论文部分内容阅读
美国宪法最高条款规定条约是美国的法律。但在条约成为国内法与条约可为私人援引之间仍存在着很大的距离,中间要跨越狭义的非自动执行检验、法院可援引性检验(可直接适用性检验)和私人可援引性检验三道关。这三道检验的共同作用是过滤掉不可(私人)司法强制执行的条约规范,因此它们的上位概念应是不可(私人)司法强制执行性。但在美国司法实践中扮演这一上位概念角色的是非自动执行性。这种用法导致了很大的混乱,使非自动执行性成为美国条约法上最令人困惑的问题。应该对导致条约不可(私人)司法强制执行性(广义非自动执行性)的原因作类型化的研究,厘清相互间的关系和各自的判断标准。本文将条约的非自动执行性分为Foster案型(狭义非自动执行)、合宪性型、不可司法性型、私人诉权型、起诉资格型和救济适当性型六种类型,并分别考察其原因、性质和判断标准,以期对国内相关研究有所启发。
The highest terms of the United States Constitution stipulate that the treaty is the law of the United States. However, there is still a long way to go before a treaty becomes domestic law and a treaty may be privately invoked. In the middle, there are still non-self-executing tests in narrow sense, courts may invoke tests (tests for direct applicability), and tests for private tests that may be invoked Three pass. The common test of these three tests is to filter out treaty norms enforced by unjust (private) judiciaries, so their superordinate notion should be enforceable by (private) justice. However, the role of this superordinate concept in judicial practice in the United States is non-self-executing. This usage led to considerable confusion, making non-self-executing the most puzzling issue in the law of treaties in the United States. The reasons for the imposition of treaties that can not (privately) administer justice (generalized non-self-executing nature) should be studied in a typology that clarifies the mutual relations and the respective criteria of judgment. This article divides the non-automatic execution of the treaty into six types: Foster case (narrow non-automatic execution), constitutional type, non-judicial type, private litigation type, prosecution eligibility type and relief appropriate type, The reason, the nature and the judgment standard, with a view to the domestic related research has the inspiration.