WTO裁决执行中的合理期限仲裁

Reasonable Period of Time in the Implementation of WTO Rulings

WTO 《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》规定,在立即执行争端解决机构作出的裁决不可行的情况下,败诉成员方可以被赋予一个执行的合理期限。通过仲裁方式确定合理期限,与《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》规定的其它两种确定合理期限的方式即单方提议和双方协商相比,具有很大的不确定性。确定有关规则的内涵及其适用的条件更多地取决于仲裁实践背后的法理或者说仲裁人逐案的阐释和推理。本文详细考察了WTO裁决执行实践中有关合理期限仲裁认定的可获得的全部实证资料,结合已有的研究成果,阐释了合理期限仲裁认定实践背后的法理。从合理期限仲裁的起源上看,WTO对合理期限进行仲裁认定的制度设计是建立在英美法律有关合理期限的概念上。随着合理期限仲裁案件数量的增多,仲裁实践进一步澄清和严格了有关合理期限的规定,对促使成员迅速执行裁决发挥了重要作用。

The WTO s Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes(DSU)allows for an exception to prompt compliance with the rulings and recommendations of the Dispute Settlement Body(DSB)where immediate implementation is impractical.A reasonable period of time can thus be granted to the implementing party.Pursuant to DSU Art.21.3,there are three manners to decide the reasonable period,namely,proposal by the implementing party,mutual agreement among parties involved,and arbitration.Compared with the other two manners,the arbitration of reasonable period is much theoretically misty,and how a reasonable period is determined in the course of arbitration deserves scrutiny.This article investigates,in details,all empirical materials available in the arbitrations of reasonable period in the implementation of WTO rulings,combines findings of other researches on hand,and expounds on the jurisprudence behind the arbitration of reasonable period.This article reaches its fundamental conclusions:firstly,dating back to the origins of arbitration of reasonable period,WTO law has constructed its arbitrating system of reasonable period on the basis of similar concept in common law;secondly,as the caseload of arbitrations of reasonable period surges,the interpretation and analysis of the arbitrator has gone through an evolution towards“rule orientation”-the arbitral practices have further clarified and tightened the rules in regard to the reasonable period;thirdly,reasonable period has played a pivotal role in urging WTO members to implement DSB recommendations and rulings.