单边制裁:种类与程度;长臂和强臂管辖;真实意图和“可能”意图

Unilateral Sanctions:Kind and Degree;Long-arm and Strong-arm Jurisdiction;Real Intent and“Could-be”Intent

本文概述了对单边制裁的常规分析,包括以下三个步骤:第一,制裁措施是否被禁止,不管作为单边制裁,抑或是作为另一名称下的某种行为;第二,制裁措施能否被合法地表述为另一种合法行为,几乎或显然是作为一种“辩护”;第三,某些特殊法律制度是否禁止或间接禁止单边制裁措施,无论何种。每一步骤中都同时包含种类和程度的问题。管辖权制度对本文的分析可能有重要作用。有时,为证明某一措施的合法性而主张的所谓长臂管辖权过于微弱和具有压迫性,以至于最好将其称为“强臂管辖权”。无论如何,即使管辖权存在一定的依据,也不能单纯由此使制裁措施具有合法性。每一步骤的分析中,制裁措施背后的真实意图解决了种类的问题,而应当被认真识别。特定的真实意图是独特的,其使某一行为成为独特的国际行为。这将驳斥以下论点,即制裁措施所涉及的意图也“可能”是将其视为合法措施所需的意图。为了论证的目的,假设某一措施中存在两种不同类型的意图,那该项措施既可被证明为发起制裁国的反措施(或称“反制措施”),又可被证明为对目的国的主权事务的非法干涉,这里可能存在需要解决的规则冲突问题。最终,重要的问题是决策者在评估意图时的审查程度或审议标准。

This paper sketches out a normal analysis of unilateral sanctions.This consists of three steps:first,whether the sanctions measures are authorised or prohibited or not as unilateral sanctions,or as a course of conduct under a different name;second,whether they may be legitimately couched as another kind of lawful action,almost or apparently as a kind of“defence”;and third,whether unilateral sanctions in any category are prohibited or not collaterally by some special legal regimes.In each step,there is a question of kind as well as a question of degree.The jurisdictional regime may be of importance in the analysis.Sometimes the assertion of the so-called long-arm jurisdiction to justify a measure is so weak and so oppressive at once that it is better called“strong-arm jurisdiction”.In any event,a possible jurisdictional justification does not for this reason alone make a sanctions measure lawful.In each step of the analysis,the real intent behind the measure at issue settles the question of“kind”and should be carefully identified.The particular real intent,which is unique,qualifies that act as a unique international act.This would debunk the argument that the intent involved in a sanctions measure also“could be”the one required for treating it as a lawful measure.If,for the sake of argument,two different kinds of intent are present in a measure so that the measure can be qualified as,for example,a countermeasure by the imposing State and,at the same time,as unlawful intervention in the sovereign affairs of the target State,there may exist a conflict of norms to be resolved.Ultimately,of great importance is the level of scrutiny or standard of review that a decision-maker would apply to the assessment of intent.