發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-21 16:35

  本文選題：稀土案 + 自然資源��； 參考：《中國(guó)人口·資源與環(huán)境》2017年01期

【摘要】：舉世矚目的 WTO"稀土案"于2014年8月7日終落帷幕。同先前的"原料案"一樣,中國(guó)還是難逃敗訴的命運(yùn)。上訴機(jī)構(gòu)支持申訴方的大部分指控,再次否決了《1994年關(guān)稅與貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994,以下簡(jiǎn)稱GATT)第20條對(duì)中國(guó)《入世議定書》的可適用性,從而確認(rèn)中國(guó)對(duì)稀土、鎢、鉬三種原材料采取的出口稅及配額等管制措施違背了WTO相關(guān)規(guī)則和入世所作的特殊承諾。作為自然資源的進(jìn)出口大國(guó),在自然資源貿(mào)易糾紛(特別是出口管制問(wèn)題)不斷"升溫"和WTO爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制運(yùn)用愈來(lái)愈頻繁的今天,中國(guó)應(yīng)認(rèn)真總結(jié)和反思這場(chǎng)"稀土保衛(wèi)戰(zhàn)"失利帶來(lái)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn),以從源頭上破解中國(guó)出口管制措施在WTO體制下遭遇的法律困境,避免今后類似案件敗訴的重現(xiàn)�；诖�,本文綜合應(yīng)用案例分析、文本分析、歷史分析和比較分析等方法對(duì)"稀土案"爭(zhēng)訟的焦點(diǎn)和爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)構(gòu)(DSB)的裁決意見(jiàn)做了詳盡的透析,結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)此案中DSB的審理不同程度存在著解釋僵化、無(wú)視中國(guó)締約真意及主觀隨意、前后矛盾等失范之處,對(duì)中國(guó)頗為不公。不過(guò),該案也從另外一方面暴露出中國(guó)出口管制立法的疏漏與實(shí)施缺陷。是故,本文建議中國(guó):1請(qǐng)求部長(zhǎng)級(jí)會(huì)議/總理事會(huì)對(duì)GATT與《入世議定書》關(guān)系做出統(tǒng)一解釋,并單獨(dú)將出口稅承諾納入減讓表;2重視DSB既有的裁決思路,根據(jù)WTO規(guī)則修改相關(guān)出口管制法規(guī);3加強(qiáng)資源開(kāi)采的法律管控,提高資源稅的征收標(biāo)準(zhǔn);4確保對(duì)內(nèi)外資源需求企業(yè)的管制一致,優(yōu)化出口許可管理,努力從WTO法和國(guó)內(nèi)法兩個(gè)層面推動(dòng)現(xiàn)行自然資源出口秩序的完善,使中國(guó)今后對(duì)自然資源的出口管制既能符合WTO規(guī)則又能達(dá)致確保本國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)可持續(xù)性發(fā)展之目的。
[Abstract]:The world-renowned WTO rare Earth case ended on August 7, 2014. Like the previous Raw material case, China is still doomed to defeat. The Appellate body upheld most of the complaints made by the complainant and again rejected the applicability of Article 20 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 to China's accession Protocol, thereby confirming China's commitment to rare earths and tungsten, The export tax and quota of molybdenum three kinds of raw materials violate the relevant rules of WTO and the special commitments made by WTO. As a large country of import and export of natural resources, today, trade disputes of natural resources (especially export control issues) are constantly "heating up" and the dispute settlement mechanism of WTO is being used more and more frequently. China should seriously sum up and reflect on the experience and lessons brought about by the defeat of the "rare earth defense war", so as to solve the legal dilemma of China's export control measures under the WTO system and avoid the recurrence of similar cases in the future. Based on this, this paper makes a detailed analysis of the focus of the "rare earth case" and the ruling opinion of the dispute settlement body (DSBs) by using the methods of case analysis, text analysis, historical analysis and comparative analysis. The results show that the trial of DSB in this case has different degrees of interpretation ossification, ignoring the true intention of China's contracting, subjective and arbitrary, contradictions and other irregularities, which is quite unfair to China. However, the case also exposed the oversight and implementation of China's export control legislation. Therefore, this paper suggests that China 1 should request the Ministerial Conference / General Council to make a unified interpretation of the relationship between the GATT and the Protocol to the WTO, and separately incorporate the export tax commitment into the concession schedule and attach importance to the existing ruling ideas of DSB. According to the WTO rules, we should amend the relevant export control laws and regulations to strengthen the legal control of resource exploitation, raise the standard of resource tax collection and ensure the consistency of the control over domestic and foreign enterprises in need of resources, and optimize the management of export licenses. This paper tries to promote the perfection of the current natural resource export order from the two aspects of WTO law and domestic law, so that China's export control of natural resources in the future can not only conform to the WTO rules but also achieve the purpose of ensuring the sustainable development of the country's economy.
【作者單位】： 華僑大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：國(guó)家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目“WTO擴(kuò)散效應(yīng)研究”(批準(zhǔn)號(hào):12CFX109) 2012年華僑大學(xué)“哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)青年學(xué)者成長(zhǎng)工程”(批準(zhǔn)號(hào):12SKGC-QT15) 2016年福建省高等學(xué)校新世紀(jì)優(yōu)秀人才支持項(xiàng)目
【分類號(hào)】：D996.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李根信;孫晉忠;;論中國(guó)的出口管制政策[J];國(guó)際問(wèn)題研究;2007年03期

2 李恒陽(yáng);;美國(guó)在出口管制上的國(guó)際合作[J];國(guó)際關(guān)系學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年04期

3 張文宗;;美放松出口管制的虛實(shí)[J];w，

本文編號(hào)：1783225