上诉机构的危机与改革——以审查专家组客观评估事实为切入点

The Crisis and Reform of the WTO Appellate Body:A Perspective of Reviewing Panels’Objective Assessment of the Facts

美国阻挠上诉机构成员遴选的理由之一是上诉机构越权审查专家组的事实认定。上诉机构在“欧共体荷尔蒙案”中将DSU第11条规定的“客观评估案件事实”解释为专家组的一项义务,进而主张“专家组是否对事实作出客观评估”属于法律问题,落入上诉审查范围。上诉机构审查的对象是专家组在事实认定过程中是否违背正当程序原则,而纠正程序性错误属于上诉机制的固有职权,故上诉机构的审查具有正当性。实践中,上诉机构在不同案件中适用的审查标准存在差别,但这并不必然导致上诉机构突破限制对案件事实进行实质上的审查。

One reason for blocking the selection of the WTO Appellate Body members by the United States is that the Appellate Body exceeded its power to review the panel’s fact-finding.The Appellate Body in EC—Hormone considered the term“objective assessment of the facts”contained in Article 11 of the DSU as imposing an obligation upon the panel,and further asserted whether the panel made such an objective assessment constitutes a legal issue,which falls within the scope of appellate review.This article argues that,when reviewing the panel’s objective assessment of the facts,the Appellate Body actually examines whether the panel violates due process in the fact-finding.Since an appellate mechanism has the inherent power to rectify procedural errors committed by the court of first instance,it is legitimate for the Appellate Body to review due process violations of the panel.Although the Appellate Body has applied different standards of review in different cases,this does not necessarily result in reviewing factual issues.