论文部分内容阅读
近年来,宪法已经成为世贸组织法学研究的中心话语。三种主流的世贸组织宪政理论,将世贸组织宪法分别理解为由世贸组织的制度建构、一套规范性承诺或者对相冲突价值进行司法调解的过程所构成。其共同之处是认为世贸组织宪政能够引导贸易政治的走向,或者把贸易政治减少到最低程度。然而,困境在于对宪政的呼吁正激发了其试图预先阻止的那类政治纷争。对世贸组织乃至其他国际法领域中宪法话语的祈求,反映了对国际法的现时地位和作用在规训意义上的深切忧虑,旨在赋予国际法以国家宪法结构和规范所具有的权限和权威。但是,这种策略可能自我挫败。应可以设想其他的宪政形式,以促进世贸组织乃至国际法的合法性。国际宪政问题是21世纪国际哲学家所面临的最重要挑战。
In recent years, the constitution has become the central discourse of WTO jurisprudence. The three mainstream WTO constitutionalist theories respectively interpret WTO constitutions as being constituted by the institutional construction of the WTO, a set of normative commitments or the judicial mediation of conflicting values. What they have in common is that the constitutional government of WTO can guide the direction of trade and politics or minimize the trade politics. However, the dilemma is that appeals for constitutional government are sparking the kind of political strife they seek to prevent in advance. The prayers for constitutional discourse in the WTO and in other areas of international law reflect the deep-seated concern about the present status and role of international law in the sense of discipline and aim to give international law the authority and authority that state constitutional structures and norms have. However, this strategy may self-defeat. Other forms of constitutionalism should be envisaged to promote the legitimacy of the WTO and even international law. The issue of international constitutionalism is the most important challenge facing international philosophers in the 21st century.