本文選題：動(dòng)物福利 + 自由貿(mào)易�。� 參考：《鄭州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的深入發(fā)展,國(guó)際之間的貿(mào)易日益繁盛,而各國(guó)商品能否在全世界范圍內(nèi)自由流通就成了各國(guó)關(guān)注的重要目標(biāo),由于在國(guó)際貿(mào)易中各國(guó)地位的不平等,為了維護(hù)自身利益導(dǎo)致各種各樣的貿(mào)易壁壘也層出不窮。另一方面經(jīng)濟(jì)水平的提升推動(dòng)了人們生活水平的提高,保護(hù)大自然意識(shí)也逐步增強(qiáng),保護(hù)動(dòng)物福利成為了一個(gè)全球性的話題。而此時(shí)動(dòng)物福利與自由貿(mào)易之間的矛盾也逐漸引起了國(guó)際社會(huì)的廣泛關(guān)注。2009年,歐洲議會(huì)和歐盟理事會(huì)出臺(tái)了一項(xiàng)全面禁止在歐盟國(guó)家銷售海豹產(chǎn)品的規(guī)則,引起了世界上最大的海豹產(chǎn)品出口國(guó)加拿大和挪威的強(qiáng)烈不滿,在協(xié)商無(wú)果的情況下最終兩國(guó)就此案訴于WTO。這是WTO處理的第一起以保護(hù)動(dòng)物福利為目的涉嫌限制自由貿(mào)易的案件,引起了國(guó)際社會(huì)普遍關(guān)注。2013年11月25日,WTO爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)構(gòu)發(fā)布了關(guān)于本案的專家組報(bào)告,一方面肯定了歐盟海豹管理措施保護(hù)動(dòng)物福利相關(guān)的公共道德目標(biāo)的正當(dāng)性,另一方面又認(rèn)為此項(xiàng)措施不是以公平公正的方式實(shí)施的,違背了WTO協(xié)議的相關(guān)義務(wù)。對(duì)此雙方都有不服之處先后提出上訴,2014年5月22日WTO上訴機(jī)構(gòu)發(fā)布了報(bào)告,對(duì)持續(xù)多年的海豹貿(mào)易爭(zhēng)端作出了最終裁決。在該案的上訴機(jī)構(gòu)報(bào)告中,上訴機(jī)構(gòu)推翻了專家組關(guān)于歐盟海豹管理措施屬于TBT協(xié)定1.1中的“技術(shù)性法規(guī)”的認(rèn)定,專家組根據(jù)TBT協(xié)定所作出的認(rèn)定沒(méi)有法律效力,同時(shí)又維持了專家組認(rèn)定該措施違反了GATT 1994協(xié)議中的最惠國(guó)待遇原則和國(guó)民待遇原則,并且雖然該措施可以根據(jù)GATT 1994協(xié)議第20條(a)項(xiàng)公共道德例外獲得臨時(shí)正當(dāng)性,但因?yàn)槠洳](méi)有滿足第20條前言各項(xiàng)要求所以不能獲得最終正當(dāng)性。該案表明,動(dòng)物福利措施既有其合理的一面,又有可能造成新形式的貿(mào)易壁壘。我國(guó)是世界貿(mào)易組織的重要成員,同時(shí)又是動(dòng)物產(chǎn)品出口大國(guó),在此案件中雙方圍繞著幾大爭(zhēng)論焦點(diǎn)展開(kāi)的激烈爭(zhēng)論、有關(guān)條約的解釋和認(rèn)定爭(zhēng)議所采取的審查措施,對(duì)我國(guó)日后面對(duì)復(fù)雜多面的國(guó)際貿(mào)易爭(zhēng)端有很重要的借鑒意義。
[Abstract]:With the deepening development of economic globalization, the international trade is flourishing day by day, and whether the goods of all countries can circulate freely in the whole world has become the important goal of the countries concerned, because of the unequal status of the countries in the international trade. In order to protect their own interests, a variety of trade barriers are also emerging. On the other hand, the improvement of economic level has promoted the improvement of people's living standard, and the consciousness of protecting nature has been gradually strengthened, and the protection of animal welfare has become a global topic. Meanwhile, the contradiction between animal welfare and free trade has gradually aroused widespread concern in the international community. In 2009, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union issued a total ban on the sale of seal products in European Union countries. Canada and Norway, the world's largest exporters of seal products, were furious, and the two countries sued the case against the WTO in the futile negotiations. This is the first case to be dealt with by the WTO concerning alleged restrictions on free trade for the purpose of protecting animal welfare, which has aroused widespread concern in the international community. On 25 November 2013, the WTO dispute settlement body issued the report of a panel of experts on the case, On the one hand, it affirms the legitimacy of the public moral goals related to the seal management measures of the European Union to protect animal welfare. On the other hand, it considers that the measures are not implemented in a fair and impartial manner, which violates the relevant obligations of the WTO agreement. On May 22, 2014, the WTO Appellate body issued a report that made the final ruling on the seal trade dispute that had lasted for many years. In the case's appellate body report, the appellate body overturned the panel's finding that EU seal management measures were "technical regulations" in TBT Agreement 1.1, and that the Panel's findings under the TBT Agreement had no legal effect. Maintaining the Panel's finding that the measure violates the principle of most-favoured-nation treatment and the principle of national treatment in the GATT 1994 Agreement, and that the measure may be provisionally justified in accordance with article XIX.a) of the GATT 1994 Agreement, However, because it does not meet the requirements of article 20 preamble, it can not obtain the ultimate legitimacy. The case shows that animal welfare measures have both a legitimate side and the potential for new forms of trade barriers. China is an important member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and also a major exporter of animal products. In this case, the two sides engaged in fierce disputes around several major points of contention, and the examination measures taken in relation to the interpretation and determination of the dispute, It is of great significance for our country to face complex and multi-sided international trade disputes in the future.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D996.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 胡建國(guó);;多邊貿(mào)易體制下的動(dòng)物福利與土著群體生存利益之辯——WTO上訴機(jī)構(gòu)歐盟海豹案裁決的啟示[J];國(guó)際法研究;2015年03期

2 郭桂環(huán);;WTO體制下的動(dòng)物福利與貿(mào)易自由——基于海豹產(chǎn)品案的思考[J];政法論壇;2015年02期

3 漆彤;;動(dòng)物福利與自由貿(mào)易之辯——評(píng)加拿大、挪威訴歐盟禁止海豹產(chǎn)品進(jìn)口措施案[J];廈門(mén)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2014年02期

4 王燕;張磊;;WTO體制下動(dòng)物福利措施的非歧視和必要性分析及發(fā)展困境——以加拿大訴歐盟《海豹禁令》案為視角[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)貿(mào)探索;2013年07期

5 張敏;;動(dòng)物福利的國(guó)際貿(mào)易保障制度與我國(guó)的立法對(duì)策[J];國(guó)際商務(wù)研究;2013年02期

6 彭岳;;WTO協(xié)定中公共道德例外簡(jiǎn)評(píng)[J];南京大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2007年Z1期

7 常紀(jì)文;;從歐盟立法看動(dòng)物福利法的獨(dú)立性[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2006年03期

8 常紀(jì)文;;動(dòng)物福利立法的貿(mào)易價(jià)值取向問(wèn)題[J];山東科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2006年01期

9 鄒曉琴;動(dòng)物福利:國(guó)際農(nóng)產(chǎn)品貿(mào)易中的道德壁壘[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題探索;2004年09期

，

本文編號(hào)：1987799