论文部分内容阅读
WTO和MEAS都包含了进出口管理的规则,而这两种条约自身的规定又有明显矛盾。针对某一贸易管理措施如何适用这两种条约,现行条约法并无现成的规则。从程序法的角度看,MEAS之下的争端解决机制不具有强制性,在具有强制性和排他性的WTO争端解决机制规则下,DSB将取得争端的管辖权。而WTO的现行法律和DSB已作出的裁决并不能真正终结这类争端及其法律适用的讨论。转基因产品贸易争端的妥善解决有赖于对法律适用问题的深入研究:不仅要分析MEAS与WTO规则之间的适用关系,还要考虑WTO法律体系内诸项条约之间的适用关系。
Both the WTO and the MEAS contain the rules for the import and export administration, and there are obvious contradictions between the two treaties’ own rules. There are no existing rules of the law of treaties on how to apply these two treaties to a trade control measure. From the perspective of procedural law, the dispute settlement mechanism under MEAS is not mandatory. Under the mandatory and exclusive WTO dispute settlement mechanism, the DSB will obtain the jurisdiction of the dispute. The current WTO law and the DSB’s ruling have not really ended the debate on such disputes and their legal application. The proper settlement of the trade dispute of genetically modified products depends on the in-depth study of the application of law: it not only analyzes the applicable relations between MEAS and WTO rules, but also considers the applicable relations among the treaties in the WTO legal system.