本文選題：南海島礁歸屬　切入點(diǎn)：證據(jù)研究　出處：《武漢大學(xué)》2013年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：南海諸島礁歸屬問題是整個(gè)南海問題的基礎(chǔ)。而要從法律上判定這些島礁的歸屬,由于缺乏直接的條約規(guī)定,邏輯上就必須通過證據(jù)研究基礎(chǔ)上的事實(shí)認(rèn)定結(jié)合相關(guān)領(lǐng)土取得的實(shí)體法規(guī)則來(lái)確認(rèn)。那么如何才能實(shí)現(xiàn)這種基于證據(jù)分析的主權(quán)歸屬判定呢?本文從三個(gè)層面對(duì)此問題展開了論述。 導(dǎo)論部分重點(diǎn)論述了南海島礁歸屬證據(jù)研究的必要性,以及研究思路的形成過程。正是這一形成過程,導(dǎo)致了主體部分三個(gè)層面的研究區(qū)分。同時(shí),還對(duì)研究局限于側(cè)重國(guó)際法院證據(jù)實(shí)踐而不及于國(guó)際仲裁,以及本文只是對(duì)完整的南海島礁歸屬證據(jù)研究構(gòu)成初步論述的原因稍作了說明。 第一章通過新加坡／馬來(lái)西亞白礁島案的證據(jù)層面解讀,提出了國(guó)際法院在處理以證據(jù)分析為基礎(chǔ)的事實(shí)認(rèn)定問題、進(jìn)而做出判決時(shí),所必須考慮的幾個(gè)問題,對(duì)這些問題的分析和回答才能構(gòu)成比較全面的證據(jù)研究。這些問題歸納起來(lái)就是主體部分三個(gè)層面問題。以此為標(biāo)準(zhǔn),則現(xiàn)有相關(guān)研究都只是對(duì)證據(jù)研究的一個(gè)方面或者一個(gè)具體問題進(jìn)行探討,完整意義上的證據(jù)研究在現(xiàn)有研究中是缺失的。同時(shí),由于缺乏這種宏觀的視角,導(dǎo)致具體研究存在不足甚至錯(cuò)誤認(rèn)識(shí)。 第二章從證據(jù)本身層面進(jìn)行了分析。在對(duì)證據(jù)和證據(jù)載體進(jìn)行兩分的基礎(chǔ)上,指出了通常所說的“證據(jù)”實(shí)際上應(yīng)界定為證據(jù)載體,而由這些證據(jù)載體可以抽象、提煉出多樣化的、以“關(guān)于事實(shí)的認(rèn)識(shí)”為本質(zhì)的證據(jù),后者才是用于證據(jù)分析或者說司法證明的證據(jù)。同時(shí),基于證據(jù)載體可以提煉出多樣化認(rèn)識(shí)或者說證據(jù)這一觀點(diǎn),文章討論了條約在領(lǐng)土邊界爭(zhēng)端解決中的雙重定性：條約可以作為直接確立權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系的法律依據(jù)適用,也可以作為一般意義上的書面證據(jù)載體即作為證據(jù)運(yùn)用。在這些理論分析的基礎(chǔ)上,文章指出了在南海島礁歸屬問題上證據(jù)提煉的實(shí)踐運(yùn)用,以及現(xiàn)有研究存在的單一化對(duì)待證據(jù)載體問題。 第三章從證據(jù)分析的層面進(jìn)行了探討。本章主要介紹了證據(jù)分析的七步規(guī)程,指出只有運(yùn)用這一嚴(yán)密的七步規(guī)程才能比較準(zhǔn)確有效地對(duì)南海島礁證據(jù)問題、進(jìn)而島礁歸屬的判定作出預(yù)測(cè)。由于現(xiàn)實(shí)的局限性,在南海島礁歸屬進(jìn)行七步規(guī)程分析的具體運(yùn)用上,’本文僅對(duì)爭(zhēng)點(diǎn)的和待證事實(shí)的確定進(jìn)行了探討。其中重點(diǎn)指出了相關(guān)國(guó)際實(shí)體法規(guī)則具體內(nèi)容具有可發(fā)展性,這一特性可以為當(dāng)事國(guó)的主張及論證提供一定的靈活性和可操控性。 第四章從證據(jù)法層面進(jìn)行了剖析。由于主導(dǎo)和參加國(guó)際法院訴訟活動(dòng)的法官、當(dāng)事國(guó)的代理人具有精英化特點(diǎn),國(guó)際法院司法程序又具有書面化和相對(duì)簡(jiǎn)單化的特點(diǎn),因此其所需要的證據(jù)規(guī)則也是相對(duì)比較簡(jiǎn)單的——人的作用取代了某些證據(jù)規(guī)則的作用。在這些簡(jiǎn)單化規(guī)則中最重要的就是以相關(guān)性為內(nèi)核的可采性規(guī)則。而從相關(guān)性出發(fā),結(jié)合前兩章的證據(jù)提煉以及證據(jù)分析理論,我國(guó)一直所主張的證據(jù)(載體)很多都有待進(jìn)一步的分析和認(rèn)識(shí)。 余論部分首先對(duì)如何在國(guó)際司法程序中運(yùn)用證據(jù)進(jìn)行論證總結(jié)為兩點(diǎn)：其一,證據(jù)提煉；其二,證據(jù)鏈的構(gòu)建。這兩個(gè)步驟也是證據(jù)分析的本質(zhì)。而證據(jù)法的作用在此類程序中的作用相對(duì)而言很小。然后針對(duì)需要進(jìn)一步展開研究的問題進(jìn)行了介紹,并從方法論意義上指出了現(xiàn)有研究的不足。
[Abstract]:The South China Sea the island ownership is the foundation of the South China Sea. And from the legal determination of these reefs belonging, due to the lack of direct provisions of the treaty, the logic must based on the facts of evidence of substantive rules associated with the acquisition of territory to confirm. So how to realize the analysis of evidence based on the attribution of sovereignty judge? This paper discusses three aspects of this problem.
The introduction part mainly discusses the necessity of the South China Sea and the attribution of evidence, as well as the research of the formation process. It is this process, leads to the main part of the three levels of distinction. At the same time, the research was limited to focus on practical evidence but does not reach the International Court of international arbitration, and this is just a reason of this study on the South China Sea Islands belonging to the complete proof described.
The first chapter through the interpretation of evidence level of Singapore or Malaysia white coral island case, the International Court of justice in the processing and analysis of fact finding based on evidence, and then make a judgment, several problems must be considered, evidence of the comprehensive study of these problems and to answer these questions. The analysis is summed up in the main part three aspects of the problem. This is the standard, then the existing related research are just one aspect of the research evidence or a specific issue, evidence of complete sense is missing in the current study. At the same time, due to the lack of the macro perspective, leads to the deficiency of research or even wrong understanding.
The second chapter carries on the analysis from the evidence itself level. Based on the evidence and two carrier, that usually said "evidence" in fact evidence should be defined as the carrier, and by the evidence carrier can be abstract, refine the diversification, to "know" about the fact that the nature of the evidence, the latter it is used for the analysis of evidence or judicial evidence. At the same time, the evidence can be extracted from the carrier or understanding diversification this view based on the evidence discussed in the double qualitative territory boundary dispute settlement treaty in the Treaty can be used as direct legal basis to establish the relationship between the rights and obligations of the application, but also can be used as a carrier of general written evidence sense as the use of evidence. On the basis of theoretical analyses, this paper points out the practical application in the South China Sea Islands belong to extract evidence on, and now There is a study of the existence of a single approach to the carrier of evidence.
The third chapter from the analysis of the level of evidence was discussed. This chapter mainly introduces the seven step rules of evidence analysis, pointed out that only using the seven step procedure to close accurately the South China Sea Islands and reefs belonging to determine the evidence, make a prediction. Due to the limitations of reality, detailed analysis using the seven step for in the South China Sea Islands belong to ", this paper only focuses on the issue and determine the facts to be proved are discussed. Which mainly points out the relevant rules of international law with the development of the specific content, this feature can provide some flexibility when claims and demonstration parties and can be manipulated.
The fourth chapter analyzes from the perspective of the law of evidence. Because of leading and participating in litigation activities of the International Court of justice, the country's elite agents with characteristics of the judicial procedure of International Court of justice has written and relatively simple features, so the required evidence rules is relatively simple: replace the role of people some of the rules of evidence. The most important role in these simple rules is related to the kernel of the admissibility rules. From the correlation of combination of the first two chapters of the evidence extraction and evidence analysis theory, China's direct claim evidence (carrier) many have yet to be further analysis and understanding.
The first part of how to use evidence in international judicial proceedings argument summarized as two points: first, evidence of refining; second, to build the chain of evidence. Analysis of the nature of these two steps is evidence. While the role of the law of evidence in such applications is relatively small. And then introduces the need in further study, and from the methodology significance, points out the shortcomings of existing studies.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D993.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張衛(wèi)彬;;南海U形線的法律屬性及在劃界中地位問題[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2013年02期

2 韓永利;譚衛(wèi)元;;時(shí)際法與南海諸島主權(quán)的歷史演變[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文科學(xué)版);2013年02期

3 張衛(wèi)彬;;國(guó)際法院解決領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端中的關(guān)鍵日期問題——中日釣魚島列嶼爭(zhēng)端關(guān)鍵日期確定的考察[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2012年03期

4 張衛(wèi)彬;;國(guó)際法院解決領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端中推定的適用問題——兼談對(duì)解決我國(guó)南沙群島主權(quán)爭(zhēng)端的啟示[J];國(guó)際論壇;2012年03期

5 張衛(wèi)彬;;國(guó)際法院解決領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端中證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問題[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2011年05期

6 張衛(wèi)彬;;論國(guó)際法院的三重性分級(jí)判案規(guī)則[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)與政治;2011年05期

7 曲波;;有效控制原則在解決島嶼爭(zhēng)端中的適用[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2010年01期

8 張新軍;;法律適用中的時(shí)間要素——中日東海爭(zhēng)端關(guān)鍵日期和時(shí)際法問題考察[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年04期

9 聶宏毅;;國(guó)際法院在解決領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端中的作用及困境評(píng)析[J];河北法學(xué);2009年01期

10 孫傳香;;有效控制理論在國(guó)際法院的運(yùn)用及我國(guó)的對(duì)策[J];平頂山學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：1606033