国际法上个人责任的法理:制度渊源与价值关联

On the Jurisprudence of Individual Responsibility in International Law:Legal Origin and Value Relations

西方国家近年来隐瞒战争罪行,并企图抵制或阻碍相关司法追责的行径引发了国际社会的广泛关注。国际法上的个人责任是战后国际法发展所确立的重要法律原则,它与现代国家责任拥有共同的制度渊源。随着国际法的演进,国际法规范在层次和效力上呈现出区分性,为确立与特定国际义务相称且充足的法律制裁,个人责任通过颠覆传统国际责任集体性的方式衍生出来,抽象实体说、个人义务说、法律规定说等学理为集体性的悖反提供了理论支撑。个人责任继承了传统国际责任的法律主义倾向,通过目标扩张形成了由规范责任、功能责任与秩序责任组成的复合式的法理结构。个人责任的内在价值在理论上相互关联、互为支撑,实践中彼此之间又表现出一定的不一致或冲突状态,这导致个人责任面临理论充足性的质疑与实证局限性的挑战。应当坚决反对惩治国际罪行过程中的政治操纵、双重标准和强权逻辑,维护国际法的严肃性和权威性。

In recent years,some western countries attempted to conceal war crimes committed by their military staff or intelligence officers,and tried to resist or hinder the process of criminal accountability,which has aroused widespread concerns around the globe.Contrary to the general perception,individual responsibility in international law and modern state responsibility share a common legal origin.With the evolution of international law since late 19th century,international norms differentiated in terms of gradation and legal effect.To establish legal sanctions that were adequate to implement these new-emerging international obligations,individual responsibility was introduced through the de-collectivization of traditional international responsibility by employing the theories of abstract entities,individual duties and legal stipulation.Individual responsibility inherited and developed the legalism tradition,and through the expansion of its anticipated goals,it has formed a pluralistic theoretical structure composed of the normative,functional and order dimensions.Meanwhile,there are clashes among the triple intrinsic values of individual responsibility,and the inconsistency between theoretical rationality and empirical limitation can be observed.It concludes that political manipulation,double standards,and power politics in punishing international crimes should be resolutely opposed,and the authority of international law should be firmly upheld.