【摘要】：間接征收問(wèn)題在國(guó)際投資領(lǐng)域既是熱點(diǎn)也是難點(diǎn)。經(jīng)濟(jì)的全球化和投資自由化的發(fā)展使得間接征收案件不斷涌現(xiàn)。間接征收的發(fā)展呈現(xiàn)出了擴(kuò)大化的趨勢(shì)，這一趨勢(shì)使得原本具有模糊性、任意性和不確定性特點(diǎn)的間接征收規(guī)則引發(fā)了更多的法律問(wèn)題，對(duì)投資者的過(guò)度保護(hù)和東道國(guó)權(quán)益的忽視使得間接征收規(guī)則中的權(quán)益失衡問(wèn)題突出，資本輸出國(guó)和資本輸入國(guó)的不同立場(chǎng)也導(dǎo)致了間接征收規(guī)則的非統(tǒng)一性。這些法律問(wèn)題使資本輸出國(guó)和資本輸入國(guó)都面臨困境。間接征收規(guī)則是國(guó)際直接投資的內(nèi)容之一，其發(fā)展直接影響著投資環(huán)境以及國(guó)際資本的流動(dòng)，繼而影響世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展。 國(guó)際投資領(lǐng)域間接征收的法理基礎(chǔ)是國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)，間接征收規(guī)則存在的諸多問(wèn)題是東道國(guó)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)與外國(guó)投資者私人財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)之間矛盾的集中體現(xiàn)。資本輸出國(guó)和資本輸入國(guó)的價(jià)值取向和理念的不同以及本國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)略的差異使兩類國(guó)家對(duì)待間接征收規(guī)則的態(tài)度不同。目前國(guó)際投資協(xié)定包括多邊、區(qū)域性及雙邊投資協(xié)定，這些投資協(xié)定中幾乎都涵蓋了間接征收規(guī)則，但這三種投資協(xié)定對(duì)間接征收規(guī)則的主導(dǎo)地位有所不同。世界范圍內(nèi)的多邊投資條約尚未達(dá)成，而雙邊投資條約先天的局限性加劇了間接征收規(guī)則的模糊性、不確定性和非統(tǒng)一性的特點(diǎn)。 國(guó)際投資仲裁庭對(duì)外國(guó)投資者的保護(hù)性傾向在間接征收案件裁決中體現(xiàn)的淋漓盡致，削弱了東道國(guó)的外資管轄權(quán)，使得間接征收規(guī)則失衡的狀況雪上加霜，且因仲裁庭本身的秘密性、不透明性、獨(dú)立性等原因也使得間接征收案件的裁決結(jié)果不統(tǒng)一、不確定，引來(lái)了各界的強(qiáng)烈質(zhì)疑，就連發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家也開始著手對(duì)投資仲裁庭進(jìn)行改革。 對(duì)于我國(guó)這樣的資本輸入國(guó)和資本輸出國(guó)雙重身份的大國(guó)而言，對(duì)待間接征收規(guī)則的態(tài)度上處于兩難境地，既要注重維護(hù)外國(guó)投資者的利益，創(chuàng)造更好的投資環(huán)境以吸引外資，促進(jìn)我國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展；又要在我國(guó)實(shí)施“引進(jìn)來(lái)”和“走出去”戰(zhàn)略的同時(shí)，加強(qiáng)保護(hù)我國(guó)海外投資者的權(quán)益。 面對(duì)間接征收的擴(kuò)大化、間接征收規(guī)則所導(dǎo)致的幾重權(quán)益的失衡以及間接征收非統(tǒng)一性等主要法律問(wèn)題，我國(guó)應(yīng)當(dāng)積極應(yīng)對(duì)，堅(jiān)持國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)原則和公平公正等原則的前提下，努力限制和防止間接征收規(guī)則的無(wú)限擴(kuò)大化趨勢(shì)，適當(dāng)平衡間接征收規(guī)則所涉及的幾重權(quán)益并克服其非統(tǒng)一性。 本文包括導(dǎo)論，正文和結(jié)語(yǔ)三個(gè)部分，共七章： 第一章間接征收的基本問(wèn)題。傳統(tǒng)上，間接征收的概念、類型、特點(diǎn)和界定等問(wèn)題是間接征收的基本問(wèn)題。本章對(duì)間接征收進(jìn)行追根溯源，交代概念不統(tǒng)一，條約實(shí)踐和司法實(shí)踐中都有各種不同的表述。西方國(guó)家從資本輸出國(guó)的立場(chǎng)出發(fā)，任意擴(kuò)大間接征收的范圍，最大限度地限制東道國(guó)的國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)。國(guó)際仲裁庭往往對(duì)間接征收案件做出有利于保護(hù)外國(guó)投資者的解釋。二十世紀(jì)七八十年代間接征收案件的涌現(xiàn)直接引發(fā)了學(xué)界對(duì)這一問(wèn)題的熱議。間接征收與政府管制措施之間的界限是間接征收制度的重點(diǎn)和難點(diǎn)，對(duì)兩者的界定要對(duì)各種因素進(jìn)行綜合考量，運(yùn)用比例原則的方法來(lái)區(qū)分。 第二章間接征收的法理依據(jù)。間接征收的法理基礎(chǔ)是國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)、外資管轄權(quán)和自然資源永久主權(quán)以及私人財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)理論。間接征收的最新發(fā)展直接侵害了東道國(guó)的自然資源永久主權(quán)和外資管轄權(quán)。南北國(guó)家仍存在巨大矛盾，東道國(guó)側(cè)重把國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)作為間接征收的理論基礎(chǔ)進(jìn)而要求盡量縮小間接征收的范圍而保護(hù)東道國(guó)的主權(quán)。資本輸出國(guó)則更側(cè)重強(qiáng)調(diào)私人財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)理論作為法理基礎(chǔ)對(duì)間接征收的范圍進(jìn)行擴(kuò)張，從而高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)地保護(hù)其海外投資。發(fā)展中國(guó)家作為東道國(guó)，，應(yīng)當(dāng)以維護(hù)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)作為間接征收制度的法理基礎(chǔ)。 第三章間接征收的法律實(shí)踐。對(duì)間接征收的司法實(shí)踐和條約法實(shí)踐進(jìn)行考察會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，間接征收規(guī)則存在很多問(wèn)題，不同的國(guó)際仲裁庭對(duì)間接征收的界定觀點(diǎn)不一致、方法不統(tǒng)一，對(duì)各種參考因素的考量側(cè)重有所不同，從而使得間接征收案件結(jié)果不統(tǒng)一，也無(wú)法預(yù)測(cè)。然而，國(guó)際仲裁庭已經(jīng)逐漸采納歐洲人權(quán)法院的比例原則來(lái)確定間接征收是否發(fā)生。條約法當(dāng)中的間接征收規(guī)則因國(guó)家立場(chǎng)的不同而標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一。 第四章間接征收擴(kuò)大化及引發(fā)的法律問(wèn)題。間接征收規(guī)則的擴(kuò)大化表現(xiàn)在投資定義的擴(kuò)大化、措施定義的擴(kuò)大化、間接征收范圍的擴(kuò)大化等。形成這種擴(kuò)大化趨勢(shì)的原因包括仲裁庭對(duì)投資者的傾向性、資本輸出國(guó)主導(dǎo)著間接征收規(guī)則的內(nèi)容，而發(fā)展中國(guó)家未體現(xiàn)自己的利益訴求。這種擴(kuò)大化導(dǎo)致東道國(guó)利益與投資者權(quán)益的失衡、東道國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)的削弱以及投資者的過(guò)度保護(hù)等法律問(wèn)題。 第五章間接征收中的權(quán)益失衡問(wèn)題分析。從投資者與東道國(guó)、投資者與母國(guó)、東道國(guó)與母國(guó)三重權(quán)益失衡的角度全面體現(xiàn)了間接征收中的權(quán)益失衡問(wèn)題。三者目標(biāo)不一致、立場(chǎng)不同、手段和方法也不盡相同，在國(guó)際投資活動(dòng)中的地位也不平等。間接征收立法與司法實(shí)踐中均出現(xiàn)了片面保護(hù)投資者權(quán)益而忽視甚至削弱東道國(guó)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)的問(wèn)題，從而使得東道國(guó)公共利益與外國(guó)投資者私人利益的失衡，影響著國(guó)際間的資本流動(dòng)并阻礙經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的發(fā)展，也使國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)面臨威脅和挑戰(zhàn)。 第六章間接征收規(guī)則非統(tǒng)一性問(wèn)題分析。從各國(guó)所簽訂的雙邊投資協(xié)定、自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定以及區(qū)域性投資協(xié)定、多邊投資協(xié)定對(duì)間接征收的規(guī)定進(jìn)行比較；并對(duì)間接征收規(guī)則非統(tǒng)一性的深層次原因進(jìn)行剖析，可以發(fā)現(xiàn)，由于各國(guó)立場(chǎng)不同、目標(biāo)不一致等原因，出現(xiàn)了間接征收規(guī)則的非統(tǒng)一性。隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的深入和國(guó)際投資法制的發(fā)展以及間接征收在實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的各種問(wèn)題，各國(guó)逐漸開始對(duì)間接征收規(guī)則進(jìn)行調(diào)整，這些新的變化已經(jīng)逐漸顯現(xiàn)。 第七章我國(guó)間接征收制度的立法現(xiàn)狀及法律對(duì)策。我國(guó)作為資本輸出國(guó)與輸入國(guó)雙重身份的大國(guó)，對(duì)間接征收規(guī)則的制定有現(xiàn)實(shí)的需求。間接征收的擴(kuò)大化趨勢(shì)使得我國(guó)面臨兩難困境。針對(duì)間接征收擴(kuò)大化、間接征收規(guī)則導(dǎo)致的權(quán)益失衡、間接征收的非統(tǒng)一性這幾個(gè)主要問(wèn)題，從我國(guó)的立場(chǎng)和角度出發(fā)，在堅(jiān)持發(fā)展中大國(guó)立場(chǎng)的前提下，對(duì)上述間接征收問(wèn)題進(jìn)行針對(duì)性的分析，提出我國(guó)的應(yīng)對(duì)策略。統(tǒng)一國(guó)內(nèi)法與國(guó)際條約對(duì)間接征收的規(guī)定，堅(jiān)持國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)主權(quán)原則、公平互利原則，限制間接征收的擴(kuò)大化，平衡東道國(guó)與外國(guó)投資者的利益并體現(xiàn)我國(guó)雙重身份大國(guó)的利益訴求，積極參與制定國(guó)際投資協(xié)定和貿(mào)易協(xié)定并爭(zhēng)奪話語(yǔ)權(quán)。
[Abstract]:Indirect expropriation is a hot and difficult issue in the field of international investment. The globalization of economy and the development of investment liberalization make the cases of indirect expropriation emerge constantly. More legal problems, over-protection of investors and neglect of the rights and interests of the host country make the imbalance of rights and interests prominent in the indirect expropriation rules. The different standpoints of the capital exporting countries and the capital importing countries also lead to the non-uniformity of the indirect expropriation rules. Receiving and expropriating rules are one of the contents of international direct investment. Their development directly affects the investment environment and the flow of international capital, and then affects the development of the world economy.
The legal basis of indirect expropriation in the field of international investment is national economic sovereignty. Many problems in the rules of indirect expropriation are the concentrated reflection of the contradiction between the national economic sovereignty of the host country and the private property rights of foreign investors. The two types of countries have different attitudes towards indirect expropriation rules. At present, international investment agreements include multilateral, regional and bilateral investment agreements, almost all of which cover indirect expropriation rules, but these three kinds of investment agreements have different dominant positions on indirect expropriation rules. However, the inherent limitations of BITs aggravate the fuzziness, uncertainty and non-uniformity of indirect expropriation rules.
The protective tendencies of the international investment arbitration tribunal towards foreign investors are vividly reflected in the awards of indirect expropriation cases, which weakens the foreign capital jurisdiction of the host country and aggravates the imbalance of the indirect expropriation rules. Moreover, because of the confidentiality, opacity and independence of the arbitration tribunal itself, the awards of indirect expropriation cases are also made. The results were not uniform and uncertain, which aroused strong doubts from all walks of life. Even developed countries began to reform the investment arbitration tribunal.
As a big country with dual identities of capital importing country and capital exporting country, China is in a dilemma in dealing with the indirect expropriation rules. We should not only pay attention to safeguarding the interests of foreign investors, create a better investment environment to attract foreign capital and promote the development of China's domestic economy, but also implement "import" and "import" in China. At the same time of "going global" strategy, we should strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of our overseas investors.
Facing the main legal problems such as the expansion of indirect expropriation, the imbalance of several rights and interests caused by the rules of indirect expropriation, and the non-unity of indirect expropriation, China should actively respond to these problems, adhere to the principles of national economic sovereignty and fairness and justice, and strive to limit and prevent the trend of unlimited expansion of the rules of indirect expropriation, so as to be fair and proper. We should balance several interests involved in the rule of indirect expropriation and overcome its non uniformity.
This article consists of three parts: introduction, main body and conclusion. There are seven chapters.
The first chapter is the basic problem of indirect expropriation. Traditionally, the concept, type, characteristics and definition of indirect expropriation are the basic problems of indirect expropriation. International arbitral tribunals often interpret indirect expropriation cases in favor of protecting foreign investors. The emergence of indirect expropriation cases in the 1970s and 1980s directly triggered a heated debate in academic circles on this issue. The boundary between system and measure is the key and difficult point of indirect expropriation system.
Chapter 2: Legal basis of indirect expropriation. The legal basis of indirect expropriation is the theory of national economic sovereignty, foreign capital jurisdiction, natural resources permanent sovereignty and private property right protection. The latest development of indirect expropriation directly infringes the host country's permanent sovereignty over natural resources and foreign capital jurisdiction. Capital exporting countries emphasize the expansion of the scope of indirect expropriation on the basis of private property rights, so as to protect their overseas investment. As a host country, the Chinese nation should take the protection of the state's economic sovereignty as the legal basis for the indirect expropriation system.
Chapter III Legal Practice of Indirect Expropriation. A survey of the judicial practice and treaty law practice of indirect expropriation shows that there are many problems in the rules of indirect expropriation. Different international arbitral tribunals have different opinions on the definition of indirect expropriation, different methods, and different considerations of various reference factors, thus making indirect expropriation different. However, the international arbitral tribunal has gradually adopted the principle of proportionality of the European Court of Human Rights to determine whether indirect expropriation occurs.
Chapter Four: Expansion of indirect expropriation and legal problems arising from it. The expansion of indirect expropriation rules is manifested in the expansion of investment definition, measures definition and indirect expropriation scope. This enlargement leads to the imbalance between the interests of the host country and the interests of investors, the weakening of the economic sovereignty of the host country and the excessive protection of investors.
Chapter Five analyzes the imbalance of rights and interests in indirect expropriation.The imbalance of rights and interests in indirect expropriation is fully reflected from the perspective of the triple imbalance of rights and interests between the investor and the host country, the investor and the home country, the host country and the home country. Equality. In both legislation and judicial practice of indirect expropriation, the problem of one-sided protection of investor's rights and interests while neglecting or even weakening the sovereignty of the host country's national economy has arisen, resulting in the imbalance between the public interests of the host country and the private interests of foreign investors, affecting international capital flows and hindering the development of economic globalization, as well as the national economy. Sovereignty is facing threats and challenges.
Chapter VI: Analysis of the non-uniformity of indirect expropriation rules. Comparing the provisions of indirect expropriation in bilateral investment agreements, free trade agreements, regional investment agreements and multilateral investment agreements signed by various countries, and analyzing the deep-seated reasons for the non-uniformity of indirect expropriation rules, we can find that different countries have different standpoints. With the deepening of economic globalization and the development of international investment legal system, and various problems of indirect expropriation in practice, countries gradually began to adjust the indirect expropriation rules, and these new changes have gradually appeared.
Chapter 7: The legislative status and Legal Countermeasures of indirect expropriation system in China. As a big country with dual status of capital exporting country and importing country, China has a realistic demand for the formulation of indirect expropriation rules. From the standpoint and angle of our country and on the premise of adhering to the standpoint of a large developing country, this paper makes a pertinent analysis of the above indirect expropriation and puts forward our countermeasures. The principle of equality and mutual benefit restricts the expansion of indirect expropriation, balances the interests of the host country and foreign investors and reflects the interests of China's dual identity power, actively participates in the formulation of international investment agreements and trade agreements and competes for the right to speak.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D996.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王小麗;黃夕彪;;國(guó)際投資法自由化與我國(guó)外資立法對(duì)策[J];安徽農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年03期

2 季燁;;國(guó)際投資條約中投資定義的擴(kuò)張及其限度[J];北大法律評(píng)論;2011年01期

3 劉筍;從多邊投資協(xié)議草案看國(guó)際投資多邊法制的走向[J];比較法研究;2003年02期

4 張千帆;“公共利益”的構(gòu)成——對(duì)行政法的目標(biāo)以及“平衡”的意義之探討[J];比較法研究;2005年05期

5 徐崇利;從南北紛爭(zhēng)焦點(diǎn)的轉(zhuǎn)移看國(guó)際投資法的晚近發(fā)展[J];比較法研究;1997年01期

6 梁詠;;間接征收的研究起點(diǎn)和路徑——投資者權(quán)益與東道國(guó)治安權(quán)之衡平[J];財(cái)經(jīng)問(wèn)題研究;2009年01期

7 葉興平;《北美自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定》爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制的創(chuàng)新及意義[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2002年07期

8 張光;;論國(guó)際投資仲裁中投資者利益與公共利益的平衡[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2011年01期

9 單文華;國(guó)有化補(bǔ)償理論與實(shí)踐的發(fā)展及中國(guó)的對(duì)策[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1995年04期

10 彭岳;;國(guó)際投資中的間接征收及其認(rèn)定[J];復(fù)旦學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 石儉平;國(guó)際條約中的征收條款研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

本文編號(hào)：2230250