【摘要】： 遇難船避難地問(wèn)題在當(dāng)代海事背景下是一個(gè)典型的海事問(wèn)題,并涉及眾多的利益主體,如船舶、船東、沿岸國(guó)以及船旗國(guó)等。出于對(duì)本國(guó)沿岸利益的保護(hù),有些國(guó)家在某些重大的海難事故中拒絕遇難船進(jìn)入其避難地的案例,如the Castor案和Prestige案,促使國(guó)際范圍內(nèi),特別是國(guó)際海事組織(IMO)以及國(guó)際海事委員會(huì)(CMI)對(duì)避難地問(wèn)題核心問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了深入的研究,主要關(guān)注遇難船避難地進(jìn)入權(quán)與沿岸國(guó)保護(hù)自身國(guó)家利益之間的沖突、兩者權(quán)利行使的條件和限制以及可能產(chǎn)出的國(guó)家責(zé)任問(wèn)題。 遇難船避難地問(wèn)題的復(fù)雜性不僅體現(xiàn)在其涉及利益主體的多樣性,而且還涉及國(guó)際法的各個(gè)部門(mén),如一般國(guó)際法原則、國(guó)際海洋法、國(guó)際環(huán)境法、國(guó)際人道主義法以及海商法等。本文探討的內(nèi)容主要集中在法律層面,具體指遇難船與沿岸國(guó)之間的權(quán)利義務(wù)層面,并不涉及可能的國(guó)家責(zé)任。在批判地分析了國(guó)際上已有的關(guān)于上述權(quán)利沖突的四種理論基礎(chǔ)上,筆者認(rèn)為一方面應(yīng)當(dāng)肯定國(guó)際法上遇難船的進(jìn)入避難地的權(quán)利,此應(yīng)為一般原則;另一方面,沿岸國(guó)依據(jù)個(gè)案平衡方法,在例外情況下為保護(hù)自身安全利益有權(quán)拒絕遇難船進(jìn)入。國(guó)家在國(guó)際法上是否承擔(dān)救助遇難船的義務(wù),目前尚無(wú)定論,但總的趨勢(shì)是國(guó)家承擔(dān)對(duì)遇難船的救助義務(wù)將會(huì)越來(lái)越重。而有的國(guó)家或區(qū)域,如歐盟,已有相關(guān)的立法舉措要求成員國(guó)對(duì)避難地問(wèn)題承擔(dān)更多的責(zé)任。 為證明遇難船享有的避難權(quán),本文專(zhuān)門(mén)從國(guó)際習(xí)慣法的角度,實(shí)證地考察了不同歷史階段存在的關(guān)于避難習(xí)慣的大量海事法律實(shí)踐,包括國(guó)家間條約實(shí)踐、國(guó)家立法、司法以及政策性實(shí)踐。并從微觀的角度,歸納出遇難船避難習(xí)慣的構(gòu)成要素,以及遇難船主張避難權(quán)應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)的舉證責(zé)任和證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。具體而言,主張避難權(quán)的一方應(yīng)當(dāng)證明存在導(dǎo)致其非自愿進(jìn)入避難地的海難事實(shí),并且該海難應(yīng)達(dá)到迫切情勢(shì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(necessity test)。 本文開(kāi)創(chuàng)性地研究了我國(guó)不同層次的立法就遇難船避難地問(wèn)題的相關(guān)規(guī)定,包括雙邊條約、法律、行政法規(guī)以及地方性法規(guī)等,并得出結(jié)論認(rèn)為,我國(guó)的相關(guān)海事立法就遇難船問(wèn)題的規(guī)定比較完善。但限于筆者掌握的材料,未能考察具體實(shí)踐中我國(guó)對(duì)遇難船避難地問(wèn)題的應(yīng)對(duì)。這方面有待進(jìn)一步的研究。本文最后就遇難船避難地問(wèn)題的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)和特點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了歸納,以期對(duì)將來(lái)的研究有所裨益。
[Abstract]:The problem of refuge place of shipwrecked ship is a typical maritime problem in the contemporary maritime background, and involves many stakeholders, such as ship, ship owner, coastal state, flag state and so on. For the protection of their coastal interests, some countries have denied ships in distress access to their places of refuge in some major maritime accidents, such as the Castor and Prestige cases, prompting the international community, In particular, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) (IMO) and the International Maritime Committee (CMI) have carried out in-depth research on the core issues of asylum, mainly focusing on the conflict between the right of entry to the place of refuge of shipwrecks and the protection of the national interests of coastal States. The conditions and limitations of the exercise of both rights and the question of State responsibility for possible outcomes. The complexity of the issue of places of refuge for ships in distress is reflected not only in the diversity of stakeholders involved, but also in various sectors of international law, such as the principles of general international law, the international law of the sea, international environmental law, International humanitarian law and maritime law. The content of this paper mainly focuses on the legal level, specifically refers to the rights and obligations between the shipwrecked ship and the coastal state, and does not involve the possible state responsibility. Based on the critical analysis of the four theories on the conflict of rights mentioned above, the author holds that the right to enter the asylum of shipwrecked ships in international law should be affirmed, which should be a general principle; On the other hand, coastal states have the right to deny access to wrecked vessels in exceptional circumstances to protect their own security interests, according to the case-based balance method. Whether the state should undertake the obligation of rescuing the shipwrecked ship in international law has not been decided at present, but the general trend is that the obligation of rescuing the shipwrecked ship will be more and more serious. Some countries or regions, such as the European Union, have legislation that requires member states to take more responsibility for asylum issues. In order to prove the right of asylum enjoyed by shipwrecked ships, this paper investigates empirically a large number of maritime legal practices on asylum customs in different historical stages, including inter-state treaty practice and national legislation, from the perspective of international customary law. Judicial and policy practice. From the microcosmic point of view, the author concludes the elements of asylum habits of shipwrecked ships, and the burden of proof and the standard of proof that shipwrecks should bear in claiming the right of asylum. In particular, the party asserting the right of asylum should prove the existence of a maritime disaster that led to its involuntary entry into the place of asylum, and that the maritime disaster should meet the urgent situational standard (necessity test). This paper studies the relevant provisions of different levels of legislation in China, including bilateral treaties, laws, administrative regulations and local regulations, and concludes that, The relevant maritime legislation of our country is relatively perfect on the problem of shipwreck. However, it is limited to the material that the author grasps, and fails to investigate the response of our country to the problem of refuge place of shipwrecked ship in concrete practice. This aspect needs further study. At the end of this paper, the development trend and characteristics of shipwrecked asylum are summarized in order to benefit the future research.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D996.19

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 姜傳堯;遇難船避難地問(wèn)題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2308805