本文選題：歐盟航空減排指令　切入點(diǎn)：芝加哥公約　出處：《復(fù)旦大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：歐盟于2008年11月19日通過(guò)法案(第2008/101/EC號(hào)指令)決定將航空領(lǐng)域納入歐盟碳排放交易體系(EU-ETS)中,并于2012年1月1日正式開(kāi)始實(shí)施。該指令適用于所有飛抵和飛離歐洲的航班,歐盟成員國(guó)經(jīng)歐盟授權(quán)管制其國(guó)內(nèi)航班及指定的外國(guó)航班,此舉引起國(guó)際社會(huì)的廣泛爭(zhēng)議。此舉涉嫌違反《芝加哥公約》、《京都議定書(shū)》等國(guó)際條約,以及“主權(quán)排他管轄原則”、“共同但有區(qū)別原則”、“非歧視待遇原則”等國(guó)際慣例。 美國(guó)多家航空公司聯(lián)合于2009年對(duì)歐盟委員會(huì)提起訴訟,稱“指令”違反了《芝加哥公約》、《京都議定書(shū)》、《開(kāi)放天空協(xié)議》及有關(guān)國(guó)際原則慣例,官司以歐盟法院判決美方敗訴結(jié)束。歐盟判決的公正性遭到國(guó)際社會(huì)的質(zhì)疑。2012年2月21、22日,國(guó)際民航組織的32個(gè)成員國(guó)在莫斯科通過(guò)的“莫斯科宣言”中提議采取九種對(duì)抗性措施。在國(guó)際社會(huì)的壓力下,2013年2月26日,歐盟委員會(huì)通過(guò)了暫時(shí)停止“指令”執(zhí)行的方案。航空二氧化碳減排問(wèn)題不僅是全球環(huán)境問(wèn)題,也關(guān)系到各國(guó)的政治、經(jīng)濟(jì)利益,因此,最好的解決方法還是應(yīng)回歸到法律層面來(lái)進(jìn)行分析。 本文主要分為四個(gè)部分：一、背景介紹,主要闡述《第2008/101/EC號(hào)指令》的產(chǎn)生原因、發(fā)展進(jìn)程及主要內(nèi)容；二、指令實(shí)施后國(guó)際社會(huì)的反應(yīng)及應(yīng)對(duì)情況；三、在前兩章的基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)“指令”的合法性進(jìn)行分析；四、針對(duì)上述分析,提出我國(guó)的應(yīng)對(duì)措施。本文的主要對(duì)歐盟航空減排指令從以下幾方面進(jìn)行合法性分析：一、《芝加哥公約》的第1條關(guān)于主權(quán)國(guó)家排他管轄權(quán)的規(guī)定；第15條和第24條關(guān)于免收稅費(fèi)的規(guī)定；二、《京都議定書(shū)》中第2條第2款關(guān)于航空領(lǐng)域溫室氣體排放規(guī)制的規(guī)定,及確立的“共同但有區(qū)別原則”的國(guó)際慣例；三、WTO規(guī)則中的的“國(guó)民待遇原則”和“最惠國(guó)待遇原則”,以及“指令”是否符合WTO中關(guān)于環(huán)境保護(hù)的“一般例外條款”的規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:The European Union passed the Act (Directive No. 2008 / 101 / EC) on November 19th 2008 to include the aviation sector in the European Union's carbon emissions trading system, EU-ETS, which was formally implemented in January 1st 2012. The directive applies to all flights arriving and leaving Europe. The EU member states have been authorized by the EU to regulate their domestic flights and designated foreign flights, which has caused widespread controversy in the international community. The move is suspected of violating international treaties such as the Chicago Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. And international practices such as the principle of sovereign exclusive jurisdiction, the principle of common but differentiated treatment and the principle of non-discrimination. A number of American airlines filed a joint lawsuit against the European Commission on 2009, alleging that the Directive violated the Chicago Convention, the Kyoto Protocol, the Open Skies Agreement and related international principles and practices. The case ended with a US defeat by the European Court of Justice. The impartiality of the EU decision was questioned by the international community. On February 2012, on 22nd, The Moscow Declaration, adopted in Moscow by the 32 member States of the International Civil Aviation Organization, proposed nine confrontational measures. Under pressure from the international community, on February 26th 2013, The European Commission has adopted a moratorium on the implementation of the directive. The issue of reducing carbon dioxide emissions in aviation is not only a global environmental issue, but also a matter of political and economic interest for all countries. The best solution is to return to the legal level for analysis. This article is mainly divided into four parts: first, background introduction, mainly explain the cause, development process and main contents of EC Directive 2008 / 101; second, the response and response of the international community after the implementation of the directive; third, On the basis of the first two chapters of the analysis of the legitimacy of the "directive"; fourth, in view of the above analysis, The main contents of this paper are as follows: (1) Article 1 of the Chicago Convention on the exclusive jurisdiction of sovereign states; The provisions of articles 15 and 24 on exemption from taxes and fees; second, the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Kyoto Protocol on the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions in the field of aviation, and the established international practice of the "common but differentiated principle"; Third, the "principle of National treatment" and "principle of most-favoured-nation treatment" in the WTO rules, and whether the "Directive" conforms to the "general exception clause" of environmental protection in WTO.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D996.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 覃華平;;歐盟航空減排交易體制(EU ETS)探析——兼論國(guó)際航空減排路徑[J];比較法研究;2011年06期

2 胡曉紅;;歐盟航空碳排放交易制度及其啟示[J];法商研究;2011年05期

3 梁詠;;歐盟碳減排的國(guó)際法規(guī)制——以航空業(yè)為例[J];法學(xué);2011年12期

4 張磊;王燕;;歐盟航空碳限額交易措施在多邊法律體制內(nèi)的合法性研究——兼論中國(guó)航空業(yè)的應(yīng)對(duì)策略[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)貿(mào)探索;2012年07期

5 閆婭;丁寶根;;透析歐盟征收航空碳稅的影響及應(yīng)對(duì)措施[J];對(duì)外經(jīng)貿(mào)實(shí)務(wù);2012年02期

6 張華;;論“歐盟航空減排指令”的域外管轄問(wèn)題及中國(guó)的對(duì)策[J];國(guó)際論壇;2012年05期

7 胡昌梅;曹昶輝;;歐盟環(huán)境保護(hù)政策及其對(duì)中國(guó)的影響——?dú)W中在碳排放問(wèn)題上的互動(dòng)[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年01期

8 蘭花;;歐盟航空減排貿(mào)易指令的國(guó)際法分析——兼評(píng)中歐航空減排爭(zhēng)議[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年03期

9 梁詠;葉波;;歐盟航空業(yè)碳減排規(guī)則的國(guó)際法分析[J];歐洲研究;2012年01期

10 劉旭光;;從法理視角看歐盟航空碳稅新法規(guī)[J];檢察風(fēng)云;2012年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：1620830