论文部分内容阅读
无论国际组织章程条约是否规定退出机制,成员国的单边退出行为都会引发不同程度的关切。由《里斯本条约》引进的《欧盟条约》第50条结束了欧盟内部有关退出机制的长期争论,为英国“退欧”提供了相对明确的法律依据。因缺乏可资借鉴的先例,英国“退欧”所带来的法律上的不确定性在短期内无法消除。随着“退欧协定”谈判工作的展开,英国与欧盟早期在谈判路线方面的分歧日渐式微。但从谈判立场和缔约机制的角度来看,双方欲在预设期限内完成“退欧协定”的谈判和缔结工作,仍面临着潜在的法律障碍。对于包括中国在内的第三国而言,英国“退欧”在近期并不会对欧盟与第三国的条约关系造成重大冲击,只是在必要的情况下应考虑未来与英国重新缔结条约,以避免英国“退欧”后产生的法律真空。
Regardless of whether the charter treaty of the international organization provides for the withdrawal of the mechanism, unilateral withdrawals by member states trigger different levels of concern. Article 50 of the “EU Treaty” introduced by the “Lisbon Treaty” ended the long-standing controversy within the EU regarding the exit mechanism and provided a relatively clear legal basis for the British “Brexit.” Because of the lack of precedents that can be borrowed, the legal uncertainty brought about by the United Kingdom “Brexit ” can not be eliminated in a short period of time. With the commencement of the negotiations on the Brexit agreement, the differences between the United Kingdom and the EU in the early stages of the negotiation are diminishing. However, from the perspective of the negotiation position and the contracting mechanism, both parties are still facing potential legal obstacles to complete the negotiation and conclusion of the “Agreement on Brexze ” within the deadline. For the third country, including China, the United Kingdom “Brexit ” will not have a significant impact on the treaty relations between the EU and a third country in the near future, but only consider renegotiating the treaty with Britain in the future if necessary, To avoid the legal vacuum created by the United Kingdom after the “Brexit”.