期刊文献+

多边贸易体制下的动物福利与土著群体生存利益之辩——WTO上诉机构欧盟海豹案裁决的启示 被引量:1

The Relationship between the Animal Welfare and the Subsistence of Indigenous Communities under the Multilateral Trade System:Insights from WTO Appellate Body Rulings of the EU-Seals Case
原文传递
导出
摘要 动物福利和土著群体利益保护是近年来国际社会的两个热门话题,欧盟海豹案第一次在多边贸易体制下考虑了两者的关系。WTO上诉机构在该案中,不仅明确承认动物福利作为一种公共道德优先于自由贸易,而且也隐含承认,土著群体的生存利益优先于动物福利保护。为了实现动物福利与土著群体生存利益保护之间的适当平衡,上诉机构对国内立法提出了一系列要求:在采取措施实现土著群体生存利益保护这一优先目标时,应当尽量减轻措施对动物福利可能造成的负面影响;国内立法应当统筹考虑,公平对待WTO所有成员的出口利益,特别是在设定相关标准时,应当适当考虑部分出口国的特殊情况;国内立法应当精细化,避免授予执法机关过多裁量权;国内立法应当实体和程序并重,并加强执法监督。这些要求对于我国制定具有多重目标的类似法律,具有重要参考价值。 Animal Welfare and the subsistence of indigenous communities are two hot topics among international community in recent years.EU-Seals is the first case that linked them under the multilateral trade system.While explicitly acknowledging of the priority of the protection of animal welfare over free trade as a kind of public moral,the WTO Appellate Body in this case implicitly put the subsistence of indigenous communities over the animal welfare.In order to maintain the proper balance between the animal welfare and the subsistence of indigenous communities,the Appellate Body put some limits on the domestic legislation:alleviating as possible the negative impact on animal welfare in the course of adopting appropriate measures to protect of the subsistence of indigenous communities;treating all WTO member' exporting interests evenhandedly;not empowering the enforcement authorities too much discretionary;and the supervision of enforcement should be strengthened.This case provides some important insights and guidance if China wants to enact similar legislation with multiple purposes.
作者 胡建国
机构地区 南开大学法学院
出处 《国际法研究》 2015年第3期112-128,共17页 Chinese Review of International Law
基金 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目"WTO法律体系内部协调发展研究"(NKZXB1207)的支持
关键词 多边贸易体制 动物福利 土著群体生存利益 欧盟海豹案 Multilateral Trade System Animal Welfare Subsistence of Indigenous Communities EUSeals Case
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献34

  • 1莽萍.动物福利法溯源[J].河南社会科学,2004,12(6):25-28. 被引量:21
  • 2高新伟,张娟.解读与应对中国水产品出口中的动物福利壁垒[J].国际经贸探索,2007,23(9):22-25. 被引量:5
  • 3Jagdish Bhagwati and T. N. Srinivasan. 1996. Trade and the Environment: Does Environmental Diversity Detract from the Case for Free Trade?[C], in Bhagwati & Robert E. Hudec eds. Fair Trade and Harmonization, Jagdish.
  • 4Jeff Leslie and Cass R. Sunstein. 2007. Animal Rights Without Controversy[J]. 70 Law & Contemp 4.
  • 5Peter L. Fitzgerald. 2011. "Morality" May Not Be Enough to Justify the EU Seal Products Ban: Animal Welfare Meets International Trade Law[J]. 14 Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 4.
  • 6Richard A. Posner & Peter Singer. 2001. Email Debates of Noteworthy Topics: Animal Rights[J], SLATE, Jun. 12, 2001, http://www.slate.com/id/110101/entry/110109/.
  • 7Robert Howse and Joanna Langille. 2012. Permitting Plurism: The Seal Product Dispute and Why WTO Should Accept Trade Restrictions by Noninstrumental Moral Values[J]. 37 Yale J. Int'l L.2.
  • 8Simon Lester. 2012. The WTO Seal Products Dispute: A Preview of the Key Legal Issues. [R] http://www.asil.org/ insights100113.cfm.
  • 9Steve Charnovitz. 1998. The Moral Exception in Trade Policy[J]. 38 Va. J. Int'l L 2.
  • 10Terence P. Stewart, Elizabeth J. Drake and Stephanie Manaker. 2013. Is a Balance Between Trade Liberalization and Animal Welfare Achievable: The Role of WTO EC-Seal Product Case in the Debate JR]. http://www.stewartlaw. corrt/Article/ViewArticle/848.

共引文献7

同被引文献10

  • 1陈松川,楚树龙.21世纪初叶世界发展大趋势[J].现代国际关系,2010(S1):5-9. 被引量:2
  • 2孙江,何力,黄政.《动物保护法概论》,北京:法律出版社,2009年.
  • 3Bimie P W, Boyle A E, Redgwell C. International Law and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
  • 4Sykes K. Sealing animal welfare into the GATI" exceptions: The international dimension of animal welfare in WTO disputes. World Trade Review, 2014 , 13 (3) : 471 -498.
  • 5Lydgate E B. Biofuels, sustainability, and trade-related regulatory chill. Journal of International Economic Law, 2012, 15 (1): 157-180.
  • 6Shaffer G , Pabian D. The WTO EC - seal products decision : Animal welfare , indigenous communities and trade. Arrverican Journal of International Law, 2015, Forthcoming.
  • 7Howse R. The appellate body rulings in the shrimp/turtle case: A new legal baseline for the trade and environment debate. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 27 Colum. J. Envtl. k 491 : 491 -522.
  • 8E.U.彼德斯曼.《国际经济法的宪法功能与宪法问题》,何志鹏,等译,北京:高等教育出版社,2004年.
  • 9陈卫东,石静霞.WTO体制下文化政策措施的困境与出路——基于“中美出版物和视听产品案”的思考[J].法商研究,2010,27(4):52-62. 被引量:16
  • 10石静霞.“同类产品”判定中的文化因素考量与中国文化贸易发展[J].中国法学,2012(3):50-62. 被引量:12

引证文献1

二级引证文献4

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