《联合国海洋法公约》争端解决中可受理性的“功能性搁浅”:问题及应对

“Functionally stranded”admissibility in UNCLOS dispute settlement:issues and countermeasures

可受理性在海洋争端解决中具有抑制强制程序扩张适用的独立理论功能,实践中这一功能无从发挥。在《联合国海洋法公约》实践中,裁判机构对可受理性或敬而远之,或作时而严格、时而宽松的解释,造成可受理性“功能性搁浅”。《联合国海洋法公约》下可受理性的外延不明晰,涉及请求国资格的可受理性障碍解释空间过大,是导致其“功能性搁浅”的表面原因。实效主导海洋争端解决的逻辑是可受理性“功能性搁浅”的根本原因。基于此,《联合国海洋法公约》条款明确覆盖的可受理性障碍可与管辖权异议一并提出,与《联合国海洋法公约》条款以外国际法原则相关的可受理性障碍应单独明确提出。此外,衡平法原则偏袒小国的隐患需额外重视。

Admissibility has an independent theoretical function of restraining the expansion of compulsory procedures in maritime dispute settlement,which could not play its role sufficiently in practice.In the UNCLOS practices,the admissibility issues were either avoided or given strict/loose interpretations,which results in the“functionally stranded”admissibility.The concept of admissibility under UNCLOS is not clear enough,especially the admissibility barriers related to the qualification of the launching state,which makes the superficial cause of“functionally stranded”admissibility.The effectiveness dominating maritime dispute settlement constitutes the root of“functionally stranded”admissibility.The admissibility barriers clearly covered by UNCLOS provisions can be raised together with the objections against jurisdiction;and the admissibility barriers related to international legal principles outside UNCLOS should be raised separately.The equity principles inclined to small states require additional attention.