论地图在国际法院解决领土争端中的证明价值——析地图证据之于钓鱼岛列岛争端

Value Concerning Maps as Evidence of Territorial Disputes before the International Court of Justice

通常,国际法院在解决领土争端的过程中,仅将地图和其他图表资料作为补强证据,并不视为一国取得领土主权的权原。但是,如果地图成为解决领土边界条约不可分割的一部分,或者对另一方产生承认、默认或禁止反言之效果,充分体现当事国之间确定的意图,那么对争议领土的主权归属的判定则具有不可反驳的推定作用,等同于法律权利。而且,与私人绘制的地图相比,一般来源于官方、相反利益方、第三方以及中立机构的地图证明价值较大。根据国际法院适用的证据分量大小比较规则,通过对中国、日本和第三方绘制的早期地图证明价值的分析,我国对钓鱼岛列岛享有无可辩驳的历史主权。

Generally, the International Court of Justice have been cautious in accepting maps as having any val- ue beyond that of a secondary source of corroborative evidence. In other words, maps are not the original source of legal title per se. However, when the map is integrated into a boundary treaty, or taken as an evidence of recognition, acquiescence and estoppel on the part of other party, it would form an irrebuttable presumption, tantamount in fact to legal title, fully embodying the physical expression of the will of the state. Moreover, com- pared with maps dram by private persons, maps drawn by official sources, opposite party, official or the third party or neutral agencies are likely to have higher evidential value than those drawn to advance particular claims or expressing a personal opinion. By analyzing early maps drawn by China, Japan and other neutral countries, according to the criteria of international court of concerning value of justice evidence, Diaoyu Islands indisputa- bly belongs to China.