海洋争端法律解决机制执行比较研究

A Comparative Study on the Implementation of Dispute Settlement Mechanism in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

《联合国海洋法公约》中规定了争端解决机制的组成、权限、审理程序等,但是在形成有强制拘束力裁决的执行问题上却鲜有涉及。从目前对国际法院、国际海洋法法庭以及仲裁法庭的案件执行信息统计来看,三者执行情况存在一定的差异。从1994年《联合国海洋法公约》生效开始,国际法院受理案件18件,审结13件,其中6件都没有得到合理善意充分执行;国际海洋法法庭受理案件25件,审结25件,未执行3件;仲裁法庭受理案件22件,审结13件,5件没有得到执行。而产生这种执行差异的原因包括机构设置本身的权威性、案件的内容和裁决、执行保障等因素。为此,可以构建执行监督体系和创设强制执行措施来作为设想,进一步保障《联合国海洋法公约》所涉争端解决机制的合理善意充分地执行。

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provides for the constitution,jurisdiction and trial procedure of the dispute settlement mechanism.But it is rarely involved in the implementation of a binding adjudication.From the information statistics of case implementation of the International Court of Justice (ICJ),the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the arbitration tribunal,there are some differences in implementation between the three mechanisms.Since the UNCLOS took effect in 1994,the ICJ has accepted 18 cases and concluded 13 cases,of which 6 cases have not been reasonably,in good faith and fully implemented;the ITLOS has accepted 25 cases,concluded 25 cases,and 3 cases have not been implemented;the arbitration tribunal has accepted 22 cases,concluded 13 cases,and 5 cases have not been implemented.The reasons for this discrepancy include the authority of the institution itself,the content and adjudication of the case,and the implement guarantee,etc.Therefore,there is an assumption for the construction of an executive supervisory system and the creation of enforcement measures to further guarantee the reasonable,full and good faith implementation of the dispute settlement mechanism in the UNCLOS.