本文選題：中國——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū) + 爭端解決機(jī)制��； 參考：《云南大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：建立中國——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)的共同設(shè)想的提出是在2000年11月于新加坡召開的中國與東盟領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人會議期間。2002年11月4日,總理朱隆基代表中國與東盟各國領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人一同簽署了《中國——東盟全面經(jīng)濟(jì)合作框架協(xié)議》(以下簡稱《框架協(xié)議》)。《中國——東盟全面經(jīng)濟(jì)合作框架協(xié)議》的正式簽署標(biāo)志著中國與東盟各國的經(jīng)濟(jì)、貿(mào)易的合作進(jìn)入到一個嶄新的階段,中國和東盟之間的經(jīng)濟(jì)、貿(mào)易合作關(guān)系實(shí)現(xiàn)了真正跨越式的發(fā)展。 隨后中國與東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)又簽訂了中國——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》(以下簡稱CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》)。CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》的簽定一定程度上為中國——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)各項(xiàng)貿(mào)易措施的實(shí)施提供有力法律保障,為中國與東盟各成員國在法律框架下進(jìn)一步拓展經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易的合作奠定了基礎(chǔ)。但該協(xié)議仍有諸多不足之處,并且該協(xié)議自簽署至今仍未真正發(fā)揮作用。 本文主要以中國與東盟各國在CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》中達(dá)成的共識為基礎(chǔ),通過闡述CAFTA爭端解決機(jī)制的特點(diǎn),比較和借鑒世貿(mào)組織關(guān)于爭議解決機(jī)制的相關(guān)規(guī)定,結(jié)合國際投資爭端解決機(jī)制的發(fā)展趨勢,分析CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》存在的問題,提出完善的建議。 本文共分四個部分。第一部分對CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》的概述,主要介紹了CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》的產(chǎn)生背景、意義、特點(diǎn),包括相關(guān)機(jī)構(gòu)的設(shè)立、程序安排和執(zhí)行方式。第二部分對CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》的規(guī)則和內(nèi)容與WTO爭端解決機(jī)制相關(guān)內(nèi)容進(jìn)行比較,主要針對兩者之間關(guān)于爭端解決機(jī)制的基本程序、適用范圍與主體、工作時限和爭端解決機(jī)構(gòu)及爭端解決機(jī)制的評價等方面的異同。第三部分分析CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》存在的問題以及現(xiàn)實(shí)缺陷。第四部分對如何完善CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》提出具體建議,如中國——東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)法制建設(shè),以及CAFTA《爭端解決機(jī)制協(xié)議》中有關(guān)于常設(shè)爭端解決機(jī)構(gòu)的設(shè)立,仲裁程序中仲裁機(jī)構(gòu)的設(shè)置、仲裁人員的選人、仲裁裁決的復(fù)核和執(zhí)行中可能存在的問題提出完善建議。
[Abstract]:The joint vision for the establishment of a China-ASEAN Free Trade area was put forward during the China-ASEAN leaders' meeting held in Singapore in November 2000. On 4 November 2002, On behalf of China and ASEAN leaders, Premier Zhu Longji signed the Framework Agreement on China-ASEAN Comprehensive Economic Cooperation (hereinafter referred to as the Framework Agreement). The signing marks the economies of China and the ASEAN countries. Trade cooperation has entered a new stage. The economic and trade cooperation between China and ASEAN has realized a real leapfrog development. Subsequently, the China-ASEAN Free Trade area signed the Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism between China and ASEAN Free Trade area (hereinafter referred to as the CAFTA Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism). The implementation of various trade measures in the China-ASEAN Free Trade area provides a strong legal guarantee, It has laid a foundation for the further development of economic and trade cooperation between China and ASEAN member countries under the legal framework. However, the agreement still has many shortcomings, and it has not really played a role since it was signed. Based on the consensus reached between China and ASEAN countries in the CAFTA dispute settlement Mechanism Agreement, this paper compares and draws lessons from the relevant provisions of the CAFTA dispute settlement Mechanism by elaborating the characteristics of the CAFTA dispute settlement Mechanism. Combined with the development trend of the international investment dispute settlement mechanism, this paper analyzes the problems existing in the Agreement on the dispute settlement Mechanism of CAFTA, and puts forward some suggestions for perfection. This paper is divided into four parts. The first part is an overview of the CAFTA Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism, which mainly introduces the background, significance and characteristics of the CAFTA Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism, including the establishment of relevant institutions, procedural arrangements and implementation methods. The second part compares the rules and contents of the CAFTA dispute settlement Mechanism Agreement with the relevant contents of the WTO dispute settlement Mechanism, mainly aiming at the basic procedure, application scope and subject of the dispute settlement Mechanism between the two parties. The differences and similarities between the time limit of work and the evaluation of dispute settlement body and dispute settlement mechanism. The third part analyzes the existing problems and practical defects of CAFTA dispute settlement Mechanism Agreement. The fourth part puts forward concrete suggestions on how to perfect the Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism of CAFTA, such as the legal construction of China-ASEAN Free Trade area, and the establishment of permanent dispute settlement body in the Agreement on dispute settlement Mechanism of CAFTA. The establishment of the arbitration institution, the selection of the arbiter, the review of the arbitration award and the possible problems existing in the execution of the arbitration award are put forward.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：云南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D996.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊麗艷;;試論中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制[J];安徽大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2008年04期

2 陳立虎;趙艷敏;;中國參與建立的區(qū)域貿(mào)易爭端解決機(jī)制[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年03期

3 陳志;;構(gòu)建大湄公河次區(qū)域爭端解決機(jī)制的思考——以區(qū)域貿(mào)易爭端解決機(jī)制模式為鑒[J];東南亞縱橫;2008年09期

4 麻慧;中國-東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制之探討——以比較研究為視角[J];東南亞研究;2005年04期

5 楊麗艷;蔣德翠;劉秋芷;李志楷;;廣西在中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)的新規(guī)則下的對策研究[J];改革與戰(zhàn)略;2006年02期

6 羅素麗;淺議中國—東盟投資爭端解決機(jī)制的構(gòu)建[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年05期

7 秦建榮;;WTO與NAFTA爭端解決機(jī)制之差異性比較研究——兼論對CAFTA爭端解決機(jī)制的借鑒意義[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

8 張昕宇;;中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)仲裁機(jī)制研究[J];河北法學(xué);2010年06期

9 宋錫祥;吳鵬;;論中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制及其完善[J];時代法學(xué);2006年05期

10 王雅紅;黃德明;;再論“中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)”[J];學(xué)理論;2009年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 張攀攀;中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制研究[D];云南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2011年

2 孔蕊;中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制及我國的應(yīng)對策略研究[D];山東大學(xué);2011年

3 艾宏偉;中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制制度研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2011年

4 蔣德翠;中國—東盟自由貿(mào)易區(qū)爭端解決機(jī)制的法律問題研究[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號：1923169