期刊文献+

PHEIC时期临时贸易措施的WTO合法性分析——以2019年新冠肺炎疫情为视角 被引量:1

Legitimacy Analysis under WTO Law of Temporary Trade Measures during PHEIC——On the Event of COVID-19 Pandemic
原文传递
导出
摘要 WTO成员在新冠肺炎疫情等PHEIC时期采取的大部分临时贸易措施因对国际贸易的影响较大、对实现保护人类、动物生命或健康的目标缺乏贡献、存在合理可用的替代措施或以构成武断、不合理歧视的方式实施,而难以认为符合GATT、GATS的公共卫生例外或《SPS协定》的具体义务条款规定。成员采取的临时动植物检疫措施应基于《SPS协定》所认可的国际标准、指南或建议,但在缺乏相关科学证据时可根据《SPS协定》第5.7条暂时维持额外的动植物检疫措施。鉴于WTO在争端解决程序和救济方式上的局限、对成员公共卫生管辖权的限制降低了其有效规制临时贸易措施的潜力,WTO成员首先应确保其临时贸易措施符合WTO规则,必要时可将仲裁作为替代性争端解决方式。 Most temporary trade measures( TTMs) taken by WTO Members during PHEIC( e.g.,COVID-19)may fail to comply with public health exception provisions under GATT or GATS,or with specific provisions of SPS Agreement,if such measures have significant impact on international trade,make no contribution to the objective of protecting human or animal life or health,alternative measures are reasonably available or such measures are applied in a manner which constitutes a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination.SPS measures taken by a Member shall be based on international standards,guidelines or recommendations recognized by SPS Agreement.When,however,relevant scientific evidence is insufficient,a Member may maintain additional SPS measures according to Article 5.7 of SPS Agreement.Since the weakness of WTO dispute settlement procedures and remedy and the restrictions on Member’s right to regulate its public health both undermine WTO’s efficacy of regulating TTMs,Members shall in the first place make their TTMs in conformity with WTO law,and utilize arbitration as the alternative dispute settlement approach when necessary.
作者 鄢雨虹 Yan Yuhong
出处 《国际经济法学刊》 2021年第1期42-53,共12页 Journal of International Economic Law
关键词 新冠肺炎疫情 临时贸易措施 公共卫生例外 必要性测试 WTO COVID-19 Temporary Trade Measures Public Health Exception Necessity Test WTO
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献15

  • 1Joel P. Trachtman , Trade in financial services under GATS, NAFTA and the EC : A Regulatory Jurisdiction Analysis, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Voi. 34, pp. 37-55.
  • 2Deborah A. Osiro, GATT/WTO Necessity Analysis: Evolutionary Interpretation and its Impact on the Autonomy of Domestic Regulation, Legal Issues of Economic Intergration (LIEI), 2002, p. 123.
  • 3US-Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, p. 16.
  • 4US-Section 337, GATT Panel Report, para. 5.26.
  • 5Korea-Beef, Appellate Body Report, paras. 162-167.
  • 6US-Gambling, Appellate Body Report, para. 291.
  • 7Gisele Kapterian, A Critique of the WTO Jurisprudence on 'Necessity', International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 2010, p. 103.
  • 8Robert'Howse & Elisabeth TUrk, The WTO Impact Upon Internal Regulations: A Case Study of the Canada- EC Asbestos Dispute, in George Bermann and Pertos Mavroidis, Trade and Human Health and Safety , Cambridge University Press, New York 2007, p. 113.
  • 9Benn Mcgrady, Necessity Exceptions In WTO Law:Retreaded Tyres, Regulatory Prepose and Cumulative Regulatory Measures, Journal of International Economic Law, 2008, p. 158.
  • 10Damme, Isabelle Van , Treaty interpretation by the WTO Appellate Body , Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 643.

共引文献141

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部