【摘要】：在兩個或兩個以上國家共有同一個淡水河流、淡水湖或地下水層的情況下,相關(guān)國家就水資源的爭端很難得到有效解決。近年來,隨著全球性用水危機(jī)的加劇,關(guān)于跨界淡水資源的糾紛進(jìn)一步突顯。本文在解析出尼羅河水資源爭端的實質(zhì)的基礎(chǔ)上,分析了關(guān)于尼羅河水資源國際條約的效力問題,重點關(guān)注了國際河流爭端解決機(jī)制以及其他國際河流爭端有效解決的實踐在尼羅河爭端中的應(yīng)用。試圖為解決尼羅河水資源爭端提供一些法學(xué)理論支撐。 長期以來,尼羅河流域國家在如何合理分配和利用尼羅河水資源的問題上一直爭論不休。本文認(rèn)為,其實質(zhì)在于尼羅河各流域國出于本國利益的考慮,對水資源權(quán)產(chǎn)生的不同解讀。 解決尼羅河水資源爭端,首先要解決兩個的法律問題,水資源權(quán)和尼羅河水資源條約的效力。本文認(rèn)為,上下游國家堅持的絕對領(lǐng)土主權(quán)和絕對領(lǐng)土完整主權(quán)理論始終在解決爭端中扮演著絆腳石的角色,應(yīng)該摒棄。而國際河流中的有限領(lǐng)土主權(quán)和利益共享理論對解決爭端有著積極的意義。關(guān)于尼羅河水資源的條約的制定分為三個時期:依據(jù)條約繼承“白板原則”,相關(guān)國家有權(quán)主張不履行殖民時期的條約規(guī)定的義務(wù);后殖民時期,上游國家沒有簽署任何一個與下游國家有關(guān)尼羅河水資源的協(xié)議,1959年的協(xié)定的效力只對簽約國即埃及和蘇丹有約束力;2010年的《尼羅河合作框架協(xié)議》基于同樣的原因,不能對下游國家產(chǎn)生約束力。若試圖解決爭端,就必須制定出一個包括所有流域國在內(nèi)的水資源分配協(xié)議。 尼羅河流域國為解決爭端付出了大量努力,但成效甚微。在國際上,國際河流爭端解決機(jī)制強調(diào)國家行為應(yīng)遵循國際社會主導(dǎo)的政治以及法律原則。在爭端發(fā)生后,國際上有著大量成熟有效的爭端解決案例可供爭端方根據(jù)現(xiàn)實情況進(jìn)行借鑒。 《國際河流利用規(guī)則》和《國際水道非航行適用法公約》等國際水法的文件為解決國際河流爭端提供了法律基礎(chǔ)。盡管由于各國際河流的具體情況千差萬別,國際水法并不能在國際河流爭端中得到普遍適用,我們?nèi)钥梢栽谄浠驹瓌t的指導(dǎo)下,找到解決措施。
[Abstract]:In the case of the same freshwater river, freshwater lake or groundwater layer in two or more countries and more than two countries, the disputes on water resources are difficult to be solved effectively. In recent years, with the intensification of the global water crisis, the dispute about the transboundary freshwater resources is further highlighted. This article is an analysis of the real water resources dispute in the Nile River. On the basis of quality, this paper analyzes the effectiveness of the international treaty on the Nile River water resources, focusing on the application of the international river dispute settlement mechanism and the effective settlement of other international river disputes in the Nile dispute, trying to provide some legal theoretical support for the settlement of the Nile water dispute.
For a long time, the Nile River Basin countries have been arguing about how to rationally allocate and utilize the Nile water resources. The essence of this article is that the Nile Valley countries have different interpretations of the right to water resources for the sake of their own interests.
In order to solve the Nile water resource dispute, it is necessary to solve the two legal issues, the right of water resources and the validity of the Nile water resource treaty. This article holds that the theory of absolute territorial sovereignty and absolute territorial integrity of the upper and lower countries has always played a stumbling block in the settlement of disputes and should be abandoned. The theory of territorial sovereignty and interest sharing has positive significance to the settlement of disputes. The formulation of the Nile River water resources treaty is divided into three periods: according to the treaty, the "white board principle" is inherited by the treaty, and the relevant countries have the right to claim the obligations under the Treaty of the colonial period; in the post colonial period, the upstream countries did not sign any one and the lower reaches. The national agreement on the Nile water resources, the validity of the 1959 agreement is binding only on the contracting countries, namely, Egypt and Sultan, and the 2010 Nile cooperation framework agreement, based on the same reasons, can not be binding on the downstream countries. If the dispute is tried to solve the dispute, a water resource, including all the basin countries, must be developed. Match the agreement.
The Nile River Basin countries have made great efforts to solve the dispute, but have little effect. In international, the international river dispute settlement mechanism emphasizes that state behavior should follow the political and legal principles dominated by the international community. After the dispute, there are a large number of mature and effective dispute settlement cases in the world. Draw lessons from.
International water law documents, such as the international rules for the use of rivers and the International Water Law Convention on the law of the non navigation of international watercourses, provide the legal basis for the settlement of international river disputes. Although the international water law is not universally applicable in international river disputes, we can still refer to the basic principles of international rivers, although the specific circumstances of the international rivers can not be widely applied in the international river disputes. Guide, find the solution.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D996.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 王鴻剛;國際沖突將圍繞資源展開[J];河南國土資源;2003年09期

2 特斯琺業(yè)·塔菲斯;尼羅河流域分水爭議解決機(jī)制評價[J];人民黃河;2005年11期

3 鄧宏兵;我國國際河流的特征及合作開發(fā)利用研究[J];世界地理研究;2000年02期

4 劉斌;關(guān)于水權(quán)的概念辨析[J];中國水利;2003年01期

5 周玉璽,胡繼連,周霞;流域水資源產(chǎn)權(quán)的基本特性與我國水權(quán)制度建設(shè)研究[J];中國水利;2003年11期

6 裴麗萍;水權(quán)制度初論[J];中國法學(xué);2001年02期

7 何大明,茍俊華;全球變化對跨境淡水資源利用和管理的影響[J];自然資源學(xué)報;1999年03期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 中國農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)院農(nóng)業(yè)自然資源和農(nóng)業(yè)區(qū)劃研究所副研究員 姜文來;[N];中國水利報;2000年

，

本文編號：2133697