,难度较大。为缓解异议意见制度在国际投资仲裁中的实践困境:一是要强化仲裁员的责任意识,使其慎于发表异议意见;二是要引入首席裁决机制,在两名联裁产生重大分歧之时,允许首裁根据自己的意见独立作出裁决,不必被迫“站队”;三是要在标的额相对较小、争议内容相对简单的案件中,大力倡导独任仲裁庭的运用。Unlike international commercial arbitration which is collectively silent on dissenting opinions,the international investment arbitration regime centered on the Washington Convention adopted rules on dissenting opinions from the very beginning.This original adoption was mainly based on the following a priori judgment:as an expression of freedom of speech,dissenting opinions can prompt arbitrators holding majority opinions to adjudicate cases in a more responsible manner,which in turn is conducive to the production of high-quality awards,and helps to enhance the parties' trust in the arbitration process and to promote the development of international investment law.However,in practice,almost all dissenting opinions come from arbitrators appointed by the losing party.Years of practice in international investment arbitration have not confirmed that a priori judgment based on which the rules on dissenting opinions were introduced into international investment arbitration.The moral hazard of the unilateral appointment mechanism is believed to be the main cause for this phenomenon.However,the abolition of the unilateral appointment mechanism would undermine the legitimacy of arbitration,lead to the increasing bureaucratization of ICSID institutions,and would not fully eradicate the bias of arbitrators.Abolishing the rules on dissenting opinions would be too extreme and would require a global consensus on the revision of a series of important international legal instruments,such as the Washington Convention,which would be difficult to achieve.In order to alleviate the practical dilemma of the rules on dissenting opinions in international investment arbitration,it is firstly necessary to strengthen the sense of responsibility of the arbitrators,so as to make them prudent in expressing dissenting opinions.Secondly,it is necessary to recognize arbitral awards made by the presiding arbitrator alone,so that when the two co-arbitrators have significant disagreement on the case,the presiding arbitrator is allowed to make the de

关 键 词：国际投资仲裁 异议意见 联席仲裁员 仲裁员责任 委任机制 

分 类 号：D996.4[政治法律—经济法学] D997.4[政治法律—国际法学]