论混合型海洋争端的管辖权问题

On the Issue of the Jurisdiction of Hybrid Maritime Disputes

以"查戈斯群岛仲裁案"和"南海仲裁案"为代表,混合型海洋争端的管辖权问题从理论争议演变为现实困境。受制于特定的属物管辖权,《联合国海洋法公约》争端解决机制框架下的国际仲裁庭不能对混合型海洋争端整体实施管辖权。相关争端当事方为规避管辖权的障碍,故意将混合型海洋争端的局部提交强制仲裁机制。但是,由于领土主权和海洋权益争端之间的固有联系,这种人为的割裂难以使海洋争端纯粹化,相反给国际仲裁庭的裁决带来了更大程度的困扰。鉴于混合型海洋争端所引发的正当性、实效性和公正性危机,国际仲裁庭在裁决管辖权问题时不得不持谨慎态度。国际仲裁庭在"查戈斯群岛仲裁案"中所使用的"重心检验"方法能确保对混合型海洋争端进行相对准确的定性,并随之确定管辖权。而在"南海仲裁案"中,国际仲裁庭并没有沿用"重心检验"方法对菲律宾的仲裁请求逐项进行客观和全面的审查,致使其管辖权裁决出现重大瑕疵。

Take the Chagos arbitration case and the South China Sea arbitration case as typical examples, the theoretical disagreement over the jurisdiction of hybrid maritime dispute turns out to be a predicament in reality. Due to the restriction of special ratione materiae, the international arbitration tribunal under the UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Mechanism cannot exercise its overall jurisdiction over this dispute. With an aim to evade the obstacles from gaining the jurisdiction, some parties to the dispute deliberately submit the part of the dispute to the mandatory arbitration mechanism. For all this, such a man-made isolation hardly purifies the maritime dispute and even brings greater perplexities to the international arbitration tribunal because of the inherent links between the disputes of territorial sovereign and maritime rights. In light of the crisis of legitimacy, effectiveness and impartiality caused by the maritime dispute, the international arbitration tribunal has to be cautious about arbitrating the issue of jurisdiction. ＂The center of gravity test＂ applied by the tribunal in the Chagos arbitration case can ensure the relatively accurate qualitative of hybrid maritime dispute, and then confirm the jurisdiction. Regrettably, the international arbitration tribunal did not follow the same test to investigate the arbitration request from the Philippines objectively and comprehensively in the South China Sea Arbitration, which caused substantial flaws in its arbitration on the right of jurisdiction of the South China Sea.