菲律宾南海仲裁案管辖权与可受理性裁决书评析——以事实认定和证据使用为角度

Commentary on Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of the Philippines-instituted Arbitration under Annex VII to the UNCLOS: Fact-finding and Evidence

2015年10月29日,依据《联合国海洋法公约》附件七,由菲律宾单方请求组成的仲裁庭以全体一致的方式,对菲律宾单方提起的仲裁请求作出了关于管辖权与可受理性问题的裁决。法律实践皆有相同之处,事实认定与法律适用就属于裁判过程中不可或缺的两个基本依据。而仲裁过程中的事实认定,从根本上就是裁判者对证据的采纳、评估与解释过程。这使得证据问题无疑成为仲裁的核心。因此,本文从仲裁庭裁决书的思路出发,结合国家间仲裁的特点,以事实认定和证据使用为角度,评析裁决书中在这两方面存在的问题,同时提出仲裁庭在实体阶段的审理中可能面临的问题。虽然仲裁庭在认定事实方面拥有较大的自由裁量权,但对于证据的提供、采纳、评估与解释依然需要以公平原则为基础,裁决书中所暴露的事实认定和证据使用不同程度的问题,在实体阶段将会更为严重,并最终影响法律适用以及仲裁的公平与公正。

The Tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in the arbitration instituted by the Republic of the Philippines against the People's Republic of China issued its Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility on 29 October 2015. Legal practice has something in common. The judicial trial process generally covers two indispensable stages: fact-finding and lawapplication. Fundamentally speaking, the production, collection, and evaluation of evidences serve a particular purpose: they are meant to enable the adjudicative body in question to find facts. Thus,evidence is meant to prove or disprove facts. This review paper aims to discuss evidence issues and factfinding process in the Award. It begins by introducing the logic of the Award and then describes the possible problems during the merit procedure. As a general rule,international judges or arbitrators have wide discretion in the evaluation of evidence. However,it has been stated that the guiding principle of the rules governing the production,collection,and evaluation of evidence should be the principle of fair trial. The problems of fact-finding and evidence revealed in the Award would be much serious in the merits phase,thus having negative effect for the Tribunal to deliver its decision impartially.