论文部分内容阅读
国际争端解决机构对于案件涉及的条约术语采取何种解释方法,直接决定着有关争议问题的裁决和有关当事方的成败。WTO上诉机构在“中美出版物市场准入案”中对于“录音产品分销”术语所采用的当代意义解释法,固然有其自身的先例可供援引,也有国际法院的类似解释方法可资借鉴,但是,迄今尚不足以构成公认的国际公法的习惯解释规则。当代意义解释法作为条约解释方法的一种新趋势,尽管已经确立了诸如条约术语的“一般性”和条约的“无限期”等适用的前提条件,但尚存在一些疑问和不确定性,有待包括WTO上诉机构在内的国际争端解决机构未来实践的进一步澄清和发展。
How international dispute settlement institutions interpret the treaty terms involved in the case directly determines the ruling on disputes and the success or failure of the parties involved. The WTO Appellate Body does have its own precedents for the contemporary interpretation of the meaning of the term used in the phrase “distribution of the recording products” in the “Accession to the Publications of the United States and China.” There are also similar interpretations of the International Court of Justice However, as yet, it is not enough to constitute a generally accepted rule of public accountability for public international law. As a new trend in the interpretation of treaties as a contemporary interpretation of law, although there are established preconditions such as “generality ” for treaty terms and “indefinite ” for treaties, there are some questions and not Certainty, further clarification and development of the future practice of the International Dispute Settlement Body, to be covered by the WTO Appellate Body.