安全视域下投资条约根本安全利益条款的中国范式

The Chinese Paradigm of the Essential Security Interests Clause in Investment Treaties from the Perspective of Security

随着世界进入新的动荡变革期,更多因素被纳入安全范畴并在实践中予以回应。在国际投资法场域中表现为根本安全利益条款在文本中激增、国内法中对非传统安全因素的更多纳入和根本安全利益条款频繁在争端解决机制中被援引,三者之间“循环促进”,更进一步地推动了根本安全利益条款的发展。根本安全利益条款联通国内国际两个领域,与中国主导的统筹推进国内法治和涉外法治方略具有内在统一性。我国应从总体国家安全观出发,结合中国双向投资利益需求,明确自裁判权、采纳“明确列举+兜底”的安全内涵表述方式、纳入引导性判断标准、强化缔约方联合解释权及重视序言的配套作用,强化根本安全利益条款的“安全阀”作用。在实践中,应推动根本安全利益条款在国内法治与涉外法治场景中的全面落实和内在衔接,以发展定义安全,为根本安全利益条款提供一个相对稳定的实践场域,最终通过文本与实践互鉴创新,构建“中国式”根本安全利益条款并积极对外推广,为引领更均衡的新一代国际投资规则提供智识支撑。

The essential security interests(ESI)clause in investment agreements sets forth an important carve-out for contracting states during security emergencies.As the world enters a new period of turbulence and changes,more non-traditional security elements are included in the scope of overall national security.In response to the increased security concerns of contracting states,the ESI clause in investment treaties evolves in three dimensions,namely frequency,intensity,and breadth.The clause is construed to grant States broad discretion to limit or derogate from obligations arising under investment treaties,providing legitimacy for taking regulatory measures to maintain national security in emergency situations.Although the ESI clause is explicitly“self-judging”,it is still subject to review by arbitral tribunals.However,the variations of the ESI provisions in investment treaties,coupled with the“intentional ambiguities”in requirements of invocation and the“finality”of the tribunal judgments,lead to the“fragmented interpretation”of the clause and may challenge the basis of consensus and stability of investment treaties.The cross-border nature of the ESI clause will make it an important approach to carrying out a China-led strategy of integrated promotion of domestic rule of law and foreign-related rule of law.In the context of non-traditional security,this article analyzes the evolution of the ESI clause in investment treaties,examines a series of Argentine cases arising from the 2001-2003 Argentine financial crisis,two related Indian telecom cases and four recently resolved WTO cases,and discusses the tribunal’s major concerns.It argues that a triangular power balance should be constructed between the self-judging right of contracting parties on ESI issues,the tribunal’s authority to review the legitimacy of invoking the ESI clause,and a certain right of the contracting parties to interpret the review standards.On this basis,the article reveals China’s paradigm of the ESI clause from the following three dimensions.In the textual dimension,China should take its overall national security and self-judging right as the starting point,stick to the security connotation of“clear enumeration+backstop”,introduce leading assessment criteria,enhance its joint interpretation power,and give full play to the role of the preamble as a“safety valve”.In the practical dimension,China should promote the full implementation and internal applicability of the ESI clause in various domestic and foreign-related rule of law scenarios,see security from a development-oriented perspective,and provide a relatively stable context for the application of the ESI clause.In the strategic dimension,China should promote the innovative“China-Model”ESI clause to the world,thereby contributing intellectually to a new generation of more balanced international investment rules.