“或引渡或起诉”义务的性质问题研究

The Obligation Extradite or Prosecute:Clarifying Its Nature

“或引渡或起诉”义务在众多条约中都有体现,受到了国际层面的广泛关注。在“或引渡或起诉”义务的适用问题上,首先要解决的就是这一义务的性质问题:如果该义务仅为条约性义务,那么这一义务就只对某国际法律条约的缔约国有强制力;如果该义务已被确认为习惯国际法的一部分,那么“或引渡或起诉”义务将对所有国家具有约束力,无论其是否为条约缔约国。对这一问题的模糊处理,使得这一义务适用时“强制性”的对象范围难以得到明确。从国家层面上的实践和争议可以看出,对于该义务的表述,非基于条约时,其性质尚不明确,直接影响了“或引渡或起诉”义务的适用。笔者认为,“或引渡或起诉”这一义务在针对国际核心罪行,如种族灭绝、反人类罪和战争罪时应当具有国际习惯法地位。

The obligation to extradite or prosecute(aut dedere aut judicare)is enshrined in numerous treaties,and it is now the subject of particular attention.The most significant question of the application of the obligation to extradite or prosecute is what the nature it is.The answer to the question affects the obligation for“mandatory”object scope:if the obligation is only treaty obligations,then this obligation is only to an international legal treaty contracting state mandatory;if part of the obligation has been recognized as customary obligation,so it will be binding on all countries,regardless of whether the parties to the treaty.However,state practice and the debates show that the non-treaty based status of the obligation remains unclear.This article elucidates such a status and clarifies the definition and scope of this obligation.The author concludes that a customary status may be ascribed to the obligation to extradite or prosecute for core international crimes such as genocide,crimes against humanity and war crimes.