本文選題：文化財產(chǎn) + 武裝沖突�。� 參考：《吉林大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文第一部分簡單介紹了文化財產(chǎn)的定義、范圍,將文化財產(chǎn)的主體剖析成兩種屬性：“文化性”和“財產(chǎn)性”,分析了文化財產(chǎn)對人類經(jīng)濟、藝術、歷史等方面的價值以及意義。以及保護的原因分析,戰(zhàn)亂時期的毀壞以及和平時期的盜竊和非法發(fā)掘非法移轉等等,都是文化財產(chǎn)需要保護的原因,針對各種破壞的不同,對文化財產(chǎn)的保護方式也不同。對于武裝沖突時期對的毀壞和掠奪主要通過國際公法領域對武裝沖突以及國際人道方面的調控來完成保護；對于和平時期文化財產(chǎn)的盜掘和非法移轉可以通過國際公法領域以及國際私法領域來保護。綜述了不同時期的不同種類的文化財產(chǎn)保護體制的構建。 文章第二部分重點分析在武裝沖突時期文化財產(chǎn)的保護方式,在武裝沖突時期對文化財產(chǎn)的最大破壞莫過于戰(zhàn)火對其產(chǎn)生的毀壞,有些是偶然的,有些是惡意的。雖然如此,對文化財產(chǎn)的保護仍然不能放松警惕,不能以偶然性作為借口來放任戰(zhàn)火對文化財產(chǎn)的破壞。根據(jù)以往的經(jīng)驗,國際社會開始在武裝沖突的條約中漸漸加入了文化財產(chǎn)保護的條款,而后制定了專門性的國際條約,本文中主要分析了1954年《關于發(fā)生武裝沖突時保護文化財產(chǎn)的公約》(1954年海牙公約),1954年海牙公約是關于武裝沖突時期文化財產(chǎn)保護的適用范圍最廣也是最主要的國際公約,公約相比之前的武裝沖突法律體系中的零星文化財產(chǎn)保護條約更加完善,對于文化財產(chǎn)的定義、保護義務方的界定都有了更加全面的規(guī)范,如同文章中所說,1954年海牙公約并非是一個反戰(zhàn)公約,而是一個規(guī)范戰(zhàn)爭的公約,它更加理性地對待戰(zhàn)爭與文化財產(chǎn)之間的關系,形成了武裝沖突時期文化財產(chǎn)保護的法律框架。 文章的第三和第四部分主要講的是和平時期文化財產(chǎn)保護的方式,既然處于和平時期,那么對于文化財產(chǎn)的破壞則主要是針對其“財產(chǎn)性”的,包括盜竊、非法發(fā)掘、非法移轉等等,對于這類破壞的主要原則方式也由戰(zhàn)時的單純的禁止性轉化為禁止性和主動性,即戰(zhàn)時的避免破壞轉化成為和平時期的避免破壞和主動追索。其中第三章主要從國際公法領域來研究,避免破壞的國際公約以1970年聯(lián)合國教科文組織的《關于采取措施和防止非法進口文化財產(chǎn)和非法轉讓其所有權的公約》為主；主動追索的國際公約以1995年國家統(tǒng)一私法協(xié)會的《關于被盜或非法出口文物公約》為主,因為涉及追索問題,該公約一定涉及國家私法層面的參與,這里就引入第四部分,在1995年國家統(tǒng)一私法協(xié)會《關于被盜或非法出口文物公約》的基礎上,西方各主要國家對于文化財產(chǎn)的保護方面的法律實踐,基于這些實踐可以判斷出各國對于該問題的態(tài)度都是積極的。但在公法調控需要私法實施的情況之下,由于各國的法律制度的多元化,文化財產(chǎn)的追索問題始終存在著瑕疵,第四部分還提出了構建文化財產(chǎn)追索仲裁機構的設想,并分析了實現(xiàn)這種設想的條件和背景,做出期待。 第五章主要的內容是基于我國的情況來分析的,自古以來,華夏五千年的文明對全世界都充滿了神秘的誘惑,十九世紀二十年代鴉片戰(zhàn)爭敲開了中國的大門,隨之而來的戰(zhàn)亂給中國的文化財產(chǎn)帶來了巨大的災難；戰(zhàn)爭結束了,隨之而來的是各種文化財產(chǎn)的犯罪,盜竊、盜掘、走私等等問題越來越嚴重,造成了中國大量文化財產(chǎn)的流逝。那么如何追索流失的文化財產(chǎn),則成為了當下最重要的問題。第五部分從國際多邊、單邊合作、國內立法、相關政策以及民間等方面分析中國的文化財產(chǎn)保護的體制構建問題和提出建議,以完善我國的文化財產(chǎn)保護制度。
[Abstract]:The first part of this article briefly introduces the definition and scope of cultural property, and analyzes the main body of cultural property into two attributes: "culture" and "property". It analyzes the value and significance of cultural property to human economy, art and history, as well as the analysis of the original cause of protection, the destruction of the war period and the theft of the peace period. Theft, illegal excavation, illegal transfer and so on are the reasons for the protection of cultural property, and the protection of cultural property is different in view of the different types of destruction. The destruction and plundering of the period of armed conflict is protected mainly through the regulation of armed conflict and international humanitarian aspects in the field of international public law; for peace The excavation and illegal transfer of cultural property in the period can be protected through the field of public international law and the field of private international law. The construction of different kinds of cultural property protection system in different periods is summarized.
The second part of the article focuses on the analysis of the protection of cultural property during the armed conflict. In the period of armed conflict, the greatest destruction of the cultural property is the destruction of the war and fire, some are accidental and some are malicious. In the light of previous experience, the international community began to gradually join the provisions of the protection of cultural property in the treaties of armed conflict, and then formulated specialized international treaties. This article mainly analyzed the 1954 Convention on the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict (the Hague convention of 1954), The 1954 Hague convention is the most widely used and most important international convention on the protection of cultural property in the period of armed conflict. The Convention on the protection of sporadic cultural property in the legal system of armed conflict is more perfect than before. The definition of cultural property and the definition of the protection agent have been more comprehensive. In the article, the Hague convention in 1954 is not an anti war convention, but a convention to standardize the war. It is more rational in dealing with the relationship between war and cultural property and forming a legal framework for the protection of cultural property during the armed conflict.
The third and fourth parts of the article are mainly about the way of the protection of cultural property in the period of peace. Since it is in a peaceful period, the destruction of the cultural property is mainly aimed at its "property", including theft, illegal excavation, illegal transfer and so on, and the main principle of this kind of destruction is also simply prohibited in wartime. The nature of the third chapters, mainly from the field of public international law, has been translated into prohibition and initiative. The third chapters are mainly from the field of public international law, and the international conventions to avoid destruction are adopted by the UNESCO in 1970 to take measures and prevent the illegal import of cultural property and the illegal transfer of them. The Convention on ownership is dominant; the International Convention on active recourse is dominated by the Convention on stolen or illegal export of cultural relics by the National Association for the unification of private law in 1995, because it involves the issue of recourse. The convention must involve the participation of the national private law level. The fourth part is introduced here. In 1995, the National Association for the unification of private law < about stolen or illegal. On the basis of the Convention on the export of cultural relics, the legal practice of the protection of cultural property in the main western countries can be judged by these practices that all countries are positive in their attitude to the problem. However, under the circumstances of the private law enforcement of public law regulation and regulation, the pursuit of cultural property because of the pluralism of the legal system of various countries The problem has always been defective. The fourth part also puts forward the idea of building a cultural property recourse to arbitration institutions, and analyses the conditions and background of realizing this idea, and makes expectations.
The main content of the fifth chapter is based on the analysis of the situation in China. Since ancient times, the five thousand years of China's civilization has been full of mysterious seduction to the whole world. In 1820s, the Opium War opened the door of China. The war chaos brought a great disaster to the cultural property of China; the war ended and followed. The problems of crime, theft, theft, smuggling and so on are becoming more and more serious in all kinds of cultural property, which have led to the passage of a large number of cultural property in China. Then how to recourse the lost cultural property has become the most important problem at the moment. The fifth part is from the analysis of international multilateral, unilateral cooperation, domestic legislation, relevant policies and folk. China's cultural property protection system construction problems and suggestions are put forward to improve our cultural property protection system.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D997

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 方慧;;云南少數(shù)民族文物法律保護的問題與思考[J];民族研究;2000年04期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 楊婧;文化遺產(chǎn)權芻論[D];河海大學;2006年

2 管松;“無意中影響水下文化遺產(chǎn)的活動”法律問題研究[D];廈門大學;2007年

，

本文編號：2023250