投资条约对国家公共政策空间的侵蚀及其变革——兼论我国缔约时的相关考量

The Corrosion of Public Policy Space Resulted from the Investment Agreements and Relevant Reforms——An China's Response When Negotiating Investment Agreements

现行投资条约大部分缔结于20世纪90年代,受自由主义经济政策的影响,这些投资条约重在保护和促进投资,而漠视东道国的公共利益和社会价值,菲利普·莫里斯案即是投资者利用投资条约挑战东道国就公共事务行使规制权的典型。对此,一些国家开始在新一代投资条约中进行变革:转变立法导向、增加例外条款、明确实体性投资保障条款的内涵,以维护国家就公共事务进行规制的权利。基于我国兼具重要的资本输出国和输入国的双重立场,我国在缔结新投资条约时,总体指导原则应是平衡投资者权益和东道国公共利益,但与不同缔约对象谈判时,涉及国家公共政策空间条款的具体安排和阐述应有所区别。

The majority of the investment agreements were sealed in the 1990 s. Under the influence of economic liberalism,these treaties put primary emphasis on the investment protection and promotion,and neglect the public interests and social value. The Philip Morris dispute is a cuse which the investors took the investment agreement as a tool for challenging the national regulation power over public affairs. Subsequently, some states initiated reforms in the new generation of investment agreements,altering the legislative intent,adding exceptional clauses, clarifying the scoop of investment protection clause,in order to maintain the national sovereign power over the public affairs. China are both a major capital Export and a import country,therefore our principle balance the intevests between investors' and host nation's,whereas differentiating the arrangement and explanation of the clauses regarding the national public affairs among different counter parties.