【摘要】：外交部門(mén)介入本國(guó)法院審理的以外國(guó)國(guó)家為被告的案件,從結(jié)構(gòu)上彌補(bǔ)了普通民事訴訟程序適用于主權(quán)國(guó)家所面臨的對(duì)外關(guān)系利益主體缺位,具有保障司法居中裁判之"補(bǔ)缺"功能,而非代行司法裁判權(quán)。國(guó)家豁免訴訟制度的結(jié)構(gòu)安排為此提供了平衡保障。美國(guó)聯(lián)邦法院的司法判例、"泰特公函"和1976年《美國(guó)外國(guó)主權(quán)豁免法》的發(fā)展演變表明,對(duì)外關(guān)系利益與私人權(quán)益的平衡(而非外交與司法權(quán)限的劃分)是外交介入國(guó)家豁免訴訟的決定性因素。對(duì)外關(guān)系利益與私人權(quán)益的重合使得外交介入國(guó)家豁免訴訟面臨再次失衡的可能,應(yīng)受到外部制衡。我國(guó)可以在國(guó)家豁免制度立法中規(guī)定利益平衡原則,明文賦予外交"補(bǔ)缺"國(guó)家豁免訴訟之功能,并從外交介入的形式、效力和事項(xiàng)范圍三個(gè)方面保障此種"補(bǔ)缺"功能之實(shí)現(xiàn),維護(hù)我國(guó)對(duì)外關(guān)系領(lǐng)域的公私利益。
[Abstract]:The involvement of diplomatic departments in cases involving foreign countries as defendants in their own courts has made up for the absence of the subjects of interest in foreign relations that ordinary civil proceedings apply to sovereign states. It has the function of ensuring that the judicature is in the center, but not the power of judicial adjudication. The structure of the state immunity litigation system provides a balanced guarantee for this. The judicial jurisprudence of the United States Federal Court, the evolution of the Tate official letter and the 1976 United States Act on Foreign Sovereign Immunities indicate that The balance between the interests of foreign relations and private rights (rather than the division of diplomatic and judicial powers) is the decisive factor for diplomatic intervention in state immunity litigation. The coincidence of the interests of foreign relations and private interests makes the diplomatic intervention in state immunity litigation face the possibility of again imbalance, and should be subject to external checks and balances. Our country can stipulate the principle of balance of interests in the legislation of the system of state immunity, explicitly endow diplomacy with the function of "filling up" the function of state immunity litigation, and from the form of diplomatic intervention, The effectiveness and scope of affairs guarantee the realization of this function and safeguard the public and private interests in the field of foreign relations.
【作者單位】： 華東政法大學(xué)國(guó)際法學(xué)院;
【基金】：國(guó)家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目(15BFX203)
【分類號(hào)】：D971.2;DD911

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 李適時(shí);;美國(guó)行政部門(mén)在國(guó)家豁免實(shí)踐中的作用與影響[J];外交學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1984年02期

2 克里斯托夫·施魯厄爾;潘漢典;;國(guó)家豁免法的新發(fā)展美、英、西德立法、判例與國(guó)際法的比較[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;1981年02期

3 王卿;;美國(guó)對(duì)外國(guó)國(guó)家的送達(dá)制度[J];北方法學(xué);2014年03期

4 李慶明;;加拿大一公司訴四川省政府案[J];中國(guó)審判;2008年01期

5 黃進(jìn);李慶明;;2007年莫里斯訴中華人民共和國(guó)案述評(píng)[J];法學(xué);2007年09期

6 楊松;;從仰融案看跨國(guó)訴訟中的國(guó)家豁免問(wèn)題[J];政治與法律;2007年01期

7 盧有學(xué);;塞拉利昂特別法庭及其對(duì)泰勒的審判[J];山東警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 吳詩(shī)吟;英國(guó)《1978年國(guó)家豁免法》中的仲裁例外及對(duì)中國(guó)的啟示[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

，

本文編號(hào)：2350577