發(fā)布時間：2018-04-26 00:33

  本文選題：安理會決議 + 合法性�。� 參考：《武漢大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：冷戰(zhàn)結(jié)束以后,安理會在維持國際和平與安全方面發(fā)揮著越來越大的作用,安理會通過的決議數(shù)量也大為增加,但一些安理會決議的合法性也受到了質(zhì)疑。針對安理會決議的合法性問題,一些學(xué)者主張由國際法院對安理會決議進(jìn)行司法審查。這一主張面臨著諸多重大困難,這些困難包括《聯(lián)合國憲章》并沒有規(guī)定國際法院可以對安理會決議的合法性進(jìn)行司法審查,國際法院在其司法實踐中也明確表示自己對安理會決議沒有司法審查的權(quán)力。此外,對安理會決議的司法審查還涉及審查的原則、審查的范圍、審查的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、審查的方式、審查的法律效力等問題。本文共分八章來探討這些問題。 第一章是安理會決議司法審查的法理基礎(chǔ)。該章首先概述了安理會決議的種類、法律性質(zhì)以及其法律約束力,接著分析了安理會決議合法性危機(jī)的表現(xiàn)、原因以及解決的途徑等。對安理會決議進(jìn)行司法審查的理論依據(jù)主要有國際法治的要求、權(quán)力限制理論以及國家的司法救濟(jì)權(quán)。 第二章是安理會決議司法審查的主體。對安理會決議的進(jìn)行司法審查,首先考慮的是由聯(lián)合國國際法院來進(jìn)行,但從《聯(lián)合國憲章》和《國際法院規(guī)約》的規(guī)定來看,找不到這樣的法律依據(jù)。《聯(lián)合國憲章》起草的歷史也表明國際法院不擁有對安理會決議司法審查的權(quán)力,國際法院在其司法實踐中也不承認(rèn)擁有對安理會決議司法審查權(quán)。盡管這樣,但從各種分析來看,最有可能對安理會決議進(jìn)行司法審查的主體就是聯(lián)合國國際法院了,其他國際司法機(jī)構(gòu),如前南斯拉夫國際刑事法庭、歐盟法院即使聲稱自己擁有對安理會決議合法性進(jìn)行審查的權(quán)力,也只是就某個或某些特定的安理會決議進(jìn)行司法審查。 第三章是安理會決議司法審查的原則。如果國際法院對安理會決議合法性進(jìn)行審查,以下原則應(yīng)得到尊守。這些原則包括案件性原則、政治問題不審查原則、安理會決議有效推定原則以及安理會決議合法性解釋原則。 第四章是安理會決議司法審查的范圍。國際法院對安理會決議的司法審查范圍應(yīng)主要集中于安理會根據(jù)《聯(lián)合國憲章》第七章作出的決議。對這些決議進(jìn)行司法審查的難點在于安理會通過此類決議時擁有很大的自由裁量權(quán),并沒有很明確的法律規(guī)定,審查時很難斷定安理會決議違反了什么法律。聯(lián)合國安理會通過的有些維和行動的決議的合法性也受到了質(zhì)疑,對它們合法性進(jìn)行審查時同樣面臨著法律標(biāo)準(zhǔn)缺失的問題。 第五章是安理會決議司法審查的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)�！堵�(lián)合國憲章》規(guī)定的聯(lián)合國宗旨與原則是安理會必須遵守的,國際習(xí)慣法如果本身同時也是國際強行法,則安理會也必須遵守。一般法律原則在國際法院的司法實踐中很少適用,即使適用也只是司法程序方面的一般法律原則,所以采用一般法律原則來審查安理會決議合法性的意義不是很大。 第六章是安理會決議司法審查的方式。由于國際法院訴訟管轄案件的當(dāng)事方必須為國家,所以國際法院以直接訴訟管轄的方式對安理會決議實施司法審查面臨著很多制度障礙,但是國際法院在目前的訴訟管轄中對安理會決議實施間接司法審查的可能性還是存在的。以咨詢管轄方式對安理會決議實施司法審查的可能性是存在,但是最大的問題在于法院的咨詢意見沒有法律效力。 第七章是安理會決議司法審查的法律效力。國際法院對安理會決議司法審查的判決或意見應(yīng)具有法律有約束力,否則可能會導(dǎo)致安理會決議一方面被國際法院宣告為違法或無效,另一方面聯(lián)合國會員國又必須遵守安理會決議的奇怪局面。安理會決議違法或無效還可能導(dǎo)致聯(lián)合國的國際法律責(zé)任。 第八章是中國對安理會決議司法審查構(gòu)建的立場。從中國在聯(lián)合國的實踐來看,中國政府更加注重聯(lián)合國安理會在維護(hù)國際和平與安全方面的作用,結(jié)合中國對國際法院的立場來看,很難得出中國政府支持國際法院對安理會決議進(jìn)行司法審查的結(jié)論。支持國際法院對安理會決議進(jìn)行司法審查,有助于加強對安理會權(quán)力的限制,減輕安理會改革的壓力。這一制度也將有助于避免中國與美國等西方國家在聯(lián)合國發(fā)生尖銳對立,從而為和平發(fā)展創(chuàng)造一個比較有利的國際環(huán)境。
[Abstract]:After the end of the cold war , the Council has played an increasingly important role in the maintenance of international peace and security , and the legitimacy of the resolutions adopted by the Council has also been questioned . In response to the legitimacy of the Council ' s resolutions , a number of scholars have advocated judicial review of the legitimacy of the Council ' s resolutions .

Chapter One is a legal basis for judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . The chapter first summarizes the types , legal nature and the binding of the Council resolutions , then analyses the manifestations , reasons and ways of resolving the legitimacy crisis of the Security Council resolutions . The theoretical basis for judicial review of the Council resolutions is mainly the requirements of the international rule of law , the theory of power limitation and the judicial relief right of the State .

Chapter II is the subject of judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions , first considered by the United Nations International Court of Justice , but not by the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and the Statute of the International Court of Justice . The history of the Charter of the United Nations also shows that the International Court of Justice does not have the right to judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions .

Chapter III is the principle of judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . Should the International Court of Justice review the legitimacy of the Council ' s resolutions , the following principles should be respected . These principles include the principle of cases , the principle of non - examination of political issues , the principle of effective presumption of the Council ' s resolutions and the principles of the legitimacy of the Council ' s resolutions .

Chapter IV is the scope of judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . The scope of the Council ' s judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions should focus primarily on the Council ' s resolutions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations . The difficulty in judicial review of these resolutions lies in the fact that the Council has a large discretionary power in adopting such resolutions , and does not have a clear legal provision , and it is difficult to determine what laws the Council resolutions violated . The legitimacy of the resolutions adopted by the United Nations Security Council was also questioned , and there was also a lack of legal standards for their legality .

Chapter V is the standard of judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . The purposes and principles of the United Nations , as set out in the Charter of the United Nations , are to be observed by the Council and must be observed by the Council . The general principles of law are rarely applied in the judicial practice of the International Court of Justice , even if applicable only in general legal principles in judicial proceedings , so that the significance of the legitimacy of the Council ' s resolutions is not great in adopting general legal principles .

Chapter VI is a way of judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . As a result of the fact that the parties to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice have to be States , the International Court of Justice has faced a number of institutional obstacles to the implementation of judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions in a direct litigation jurisdiction , but the possibility of an indirect judicial review by the International Court of Justice in the current jurisdiction over the implementation of the Council ' s resolutions exists , but the greatest problem is that the advisory opinion of the Court has no legal effect .

Chapter VII is the legal effect of the judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . The decisions or observations of the International Court of Justice on the judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions should be legally binding , which might otherwise result in the Council ' s resolution being declared illegal or invalid on the one hand by the International Court of Justice and , on the other hand , by the Member States of the United Nations , which in turn must comply with the Council ' s resolutions . The Council ' s resolution on the law or invalidity may also lead to the international legal responsibility of the United Nations .

Chapter 8 is China ' s position on the judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . From China ' s practice in the United Nations , the Chinese government has paid more attention to the role of the United Nations Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security . It is rare for the Chinese Government to support the International Court of Justice ' s conclusions on the judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . It supports the International Court of Justice ' s judicial review of the Council ' s resolutions . It will help to strengthen the power of the Council and reduce the pressure on the reform of the Council . This system will also help to avoid the sharp opposition between China and the United States in the United Nations , thus creating a more favourable international environment for peaceful development .

【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D813.2;D997.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李壽平;;國際和平與安全的新威脅與聯(lián)合國框架下的使用武力規(guī)則[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2007年03期

2 陳玲玲;淺談聯(lián)合國安理會運作機(jī)制的改革[J];中共成都市委黨校學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué));2005年05期

3 劉亮;;國際法院咨詢管轄中“法律問題”的界定[J];研究生法學(xué);2008年06期

4 何增科;全球民主治理與聯(lián)合國改革[J];當(dāng)代世界與社會主義;2004年01期

5 簡基松;聯(lián)合國制裁之定性問題研究[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2005年06期

6 李薇薇;;論聯(lián)合國經(jīng)濟(jì)制裁中的人權(quán)保護(hù)——兼評聯(lián)合國對朝鮮的經(jīng)濟(jì)制裁[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報);2007年02期

7 王秀梅;;國際憲政思潮的興起與國際法“憲法化”趨勢[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2011年02期

8 邱冬梅;;論國際強行法的演進(jìn)[J];廈門大學(xué)法律評論;2005年01期

9 邱冬梅;;論國際刑事法院與聯(lián)合國安理會的關(guān)系[J];廈門大學(xué)法律評論;2006年02期

10 黃偉;;也論國際法的等級[J];湖南社會科學(xué);2009年02期

，

本文編號：1803699