国际法院对新冠疫情国家责任争端的管辖权障碍

The Possible Obstacles for the ICJ Jurisdiction over China's Liability in Combating COVID-19 Pandemic

《世界卫生组织组织法》第75条确定了有条件的国际法院协定管辖,其前置程序要求争端未能通过谈判或世界卫生大会解决。两个前置程序之间的关系不能简单理解为替代关系。此外,《世界卫生组织组织法》主要条款均是有关世界卫生组织的机构宗旨、功能及运行,没有对国家在国际公共卫生方面的具体义务作出规定。虽然可以设法连接2005年《国际卫生条例》与《世界卫生组织组织法》而构建有关《世界卫生组织组织法》解释或适用的争端,但结合《国际卫生条例》及《世界卫生组织组织法》的具体义务来看,这种构建面临事实和法律障碍。《世界卫生组织组织法》和《国际卫生条例》均没有将首个发现并报告疾病的国家与其他国家区别对待,更不存在对这些国家的所谓追责条款。再者,向首个报告疫情的国家追责,不符合有关国际法规则的宗旨和目的,也不符合具体的国际法规则。应善意解释和适用有关国际法规则,通过国际合作应对当前疫情。

Article 75 of the Constitution of the World Health Organization provides that a dispute that has not been resolved by the negotiation or the Health Assembly shall be submitted to the ICJ.As a Constitution for the establishment and the operation of the WHO,it does not provide any obligations on the public health issues in details,thus it is difficult to formulate a dispute under such Constitution.However,it might be possible to formulate a dispute arising from both of the instruments,but there still are some possible factual and legal obstacles to submitting the dispute to the ICJ,for example,whether the two pre-conditions are alternative or both necessary depends on the object and purpose of the Constitution.Besides,neither of the two documents nor other instruments under the WHO has distinguished the first-reported states from others,and none of them has set special obligations for the first-reported states.To distinguish the first-reported state and other states is neither consistent with the object and purpose of the international law nor a wise choice.The COVID-19 pandemic can only be defeated through the international cooperation among all the states by interpreting and implementing the international rules in good faith.