开放选修丨2021年春国际法专题研讨课：“国际争端解决”

本文转载自公众号 “PKU国际法”

主讲人

村濑信也教授

（日本上智大学荣休国际法教授、联合国国际法委员会委员）

课程简介

本课程将从国际争端解决的基本理论、解决国际争端的司法程序出发，关注海洋法、国际经济法、国际环境法、与传染病有关的国际法等具体领域，阐明各种国际争端解决的过程和方式。

课程时间

2021年3月10日-4月21日（共6次）

每周三下午 15:00-17:00

授课方式

腾讯会议线上授课

课程注册

课程开放校内外师生选修，无学分。

课程报名请联系课程助教冯丽羽，截止日期为3月5日，报名邮箱：pkuids2021@163.com。请注明姓名、机构、电话、邮箱地址，每次课前会发送腾讯会议链接及课程材料。

授课形式

本课程的授课形式包括：教师主讲、学生课堂展示以及课堂讨论。

主讲人简介

村濑信也，日本上智大学荣休国际法教授、国际法研究院院士、联合国国际法委员会现任委员和“大气层保护”专题的特别报告员。2014-2017年间曾担任中国青年政治学院（现中国社会科学院大学）访问教授，2017年11月起任北京大学法学院访问教授。

村濑教授是东京大学法学博士（1972）、哈佛大学法学院访问学者（1974-1976）、哥伦比亚大学法学院访问教授（1995）。其曾任联合国法律事务厅法律顾问（1980-1982）、亚洲开发银行行政法庭法官（1998-2004）、联合国国际法委员会委员（2009至今）、海牙常设仲裁法院仲裁员（2013至今），并于2011年入选国际法研究院副院士、2017年入选院士，是当今国际法学界公认的国际法大家，在国际法基本理论、国际环境法等领域有深厚造诣。

课程大纲

第一周（3月10日）

课程导引

第二周（3月17日）

国际争端的司法解决

第三周（3月24日）

国际海洋法法庭

第四周（3月31日）

国际经济争端

第五周（4月14日）

国际环境争端

第六周（4月21日）

传染病的国际法争端

International Disputes Settlement (Online)

Selected Problems

Peking University Graduate School of Law

Syllabus

(Wednesday 15:00-17:00, Beijing Time)

10 March, 2021 - 21 April, 2021

Professor: Dr. Shinya Murase

Professor Emeritus, Sophia University, Tokyo; Visiting Professor at PKU (2017-); Member of the UN International Law Commission (ILC 2009-); Membre, Institut de droit international (IDI 2011-)

This course is given in English.

Basic Reading Material: 

(1) 村瀬信也『国際立法―国際法的法源論』（秦一禾訳）中国人民公安大学出版社、2012年 (Get a UBS copy from TA) (参照：陳一峰「国際造法問題的理論再造：評・村瀬信也『国際立法—国際法的法源論』」中国社会科学院国際法研究所『国際法研究』(2014.01) pp.122-128)

(2) S. Murase, International Law：An Integrative Perspective on Transboundary Issues, Sophia University Press, 2011.

(3) For Documents of the UN International Law Commission, see:

http://legal.un.org/ilc/index.shtml

(4) For ICJ judgments and advisory opinions, see:

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3

(5) For PCA decisions, see: 

http://www.pca-cpa.org

(6) For ITLOS decisions, see:

https://www.itlos.org

(7) Collection of treaties and judicial decisions, as necessary.

1. Introduction (10 March)

(1) International law as a profession

(2) Purpose of the Study of Dispute Settlement in International Law

(3) “Conflicts” and “Disputes”

(4) Disputes on “legality” and disputes on “opposability”

(5) Importance to turn conflicts into disputes, and “control” them

(6) “Settlement” and “Resolution” of Disputes

(7) Various Procedures for the Settlement of Disputes

(a) Article 33 of the UN Charter

(b) Role of Diplomatic Negotiations in the Settlement of Disputes

(c) Significance of the ICJ “Orders to Negotiate in Good Faith”.

(d) Significance of Fact-Finding in the Settlement of Disputes

(e) Conciliation and Mediation

(f) Arbitration

(g) Judicial Settlement (ICJ, ITLOS, etc.)

(h) Interaction between Non-Judicial and Judicial Means for the Settlement of Disputes

Relevant Cases:The Rainbow Warrior case (1990); Jan Mayen Maritime Delimitation case (ICJ, 1999); Fisheries Jurisdiction case (ICJ, 1974)

Reading: Collier & Lowe, The Settlement of Disputes in International Law, Oxford, 1999 (rev. ed., 2021); Phillip Jessup, Price of International Justice, 1971.

Arbitration

(1) Arbitrations in Historical Perspectives

(2) Merits and Demerits of Arbitrations as Means of Settling Disputes

(3) Ad hoc Arbitration

(4) PCA serving as registry: ITLOS; Energy Charter Treaty

(5) Comparison between Arbitration and Judicial Settlement (ICJ)

Relevant cases: Alabama case 1872); Japanese House Tax case (PCA, 1905); Southern Blue Fin Tuna case (Australia, NZ v. Japan, 2000); Maritime and Land Boundary dispute (Croatia v. Slovenia, 2017); Yukos case (Yukos v. Russia, UNCITRAL, 2009)

Territorial Disputes

(1) Patterns of territorial disputes

Relevant cases: (1) Palmas (PCA 1928); (2) Eastern Greenland (PCIJ 1933); (3) Minquiers and Ecrehos (ICJ 1953); (4) Japan’s territorial disputes and conflicts: (a) Northern Territories (Kuril Islands/Russia); (b) Takeshima (Dokto/Korea); (c) Senkaku (Diaoyu/China)

2. Significance of Judicial Proceedings in the Settlement of International Disputes (17 March)

(1) Function of ICJ

(2) Some Features of the International Court of Justice (Ad hoc Judges)

(3) Jurisdiction, Automatic reservation, multilateral treaty reservation, etc.

(4) Admissibility

(5) Standing

Relevant Cases: South West Africa case (1966); Nicaragua case (1984) 

Reading: Mariko Kawano, “The Role of Judicial Procedures in the Process of the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes,” Recueil des cours, Vol. 346, 2009, pp.9-474.

Procedures for Contentious Cases

(1) Provisional Measures of Protection

(2) Intervention by Third States

(3) Non-Appearance of One of the Parties

(4) Effect of Judgments

(5) Implementation and Enforcement of Judgments

Relevant Cases:La Grand case, ICJ,1999, 2001) (Hostages case, ICJ, 1980), Temple cases (ICJ, 1962, 2013) 

Advisory Opinions of the International Court of Justice

(1) Significance of Advisory Proceedings: Legal advisor or dispute settler?

(2) Procedures of Advisory Proceedings

(3) Effect of Advisory Opinions

Relevant Cases:Austro-German Customs Union case (PCIJ,1931); Nuclear Weapons case (1996)

Applicable Law and the Rules of Evidence before the Court (10 March)

(1) Applicable Law of ICJ

(a) international conventions

(b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law

(c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations

(d) subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law: judicial decisions and the teachings of most highly qualified publicists of the various nations

(e) ex aequo et bono (if the parties agree thereto)

Questions: What is “general international law”, “general principles of law” and “equity”? 

Relevant Cases:North Sea Continental Shelf cases (ICJ, 1969), Fisheries

Jurisdiction cases (ICJ, 1974), Nicaragua Case (ICJ, 1986), Sovereign Immunities case (ICJ, Germany v. Italy, 2012) Whaling in the Antarctic case (ICJ, Australia v. Japan, NZ intervening, 2014), Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso v. Mali, 1985). 

Rules of Evidence

(1) Basic Character of ICJ: the civil law or common law tradition?

(2) ICJ rules on evidence: Adversarial process and inquisitorial provisions

(3) Jura novit curia (“The court knows the law”)

(4) Evidence on Facts and Law, technical and non-technical facts

(5) Non ultra petita (The court considers only the issues submitted thereto)

(6) Experts appointed by the Court and those appointed by the Parties

Related Cases:Corfu Channel case (ICJ, 1949); Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case (ICJ, 1997), Pulp Mills case (ICJ, 2010) and Whaling case (ICJ, 2014); Road Construction case (ICJ, Costa Rica v. Nicaragua, 2015); Maritime Delimitation (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua, pending)

3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (24 March)

(1) Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals?

(2) Procedures for the Law of the Sea Disputes

(3) Prompt Release Cases

(4) Advisory opinions

(5) Conciliation

(6) Compulsory Arbitrations

Relevant Cases:The Saiga (1999), Mox Plant (2001), ARA Liberated (2012), Seabed Area (Adv. Op, 2011)

South China Sea dispute (PCA, Philippines v. China, 2015)

(1) UNCLOS Dispute Settlement procedures

(2) Legal characteristics of the “Nine-Dash-Line”

(3) “Entitlements” and not maritime delimitation (sovereignty)

(4) Jurisdiction and admissibility: Relevance of the Southern Blue Fin Tuna case?

(5) Non-appearance

(6) Merits: historic titles, islands

(7) Impacts of the award

4. International Economic Law Disputes (31 March)

Extraterritorial Application of Anti-Trust Law

Relevant Cases: The Lotus case (PCIJ, 1923); The Alcoa case (US  1941); Timberlane (US 1976), Mannington Mills (US 1979); The Siberian Pipelines case (1982). 

Reading: Murase, International Law, pp. 247-250.

Investment Dispute Settlement

(1) Basic Characteristics of Investment Disputes

(2) The Most-Favored-Nation Treatment in Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and Its Coverage of Substantive and Procedural Matters

Relevant Cases:Ambatieros case (ICJ, 1953), Maffezini case (ICSID, 2000)

Reading: ILC Study Group Report on the MFN Clauses (2015); Alverez’s paper on “A BIT on Custom,” and Murase’s paper on “A BIT on Mixed Tribunal.”

WTO Dispute Settlement

(1) Procedures for WTO Dispute Settlement

(2) WTO Jurisdiction over Non-Trade Related Matters

Related Cases: Gasoline case (WTO, 1998)

Reading: Murase, International Law, pp. 130-165, 267-275.

5. International Environmental Law Disputes (14 April)

(1) Disputes of fact-intensive and science-heavy character: Use of scientific evidence

(2) Burden of proof in traditional disputes concerning preventive principle

(3) Shift of the burden of proof in precautionary principle

(4) Non-compliance with international law: traditional approach: State responsibility and sanction

(5) Non-compliance with international environmental law: facilitative approach: assistance rather than penalty

(6) Extraterritorial Application of Domestic Environmental Law (controversy bet. Singapore and Indonesia). 

Related Cases:Trail Smelter Arbitration (1941); Gabčikovo-Nagymaros (ICJ, Slovakia–Hungary, 1997); Pulp Mills (ICJ, Argentina-Uruguay, 2010); Whaling in the Antarctica (ICJ, Australia v. Japan, NZ intervening, 2014); Road Construction (ICJ, Nicaragua v. Costa Rica, 2015)

Reading: S. Murase, ILC Fifth Report (2018)

6. Disputes relating to Epidemics (21 April)

(1) Disputes before ICJ and PCA

(2) Disputes before WTO

WTO, Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres, WT/DS332/AB/R (3 December 2007). See, I. Van Damme. “III. Appellate Body Report, Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres, Adopted on 17 December 2007,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 57, 2008, pp. 710f.; K.R. Gray. “Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres” (2008) 102:3 American Journal of International Law, Vol. 102, No. 3, 2008, pp.610f

WTO, India – Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products, WT/DS430/AB/R, 4 June 2015, para. 5.82. See, Chad Bown and Jennifer Hillman, “Bird Flu, the OIE, and National Regulation: The WTO’s India-Agricultural Products Dispute”, World Trade Review, Vol. 15, 2016, pp. 235–57; See also Saggi, Kamal & Mark Wu, “Trade and Agricultural Disease: Import Restrictions in the Wake of the India– Agricultural Products Dispute”, World Trade Review, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2017, pp. 279–302.)

(3) Disputes before other international fora

UN Peacekeeping Mission: Haiti Cholera case

See UNITED NATIONS, Off. Doc New approach to cholera in Haiti. Report of the Secretary-General (A/71/895) 3 May 2017; BODE, T.G., « Cholera in Haiti: United Nations Immunity and Accountability», 47 Georgia Journal of International Law (2016), pp. 759 (2015-2016); DAUGIRDAS, K. and Mortenson J. D., “Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law: International Organizations: United States Defends United Nations’ Immunity in Haitian Cholera Case»”, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 108, (2014), No. 4, pp.783-842; R. Friedmann & N. Lemay-Hebert, “Towards an alternative interpretation of UN immunity: A human rights-based approach to the Haiti Cholera Case»”, Question of International Law Journal, Vol. 2 (2015), p. 336, http://www.qil-qdi.org.; R. Pavoni, « Choleric notes on the Haiti Cholera Case, Questions of International Law» , Question of International Law Journal, Vol. 2 (2015),p. 350,  http://www.qil-qdi.org/author/riccardo-pavoni/

(4) Disputes

近期推荐

专辑

推荐

  编辑丨舟见    

点亮  在看知识又增加了！