渔业资源保育与可持续发展原则之研究
|
摘要
国际法与国内法都是法律秩序,秩序内或许有些许概念相通,但不绝对代表可以想当然尔的相互推论而得出存在于国内法的法律概念必然会反映在国际法制度。以国内法的角度检视捕鱼活动是任何人以先占的方式取得的无主物并建立所有权,但国际法的先占是建立国家的管辖,并非取得物的所有权,亦即国内法的个别财产权归属制度未落实在国际法,因此,渔业资源在国际法秩序应为是事实上的无主物。虽然国际社会曾从全人类的福祉为出发,提出”人类共同遗产”或”人类共同关切事项”的概念,试图规范涉及全人类享用的资源分配议题,但受限于国际法特性,前述两概念并不能用以定性渔业资源。
渔业资源是国际贸易主要标的,鉴于事实上无主物的特性,各国无不以”先占先赢”的态度竞相加入捞捕,经年累月过度捞捕造成生态回复力降低,甚至促成某些渔群濒临绝种的危机。有感于此,国际社会开始思索平衡生态回复与贸易发展,虽然”可持续发展原则”是否成为国际法的一般法律原则,尚有斟酌之处,但相关国家据此原则处理渔业问题已有一段时日,如《联合国海洋法公约》签署生效前的多边公约、双边协议或国际文件虽未明确要求以此原则处理渔业问题,但部分区域渔业组织与有关国家的实践显然是呼应可持续发展原则。除前项国际文件纷纷将此原则纳为主轴外,WTO更转变GATT对资源的利用态度,将1947年的”…Full use of the resource of the world…"说法转变为”…Optiimal use of the world resource…",以符合需要。
由于渔业补贴对于渔业资源的可持续发展有着深远的影响,现行的协议不能规范渔业补贴,国际社会已展开相关研究并着手修改现行《补贴与反补贴措施协议》,虽然国际社会在修订过程的分歧态度使得渔业补贴是否应受严格的管制纷扰不休,但可以确定的是增加渔获为核心的补贴对渔业资源的可持续发展是弊大于利。由于可持续发展原则内涵相当广泛,且欠缺统一的实践内容,不仅区域渔业组织建议参与会员采取措施以保育特定渔业资源的可持续发展,各国亦以本国的思维进行各项保护措施,如制定严格的食品安全法规检验进口产品、要求进入本国市场的渔产品必须具备特定标签或产品来源证明,也许这些具体或抽象的国内措施符合本国利益,但未必然通过世贸组织相关协议所建立的各项原则的检验,从历次的争端不难发现世贸组织坚守贸易自由化的底线,任何企图挑战底线的单方措施莫不受到相当程度的非难。有批评者认为世贸组织的相关判决完全抹煞各国维持生态回复能力的苦心,甚至刻意忽略生态回复与人类的关系,进而主张应由国际海洋法庭受理此类案件。实则此种涉及天然资源的贸易案件是受限于条约本身职能而无法处理此类问题,世贸组织相关协议并无处理资源保育的规范,《联合国海洋法公约》也无法处理贸易自由化的议题,因此,单一事实重复为两个不同目的以上条约规范时,不仅无法从《维也纳条约法公约》找出解决方法,以一般法律原则建立单一管辖以解决条约间的冲突也不可行,唯有受理案件系属的国际司法机构彼此进行合作,无论是临时性的交换讯息或建立常态交换讯息的机制都能消弭认知差距,建立资源保育与贸易自由双赢的局面。
Both International Law and Domestic Law are legal systems, although they do share some general legal consciousness and principles; however it definitely does not mean the legal concept which Domestic Law applies can also be adopted by International Law. For example, Fishing activity can be defined as "anyone who occupies res nullius and builds up ownership" in Domestic Law system, but the term "occupy" in International Law system works as building up a nation's jurisdiction, not as the ownership of acquisition. This explains the fact that the right of individual ownership of property does not apply to International Law, therefore Fishery Resources is de facto res nullius. Although the international community has brought up the concept of "common heritage of mankind" or "common interest of mankind", trying to regulate the issue of distribution of natural resources which shared by all human beings, the two ideas mentioned above cannot be applied to characterize fishery resources because of the notion of International Law.
Fishery resources are the main target of International Trade, due to fact that fishery resources are res nullius, every country is trying to get as much resources as they could base on "first come first serve" idea. Eventually this kind of competition causes the reduction of ecological restoration and certain species of fish are facing the possibility of extinction. Therefore, the International Community has started to think about this issue and try to find out a solution to balance the ecology and trading development. Although whether the principle of sustainable development has become the general principle of law in International Law is still under official confirmation, when it comes to the issue of fishery, most of the countries have started to follow the above principle. Many formal declarations of international conferences and documents have adapted that concept, for example even though UNCLOS did not have clear definition in either multilateral convention, bilateral agreement or international file, the actual actions between some regional organizations and countries are following the idea of sustainable development. Also WTO has even changed the statement which made by GATT in 1947 from "...full use of the resources of the world" to "...optimal use of the world resource".
Fisheries subsidies have great influence on the sustainable development of fishery resource, the international community has already launched relevant research and revising current ACSM. Even thought there were diverting opinions about this issue which made it difficult to reach an agreement on whether fishery subsidies should be strictly regulated, it is still can be sure that the increase of fishery subsidies will have negative impact on the sustainable development of fishery resources. Besides the fact that regional fishery management organizations suggest participants to take certain protecting measures on specific fishery resources based on the principle of sustainable development, every country also carries on their own protective trade-related measures, such as making sure all of the import products are being exanimate under strict food safty regulations, the fish products which access into the market should have eco labels or catch documentation schemes of origin and species. All of these measures may be able to serve national interests, however it will not be easy to pass the inspection of WTO as the principle of WTO is the liberalization of trade. Some critic thinks WTO totally obliterates the efforts that countries made to maintain the ecology restoration and suggest ITLOS should take care of this kind of cases. In fact, case like this which involves trading and natural resources will be limited by the function of treaty itself, neither WTO nor UNCLOS has relevant protocol to solve the issue. When a single issue is being regulated by two different treaties or norms, finding solutions from Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties or from general law principle are both not workable. Only when all of the involving judicial organizations cooperate with each other, temporarily exchanges information or even to establish the information exchange mechanism can prevent and reduce disparity and then to create a win-win situation.
渔业资源是国际贸易主要标的,鉴于事实上无主物的特性,各国无不以”先占先赢”的态度竞相加入捞捕,经年累月过度捞捕造成生态回复力降低,甚至促成某些渔群濒临绝种的危机。有感于此,国际社会开始思索平衡生态回复与贸易发展,虽然”可持续发展原则”是否成为国际法的一般法律原则,尚有斟酌之处,但相关国家据此原则处理渔业问题已有一段时日,如《联合国海洋法公约》签署生效前的多边公约、双边协议或国际文件虽未明确要求以此原则处理渔业问题,但部分区域渔业组织与有关国家的实践显然是呼应可持续发展原则。除前项国际文件纷纷将此原则纳为主轴外,WTO更转变GATT对资源的利用态度,将1947年的”…Full use of the resource of the world…"说法转变为”…Optiimal use of the world resource…",以符合需要。
由于渔业补贴对于渔业资源的可持续发展有着深远的影响,现行的协议不能规范渔业补贴,国际社会已展开相关研究并着手修改现行《补贴与反补贴措施协议》,虽然国际社会在修订过程的分歧态度使得渔业补贴是否应受严格的管制纷扰不休,但可以确定的是增加渔获为核心的补贴对渔业资源的可持续发展是弊大于利。由于可持续发展原则内涵相当广泛,且欠缺统一的实践内容,不仅区域渔业组织建议参与会员采取措施以保育特定渔业资源的可持续发展,各国亦以本国的思维进行各项保护措施,如制定严格的食品安全法规检验进口产品、要求进入本国市场的渔产品必须具备特定标签或产品来源证明,也许这些具体或抽象的国内措施符合本国利益,但未必然通过世贸组织相关协议所建立的各项原则的检验,从历次的争端不难发现世贸组织坚守贸易自由化的底线,任何企图挑战底线的单方措施莫不受到相当程度的非难。有批评者认为世贸组织的相关判决完全抹煞各国维持生态回复能力的苦心,甚至刻意忽略生态回复与人类的关系,进而主张应由国际海洋法庭受理此类案件。实则此种涉及天然资源的贸易案件是受限于条约本身职能而无法处理此类问题,世贸组织相关协议并无处理资源保育的规范,《联合国海洋法公约》也无法处理贸易自由化的议题,因此,单一事实重复为两个不同目的以上条约规范时,不仅无法从《维也纳条约法公约》找出解决方法,以一般法律原则建立单一管辖以解决条约间的冲突也不可行,唯有受理案件系属的国际司法机构彼此进行合作,无论是临时性的交换讯息或建立常态交换讯息的机制都能消弭认知差距,建立资源保育与贸易自由双赢的局面。
Both International Law and Domestic Law are legal systems, although they do share some general legal consciousness and principles; however it definitely does not mean the legal concept which Domestic Law applies can also be adopted by International Law. For example, Fishing activity can be defined as "anyone who occupies res nullius and builds up ownership" in Domestic Law system, but the term "occupy" in International Law system works as building up a nation's jurisdiction, not as the ownership of acquisition. This explains the fact that the right of individual ownership of property does not apply to International Law, therefore Fishery Resources is de facto res nullius. Although the international community has brought up the concept of "common heritage of mankind" or "common interest of mankind", trying to regulate the issue of distribution of natural resources which shared by all human beings, the two ideas mentioned above cannot be applied to characterize fishery resources because of the notion of International Law.
Fishery resources are the main target of International Trade, due to fact that fishery resources are res nullius, every country is trying to get as much resources as they could base on "first come first serve" idea. Eventually this kind of competition causes the reduction of ecological restoration and certain species of fish are facing the possibility of extinction. Therefore, the International Community has started to think about this issue and try to find out a solution to balance the ecology and trading development. Although whether the principle of sustainable development has become the general principle of law in International Law is still under official confirmation, when it comes to the issue of fishery, most of the countries have started to follow the above principle. Many formal declarations of international conferences and documents have adapted that concept, for example even though UNCLOS did not have clear definition in either multilateral convention, bilateral agreement or international file, the actual actions between some regional organizations and countries are following the idea of sustainable development. Also WTO has even changed the statement which made by GATT in 1947 from "...full use of the resources of the world" to "...optimal use of the world resource".
Fisheries subsidies have great influence on the sustainable development of fishery resource, the international community has already launched relevant research and revising current ACSM. Even thought there were diverting opinions about this issue which made it difficult to reach an agreement on whether fishery subsidies should be strictly regulated, it is still can be sure that the increase of fishery subsidies will have negative impact on the sustainable development of fishery resources. Besides the fact that regional fishery management organizations suggest participants to take certain protecting measures on specific fishery resources based on the principle of sustainable development, every country also carries on their own protective trade-related measures, such as making sure all of the import products are being exanimate under strict food safty regulations, the fish products which access into the market should have eco labels or catch documentation schemes of origin and species. All of these measures may be able to serve national interests, however it will not be easy to pass the inspection of WTO as the principle of WTO is the liberalization of trade. Some critic thinks WTO totally obliterates the efforts that countries made to maintain the ecology restoration and suggest ITLOS should take care of this kind of cases. In fact, case like this which involves trading and natural resources will be limited by the function of treaty itself, neither WTO nor UNCLOS has relevant protocol to solve the issue. When a single issue is being regulated by two different treaties or norms, finding solutions from Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties or from general law principle are both not workable. Only when all of the involving judicial organizations cooperate with each other, temporarily exchanges information or even to establish the information exchange mechanism can prevent and reduce disparity and then to create a win-win situation.
引文
①Sustainable Development的翻译有可持续发展与永续发展两种,本文从联合国官方网站用语。
② United Nations Report of the International Law Commission, Covering the Work of its Eighth Session, April 23-July 4,1956,51 AJIL, Vol.1,155,246-247 (1957).
③参见：Shawkat Alam, Trade Restrictions Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements: Developmental Implications for Developing Countries, Journal of World Trade 41 (5), p.1008 (2007); D. Brack and K. Gray, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO, (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs,2003)p.5～6;中进忠：《WTO协调环境贸易关系的理论与实践》,中国法制出版社2003年版,第51至55页。
① Tim Lang and Collin Hines, The New Protectionism, (London:Earthscan Publication Ltd.,1994), p.126.
② Wilfred Beckerman, Economic Growth and the Environment:Whose Environment?, World Development, vol. 20, Issue 4,81～496 (1992).
③参见：《外空条约》(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies)第1条,《月球协定》(Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies)第11条1、5、7项,UNCLOS第11部分。
④濒临绝种野生动植物国际贸易公约前言,联合国气候变化纲要公约前言,生物多样性公约前言,21世纪议程。
①陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上),(台湾)商务印书馆1965年版,第2,84,89-90、98页。
② J. G. Starke, The Introduction of International Law, (Singapore: Butterworth Co. & Ltd.,1986) pp.71-74;[英]伊恩·布朗利,曾令良、余敏友等译,《国际法原理》,法律出版社2002年版,第38-41页。
③ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), p.58.④陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上),(台湾)商务印书馆1965年版,第89页; Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,41 (2005).
⑤黄居正：《无主物、共同遗产与共有物—遗传与生物资源公约中的财产意识》,载于：《政大法学评论》,2006年12月,第94期,第19页。
⑥ Erin Bain Jones, Law of Sea, Oceanic Resources, (Dallas:South Methodist University Press,1972) pp.13,33.
① Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988) p.46.
② Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), p.29.; B. Larschan and B. Brennan, The Common Heritage of Mankind Principle in International Law,21 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,305-337,306(1983); John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, available at: http://www.netlibrary.com/Reader/, (visited on 2008/7/7).
③ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul: Thomson/West Group,2006) pp.358-359.
④ UNCLOS 第63条1项、87条、117条～120条2项;1985年《美加鲑鱼条约》 (Treaty Concerning Pacific Salmon, U.S.-Can., Jan 28,1985),T.I.A.S.11,091,1469 U.N.T.S.357 (further amended in June 1999).
⑤英汉法律辞典,法律出版社1998年版,第683页,陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上),(台湾)商务印书馆1965年版,第89-90页；Hugo Grotius, The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.24, 28.
⑥ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.28-29; Erin Bain Jones, Law of Sea, Oceanic Resources, (Dallas:South Methodist University Press,1972) pp.13,34,102-103; Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,194 (1986).
⑦ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.30,36-37; Juraj Andrassy, International Law and the Resources of the Sea (New York: Columbia Universty Press,1970),p.133; P. Sreenivasa Rao, The public Order ofOcean Resources (Cambridge: The M.I.T. Express,1975), pp.77、82.
① Available at: Http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1945/450928a.html, (visited on 2008/7/10).
② Available at:Http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/common%20property, (visited 2008/7/10).
③ Christine Stewart, Legislating for Property Rights in Fisheries, (Rome: FAO,2004) p.21-28, Cristina Leria, Annick Van Houtte, Rights Based Fisheries: A Legal Overview, in Myron H. Nordquist and John Norton Moore (ed.), Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Center for Oceans Law and Policy, (Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2000) pp.263-299.
④ J. B. Morrell, The Law of the Sea: Historical Analysis of the 1982 Treaty and Its Rejection by the United States, (London:McFarland & Company Inc.,1992),p.174.
①黄居正：《无主物、共同遗产与共有物—遗传与生物资源公约中的财产意识》,载于：《政大法学评论》,2006年12月,第94期,第19-20页。
②黄异：《鱼在法制上的意义》,载于：《台湾海洋法学报》,台湾海洋大学海洋法律研究所,2007年6月,第6卷1期,第152页。
③黄异：《鱼在法制上的意义》,载于：《台湾海洋法学报》,台湾海洋大学海洋法律研究所,2007年6月,第6卷1期,第154页。
① Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Amo Express,1972), pp.23.; Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL, 25,33-38 (2005).
②杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版,第321-328页,Arthur Nussbaum, The Significance of Roman Law in the History International Law, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol.100,682-683. (1952).
③Res这一词是多义字,通常为物之代表或形容物体的物理外观本质,还有thing或property之意,也有event或business等意思,如Res ipsa loquitur, The thing speaks for itself,事情本身说明一切。Res accessoria sequitur
rem principalem, The accessory follows the principal,从物随主物。参见：郑玉波：《法谚》,(台湾)三民书局1988年版,第44,135页；Kemal Baslar, The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.40.
④ "Although this is a Latin phrase, it does not come from Roman law.",参见：Kemal Baslar, The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988) p.42.
⑤ Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,40-41 (2005).
① Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,35～36,40～41 (2005).
② J.G. Stark, The Introduction of International Law, (Singapore:Butterworth Co. & Ltd.,1986) p.159;周鲠生：《国际法大纲》,中国方正出版社2004年版,第65页。
③ L. Oppenheim, H. Lauterpacht (ed.), International Law.-Treatise, Vol.1 (8th ed.) (New York:David McKay, 1955),p.555; J.G. Stark, The Introduction of International Law, (Singapore:Butterworth Co. & Ltd.,1986)p.88；关于该土地上面是否应有人的争议,参见：联合国大会对于西撒哈拉案(West Sahara Case)的咨询意见(UNGA Res.3292,1974/12/13)、国际法院针对西撒哈拉案判决(ICJ Rep.12,1975)以及学说的看法M. N. Shaw, The West Sahara Case,49 BYbIL,119,121～124 (1978)
④ Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,43、45 (2005).
⑤ Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.44.
⑥ G. Hardin, Tragedy of the Commons, in Robin Clarke (ed.), Note for the Future:An Alternative History of the Past Decade, (London:Thames & Hudson,1975), p.64.; Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988) pp.41,46-47,52.
①目前有关贸易措施是国际社会对于抵制非法、无报告和不受规范渔业活动的普遍应对作法,2007年11月6日ICCAT颁布相关的决议供作贸易措施之法源依据。虽说这种作法有部分合法性争议,但RFMO似乎朝这方向进行。相关论点参见：高圣惕：《贸易措施作为促进遵守区域渔业管理组织保育及管理措施之工具—以大西洋鲔类资源保育委员会之法令及实践为中心》,载于：《台湾海洋事务及海洋法律国际学术研讨会》,2007年5月,第1-89-93页。高圣惕：《台湾与区域性渔业管理组织—论大西洋鲔类保育委员会对台湾动用贸易制裁之05-02号前置性决议的合法性》,载于：《政大法学评论》,2007年6月,第66页。
② Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.),The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972),p.24; A. A.Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject:A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proceeding 13th Colloquium On the Law of Outer Space,1-214,212 (1972).
③ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), pp.349-350,359.
④ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), p.23-24.
⑤ A. A. Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject: A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proceeding 13th Colloquium On the Law of Outer Space 21,1-214,212 (1972); A. A. Cocca, The Common Heritage of Mankind-An overview. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, A1AA, New York, p.17; Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law, available at: http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041gall.htm, (visited on 2008/7/4.), J. I. Gabrynowwicz, The Province and Heritage of Mankind Reconsidered: A New Beginning, available at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archieve/nasa/casi.ntre.nasa.gov/1993004830.pdf, (visited on 2008/7/11).
⑥ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.23～24; Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), pp.60～64.
⑦ Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law,学者认为:"... for the first time in history mankind was recognized in positive law by the international legal order as a subject of this order.", available at:http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041gall.htm, (visited on 2008/7/4.).
⑧这群人必须有文化、道德、历史、种族、语言、宗教等的相同背景,且尚未建立自己的国家。如身处伊朗、伊拉克、土耳其与阿富汗的库德族,见：Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law,(Si. Paul:Thomson /West Group,2006), p.61.
① Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,191 (1986); Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.50.
② Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972),pp.28-29; A. Dolman, Resources, Regime, World Order, (Oxford:Pergamon Policy Studies,,1981), p.227.
③ R. P. Arnold, Common Heritage of Mankindas a Legal Concept,9 International Lawyer,153-155 (1975); Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,190 (1986); Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.39,45.
① Preamble of Convention of Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext (visited on:2010/11/25)
②《关于各国探索和利用包括月球和其它天体在内外层空间活动的原则条约》(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies),或简称《外层空间条约》或《外空条约》。是1963年联合国大会通过的《各国探索与利用外层空间活动的法律原则的宣言》的补充和发展,又称为《外层空间宪章》是有关外层空间的基本法,联合国大会于1966年12月19日通过后,1967年1月27日在伦敦、莫斯科和华盛顿三地开放供签署,同年10月10日生效。1985年6月30日时已有84个缔约国和30个签署国。参见：贺其治：《外层空间法》,法律出版社1982年版,第315页。
③ Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law,(Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.40～43.
④ Sylia M. Williams, The Law of Outer Space and Nature Resources,36 INTL & COMP. L.Q.142,142-145. (1987).
⑤简称《关于月球的协定》或《月球协议》的《指导各国在月球和其它天体上活动的协议》(AgreementGoverning the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies)于1979年12月5口由第34届联合
国大会未经投票通过,同年12月18日开放签字,1984年7月11日生效。
⑥详细的介绍可以参考：赵理海：《海洋法的新发展》,法律出版社1984年版,第140页；邹克渊：《南极矿物资源与国际法》,法律出版社1996年版,第202-209页：小田滋：《海洋资源的国际法Ⅱ》,东京有斐阁1972年版,第137页；J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford: Oxford Press,1982) p.110; Abdul Koroma, The future of the Common Heritage of Mankind, The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, in Albert W. Koers and Bernard H. Oxman (ed.), The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, (Honolulu:Law of the Sea Institute, University of Hawaii,1983) p.25-27.
⑦南极比较有争议,南极条约(Treaty on Antarctica)前言中指出:”为了全体人类的利益,南极将永远只使用于和平目的。"Recognizing that it is in the interest of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord虽然接近人类共同遗产的概念,但实际上目前南极的开发研究都操控于南极俱乐部(Antarctic Club)原始12个成员以及其它参加谘商会议国家之手,并未开放给其它国家,有论者认为根据条约前言已能证明南极是人类共同的遗产,也有论者认为这样的说法值得考虑。见：邹克渊：《南极矿物资源与国际法》,法律出版社1996年版,第210页Francesco Francioni, Resource Sharing in Antarctica:For Whose Benefit?, EJIL Vol.1, No.1/2, (1990) available at:http://www.ejil.org/journa/Voll/Nol/index.html, (visited on 2008/7/10).
① Lawrence Juda, UNCLOS Ⅲ and the. New International Economic Order,7 Ocean Dev. Int. L.,221,221 (1979).
②王铁崖：《论人类共同继承遗产的概念》,《中国国际法年刊》,1984年,第22页;A. C. Kiss, The Common Heritage Principle:Utopia or Reality, International Law,425 (1985); Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,196,198 (1986); 学者认为这是一种信托管理模式。见：Kemal Baslar, The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.37,60,61,64,65,69,89.
③《月球协定》第11条；月球协议虽然没有明言,目前月球上没有生物是不争的事实；UNCLOS第133条1项、136条、137条；但有学者认为前述条约的解释不应局限非生物性资源。见：Albert Hoffmann, UNCLOS and the Resource of the Seabed in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction,载于：《台湾海洋事务及海洋法律国际学术研讨会》,2007年,第2-28-29页。
④ Kemal Baslar, The Cconcept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988),p.45.
⑤学者认为：“…,the CHM regime can only start where the PSNR regime ends....". Available at:
www.dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/jur/1995/n.j.schrijver/h7.pdf, (visited on 2008/7/1)
⑥ Alexandre Kiss & Dinah Shelton, International Environment Law, (N.Y.:Transnational Publisher Inc.,1991), pp.9～11.
⑦ U.N. Doc. A/C.1/PV 1787, p.32.⑥标准为：1、人类共同遗产不能以任何形式占有,从而在法律上排除任何国家对其主张主权。2、人类共同遗产在利益归属必须依循公平分享原则。3、人类共同遗产必须有任何国家都参加的国际管理机制进行管理；4、人类共同遗产的利用必须为和平目的。J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1982) p.117,[法]亚历山大‘基思,张若思译,《国际环境法》,法律出版社2000年版,第111-113页,Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,191 (1986).
⑨ A. A. Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject:A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proc.13th Coll. On the Law of Outer Space 21,1-214,211 (1972); A. A. Cocca, The Common Heritage of Mankind-An Overview, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, AIAA, New York, p.17; Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,195 (1986); Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law, available at:http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041gal 1.htm, (visited on2008/7/4.)
① Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988),p.39;即着重在思想与创作的文化共同遗产,《世界遗产条约》或称为《有关保护世界文化遗产暨自然遗产之条约》(Convention Concerning Protecting the World Culture and Heritage),该条约于1972年经联合国教科文组织采认,1975年正式生效,迄今至少有155国参与缔约。目前被世界遗产委员会登录的遗产总数有552件,分别有418件文化遗产和114件自然遗产,以及20件复合遗产。available at:http://typo38.unesco.org/zh/unesco-home.html>, (last visited 2008/7/7).
② Alexander Kiss, Nature, the Common Heritage of Mankind, available at: http://www.nature.coe.int/english/main/naturopa/magazine/nat91.htm, (last visited 2008/7/1)
③如：1979年在德国波昂(Bonn)签署的《保护野生动物迁移公约》(Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals)之理念。
③ Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources (N.Y.:Cambridge Press,2002)pp.92-99,123,446, 449～450; John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals: The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006).
⑤ Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,194-195 (1986); Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.72-73.
⑥ J. E. S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1982) pp.117,193.
①又称《原住民和部落民族公约》(Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries),国际劳工组织于1989年6月通过。available at: http://www.pts.org.tw/～abori/law/un/3-c.html, (last visited 2008/07/16).
② A. J. Dolman, Resource, Regime and World Order, (New York: Pegramon Press,1981), pp.247-248.; Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988),p.39.
③ Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law,(Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.49.
④ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), p.61. ⑤ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development(U.K.:Manchester University Press, 2005) pp.59,73、81.
⑥秦天宝：《遗传资源获取与惠益分享管制的国际法律基础》,武汉大学出版社2006年版,第82页。
①或称使用自己财产不应损他人财产(Sie utere tuo ut alienum non ladedas),此原则是透过司法判例所确认的习惯法,如：科甫海峡案(Corfu Cannel Case,1949)、特雷尔冶炼场案(Trail Smelter Arbitration,1938,1941)、拉孥湖仲裁案(Lac Lanoux Arbitration,1957)与核试验案(Nuclear Test Case,1974),参见：陈致中编：《国际法案例》,法律出版社1998年版,第272-278、283-286页。
②秦天宝：《遗传资源获取与惠益分享管制的国际法律基础》,武汉大学出版社2006年版,第83,96-108页。
③ J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1982) p.116.
④ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (U.K.:Manchester University Press, 2005) p.59.
⑤《气候变迁公约》与《生物多样性公约》都在1992年6月5日开放签署,前者在1994年3月21日生效,目前有189个缔约国；后者在1993年12月29日生效,目前有188个缔约国。
⑥ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (U.K.:Manchester University Press. 2005) pp.59、73、81该学者更认为人类共同关切事项在国际环境法领域是习惯法。
⑦ Jutta Brunee and Stephan J. Toope, Environmental Security and Freshwater Resource：A Case for International Ecosystem Law, Yearbook of International Environmental Law, Vol.5,41,73 (1995);李耀芳：《国际环境法源起》,中山大学出版社2002年版,第145页。
⑧ Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development, available at: http://www.eldis.org/go/display/?id=23186&type=Document; http://www.iucn.org/themes/law/pdfdocuments/EPLP31 ENsecond.pdf, (both visited 2008/07/28).
①杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版,第146、148页。
② ICUN, UNEP and WWF, World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development, (Switzerland:ICUN,1980) pp.2-3.
③ Nico Schrij ver, Sovereignty Over Natural Resources：Balancing Rights and Duties, (N.Y.:Cambridge Press, 1997) pp.368,387.
④ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (U.K.:Manchester University Press, 2005),pp.101,113,116,164,166,212.
②杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版,第157页。
① The United States of America and the Republic of Costa Rica considering their mutual interest in maintaining the populations of yellow fin and skipjack tuna and of other kinds of fish taken by tuna fishing vessels in the eastern Pacific Ocean which by reason of continued use have come to be of common concern and desiring to co-operate in the gathering and interpretation of factual information to facilitate maintaining the populations of these fishes at a level which will permit maximum sustained catches year after year, have agreed to conclude a Convention for these purposes and to that end have named as their Plenipotentiaries:who, having communicated to each other their full powers, found to be in good and due form, have agreed as follows:... (底线部分作者自加)
②国际条约如：《经济社会文化权利国际盟约》第1条；国际宣言如：《斯德哥尔摩宣言》第21条；联合国大会决议如：1952年第7届之第626号决议、1962年第17届之第1803号决议、1970年第25届之第2692号与3016号决议。司法判例如：渔业管辖权案(Fishery Jurisdiction Case,1974)、利比亚美国石油仲裁案 (Libyan American Oil Company vs. Libya,1977)与科威特石油国有化仲裁案(Kuwait v.s. Aminoil, 1982)也确立国家对于自然资源的主权管辖。
① J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1982) p.117.
① IUCN, UNEP and WWF, Caring for the Earth:A Strategy for Sustainable Living, available at:Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/, (visited on:2009/11/4).
①更详细的介绍可参见：全球永续发展的源起与发展,(台湾地区)工业技术研究院能源与资源研究所,Available at:http://graupel.ihs.ncu.edu.tw/earth_sys/climate/develop2.htm, (visited on 2009/11/5).
② Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) p.16.
③《斯德哥尔摩宣言》又称《人类环境宣言》,为维护和改善人类生存环境的纲领性文件。本宣言开宗明义指出人类有权生活于有尊严和福利的环境中,享有自由、平等和生活环境安全的基本权利,并负有保护和改善当代和未来环境的责任。宣言分为共同观点及共同原则两部分。共同观点叙述对环境问题的看法和态度；26项的共同原则强调保护自然资源的要求。available at：http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=97&ArticleID=1503, (visited on 2009/11/3).
④ Principle 2、3、5 of Stockholm Declaration, available at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=97&ArticleID=, (visited on 2009/11/3)
⑤ WCED, Our Common Future,(New York:Oxford University Press,1987)pp.3,43.亦称为”布兰特报告’'(Gro Harlem Brundland Report),摘要参见：Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.18-19.
⑥联合国于1992年于巴西里约召开联合国环境及发展会议(The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development),共有176国政府代表参加,其中104国由领袖出席。多数国家于此次会议中共同签署《里约宣言》与《21世纪议程》外,还签署《气候变迁公约》、《生物多样性公约》及《森林原则》。
① Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.21-22.
② Principle 1、3、4、27 of Rio Declaration.
③ Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.25-43.
④ A/Res.47/191, available at:http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd.htm, (visited on 2009/11/3).
⑤ Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.234-240.
⑥ WCED, Our Common Future, (New York:Oxford University Press,1987) pp.43,46.
⑦ IUCN, UNEP and WWF, Caring for the Earth:A Strategy for Sustainable Living, available at: http://coombs.anu.edu.au/～vern/caring/care-earth1.txt, (visited on:2009/9/21).
①陈述彭：《环境保护与资源可持续利用》,载于：《中国人口资源与环境》,中国可持续发展研究会,1995年,第3期,第12页。
② Jonathan Lash, Towards a Sustainable Future,12 Natural Resource & Environmental,83 (1997).
③王冠雄：《永续发展在国际法意涵之探讨》,载于：《台湾海洋法学报》,台湾海洋大学海洋法律研究所,2006年,5卷2期,第190-191页。
④ Philippe Sands, Sustainable Development:Treaty, Custom, and the Cross-fertilization of International Law, in Alan Boyle and David Freestone (ed.), International Law and Sustainable Development Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999), p.45, ILA Resolution 3/2002:New Delhi Declaration Of Principles Of International Law Relating to Sustainable Development, in ILA, Report of the Seventieth Conference, New Delhi (London:ILA, 2002). Available at:http://www.ila-hq.org. (visited on:2009/10/27).
⑤发生法律效力的国际法规则称为硬法(hard law),包括条约,习惯,一般法律原则和国际组织和国际法庭根据前述所做成有约束力之判决。软法(soft law)则是国际组织和国际会议所通过的一些决议、宣言、宪章、行动计划等,并不发生拘束力的国际性纲领文件。
①捷克斯洛伐克与匈牙利在多瑙河共同进行开发投资计划,计划进行后约五年,匈牙利认为水坝的蓄水中的沉积物可能会对水域、水质产生污染以及生态影响,于是要求中止计划。判决中文参见：http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/ch/files/sum_1997-2002.pdf, (visited on:2009/10/27).
② Dispute Concerning Access to Information Under Article 9 of the OSPAR Convention (July 2,2003),42 ILM (2003) 1118, para.101,103, available at:http://www.asil.org/ilib/ilib0613. htm#j6, (visited on:2009/10/27).
③ Ellis Jaye, Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle:A Rhetorical Analysis (December 22,2008). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1319360 (visited on 2009/1/31).
④ Rosalyn Higgins, Natural Resources in the Case Law of the International Court, in A. Boyle and D. Freestone (eds), International Law and Sustainable Development:Past Achievement and Future Challenges (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999) p.111.
⑤ Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) p.48.
⑥ Vaughn Lowe, Sustainable Development and Unsustainable Arguments, in A. Boyle and D. Freestone (eds) International Law and Sustainable Development:Past Achievement and Future Challenges (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999) 20,24,25,31.
① Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project, para,140, Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,266,404 (1999), Alan Boyle, The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case:New Law in Old Bottles,8 YBIEL 13,19(1997).
② Peter (?)rebech and Martin Chanock, Toward Sustainability:The Basis in International law, in Peter (?)rebech (ed.), The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.385
③国际法由国家创设,在缺乏统一之国际法立法机关之下,判断某特定规则是否为国际法应是从国际法院规约第38条第1项规定之条约,习惯与一般法律原则为判断。
④ Peter (?)rebech and Fred Bosselman, The Linkage Between Sustainable Development and Customary Law, in, Peter (?)rebech (ed.), The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.16、23.
⑤ Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, (New York:Oxford University Press,2003) p.6、8.
① Judge Manfred Lachs, Dissenting Opinion of North Sea Continental Cases, available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/52/5583.pdf?PHPSESSID=4cb073f7a7543d67c06ed83bff416bc9, (visited on 2009/11/3).
②国际法院在1951年之庇护权案认为庇护的要件在国家外交实践出现之重大分歧,且现有之大量国家实践与系争国际法规范定义不符,将导致某规则无法形成习惯国际法。Asylum Case (Colombia/Peru),1951 I.C.J., pp.269,273,276,277. available at:http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/7/1849.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30), North Sea Continental Cases (Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands),1969, ICJ Rep. pp.3,14,28.
③ Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,1996 I.C.J.254, available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/95/7495.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30)
① Ramsar Convention on Wetland, Available at http://www.ramsar.org/cda/ramsar/display/main/main.jsp?zn=ramsar&cp=1-31-38A20671_4000_0__ (visited on 2009/10/30).
② Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, CITES, available at: http://www.cites.org/(visited on 2009/10/30).
③ Convention on Biological Diversity, available at:http://www.cbd.int/convention/convention.shtml (visited on 2009/10/30)
④ Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, available at:www.cbd.int/biosafety/protocol.shtml (visited on 2009/10/30)
⑤ Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, London Convention, available at:http://www.londonconvention.org/(visited on 2009/10/30)
⑥ Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, available at: http://www.unep.ch/Ozone/Treaties and Ratification/2A_vienna_convention.asp (visited on 2009/10/30)
⑦ Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, available at: http://ozone.unep.org/Treaties and Ratification/2B_montreal_protocol.asp (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑧ Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, available at:http://www.basel.int/(visited on 2009/10/30).
⑨ Convention on International Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Trade Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade Rotterdam, available at: http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/hazardous.chemicals.and.pesticides.prior.informed.consent.trade.rotterdam.convention.1 998/index.html (visited on 2009/10/30)
Stockholm Convention, available at:www.epa.gov.tw/FileLink/FileHandler.ashx?file=11856 (visited on 2009/10/30).
Available at:http://unfccc.int/2860.php (visited on 2009/10/30)/
Kyoto Protocol, available at:http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpchinese.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30)。哥本哈根会议是国际社会本诸于可持续发展原则讨论温室效应,碳排放与气候变迁的重要会议,原本要讨论终止京都议定书,基于众多国际因素,最终未能签署有国际法拘束力之条约,仅形成降低碳排量,控制温升2℃,但不对个别国家设立目标的共识。各国也认知此项结果。相关讨论可参见：胡思聪,哥本哈根COP15一事无成,(台湾地区)国政评论,2009年12月31日。available at:www.npf.org.tw/post/1/6890 (visited on 2009/10/30). UN Millennium Development Goals, MDG 2000, available at:http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/(visited on 2009/10/30).
① Reykjavik Declaration on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem, available at: www.fao.org/docrep/005/y2198t/y2198t01.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
② WHO Health for All Strategy, available at:www. who.int/occupational_health/en/oehstrategy.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30)
③ Declaration of the World Summit for Children, available at:www.unicef.org/wsc/declare.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
④ Copenhagen Declaration of the World Summit for Social Development, available at: www.un.org/documents/ga/conf166/aconf166-9.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑤ ILO Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work,1998, available at: www.ilo.org/declaration/thedeclaration/textdeclaration/lang-en/index.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑥ Declaration of the International Conference on Population and Development,1994, available at: http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/conference/bkg/egypt.html (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑦ UN General Assembly Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS A/RES/S-26/2 available at: http://www.un.org/ga/aids/coverage/FinalDeclarationHIVAIDS.html, (visited on 2009/11/4).
⑧ John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in InternationalJurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006); Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources (N.Y.:Cambridge Press,2002)pp.441-442,446,449-450.
⑨ John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability"in InternationalJurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,47,49 (2006); Andrew Serdy, How Long Has the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement Been in Force?,34 Ocean Dev.& Int'l L.29-39 (2003).
① Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) p.103.
② Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) p.52.
③ Philip Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003) p.232-234.
④ Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) pp.52-53.
① John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J. Int'l L.,1,10-14 (2006).
② Michael Decleris, The Law of Sustainable Development General Principles, (Luxembourg:Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,2000) p.65.
③生态原则包含环境有限承载力与同化力。环境承载力是指一个生态系统维持一定人口和其它生命的能力。人类活动必须维持在环境承载能力范围内,避免对环境造成不可逆的损害。环境同化力是指一个生态系统吸收废物的能力。人类活动必须维持在环境同化能力范围内,避免对环境造成不可逆的损害。参见Philip Sands, International Law in the Field of Sustainable Development, BYIL LXV,303,338 (1994).
④有将代际公平称为世代公平,包括当代人之间的横向的代内公平与纵向的代际公平。代内公平要求消灭贫困,缩小地区差异,满足全社会成员的基本需求。代际公平要求任何一代人都不能处于支配地位,不能出现生态赤字,各代人都享有同样的选择发展的机会和权利,本代人不能因自身的发展和需求而损害后代人赖以生存和发展的资源环境基础。参见Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,266,404 (1999)
⑤为了保护环境,各国应根据它们的能力广泛地采取预防性措施。凡遇到有可能造成严重或不可挽回的损害地步,虽缺乏充分的科学肯定性,但不能当作延迟采取防止环境退化有成本效益措施的理由。参见Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) pp.54, 136; Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,266,404 (1999)
⑥ William Edeson, Towards Long-term Sustainable Use:Some Recent Developments in the Legal Regime of Fisheries, in A. Boyle and D. Freestone (eds), International Law and Sustainable Development Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999) p.166.
⑦ Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) p.98.
① Jaye Ellis, Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle:A Rhetorical Analysis. Available at: http://ssm.com/abstract=1319360 (visited on 2009/11/4).
② Dire Tladi, Sustainable Development in International Law:An Analysis of Key Enviro-Economic Instruments (Cape Town:Pretoria University Press,2007) p.108-110.
①黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第123页。
① Hugo Grotius, The Freedom of The Seas, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin (trans.) (New York: Oxford University Press,1972) p.22,27-28,34-35,37.
②海洋自由的主张提出后,受到许多学者的批判,参见：黄异,：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化
2000年版,第155-173页；陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)元照出版社2002年版,第325-330页。W. E. Butler, Grotius and Law of the Sea, in Hedley Bull (ed.), Hugo Grotius and International Relations (New York:Oxford University Press,1990) pp.209-212.
③黄异,：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第128-129页。
④ Catherine Floit, Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resource on the High Seas, in Jon Van Dyke (ed.) Freedom of the Seas in the 21st Century, (Washington D.C.:Island Press,1993), p.322,n.14.
⑤ Catherine Floit, Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resource on the High Seas, in Jon Van Dyke (ed.) Freedom of the Seas in the 21st Century, (Washington D.C.:Island Press,1993), p. 312, n.24.
①相关讨论见：黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第121-133页。
②黄异,：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第142页。
③ Robert A. Shinn, The International Politics of Marine Pollution Control, (Santa Barbra： Praeger Publishers, 1974) p.48.
④ Brian D. Smith, State Responsibility and the Marine Environment: The Rules of Decision (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1988) p.71.
⑤ Ramanlal Soni, Control of Marine Pollution in International Law, (Cape Town:Juta,1985) p.136; Brian D. Smith, State Responsibility and the Marine Environment: The Rules of Decision (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) pp.84-85.
①如：1949年《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》(Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,日内瓦第3公约)、1949年《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,日内瓦第4公约)与《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)第5条。国际法是国家间的行为规范,自然人或法人都是处于国家主权管辖。以条约保障个人权利是发展的趋势,但个人成为国际法主体并非常态,应透过条约赋予其法律地位。现今国际法上的权利与义务仍必须通过国家才能及于个人,或者是由国家转化为国内法,由国内法贯彻到个人。
②黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第138-139,426页。
③ Peter G.G. Davis and Catherine Redgwell, The International Legal Regulation of Straddling Fish Stock,67 BYIL, p.265 n.24 (1996).
④整理自：刘楠来：《国际海洋法》,海洋出版社1986年版,第282页,陈德恭：《现代国际海洋法》,中国 社会科学出版社1988年版,第116页,陈治世：《国际法》,(台湾)商务出版社1995年版,第261页,赵明义：《当代国际法导论》,(台湾)五南出版社2001年版,第227页。
① Behring Sea Fur Seals Fisheries Arbitration,1867, available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Sea_Arbitration, (visited on:2009/10/25)，全文： http://www.archive.org/stream/behringseaarbitOOarbigoog/behringseaarbitOOarbigoog_djvu.txt (visited on: 2009/10/25).
② The Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean And Bering Sea, available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/intlagree/docs/IPHC%20-05.doc (visited on:2009/11/2).
③ Dolliver Nelson, The Development of the Legal Regime of High Seas Fisheries, in Alan Boyle and David Freestone (ed.), International Law and Sustainable Development Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999) p.113-115.
④ Catherine Floit, Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resource on the High Seas, in Jon Van Dyke (ed.) Freedom of the Seas in the 21st Century, (Washington D.C.:Island Press,1993), p. 312.
⑤ Convention Concerning Fishing in the Black Sea, available at: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/texts/tre-0230.txt, (visited on:2009/10/23)
① International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas,available at: http://www.fao.org/legal/treaties/014s-e.htm, (visited on:2009/10/25).
②Conservation of the Living Resources of the Southeast Atlantic,available at: http://www.ecolex.org/server2.php/libcat/docs/multilateral/en/TRE000097.txt,(visited on:2009/10/25).
③Baltic Sea Fisheries Convention,本公约虽于2006年1月1口停止运作,但仍有效拘束缔约方。available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/rfb/ibsfc/en.(visited on:2009/9/21).
④Convention on Conservation of Nature in the South Pacific,available at: http://sedac.ciesin.org/entri/texts/nature.south.pacific.1976.html,(visited on:2009/10/25).
⑤Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean,available at: http://eelink.net/～asilwildlife/salmon.html,(visited on:2009/10,25).
⑥参见：公海公约第2条,公海捕鱼公约第1条。
⑦即：所有国家有权由其国民在公海上捕鱼,但受条约义务、本公约规定的沿海国利益和权利与其它公约规定之限制。
⑧Fisheries Jurisdiction Case,1974 ICJ Reports 31,para.72.
⑨Dolliver Nelson,The Development of thee Legal Regime of High Seas Fisheries,in Alan Boyle and David Freestone(ed.),International Law and Sustainable Development Law(Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999) p.120.
①参见：UNCLOS第63条第2款和第64至第67条规定。
② William T. Burke, The New International Law of Fisheries:UNCLOS 1982 and beyond (New York:Oxford University Press,1994) p.94-98.
①以上公约乃整理自FAO官方网站。available at:http://www.fao.org/fibody/rfb/chooserfb.htm, (visited on: 2009/7/30).
② Agenda 21, Chap.17, para.46.
③根据FAO的2009年之数据显示,全球的金枪鱼捕获量从1950年不到60万吨,到2005年的6百万吨,足足增加了近10倍,且未来会持续增加。Available at:http://www.fao.org/fi/Resrcsc.asp#marine, (visited on:2009/10/27).
① Available at:http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_fish_stocks.htm, (visited on:2009/10/27).
② §2 of UNFSA.
① John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006); Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources (N.Y.:Cambridge Press,2002) pp.92-99,123,446,449-450.
② S. H. Gorden, The Economic Theory of a Common Property Resource:The Fishery,62 Journal of Political Economy,124-142(1954).有以最适宜持续生产量(Optimum Sustainable Yield, OSY)与MSY混称,就UNCLOS而言,两者为不同概念,MSY是生物性因素,OSY则是涵盖非生物因素,本文认为两者均在可持续发展的理念阐述如何维持种群的可持续发展性,纵考虑的层面有所不同,也未改变这特性。参见：陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)元照出版社2002年版,第109页。
③陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)元照出版社2002年版,第106页。
④学者阐释MSY为：若不采捕鱼类之情形,自然死亡与再生可趋向平衡而保持最大库存,一旦开始采补,库存将开始降低,为回复采补造成之损失,库存必须成长到原始的水平,此成长的速率极大,当库存降到特定的比率,此水平便是最大可持续捕获量。参见：R. R. Churchill and A. V. Lowe, Law of Sea, (Manchester: Manchester University Press,1985) p.226。另有学者认为TAC可取代MSY, TAC (total allowable catch)之功能在于建立每一鱼种捕捉限量界线,可基于再生的预估量,每年调整可捕获量。参见：R. P. Barston and Pactricia Birnie, The Maritime Dimension (London:Allen & Unwin,1980) p.39.
① Harald Hohmann, Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff,1994) p,189-190.
② World Charter for Nature, available at:www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm, (visited on: 2009/10/27).
③ Graeme Parkes, Precautionary fisheries management:the CCAMLR Approach, Marine Policy, vol.24, no.2, 83-91.(2000).
①所谓幽灵捕捞,系指渔船作业时,因意外或绞断,导致渔具遗失或掉落海中,这些遗失的渔具,随着洋流漂流或沉入海底,造成鱼类意外被捕捞,海底珊瑚生态被破坏。Available at：www.fao.org/fishery/topic/14798/en, (visited on:2009/10/27)
② FAO, Progress in the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and Related Plans of Action, (Rome:FAO,2005).
③ Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas. FAO Compliance Agreement, available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/MEETING/003/X3130m/X3130E00.HTM, (visited on:2009/10/27).
①权宜船相关论述,参见：[日]水上千之,全贤淑译,船舶国籍与方便船籍,大连海事大学出版社2000年版。权宜船的解决之道,可另参见：黄异：《权宜船旗现象与限制授权自由的尝试》,载于：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第290-296页。
② Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, available at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/generalassembly/contributions2004/FAO2004.pdf, (visited on:2009/10/27); http://www.ofdc.org.tw/organization/01/fao/01C_fao01.pdf, (visited on:2009/10/27).
③生物多样性公约也间接催化人类对生物资源方面保育之意识,促使FAO召开海洋渔业技术谘商会议产生责任渔业之规范。
④黄异：《渔业法规》,(台湾)渤海堂文化1999年版,第12页。
⑤责任渔业行为准则第1条：本准则系自愿的,但其某些部分系依据国际法相关规定而来,包括由1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约所反映者。本准则也包含可能或已对缔约国间具有拘束力之义务性法律文件之条款规定,例如依联合国粮农组织会议第15/93号决议第3段,1993年促进公海渔船遵守国际养护与管理措施条约,构成本准则完整的一部分。
①黄异：《渔业法规》,(台湾)渤海堂文化1999年版,第13-14页。
② International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity; IPOA-capacity, available at: http://www.fao.org/figis/servlet/static?dom=org&xml=ipoa capacity.xml, (visited on:2009/10/27)
③ International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing; IPOA-IUU,
①Available at:http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4470e/y4470e06.htm#bm06.2, (visited on:2009/10/27)
①详细讨论见：FAO, The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries, FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No.4 Supplement 2, (Rome:FAO,2003),国际社会并未形成新做法出现就必须扬弃先前分析法的见解。
② John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006); Andrew Serdy, How Long Has the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement Been in Force?,34 Ocean Dev.& Int'l L.29-39 (2003).
① Principle 4、12 of Rio Declaration, Agenda 21, para.2.3.
② David R. Downes and Van Dyke Brennan, Fisheries Conservation and Trade Rules:Ensuring that Trade Law Promotes Sustainable Fisheries (Washington, DC.:Center for International Environmental Law and Greenpeace, 1998),p.17.
③贸易与环境委员会(Committee on Trade and Environment, CTE),已认定目前有两百个左右的多边环境协议中的14个含有特定贸易义务。分别是《国际植物保护公约》(International Plant Protection Convention, IPPC)、《保育大西洋金枪鱼国际公约》(International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, ICCAT)、《华盛顿公约中的濒临绝种野生动植物国际贸易公约》(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, CITEs)、《南极生物资源保育公约》(Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, CCAMLR)、蒙特娄公约(Motreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer)、《巴赛尔公约》(Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal)、《生物多样性公约》 (Convention on Biological Diversity, CBD)、《生物安全议定书》(Cartagena Protocol on Bio-safety)、《联合国气候变迁纲要》(United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC)、《京都议定书》(Kyoto Protocol)、《国际热带木材协议》(International Tropical Timer Agreement, ITTA)、《联合国有关养护与管理跨界鱼类种群和高度洞游鱼类种群规定之协议》(UN Fish Stocks Agreement)、《鹿特丹公约》(Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade)、《斯德哥尔摩公约》(Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, POPs,)等。参见：WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.3, TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1.
④ Philip Sands, Principles of International Environmen Law (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1995) p.261; Richard Blackhurst, Alternative Motivations for Including Trade Provisions in Multilateral Environmental Agreements,131 (3) Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics,329,332(1995), Jake Caldwell, Multilateral Environment Agreements and the GATT/WTO Regime, in Liane Schalatek (ed.), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, (Washington D. C.:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) p.43-45.
① Massimiliano Montini, The Nature and Function of the Necessity and Proportionality Principles in the Trade and Environment Context, Vol.6 issue 2, RECIEL,121 (1997).
② §§6V,6X、17Ⅳ、20Ⅶ、23Ⅲ、33 Ⅱ of FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing.
③ §§31 (2)、3 III (1) of IPOA-IUU.
④ § 1 (b) of FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas.
① ICTSD, Fisheries, International Trade and Sustainable Development:Policy Discussion Paper, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series., (Geneva:ICTSD,2006), p.83.
② Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Papcr No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.2-7; Judith Swan,. Regional Fishery Bodies and Governance:Issues, Actions and Future Directions. FAO Fisheries Circular No.959.(Rome:FAO,2000) p.2-3.
①§§2；3；4；5；6；7；8；9；13 of CITES.
②§§4 Ⅰ-Ⅲ of Montreal Protocol；Philip Sands,Principles of International Environmenf Law(Manchester: Manchester Universitt Press,1995)p.261.
③§§4；6；8 of Basel Convention.
④§§2Ⅳ；6；7；8；9:10；11；12；14；15；16；18；26 of Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
⑤“鼓励”意味着该公约对于非会员的贸易相关措施不会被彻底执行,还会造成搭便车行为(free-rider)的产生,使该公约渐渐失去强制力。例如,当1987年签署蒙特娄公约时,有些不愿签署国家的企业或公司,便采取投机的作法,将生产主力迁移到未有签署国家继续生产臭氧层破坏物质,对于环境继续造成伤害。
⑥分别是美洲间热带金枪鱼委员会、大西洋金枪鱼委员会、南方蓝鳍金枪鱼养护委员会、印度洋金枪鱼委员会和中西部太平洋渔业委员会。
① R. G Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization:Compatibility or Conflict? (Cambridge:TRAFFIC International,2003), p.2-7.
② Duncan Brack and Kevin Gray, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO, Report for the International Institute for Sustainable Development, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, Sustainable Development Programme, (London:Earthscan,2003), p.6,11-13, available at: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/articles/graymeawto.pdf, (visited on 2010/7/1), Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters: Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix II of CITES., (Cambridge: TRAFFIC,2002) p.13.
③研究数据显示欧盟、日本、突尼西亚、摩洛哥已经同意将大西洋蓝鳍金枪鱼每年的捕捞限额从19,500降至13,500吨,但遗憾的是,即便是降至8,000吨,到2023年恢复至原本安全族群数量的机率也只有50%,只有完全禁止捕捞,才有可能恢复至稳定族群数量。Available at： http://wwf.panda.org/wwf news/news/?uNewsID=180682, (visited on 2010/6/24).
①本计划主要依据ⅠCCAT 92-01建议所成立,并由ICCAT 93-02、97-04、01-21三个决议所构成。92-01决议关于冷冻蓝鳍金枪鱼之部分于1993年生效,93-02决议关于新鲜蓝鳍金枪鱼于1994年生效,97-04决议要求转卖蓝鳍金枪鱼鱼体亦需证明文件,01-21则是规范大目金枪鱼出口与转卖相关事宜。
②即该计划附件一B所要求之捕获证明。美国规定所有相关旗鱼的运输必须检附经出口国官员或授权机构签署的合格证明(certificate of eligibility, COE)文件。为进入美国市场,加拿大亦实行替代方案,但并未建立管制进口的制度,因为加拿大是旗鱼出口国而非进口国。
③参见：WT/CTE/W/87; WT/CTE/W/152.
④ Paragraph 13 of the Report of the Sixth Annual Meeting (Second Part) of the CCSBT, March 2000, and Attachment Ⅰ to that Report;纽澳两国自2000年起便认为TIS制度可由CDS制度取代,理由是CDS较为透明,涵盖非进出口产品且能增加委员会效能与信用,此建议尚未被接受。参见Glenn Sant and Mary Lack, The Use of Trade-related Measure in the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), available at:http://www.traffic.org/fish/, (visited on 2010/7/1).
⑤ Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.3.
⑥ IOTC Resolution 01/06, Recommendation by IOTC Concerning the IOTC Bigeye Tuna Statistical Document Programme.
① FAO, Implementation of the International Plan of Action to Deter, Prevent and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, (Rome:FAO,2002) p.51-52, available at: http://ww.fao.org/DOCREP/005/y536E/y3536e0a.htm#fn93, (visited on:2010/7/1); Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters:Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix Ⅱ of CITES., (Cambridge:TRAFFIC,2002), p.7-11.
② Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters:Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix II of CITES, (Cambridge:TRAFFIC,2002) p.9,委员会并于2002年重申此作法。Available at: http://www.ccamlr.org/English/e_pubs/e_app_to_manag/e_app_page3.htm#Top%20of%20Page. May., (visited on 2010/6/28).
③ WT/CTE/W/160.Rev.3., TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1.,16 February 2005. available at:http://docsonline.wto.org, (visited on 2010/6/28)
① Bertrand Le Gallic, Using Trade Measures in the Fight against IUU Fishing:Opportunities and Challenges, available at:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/44/34227035.pdf, (visited on 2010/6/28); Terje Lobach, Measures to be Adopted by the Port State in Combating IUU fishing, available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y3274E/y3274e0h.htm, (visited on 2010/6/28)
② Available at:http://www.oecd.org/document/28/0,2340,en_2649_33901_23649436_1_1_1,00.html, (visited on 2010/6/28).
③ Erik J. Molenaar & Martin Tsamenyi, Satellite-Based Vessel Monitoring Systems:International Legal Aspects and Development in State Practice, p.7. available at:http://www.fao.org/Legal/prs-ol/lpo7.pdf, (visited on 2010/6/28)
④ WT/CTE/W/160.Rev.3., TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1.
① Available at:http://www.fao.org/fishery/vmsprogramme/VMS NEAFC/en, (visited on 2010/6/28)
② Emily Andrews-Chouicha,Kathleen Gray, Why Fish Piracy Prisist:The Economics of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (Paris: OECD Publishing,2005) p.128. ③ Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006),p.7.
④与白名单制度类似,日本社团法人责任渔业推广组织(Organization for the Promotion of Responsibility Tuna Fisheries, OPRT)要求其成员(包括大陆、台湾地区、韩国、菲律宾、印度尼西亚等国/地区的金枪鱼民间机构)将所属管辖超低温金枪鱼渔船名单通报给OPRT.凡没有在OPRT名单上的非日本籍渔船,其渔获不得进入日本市场。Available at:www.oprt.or.jp, (visited on 2010/7/9).
① Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006),p.6.
①§4 of EU Regulation 104/2000,电子追踪系统,可参见：www.tracefish.org.
②Available at:http://agritrade.cta.int/en/content/vicw/full/4725, (visitcd on 2009/12/21).
③参见:Permeable 1-5 of EU-IUU.
①§69 of IPOA-IUU.
②§47.2.49.50 of IOPA-IUU.
③§66 of IPOA-IUU.
④§17.2 of EU-IUU.
⑤§17.6 of EU-IUU.
⑥§17.7 of EU-IUU.
⑦§18.3 of EU-IUU.
⑧§18.4 of EU-IUU.
⑨§56.63 of IPOA-IUU.
⑩§19 of EU-IUU.
①CCAMLR Conservation Measure 10-06, paras.16、19, (2002).
① Decision regarding Cambodia, Honduras and Equatorial Guinea pursuant to the 2000 Action plan (adopted at the Eight Annual Meeting-15-19 October 2001), para 3.
② Decision regarding Belize pursuant to the 2000 Action plan (adopted at the Ninth Annual Meeting-15-18 October 2002), paras.3,4.
① ICCAT Resolution 94-3 and Resolution 95-13.
② ICCAT Resolution 98-18, Resolution 03-15, Recommendation 06-13.
③ ICCAT Recommendations 96-11,96-12.
④ ICCAT Recommendations 99-9,99-10,01-15.
⑤ ICCAT Recommendations 96-14.
⑥参见：WT/CTE/W/87, WT/CTE/W/152.
⑦ FAO, Implementation of the International Plan of Action to Deter, Prevent and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, (Rome:FAO,2002) p.49-51, available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y3536E/y3536e0a.htm#fin93, (visited on:2010/7/1).
⑧ R. G. Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization:Compatibility or Conflict? (Cambridge:TRAFFIC International,2003), p.5.
① ICCAT Recommendations,99-10,00-16,04-13.
② Cathy Roheim and Jon G Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.12.
③参见：WT/DS58/AB/R, paras.128-130.
④参见：Tuna Dolphin Case Ⅱ,33 I.L.M.895 (1994).
①参见：Shrimp and Turtle Case,37 I.L.M. (1998), para.7.43.
②参见：Tuna Dolphin Case Ⅱ,33 I.L.M.896-7 (1994)
③ Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.193-196 (1998).
① Gabrielle Marceau and Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud, The Relationship Between the Dispute Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO, in Liane Schalatek (ed.), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, (Washington D. C.:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) pp.82-83.
② Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.22.
①比例原则在国内法领域发展几近成熟,国内法通认国家机关在行使法定职权的过程中,如果出于社会公益不得不就私人权利进行限制,使用之手段要有助于目的的实现,尚须选择对私人权利损害程度最小之手段,且行为对权利造成之可能损害不得大于行为所能保护之社会公益,以保持公共利益与私人利益的均衡,如果追求目的所运用之手段造成的副作用过大,应放弃对目的之追求。目前国际法比例原则的相关运用与条约实践见于1907年又称海牙第四公约之《陆战法规和惯例公约》(Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land);23条c项,《公民权利与政治权利公约》(International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)第19条3项,《欧洲人权公约》 (Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms)第10条2项,《美洲人权公约》(American Convention on Human Rights)第13条2项等。海洋划界之实践虽不甚明显,国际法院在北海大陆架案中即表示若要根据衡平原则划定大陆架边界时,比例性是一项考虑的因素。比例性不是划界的标准,而在非常特殊的地理条件下,为衡平解决划界过程之指导性原则,相关的案例并未就比例原则做定义与要件的阐述,但相关的司法实践显示比例原则是划界中一项重要的参考因素。或许有质疑比例原则在国内法与国际法的实践是大相径庭,国际法之体系通常是依据或模拟某些法律概念所形成,虽然所属的法域不同,然基本精神均在调和法律利益冲突,以过犹不及的核心理念调整利益冲突,实现公平正义。另可参照：Hersch Lauterpacht, International Law:Collected Papers, Elihu Lauterpacht (ed), (New York:Cambridge University Press,2009) p.173,180.
② John H. Jackson, The Jurisprudence of GATT and the WTO, Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2000) p.159.
③ Panel Report, United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/R, (May 15, 1998). Appellate Body Report, United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/R, (Oct.12,1998).
④ Rudiger Wolfrum, Article XX GATT1994, in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (London:Maritus Nijhoff Publisher,2007) p.72-73.
①Petros Mavroidis,Trade and Environment after the Shrimps-Turtles Litigation,34 JWT,1,73,74,79(2000).
②§2Ⅱof TBT.
③§§2 I.2Ⅱ.3Ⅱ.5Ⅳ、Ⅵ of SPS.
①§5VII of SPS.
②§2(c) of ASCM.
①§§8 Ⅰ(b). (c)；11 Ⅰ.Ⅱ；13Ⅲ(b)of GATT。其它如:§10 ofTBT；§§3Ⅳ、4Ⅱof GATS.
②Panel Report,Japan-Restrications on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products,(Mar.22,1988),GATT B.I.S.D. (35th Supp.),163(1989)；Patricia I.Hansen,Transparency,Standards of Review and the Use of Trade Measures to Protect the Global Environment,39 Va.J.Int'l L.1017,1059(1999)
③Appellate Body Report,United States-Restrictions on Cotton and Man-made Fiber Underwear, WT/DS24/AB/R,(Feb.10,1997).
① OECD Secretariat, Trade and Regulatory Reform:Insights from the OECD Country Reviews and Other Analyses,(OECD:Trade Directorate,2000), Kalypso Nicolaidis and Michelle Egan, Journal of European Public Policy 8:3 Special Issue,454,455,469 (2001).
① Oliver Landwehr, Agreement on Application of Sanitary & Phytosanitary Measures Article 3,in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (Boston:The Martius Nijhoff Publisher,2007) p.419-429.
② §§SⅡ、3Ⅲ、5Ⅳ、Ⅴ、Ⅶ of SPS.
③此案源于1989年欧盟禁止由美国与加拿大进口以六种荷尔蒙促进生长之牛肉,认为残留在牛肉中之荷尔蒙可能具有致癌性,会危及欧盟消费者之健康：但美国与加拿大认为其牛肉中贺尔蒙含量极低,不致造成健康危害,则认为欧盟此项措施不符科学原则,要求当时的GATT加以解决,多年的缠讼仍未能解决,WTO曾做成裁决(WT/DS48/11, WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R 5.), available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu e/cases e/ds26 e.htm, (visited on 2009/8/9)近日亦有最新发展。参见：罗锦岚,陈姿妤：《WTO上诉机构就荷尔蒙案之报复措施作出裁决》,《(经贸法讯》77期,2008年12月23日,available at:http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no77/1.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9);罗锦岚,郑黛燕：《欧美荷尔蒙案之最新进展》,《经贸法讯》82期,2009年3月16日,available at: http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no82/3.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9);施晓恩,WTO荷尔蒙案建立解除报復性制裁之新规则,available at:www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no69/4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
①专家小组的理由是欧盟相关措施违反SPS第3条1项、5条1项与同条5项。上诉机构则是认为欧盟之措施违反SPS协议第3条3项及5条1项,但驳回专家小组所作违反3条1项及5条5项之判决。
②不歧视原则是WTO最重要的原则之一,其规定缔约方一方在实施某种限制或禁止措施时,不得对其它缔约方实施歧视待遇,要求各缔约国在任何贸易活动都要给予其它缔约方以平等待遇,使所有缔约国能在同样的条件下进行贸易。
③ Oliver Landwehr, Agreement on Application of Sanitary & Phytosanitary Measures Article 3,in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (Leiden:The Martius Nijhoff Publisher,2007) p.423-424.
①许惠悰：《食品安全的风险评估》,载于：《Taiwan Watch》, Vol.6, No.3,2004/Autumn, available at: http://www.taiwanwatch.org.tw/magazine/v6n3/v6n3-001.pdf (visited on 2009/8/4) ② Assuring Food Safety and Quality:Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems, available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/capacity/en/Chinese_Guidelines_Food_control.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/4).
③食品法典委员会是负责汇整食品安全的标准、操作准则、指导原则及提供建议的一个委员会。Available at: http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp, (visited on 2009/8/4).
④ Steve Charnovitz, The Supervision of Health and Biosafety Regulation by World Trade Rules,13 Tulane Environmental Law Journal,271,276,302 (2000).
⑤ Steve Charnovitz, The Supervision of Health and Biosafety Regulation by World Trade Rules,13 Tulane Environmental Law Journal,271,276,302 (2000); Report of Appellate Body, Australia-Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon, WT/DS18. (Sep.17,1998), available at: www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/australia-salmon(panel).pdf, (visited on 2009/8/4).
① Hilary French,郑先佑,郭金泉译：《Challenging the WTO》, 《World Watch》,1999年11/12月。available at:http://staff.pccu.edu.tw/-ayo/5green/WTOpap.htm, (visited on 2009/8/4).
②罗昌发：《国际贸易法》,(台湾)元照出版社1996年版,第371页。
③ Renee Johnson, Charles E. Hanrahan, The U.S.-EU Beef Hormone Dispute, Report for Congress,7 (2009), available at:www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R40449.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
④ Panel Report, Japan-Measure Affecting Argicultural Products, WT/DS/76/1, (Oct.27,1998) available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/76r.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
① Panel Report, United States-Prohibitions of Imports of Tuna and Tuna Products from Canada, L/5198-29S/91, available at:www.sice.oas.org/dispute/gatt/80tuna.asp, (visited on 2009/8/9).
②黄异：《国际法在国内法领域中的效力》,(台湾)元照出版社2006年版,第38页。
③ GATT Panel Report, US-Superfund, paras.5.2.9.-5.2.10. available at: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/gattpanels/superfund.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
① GATT Panel Report, Thailand-Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, GATT B.I.S.D. (37th Supp.), (Nov.7,1990)
②论者称为”裁量/强制”原则。参见：彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第15页。
①美国法典(USC)第2411节规定301法案：如果美国贸易代表依第2414条A项1款确定：(A)美国依任一贸易协议所享有的权利遭到否定；或(B)外国的一项法令、政策或者做法(i)违反了任一贸易协议的规定,或者与该协议的规定不符,或者否定了美国依该协议所享有的权利,或(ii)是不正当的,并且对美国的商业造成了负担或限制；那贸易代表就应采取(c)项所规定的措施。如果总统对这种措施有特别的指示,贸易代表应该遵守。贸易代表还应在总统的权限内,采取总统依该分节可能要求采取的所有其它适当、可行的措施,以实施这种权利或者消除这一法令、政策或依法采取措施。
②林彩瑜：《WTO争端解决机制与美国贸易法301条款之研究》,available at: http://www.itl.nctu.edu.tw/Thesis/1999/1999_4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/18).
③ WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.53-7.56.
①彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第14页。
② WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.30.
③ Holger Hestermeyer, Atricle 3 GATT 1994, in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.) WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (Boston:Martius Nijhoff,2007) p.21.
④ Panel Report, Report of the Panel on Uruguayan Recourse to Article XXIII, L/1923-11S/95, (Nov.16,1962), available at:http://www.sice.oas.org/dispute/gatt/62resmea.asp, (visited on 2009/9/6).
⑤根据学者考察,自本案之后,上诉机构至少在10个案件内承认此种分类,而本案也没有扬弃这种分类。彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第19页。
⑥ WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.98.
⑦即考察美国之行政措施声明(Statement of Administrative Action)已有效地限制USTR的裁量权,消除美国贸易法第304、306条的文义之内之违反WTO相关原则之因素。WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.112-7.113.
①裁量萎缩又称为裁量收缩至零,为大陆法系国家国内法解构行政裁量之特殊型态,指行政机关依法规原有决定裁量或选择裁量之空间,惟为因应具体个案中特殊情事,行政机关裁量权应受限制,如不赋予相对人该当法律效果或多数法律效果中特定之一时,即属违法。整理自吴庚：《行政法之理论与实用》,(台湾)作者自版2005年8月增订九版,李建良等：《行政法入门》,,(台湾)元照出版社2006年1月第三版,(台湾地区)司法院大法官释字第469号解释。
②彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第17-19页。
③ William Davey, Has the WTO Dispute Settlement System Exceeded its Authority? 4(1) JIEL.79,87,96,103 (2001).
④彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第22页。
① La Grand case (Germany v.United States of America), Judgment of 27 June 2001. available at: http://www.icj-cij.or g/icjwww/idocket/igua/igusframe.htm, (visited on.2009/8/23).
① Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, Mexico v. United States of America, DS21/R-39S/15,30 ILM 1594 (1991)。除前开争议外,美国与加拿大,欧盟都曾为金枪鱼捞捕作业的意外捕获海豚问题发生争端,参见：United States-Restrictions on Imports of Tuna from the EEC, GATT Doc. DS29/R reprinted in 33 I.L.M.839 (1994).
② Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,82-84 (2005).
③ US Measures Concerning the Importation Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products, Request for Establishment of a Panel by Mexico, WTO Doc, WT/DS 381/4, (Mexico Initiates WTO Dispute Proceeding Against U.S. "Dolphin-Safe" Label for Tuna, Mar.10,2009).
④ Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific-The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,84 (2005).
⑤该案主要背景为海豚与金枪鱼有共游现象,美国认为在围网(purse seine nets)过程中,无鳃的海豚很容易因为惊吓而受困网中,导致无法换气而死亡,即便捕获后放走,也容易成为掠食者的食物。为避免意外死亡的情况加剧,美国要求输入美国域内的金枪鱼根据其国内法规定加入自愿性遵守的无害海豚标签(Dolphin Safe Label),目的在于确保海豚的数量不会因捕捞金枪鱼的意外捕获造成影响族群,但不禁止任何金枪鱼产品(包含鱼体)进入美国境内。墨西哥认为此标签将使得该国以围网方式所捕得的金枪鱼无法进入美国市场。围网捕鱼虽有可能在捞捕的过程中捕获海豚,但捕获后将海豚放走是符合《国际海豚养护协议》(Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation, AIDCP)与《美洲热带金枪鱼公约》管理委员会(Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission)的标准。美国要求的标签为美国国家环境政策法规定,必须以标签上显示海洋哺乳动物保护法的相关内容,在市场有主导消费者选择的能力,没有标签的产品可能不受进口商青睐,即便贩卖,民众也可能不购买,使得该国出产的金枪鱼及产品处于市场劣势,造成实质上的销售障碍。为取得相同产品之在与美国市场之竞争地位,墨西哥籍的渔船必须改变捞捕方式,将增加不必要技术障碍与市场进入障碍,便向WTO提出成立争端解决小组,解决上述争议。
① Available at: http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2009/november/united-states-initiates-nafta-dispute-mexi co-over (visited on 2009/12/13).
②学术领域研究意外捕获对生态影响的文献颇多,本段仅择定渔具与渔法造成的影响。
③ Matt K. Boardhurst, Steven J. Kennelly and Charles Gray, Strategies for Improving the Selectivity of Fishing Gears, in Steven J. Kennelly (ed), By-catch Reduction in the World's Fisheries, (Netherlands:Springer,2007) p.2-5.
④通常两艘竹筏一组,每筏两人,以网目大小不拘的沉底拖网,上方网缘约在海面下3公尺,下方则在水面下50公尺左右,底纹不是通电就是加上滚轮或铁链,藉由这些电流或铁链锁发出的声响驱出藏身礁岩或泥沙中的鱼、贝、虾、蟹。是否开放此种渔法捕鱼取决于当地民情、地形与生态系统。目前有部分渔民极力反对此种渔法,认为此破坏性渔法有极大的可能将生态复育的成果将毁于一旦。参见：http://udn.com/NEWS/DOMESTIC/DOM5/5283972.shtml, (visited on 2009/12/20).
① Available at:www.mongabay.com/sea_turtles/fisheries.html, (visited on 2009/12/20)
②延绳钓是由渔船放出一条长达一百公里的母绳,绳上最多可系3,000个子线和鱼钩,许多鱼、海龟和鸟類会被鱼饵吸引且意外上钩,支线上绑有饵料的钓钩。其它辅助工具,例如浮标和雷达定位仪,主要是使钓线保持漂浮以及协助搜寻渔具。延绳钓船队捕捉许多鱼种,例如：鬼头刀(mahi-mahi)和剑旗鱼(swordfish)以及鲨鱼(shark)等。一本钓渔船不同于围网和延绳钓渔船使用船上储存的活饵料鱼捕捉金枪鱼,是利用停留在渔船附近的饵料鱼吸引海水表层的金枪鱼,船上的渔夫再使用长鱼竿和鱼饵去捕捉金枪鱼。
③自然保护联盟(International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, IUCN)认为信天翁都已经濒临生存危机。Available at:http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/144900/0, (visited on
2009/12/20)
④美国1996年Magnuson-Stevens法案(MSA)第3条2项的定义是：”渔业中收获的鱼类,但不是供出售或个人用途,而且包括经济性丢弃物和规定性丢弃物。不包括休闲性捕捞/释放渔业管理计划中放生的鱼类”。FAO的定义是”丢弃物或丢弃渔获物是所捕获的动物类有机物质总量中无论任何原因而被丢掉或在海上倾倒的那部分。它不包括植物和内脏等收获后废料。丢弃渔获物可以是死的,也可以是活的。”参见Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第3-5页。
⑤ Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第22页。
⑥ Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第56页。
①各国部长同意明确和改进适用于渔业补贴的WTO规则为多哈回合结论之一(TN/RL/W/213)。Available at:http://worldtradelaw.typepad.com/ielpblog/2008/10/doha-negotiatio.html?no_prefetch=1, (visited on 2009/12/24)
②海龟、鲨鱼等是在浅水性地带活动,若将延绳钩垂降到100公尺以下的水域,不但可以降低混获的比例,同时由于鲔鱼偏好活动于深水域的习性,显示此方法可增加鲔鱼捕获量。
③根据FAO的官方文件指出改变意外捕获物的利用方式亦可减缓海中生物的锐减速度。参见Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第23-34页。但根据世界自然基金会(World Wildlife Foundation, WWF)截至2009年的统计,平均每两分钟就有一头鲸豚遭渔网缠勒溺毙,每年有高达25万只海龟和10万只信天翁因延绳钓而死亡,其中有19种信天翁濒临绝种。Available at:http://www.panda.org/what we do/footprint/smart fishing/bycatch/(visited on 2009/11/16)。
④如：§2 of CITES;§§8 (j)、10 (b)、15、16 (2) (3)、19 (3)、22 of CBD。但须注意CBD仅系设定目标,并未纳入特定贸易措施或其它特定措施。另卡塔赫纳生物安全议定书前言与第2条4项则规定贸易与环境协议应相互支持；缔约国可以实行较本议定书更为保育生物多样性及可持续利用的保护措施,惟此等措施仍应符合本议定书之目标及规范,以及缔约国于其它国际规范下应遵行的义务。ICCAT公约本身并无贸易措施,但缔约国通过的议案涵盖贸易限制措施。不具法律拘束力之负责任渔业行为准则(Code of Conduct) 11.1-11.3段；IPOA-IUU 65-76段亦有规以贸易相关措施达成目的之规定。
⑤ S. Bache, M. Howard and S. Dovers, Economic, Trade and Environmental Instruments:Their Impact on Australian Fisheries Policy and Management, (Wollongong:Centre for Maritime Policy University of Wollongong,2001), p.76.
⑥ C. R. Wessells, K. Cochrane, C. Deere, P. Wallis & R. Willmann, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.83.
① Travis Potts and Marcus Howard, International Trade, Eco-labelling, and Sustainable Fisheries-Recent Issues, Concepts and Practice, Environment,9 Development and Sustainability,91 (2007) ② Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316,318-9 (2002), Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy?, Fisheries Research, Vol.100, Issue 3,185,185-186(2009). Kieran Kelleher, 世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物. Tech. Papers No. 470 (FAO:Rome,2008) 第44页。
③ Bruce Phillips, Trevor Ward & Chet Chaffee (ed.), Eco-labelling in Fisheries:What Is It All About, (Oxford:Blackwell Publishing,2003) p.4-10.
④ OECD, Eco-Labelling:Actual Effects of Selected Programme, (Paris:OECD,1997) p.1, Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.5, C. R. Wessells, Ecolabelling and International Seafood Trade:the Roles of Certification Costs and Consumers Willingness to Pay, Fisheries Economics Newsletter 50, p.44-49 (2000).
⑤ Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy?, Fisheries Research, Vol.100, Issue 3,185,185 (2009).
⑥ Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy, 309,315 (2008).
⑦油鱼(蔷薇带鰆)和鳕鱼虽然同是幅鳍鱼纲,但鳕鱼是鳕型目,有别于油鱼的鲈形目,油鱼也不是圆鳕(Gadus macrocephalus)。详细介绍可参见：张水锴：《您吃到的鳕鱼可能是「油甘」?》,《渔业推广》第235期,(台湾地区)行政院农委会渔业署,2007年10月,第24页。
①蜡酯非有毒物质,一般人体难以消化。消费者进食后30分钟就会出现腹泻、肠胃痉挛等不适症状,且蜡酯会从肛门流出。
② Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy, 315 (2008).
③ Karen West, Ecolabels:The Industrialisation of Environmental Standards, (25) The Ecologist, No.1.,3 (1995).
④ Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316,318-9 (2002), Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy?, Fisheries Research, Vol.100, Issue 3,185,185-186 (2009)
⑤ Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316 (2002), Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,375 (1999), Bruce Phillips, Trevor Ward & Chet Chaffee (ed.), Eco-labelling in Fisheries:What Is It All About, (Oxford:Blackwell Publishing,2003) p.4-10, Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy,309,314-315 (2008).
⑥ Bruce Phillips et al., Eco-labelling in Fisheries:What Is It All About, (Oxford:Blackwell Publishing,2003) pp.97-100,107,114,138,143,161.
⑦ISO的分类方式除着重标签表达内容外,也强调标签的认证单位。第一類的生态标签以预先设定之规格 标准,并经过第三者验证对环境产生不利冲击较小的产品,颁发专用标签,需强制经无利害关系的”第三者”确认或验证,多由为政府或政府支持之非营利组织执行验证。第二類是指由产品制造商、进口商、配销商、零售商或任何藉此诉求而获益的人士设计之提供讯息的符号或图形,自行验证的环境诉求；以及由厂商或营利性验证组织执行验证先前预设之科学数据后,提供给消费者信息的符号或图形的第三類环境宣告。available at:http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=34425, (visited on 2009/12/24); http://www.greenmark.org.tw/main4.asp, (visited on 2009/12/24).
① Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.13.
②美国国家有机食品标准审议委员会(Natioanl Organic Standards Board)指出,”有机食品是将产销过程中的污染毒害减至最低的一种食品,但不保证有机食品可以完全免除化肥杀虫剂的残留”。参见：RE：AMS-TM-07-0032-0001, National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) Aquaculture Standards, USDA Organic Standards for Seafood, March 21,2007, available at: http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/AFSIC_pubs/afnotes5.htm#chapl, (visited on 2009/11/18); http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/fish/seafood/labeling/organic-seafood/usda-organic-standards-for-seafood (visited on 2009/11/18).(台湾地区)有机农业管理作业要点第二条,有机农产品及有机农产加工品验证管理办法第三条为有机农产品及有机农产加工品验证基础。(台湾地区)目前并无渔产品标签,只有根据(台湾地区)水产食品业实施食品安全管制系统所着重的产销履历,避免制造过程受物质污染的安全管制,而(台湾地区)水产动物类卫生标准所规范的是重金属含量,乃着重在制成品。(台湾地区)农委会目前正在拟定整合相关授予有机农、渔产品的检测标准与认证标章之规范
③欧洲民间组织(Naturaland)只就完全圈养封闭系统与食物链低端的鱼种的认证。美国2002年有机食品计划(National Organic Program in 2002)没有将海鲜纳入,引发相当争议。多数人认为此举是可持续发展 的严重挫败。否定标章者认为有机着重生产的流程控管,而有机海鲜是无法确知海洋与养殖水域的受污染程度,永远不知道鱼在哪吃到什么。即便是箱网圈养(net-pens),圈养内的排泄物污染,疾病传递以及基因污染也是难以判断的重要因素。倡议者认为有机标章的迫切需要性,目前美国研拟联邦立法有机海鲜标章,除加州明确禁止任何食品以有机名义贩卖外,任何国家的有机海鲜标章食品都可以在美国各州贩卖,如此标准不一将会将造成误导消费者。根据报导目前美国形成之共识部分主要是先针对圈养,半圈养与野生鱼种订定不同的标准,但内容尚未定论。available at: http://naturalfoodsmerchandiser.com/tabld/109/itemId/2529/NOSB-debates-organic-seafood.aspx, (visited on 2009/12/16)
①此联合标签计划适用的对象因组织团体不同而有差异,美国责任渔业协会是美国国内的海鲜产品,而全球水产养殖联盟是全球的养殖虾业者。此联合生态标章为开放性质,以各养殖业者努力促进可持续生产海鲜为成立宗旨。使用此联合标章的业者代表已赞同此计划所提倡的责任渔业行为,并把这些原则纳入执行业务中。见：Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.12.
②海洋管理委员会为非营利之全球性国际组织。判断授予标签(The Best Environmental Choice in Seafood)之准则为：渔业管理应建置于一套有效率管理系统之上,并遵守区域渔业组织、国家及国际法令和标准。渔业行为必须不会造成过渔或鱼种减少的结果,如果是已枯竭的鱼种,渔业行为必须展现出使其恢复存量的事实。捕捞操作必须要维系生态系统的结构、生产力、功能性、及多样性。available at：http://www.msc.org/assets/docs/fishery%20certification/MSCPrinciples&Criteria.doc, (visited on 2009/12/16).
③ Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.13.
①为保持可持续的渔群数量,RFMO每年均会制订特定鱼种的总量后分配给区域渔业组织的成员,并要求在区域内作业的渔船在捕捞日志详实记录并将数量回报捕获数量,一旦超过数量就必须停止捕鱼。实际上许多作业船只都备有两套日志登记确实捕获数量。溢捕的鱼货不会回港卸货,直接在公海以装有冷冻设备的渔船载去管制较为宽松的港口卸货。
② FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2009) p.18-19.
③于2010年1月1日正式生效之新法规其它重要内容包含强化口岸检查制度,进入欧盟成员国港口进行装卸货物,转运和港口服务的非欧盟国家渔船应在指定的港口接受检查。进港船只需在进港前3天通知欧盟成员国港口检查机关,并申报所装载的渔产品数量、品种、捕捞日期和捕捞地点及捕捞工具。available at: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/extemal_relations/illegal_fishing_en.htm, (visited on 2009/12/21)相关讨论参见本文第二章第一节。
④ Jennifer Schultz, The GATTfWTO Committee on Trade and the Environment-Toward Environmental Reform,89 Am. J. Int'l L.423,428,435-436. (1995).
⑤ OECD, Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries 43, (Paris:OECD,1991), p.33, WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, Information Relevant to Consideration of the Market Access Effects of Ecolabeling Schemes, WT/CTE/W/150, p.6-10 (June 29,2000), UNCTAD, Briefing Paper of Legal and Policy Issues in the Market Access Implication of Labelling for Environment Purposes, (Bangkok:UNCTAD,2004) p.5-6, Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,116 (1997), Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,605 (1999), Christian Tietje, Voluntary Eco-Labelling Programs and Questions of State Responsibility in the WTO/GATT Legal System,29 J. World Trade,123,127-28 (1995), John J. Emslie, Labeling Programs as a reasonably Available Least Restrictive Trade Measure under Article XX's Nexus Requirement,30 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.485,494-498 (2005).
① Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,211-213 (1996), Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316,317 (2002)
② 42 U.S.C.A. Subsection 4321; 1994 Clean Air Act,42 U.S.C.7671 (j).
③ 7 U.S.C.136-136y; 40 C.F.R.721.72 (b) (1997);(台湾地区)食品卫生管理法10条与食品中多氯联苯限量标准规定食品中之多氯联苯含量不应超过一定数值,但同法17条却没有要求制造者应强制标示。
④ Steve Keane, Tradefair Competition Winner:Can a Consumer's Right to Know Survive the WTO?:The Case of Food Labeling,16Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Prob.297-301 (2006).
⑤此标签目前涵盖数百种产品,available at:http://www.blauer-engel.de/en/index.php, (visited on 2009/12/21).
⑥E之花标签,available at:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/index en.htm, (visited on 2009/12/21)其它相类似者：加拿大咨询委员会(Advisory Board)管理的政府性组织(governmental organization)的Environmental Choice, available at:http://www.ecoconceptsusa.com/EnvironmentalChoice.aspx, (visited on 2009/12/21),口本由准政府行政计划(quasigovernmental project) 的 Eco-Mark, www.ecomark.jp/english, (visited on 2009/12/21)详细讨论可参见Avi Gesser, Canada"s Environmental Choice Program:A Model for a "Trade-Friendly" Eco-Labelling Scheme,39 Harv. Int'l. L. J.501,503-505 (1998), Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,382 (1999).
⑦ Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.,373,378-380 (1999).
① U. S. C. Titles 16, Section 1385, (Dolphin Protection Consumer Protection Act); Code of Federal Regulation, Title 50, Section 216.91, (Dolphin Safe Labeling Standards); Section 216.92 (Dolphin Safe Requirements for Tuna Harvested in the East Topical Pacific by Large Purse Seine Vessels).
② Available at:http://www.dolphinsafe.gov/, (visited on 2009/12/23)
③ Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 607 (1999), Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBTAgreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,57 (1997).
④ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,57-58 (1997).
⑤ Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.7, Steve Keane, Tradefair Competition Winner:Can a Consumer's Right to Know Survive the WTO?:The Case of Food Labeling,16 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Prob.306 (2006)
⑥ Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,382 (1999)
⑦ Available at:http://www.earthtrust.org/fsa.html, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑧ Available at:http://www.greenseas.com.au/, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑨ Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,383-4 (1999).
⑩ Available at:http://www.johnwest.com.au/Environment/, (visited on 2009/12/23).
① Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.7.
② C. R. Wessells, K. Cochrane, C. Deere, P. Wallis & R. Willmann, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.60; Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,621,623 (1999).
③ Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,136-7 (1996).
① Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO?,20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.195,206-208 (2009), Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,129-131 (1996), Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,390-393 (1999), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,240 (1996)
② Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va.Envtl. L. J.51,69-70 (1997).
① Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,393 (1999), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205, 243-44 (1996).
② Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,82-84 (2005).
③ Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,133 (1996).
④ Panel Report, Tuna/Dolphin I, para.5.42-5.44, Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment: An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,65-69 (1997).
⑤ Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO?,20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.195,209 (2009), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,251-52 (1996).
① Panel Report,Tuna/Dolphin I, para.1618,1622-1623; Panel Report, Tuna/Dolphin Ⅱ, para.894,896.
② Jennifer Ramach, Dolphin-Safe Labeling:Are the Dolphins Finally Safe,15 Va. Envtl. L. J.743,748,749,753 (1996), Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,622 (1999), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,252(1996), Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,133 (1996)
③墨西哥是主张违反GATT 1994第9条产地证明(Marks of origin)。
④ William J. Snape, III and Naomi B. Lefkovitz, Searching for GATT's Environmental Miranda:Are "Process Stranards"Getting "Due Process? ",27 Cornell Int'l L. J.777,784-785 (1994), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade, 21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,253 n.309 (1996)
⑤ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,66 (1997).
① Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,121,124 (1996).
② Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,66 (1997).
③ William J. Snape III and Naomi B. Lefkovitz, Searching for GATT's Environmental Miranda:Are "Process Stranards"Getting "Due Process? ",27 Cornell Int'l L. J.777,785,789 (1994).
④ Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine Fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,84 (2005).
⑤ Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 618-619 (1999).
⑥ UNCLOS与UNFSA便是以MSY计算,目前在FAO的倡导之下,另辅以生态系(Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries; EAF)作为族群数量科学数据之评估。相关分析与的介绍,available at: www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0191e/a0191e00.HTM, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑦ Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,247-51.253 (1996).
① Carol J. Miller and Jannifer L. Croston, WTO Scrutiny v. Environmental Objectives:Assement of the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act,37 AM. Bus. L. J.73,98 (1999), Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO?,20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.195,209(2009),本文认为自由放任的贸易制度是集短视近利之大成,资本市场的自我调节机制甚少具有明智的决定,特别是为了攫取自然资源的独占地位,看不见的手根本就是蒙蔽消费者的知的权利,以方便跨国企业独占全球市场。
② United States-Import Prohibitions of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/RW; AB Report WT/DS58/RW, para.164-168,172, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds58_e.htm, (visited on 2009/12/25), Ronald Salz, Sea Turtle Mortality, Shrimp Fisheries, and International Trade:A Case Study of a Global Natural Resource Conflict, available at:www.umass.edu/hd/research/turtle.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23), John J. Emslie, Labeling Programs as a reasonably Available Least Restrictive Trade Measure under Article XX's Nexus Requirement,30 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.485,525-528 (2005).
① Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,135 (1996), WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, Communication from Canada, WT/CTE/W/21, (Feb.21,1996), p.2, Discusses Proposals on Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements and on Eco-Labelling, PRESS/TE/008, (Apr.29,1996), p.10, Report (1996) of the Committee on Trade and Environment, WT/CTE/1, (Nov.12,1996) p.6.
② United States-Measures Affecting Alcoholic and Malt Beverages (1992), GATT B.I.S.D. (39th Supp.) 206, 296-97(1993).
① Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 622 (1999)
② S. W. Chang, GATTingA Green Trade Barrier-Eco-Labelling and the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,31 (1) Journal of World Trade,138,156 (1997), Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51, 73 (1997)
③ Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 628 (1999).
④ Canada-Measures Affecting the Sale of Gold Coins, GATT Doc.45863 (1985),pp.61-62 available at:LEXIS, Intlaw Library, GATT pdf file, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑤ OECD, Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries 43, (Paris:OECD,1991 p.33, Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,383 (1999).
① V. Jha, Eco-labeling and International Trade, UNTAD, UN Doc 70 at 10, UNCTAD/OSG/DP/70(1993), cited by Atsuko Oukbo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev. 599,606 (1999).
②1.1就本协议之目的而言,如有下列情况应视为有补贴之存在：(a)(1)会员(本协议简称为「政府」)境内有由政府或任何公立机构提供之财务补助者,即政府措施涉及资金(诸如补助金、贷款及投入股本)之直接转移资金或债务可能之直接转移(例如贷款保证)；(ⅰ)政府抛弃或未催缴原已届期应缴纳之税收(例如抵减税之财务奖励)；(ⅱ)政府提供一般基本设施以外之商品或劳务,或收购商品；(ⅲ)政府提供给付予募集基金之机构,或委托或指示一民营机构执行通常归属政府之前述第(ⅰ)点至第(ⅲ)点所到之一种或多种功能,且其做法与政府通常做法实际上并无差异者：(a)(2)存有GATT1994第十六条所指任何形式之所得补贴或价格维持者；且(b)因而授与利益者。1.2前项定义之补贴应受第二篇规定之规范,或若其构成第二条规定之特定性要件者,应受第三篇或第四篇规定之规范。
③ EC-Countervailing Measures on Drams Chips, Panel Report, (WT/DS299/R) (17 June 2005) para.7.48, available at:http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/ec-dramscvd(panel).pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23).US-Countervailing Duty Investigation on Drams, Appellate Body Report, (WT/DS296/R) (21 February 2005) para.52, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/296r_a_e.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23)
④国家为了不同的国家目的及各种的经济政策,可以给予私人企业一定的财产价值之利益给予,称为行政补助或经济补助。在德国及我国学界大致上已经形成共识：如果涉及对受补助者、或第三人基本权利的限制或侵犯其它宪法原则时,则必须适用法律保留原则；否则,仅需有预算法的依据、并且透过主管机关公布的法规、依循依法行政的原则行使之只要不违反平等权,不会有行政滥权之虞,即可为之。
⑤此处所指之行政委托是指行政机关依法规将其权限之一部分,委托民间团体或个人办理。行政契约是乃行政机关与人民缔结,用以创设、变更或修改公法法律关系之契约；或二以上之法律主体,以设定、变更或消灭行政法法律关系为目的,互相为意思表示而合致成立之法律行为。本文不讨论两者的管辖变动与其它国内法问题。主要藉以说明此二者都属于国家行为的一种。另FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector (Rome:FAO,2009), p.18,忧虑是否会造成过度授与公权力问题,本文认为属该国内法的行政监督层次,非本文讨论重点。
① United States-Final Dumping Determination on Softwood Lumber from Canada, Appellate Body Report (WT/DS257/AB/R), (19 January 2004) para.46.47. available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/257abr_e.doc, (visited on 2009/12/23).
② Canda-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, Appellate Body Report (2 August 1999), para.149,154,161. available at: http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/do/www/readDoc?document_id=63655, (visited on 2009/12/23).
③ Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.28, FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2009) p.17, Erik P. Bartengen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,77 (1997), Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,642-643 (1999)
④ §§8 Ⅰ (b)、(c);11Ⅰ、Ⅱ;13 Ⅲ(b) of GATT。其它如: §10 of TBT:3 Ⅳ、4Ⅱ of GATS.
①罗昌发：《国际贸易法》,(台湾)月旦出版社1997年版,第213页,Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118, 123 (1996);如,石油标准案(.U.S.-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline)即是美国以强制性技术法规影响他国产品进入本国市场。参见：WT/DS2/R (29 January 1996), para.3.73-3.76,6.10,6.13. available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/2-9.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23)
② P.W. Birnie and A. Boyle, Basic Documents on International Law and the Environment, (Oxford:Clarendon Press,1995). p.12; United States-Taxes on Automobiles, Panel report, GATT Doc.31/R, reprinted in 33 I.L.M. 1397, (1994), at 1448., Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,67 (1997). ③ WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, Communication from Canada, WT/CTE/W/21, (Feb.21,1996), p. 2.
① Astuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 623 (1999), UNCTAD, Briefing Paper of Legal and Policy Issues in the Market Access Implication of Labelling for Environment Purposes, (Bangkok:UNCTAD,2004) p.12.
② Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.18, C. R. Wessells et al, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.59-60.
③ C. R. Wessells et al., Product Certification and Ecolabellingfor Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.61.
④ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,74 (1997).
⑤ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,76 (1997).
① Report of the Committee on Trade and Environment:Background, Analysis, Discussion and Proposals, WT/CTE/1, (Geneva:WTO,1996) p.1,15,32.
② U.S.C.Titles 16, at Section 1371 (a) (2)& Section 1385.
③ Available at:http://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/IATTC-Resolution-on-LJ-Agreement-Apr-1992.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23).
④ Available at:http://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/Declaration of Panama.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑤ Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine Fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues,23 UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,83 (2005)
⑥以下整理自 Ronald Salz, Sea Turtle Mortality, Shrimp Fisheries, and International Trade:A Case Study of a Global Natural Resource Conflict。美国公众法第609章(Section 609 of Public Law)与濒临绝种法(Endangered Species Act, ESA)禁止进口捕捉方式危及濒临绝种海龟生存的虾只,但经美国查证许可的国家则不受到前述进口禁令的影响。目的在于保护如海龟濒临灭绝的动物,未取得商务部部长或内政部部长许可之前,禁止在美国境内、美国所辖海域以及公海从事捕获海龟之行为。其后美国根据ESA要求所有美国籍拖网虾船在对海龟有重大伤害的规定区域捕虾时,应使用批准的海龟逃脱器(Turtle Excluder Devices, TEDs)或限制 低于九十分钟的拖网时间。并制订Section 609与相关执行规则,要求所有进口美国的虾必须附有虾颊出口商申报表(Shrimp Exporter's Declaration Form),陈明是在海龟无害的条件下捕虾或是Section 609所认可之作业水域。印度、马来西亚、巴基斯坦以及泰国分别要求WTO争端解决小组就美国公众法第609章法案内容进行审查。四国共同主张为违反GATT 1994第11条、第13条且非为GATT 1994第20条(b)、(g)二款所涵盖之范围与损害第二十三条第一项(a)款之权益。印度、巴基斯坦及泰国另主张违反GATT 1994第1条第1项；印度单独要求争端解决小组作成美国应立即撤销Section 609,余三国则要求争端解决小组作成要求美国修改该法案及相关执行措施。
① United States-Import Prohibitions of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/RW; AB Report WT/DS58/RW, paras.164-168,172, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds58 e.htm, (visited on 2009/12/25).
②详细介绍参照：李嘉沂,林良怡：《欧盟海豹产品进口禁令》,《经贸法讯》88期,2009年6月22日。(?)vailable at:www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no88/2.pdf, (visited on 2009/10/14);陈姿妤,黄滋立：《加拿大及挪威对欧盟海豹产品进口法令提出谘商请求》,《经贸法讯》第94期,2009年12月11日。available at: http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no94/2.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/24).
③ FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2009) pp.4,11,13.
① David Downes and Brennan Van Dyke, Fisheries Conservation and Trade Rules:Ensuring that Trade Law Promotes Sustainable Fisheries, (Washington, D.C.:Center for International Environmental Law and Greenpeace, 1998),p.1,34.
① Lothar Ehring, De Facto Discrimination in WTO Law:National and Most-Favored-Nation Treatment-or Equal Treatment?, p.4-5,31, available at:http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/01/013201.html, (visited on 2009/12/29).
① FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2004, part Ⅱ (Rome:FAO,2004), p.86, Roman Grynberg and Martin Tsamenyi, Fisheries Subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries,32 JTL 127,134(1998), Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified?,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,341,348 (2006); Negotiating Group on Rules on Rules Fisheries Subsidies, The Doha Mandate to Address Fish Subsidies:Issue, Reported in TN/RL/W/3
② Warren F. Schwartz and Eugene W. Harper, The Regulation of Subsidies Affecting International Trade,70 Michigan Law Review,831,839-842 (1972); Alan O. Sykes, Countervailing Duty Law:An Economic Perspective, 89 Columbia Law Review,199,204(1989), H. Siebert, What Does Globalization Mean for the World Trading System? in The WTO Secretasrial, From GATT to the WTO:The Multilateral Trading System in the New Millenium, (Hague:Kluwer Law International,2000) p.139.
① Benedict J. Clements, Public Expenditure Policy and the Environment: A Review and Synthesis, in Bedrich Moldan, (ed.), Economic Instruments for Sustainable Development (Prague:Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic,1995) p.124; Edward B. Barbier, Joanne C. Burgess, Joshua Bishop and Bruce Aylward, The Economics of Tropical Timber (London:Earthscan,1994), p.67.
② FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2008 (Rome: FAO,2009) p.28.
③ U. R Sumaila, L. Watson, R. Teh, P. Tyedmers and D. Pauly, Fuel Price Increase, Subsidies, Overcapacity and Resource Sustainability, ICES Journal of Marine Science, Vol.65 No.6, pp.832-840. (2008) ④ T.L. McDorman, Fisheries Conservation and Management and International Trade Law, in Ellen Hey (ed.), Developments in International Fisheries Law, (Hague: Kluwer,1999) p.510.
⑤ R. Sumaila & D. Pauly, Catching More Bait: A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies, (2nd version). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2006, Vol.14, No 6, (Canada:University of British Colombia.2006), p.7.
⑥ WT/CTE/W/121.
⑦ Anthony Cox & Carl-Christian Schmidt, Subsidies in the OECD Fisheries Sector: A Review of Recent Analysis and Future Directions (Paris:OECD,2002), p.2.
⑧ World Bank, The Sunken Billions: The economic Justification for Fisheries Reform, (Washington, DC:The World Bank,2008), p.10.
① Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.16-18.
②相关文献如：R. Arnason, Ocean Fisheries Management:Recent International Developments, Marine Policy, 334-340, September 1993, T. Matthiasson, Why Fishing Fleets Tend to be Too Big, Marine Resources Economics, Vol.11, Issue,3,173-179,1996, D. Greboval, and G. Munro, Overcapitalization and Excess Capacity in World Fisheries:Underlying Economics and Methods of Control, in D. Greboval (ed.), Managing Fishing Capacity: Selected Papers on Underlying Concepts and Issues, (Rome:FAO,1999), C. D. Stone, Too Many Fishing Boats, Too Few Fish:Can Trade Laws Trim Subsidies and Restore the Balance in Global Fisheries?,24 Ecology Law Quarterly,505-44.1997, H. Nordstrom and S. Vaughan, Special Study 4:Trade and Environment (Geneva:WTO, 1999), Environmental Benefits of Removing Trade Restrictions and Distortions:The Fisheries Sector.Note by the Secretariat, WT/CTE/W/167.
③ Peter Weber, Net Loss:Fish, Jobs, and the Marine Environment, Worldwatch Paper no.120, Table 2, (Washington, D.C.:Worldwatch Institute,1994), p.15., FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2004, part Ⅱ (Rome:FAO,2004), p.8, Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade, (Geneva:UNEP, 1998), p.11.
① Roman Grynberg and Martin Tsamenyi, Fisheries Subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries,32 JTL 127,134(1998)。日本曾主张这类论点, 见:WT/CTE/W/226, paras.2-5.
② Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified?,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,341,349 (2006).
③ UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p.1.
④ OECD, Subsidies:A Way Towards Sustainable Fisheries? (Paris:OECD,2005) p.18.
⑤ Matteo Millazzo, Subsidies in World Fisheries:A Re-examination, Technical paper No 406, (Washington, DC: World Bank,1998) p.74, Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?,6 J Int'l Econ L.879,907(2003).
⑥ Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,150-151 (2008).
⑦ UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p.3.
⑧ Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,156 (2008).
① A. A. Rosenberg et al, Achieving Sustainable Use of Renewable Resources, Science, vol.262,828 (1993).
② §§64、118 of UNCLOS; § 8 I of UNFSA.
③ M. J. Peterson, International Fisheries Management, in Peter Haas, Robert Keohane and Marc Levy (ed), Institutions for the Earth:Sources of Effective International Environmental Protection (Cambridge, The MIT Press:1993) p.249,300.
④ Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, p.5, 8-9, available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683, (visited on 2009/12/21); Martti Koskenniemi, Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, A/CN.4/L.682,13 April 2006.
⑤ J.S. Thomas and M.A. Meyer, The New Rules of Global Trade:A Guide to the World Trade Organization, (Toronto:Carswell,1997) p.150.
⑥ TN/RL/W/3, WT/CTE/W/121.
⑦ WTO, History:30 years of Trade and Environment in GATT/WTO, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envir_e.htm#history; WTO, Early years:emerging environment debate in GATT/WTO, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/histl_e.htm (also visited on: 2010/3/3).
① J. M Van Dyke, D. Zaelke, G. Hewison, Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century (Washington:Island Press. 1993) p.231, Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,153 (2008).
②即1999年3月于WTO环境贸易委员会开会时,冰岛、澳大利亚、纽西兰美国发表共同宣言(Communication from Iceland to the WTO reported in WT/CTE/w/132),嗣后陆续有国家加入所形成之团体,成员主要有阿根廷、澳大利亚、纽西兰、挪威、智利、菲律宾、美国等。
③ UN Commission on Sustainable Development, Report on the Seventh Session, E/CN.17/1999/20,14, Nancy Nelson, International Concern for the Sustainability of the World's Fisheries:United Nations Efforts to Combat Over-Fishing and International Debate over State Fishing Subsidies, Colo J Int'l Envt'l L & Pol'y 157,162. (1999).
④ Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,503. (2003).
⑤ FAO, Guide for Identifying, Assessing and Reporting on Subsidies in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2004) p.7.
⑥直接财政转移如投资补助、安全设备补助、渔船报废计划、股本注入、收入保证计划、灾害救济支付、价格支持、直接出口激励等；间接转移之服务,如优惠投资贷款、贷款担保、港口设施、签署入渔协议后将移转入渔权、政府资助的研发计划、国际合作与谈判、提供燃油或免除燃料税等；管制如进口配额、外国直接投资限制、环境保护作为、渔具管制、渔业管理等；自由不干预例如自由入渔、不采取污染控制措施、不采取管理措施、执行现有法令规章等。前述整理自：FAO, Guide for Identifying, Assessing and Reporting on Subsidies in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2004) p.16-22.
①直接支付为如补助金、渔船报废奖励、直接给付收入、失业保险等；降低成本转移,如燃料免税、补贴贷款、运输补贴、所得税减免贷款担保、政府提供入渔费；一般服务,如科学研究与管销+行政计划之施行、兴建或投资港口设施等；市场价格支持,如透过贸易限制措施使国内外市场价格形成差异,从而构成消费者和纳税人向渔民的财政转移。前述内容整理自：慕永通、朱玉贵：《渔业补贴研究进展及发展(一)》,《中国海洋大学学报》,(社会科学版),2005年第4期,第9页。与OECD, Liberalizing Fisheries Markets:Scope and Effects,2002, available at: http://www.oecd.org/document/57/0,3343,en_2649_33901_17788601_1_1_1_1,00.html (visited on 2010/3/22).
① Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.11-20.
② UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies and Marine Resource Management:Lessons Learn from Studies in Argentina and Senegal. UNEP/ETU/2001/7 (Vol. Ⅱ) 2001.
③ Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade (Geneva:UNEP,1998) p.39,43; Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.36、39.
④慕永通,朱玉贵：《渔业补贴研究进展及发展(一)》,《中国海洋大学学报》,(社会科学版),2005年第4期,第3页。
⑤ Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.30,32.
① W.W.F., Hard Facts, Hidden Problems:A View of Current Data on Fishing Subsidies, Technical Papers, (Switzland:WWF,2001) p.126, Turning the Tide of Fishing Subsidies:Can the World Trade Organization Play a Positive Role?, Issue Brief, (Switzland:WWF,2002), pp.38-62, David K. Shorr, Healthy Fisheries, Sustainable Trade:Crafting New Rules on Fishing Subsidies in the World Trade Organization, (Switzland: WWF,2004) p.95.
②相关历史演变参见：History:30 years of Trade and Environment in GATT/WTO, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envir_e.htm#history; Early years:emerging environment debate in GATT/WTO, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/histl_e.htm (also visited on:2010/3/3)。 反对的主要论点主要根据WTO功能目的与Tuna Dolphin Case, US Gasoline Case与EC Asbetos Case不同意见所示,认为WTO本身为经济性组织,涉及生态保育的问题实非职权所及,应为各国内法范畴,WTO之争端解决机制不宜涉入。相关讨论参见：牛惠之《论由WTO「补贴暨平衡税措施协议」规范渔业补贴之法理》,载于：《经社法制论丛》,第三十二期,1998年,第75至120页；Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?,6 J Int'l Econ L.,907,913-915 (2003). ① Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?,6 J Int'l Econ L.,907,917-918(2003).
② David Schorr, Fisheries Subsidies and the WTO, in Gary P. Anderson and Bradnee Chambers (eds) Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), (Tokyo:United Nations University Press,2001) p.150,194-195.
③ WT/CTE/W/67.
④ TN/RL/W/3.
⑤译文为：忆及在多哈会议就加强贸易与环境之间的相互配合作出承诺；知悉成员普遍同意,谈判小组应加强渔业补贴的规章制度,包括禁止导致生产力过剩和过度捕捞的某些形式渔业补贴；并呼吁参与成员迅速展开进一步细节工作,包括确立上述规章制度的性质和范围,例如透明度和可执行范围等。考虑到渔业在优先发展范畴、灭贫、生活保障和粮食保障等问题上的重要性,给予发展中和最不发达成员适当及有效的特殊和差别待遇,应该是渔业补贴谈判的重要组成部分。Hong Kong Declaration, Annex D, § 1.9, Ministerial Text Mandate on Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines, WT/MIN(05)
⑥ TN/RL/W/196.
⑦本表以UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p.4为基础修改而成。
①如：TN/RL/W/3, TN/RL/W/12, TN/RL/W/21, TN/RL/W/58, TN/RL/W/77, TN/RL/W/154, TN/RL/W/166, TN/RL/W/169, TN/RL/W/196 and TN/RL/GEN/145都是以现行SCM文本所以出的讨论意见。
② TN/RL/W/77, para.5、WT/CTE/W/154, (Communication from the United States.), para.9,16.
① TN/RL/W/12, (Submission from New Zealand), para 4, TN/RL/W/115, (Submission from Chile),para 8, Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,502 (2003).
② TN/RL/W/77, para.6, TN/RL/W/115, para.8 (ii) 1.4.
③ TN/RL/W/82, (Submission of the European Communities), para.4、5.
④ TN/RL/W/164.
⑤ WT/CTE/W/173, (Submission from Japan).
⑥ TN/RL/W/159日本认为纽西兰TN/RL/W/154文件提议渔业补贴应予以一般性的禁止,并订定除外清单(negative list)的建议仅顾及禁止渔业补贴的面向,却忽略多哈宣言所揭橥的面向,例如：厘清与改进WTO禁止性渔业补贴规范、确保永续发展、考虑发展中国家渔业部门之重要性、确保透明性以及鼓励与其它国际组织合作等。同时,对于纽西兰所提出的一般性禁止渔业补贴,日本认为其并未考虑不同类型之补贴,例如：UNEP所提出的矩阵模式(matrix approach)、OECD渔业委员会对渔业补贴所提之环境、经济以及社会的考虑等,日本也建议应加强会员通知义务的规范,并对于开发中国家与低度开发国家提供特殊与差别待遇,而相关国际组织的研讨均可作为其分类的参考,。
① TN/RL/W/11, (Japan's Basic Position), paras 2-5,20,; TN/RL/W/17, (Korea's Views on Fisheries Subsidies), para Ⅲ、Ⅳ,,相似论点如：TN/RL/W/52、69、97. ② TN/RL/W/136,para3.,这些国家又称SVE 集团 (Small Vulnerable Economies)且持续坚持此提案的立场到现在。
③学者认为WTO的成员数绝对超过任何一个国际渔业组织与FAO,虽部分渔业组织可以渔业实体身份加入,但WTO的成员,即以关税地区的加入也较其它的国际组织宽,故认为单以渔业组织规范过渔略嫌不足,更何况单凭一己之力所搜集的数据信息如何侈言建立良好的渔业管理制度。Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, p.19, available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=1313683, (visited on 2009/12/21).
④ Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified?,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,341,358 (2006), Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade, (Geneva:UNEP,1998), p.30,32.
⑤ TN/RL/M/18.
①TN/RL/W/164；Roman Grynberg,WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management,Marine Policy 27,503(2003)；笔者观察日本处理黑金枪鱼,鲸鱼,海豚等作法发现认为该国以搭便车的心态面对国际渔业资源,先享尽权利,不得已时再付出的作法,面对国际意见相左的困境时,先主导民间舆论抨击非政府组织的论点,再以政府间贸易互惠措施谄媚经济实力强大的国家,以两面手法充分换取攫取资源的时间,此种以拖待变的作法恰是天然资源的幕后杀手。以鲸鱼为例,多数鲸鱼被CITES列为濒危物种,但日本以UNCLOS赋予之科学研究权利作为名义,持续捕捞鲸鱼。面对非政府组织抗议,除以军舰护航外,渔船或驻在港民众以强烈手段对抗非政府组织。根据媒体报导2010年CITES年会讨论黑鲔鱼列入濒危物种议题,日本游说团体积极穿梭会中,且该国官员表示即便做成决议,该国也不会遵守。Available at:http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/100316/19/224ws.html (visited on 2101/03/16),嗣后表决未通过将黑鲔列入濒危物种,也未能禁止交易红珊瑚,足见日本游说之能,也使得国际质疑CITES之功能是否陷入危机。
②Eric A.Bilsky,Territory without Boundaries:Colonizing Natural Resource:Conserving Marine Wildlife through World Trade Law,30 Mich.J.Int'l L.599,632(2009).
③Eric A.Bilsky,Territory without Boundaries:Colonizing Natural Resource:Conserving Marine Wildlife through World Trade Law,30 Mich.J.Int'l L.599,633(2009)
①条文说明即是纳入历次争端解决小组的意见,形成补贴应具备两要件：政府或任何公立机构提供之财务补助或价格维持者；且因而授与利益者。如Panel Report,EC-Countervailing Measures on DRAM Chips,para. 7.173.；Appellate Body Report,Canada-Aircraft,para.150.；Appellate Body Report,US-Softwood Lumber Ⅳ,Para.84-5.
②TN/RL/W/213,Art.I.1-2.主席版草案使用之累积适用(accumulation)之目的并非发生条约冲突,而是原SCM之补贴定义较为广义,若毫无限制的将间接事项引入,难免造成规定容过苛,便以累积适用的方式将造成过渔因素较模糊之行为纳入规范,与论者引用累积适用作为解决规范冲突的方式不同,盖此处并无发生规范冲突。关于累积适用不同的阐释可参见：张南熏：《WTO协定间法律适用关系之研究》,《政治大学法律学系博士论文》,2008年,第59至61页。
③TN/RL/W/232,Annex C at 2,(3rd column).
④被各国广泛使用的燃料补贴具有特殊的国情与政治因素,且结合环保议题和产业竞争力,但燃料补贴直接增加捕捞压力,因此前述的不确定性,更增添燃料补贴与过渔的处理难度。此争论在韩国提出TN/RL/W/245后,依然持续发烧,尚未形成共识。
① TN/RL/W/213,Art.2.
② TN/RL/W/213,Art.1.2、3.1.
③ TN/RL/W/213, at 88, n 81.
④ UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP, 2007) p.8、14、15、20、30、36.
⑤本表整理自：UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p 10.
① UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva: UNEP, 2007) p.37.
② TN/RL/GEN/134, Annex § 4; Report of the Appellate Body, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R,16 January 1998, Part XI, p.68.
③ Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, p.31, available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683, (visited on 2009/12/21), UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP,2007) p.38.
④ FAO, FAO-CITES Agreement Promotes Sustainable Fish Trade:Collaborative Relationship Formalized in MOU, FAO Newsroom release dated 3 October 2006, available at: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000410/index.html). (visited on 2010/3/22)
① UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP, 2007) p.39.
② TN/RL/W/9 (Submission by China), Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,499 (2003).
③ Doha Declaration p.2,28; Hong Kong Declaration p.2.
④有认为此种作法并不适宜,因为难以定义规模大小,破坏性捕鱼不受限船舶大小。UNEP/WWF, Summary Report of the WTO Fishery Subsidies Negotiations:Update and Introductory Briefing for New Delegates, para.28, (1 April 2009).
⑤ TN/RL/W/213,Art.3.
①整理自：(台湾地区)参加世界贸易组织(WTO)贸易规则谈判小组会议出国报告。本文内容系整理自网络搜集到三不同版本。详细内容可参：http://open.nat.gov.tw/OpenFront/report/report detail,jsp?sysId=C09900140 (visited on:2010/3/5)
② Veniana Qalo, Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines at the WTO:Legal Architecture, available at: www.thecommonwealth.org/.../6A3006A6-144E-412D-B0A9-47C00B03E17D_PaperOnFisheriesSubsidies.pdf (visited on:2010/3/5).
③ TN/RL/W/245, paras.15-28.
④ TN/RL/W/245, para.21,29-32.
⑤参见前研究显示,台湾地区发言支持韩国的立场。而大陆在谈判初始,曾提出不可控诉(non-actional)之渔业补贴的单一类型(TN/RL/W/9),复提出渔业补贴分类可建立有助环境保育的项目(Green light) (TN/RL/W/88)。
⑥巴西于TN/RL/GEN/79Rev.1就已经提出三分法,并融合智利的通知义务要求所有成员通知WTO补贴的实施情形。日本这种说词实则是维持该国向来的一致立场。
① UNCLOS第57；62条4项a款；除此,FAO的责任渔业守则(FAO Code of Conduct, Art.5.2,6.18,11.2.7)也论及入渔协议,强调沿海国在发展自己的渔业的同时,也应确保加工和小型渔业的渔民生计能力；各国不应调节市场之通路以配合进入取得资源,但不排除国与国之间订定包括：入渔、贸易及市场进入、技术移转、科学研究、培训及其它项目之渔业协议可能性。责任渔业守则论及入渔协议的得以捕鱼(right to fish)是在阐明入渔国与沿海国相同之义务,须以负责任的态度确保有效地养护和管理海洋资源,并非代表此守则具有法律拘束力,而是入渔协议引入责任渔业守则成为协议内容的效力。
②除此还有欧盟退除役渔船转籍阿根廷后,以阿根廷籍到其它国家入渔的型态(second generation agreement), 见:Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva:International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.13; 美国与太平 洋岛国有Treaty on Fisheries Between the Governments of Certain Pacific Island States and the Government of the United States of America (2003)为主要依据,见:Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations: Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499, 505-507(2003).
③ WT/CTE/W/154, Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,501,503. (2003).
④ Matteo Milazzo, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.73.
⑥ TN/RL/W/3, para.14; Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva:International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.25,30.
⑥本表整理自：TN/RL/W/209; Marcos A. Orellana, EEZ Fisheries Access Arrangement and the WTO Subsidies Agreement:Legal Analysis and Options for Improved Disciplines (Geneva:UNEP,2007) p.23-24.
①台湾地区也支持这类方案。
② Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva:International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.29.
③ TN/RL/W/209, paras 3,8,9,11; TN/RL/GEN/150; Marcos A. Orellana, EEZ Fisheries Access Arrangement and the WTO Subsidies Agreement:Legal Analysis and Options for Improved Disciplines (Geneva:UNEP,2007) p.20.
① TN/RL/W/213,n80.
② TN/RL/W/236, paras.10; 11.
③原文为：As we understand, has not proposed a textual language, but has expressed willingness to consider suggestions along the lines of mandating the fishing industry of developed Members to pay back their governments for the financing of such arrangements.
④ Matteo Milazzo, Subsidies in World Fisheries:A Re-examination, Technical paper No 406, (Washington, DC: World Bank,1998) p.73.
① TN/RL/W/209, para.3,8,9.
②学者指出韩国与台湾地区也常用此种模式,见：Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:
Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,507(2003).
③呼应《约翰内斯堡宣言与行动计划》,配合欧盟共同渔业政策所做的改变,参见：Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,503 (2003); S. F. Walmsley, C. T. Barnes, A. I. Payne,& C. A. Howard, Comparative Study of the Impact of Fisheries Partnership Agreements, (Cambridge:MRAG, Cambridge Resources Economics & NRI.,2007)p.183.
① David K. Schorr, Fisheries Subsidies and the WTO, in Gary P. Anderson and Bradnee Chambers (eds) Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), (Tokyo:United Nations University Press,,2001) p.154-155; Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.35.
①陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)作者自版2002年,第142至145页。
①文义解释是指以文字的惯常用法语上下文关系阐释条文意义的方法。体系解释是指条文在条约中的关系了解条文的意思,因条文经常与其它相关条文共形成一个系统。目的解释是以条约的缔结或规范目的作为依据的解释方法。参见：吴昆吾：《条约论》,(台湾)商务印书馆1977年版,第73至77页；黄异：《国际法在国内法领域的适用》,(台湾)元照出版社2006年版,第31至34页；an Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1984), p.114; Palestine Concessions Case, Judgment, PCIJ (Ser. A) No.5,1925; Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case, Judgment, ICJ Rep.1950, Interpretation of the Convention of 1919 concerning Employment of Women during the Night (advisory opinion of 15 November 1932), Series A/B, No.50, p.365.
② R.R. Churchill & A. V. Lowe, The Law of Sea, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1999) p.137, Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, (New York:Cambridge University Press,1989) p.44.
③ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.132.
④原条文为：所有国家均有权由其国民在公海上捕鱼,但受下列限制：甲、其条约义务；乙、沿海国按照本公约规定的利益和权利；丙、以下各条所在关于养护公海生物资源的规定。因此,在专属经济区划定之后,其它国家之权利不应被受到限制。
⑤学者讨论问题的重心是在专属经济区内的适用原有的公海自由问题,如专属经济区内之倾倒自由,飞越航行自由与铺设管线自由等问题,参见：Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, (New York: Cambridge University Press,1989) p.44, Bernard H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea:The 1977 New YorkSession,72 Am. J. Int'l L.57 (1978) p.67, ITLOS M/V "Saiga" (No.2) 2007, Merit, para.125.
⑥ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.136,173.
⑦ R.R. Churchill & A. V Lowe, The Law of Sea, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1999) p.234.
① Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991.) pp.287-288,黎家维,国际法中「传统作业渔场」概念之澄清,available at: http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/CL/094/CL-C-094-074.htm, (visited on:2009/7/10).
② Barbare Kwiatowska, The 200 Mile Exclusive Economic Zone in the New Law of the Sea, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989)pp.15,60, Ellen Hey, The Provisions of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention on Fisheries Resource and Current International Fisheries Management Needs, in FAO, The Regulation of Driftnet on the High Sea:Legal Iissue, (Rome:FAO,1991) p.3.
③ William T. Burke, The Law of the Sea Convention and Conditions of Access to Fisheries Subject to National Jurisdiction,63 Or. L.R.73,81 (1984).
④ Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Transboundary Marine Fisheries Resources, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989) p.48.
⑤ William T. Burke, Implications for Fisheries Management of U.S. Acceptance of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea,89 Am. J. Int'l Law,792,800 (1995)
⑥ Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Transboundary Marine Fisheries Resources, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989) p.77
① Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991.) p. 286.
② Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.179.
③ Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Trans boundary Marine Fisheries Resources, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989) p.77.
④ Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, (New York:Cambridge University Press,1989) p.41.
⑤ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.136.
① Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.183, Francis T. Christy Jr., Transitutions in Management and Distribution of International Fisheries,31 Int'l Org., p.258.
② R.R. Churchill & A. V. Lowe, The Law of Sea, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1999) p.234、238.
③参见：Principles 3 of Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,1972. International Union for Conversation of Nature and Natural Resource, World Conversation Strategy,1980. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future,1987. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Report, Doc. A/CONF.151/26/Rev.l, Vol.1, Chap.17.,1993.
④ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.181, William T. Burke, The Law of the Sea Convention and Conditions of A ccess to Fisheries Subject to National Jurisdiction,63 Or. L.R.73,93 (1984).
①薛桂芳：《国际渔业法律政策与中国的实践》,中国海洋大学出版社2008年版,第21页。
② Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.130
③ David Joseph Attard, The Exclusive Economic Zone in International Law, (New York:Oxford University Press, 1987)p.165, D. P. O'Connell, International Law of the Sea, (Oxford:Clarendon Press,1984)p.566-567, Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.182.
① Marian Nash Leich, Contemporary Practice of the United Stares Relating to International Law,81 AJIL, 940-943 (1987).
② US — Upland Cotton, DS267, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds267_e.htm, (visited on:2010/9/1).
③林君宜：《抵制美国补贴棉农,巴西祭出智财权武器》,载于：(台湾地区)《商业周刊》第921期,2005年7月18日,第130-131页。
④ Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003) p.106-107.
⑤ Lassa Francis Lawrence Oppenheim, International Law, Vol.2, (London:Longmans Green & Co.,1948) pp.34-36,259-260.
⑥ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.37-41.
⑦或认为广义的自力救济。参见：望月直树：《现代国际法における对抗措置の法的性质》,载于：《国际法 外交杂志》,107卷2号,2009年,第72页。
① Thomas M. Franck, On Proportionality of Countermeasure in International Law,102 A J I L.715,715 (2008).②根据牛津字典,appreciation除表示了解或尊重外,亦有discretion,即自由裁量,margin表示一个有界限之空间,margin of appreciation表示容许自由判断裁量的界限。对于原则的中译可有自由裁量原则、国家裁量原则或判断余地,均表达国家就条约所涉及之不确定法律概念与条约要件涵摄的判断关系,本文采用与下列文献相同之译法。王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则--国家裁量余地原则》,载于：(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第487-488页,2007年9月；廖福特：《区域人权体系研究之必要及缺乏》,载于：(台湾地区)《新世纪智库论坛》第3期,2006年6月,第36页；孙世彦：《欧洲人权制度中的自由判断余地原则述评》,《环球法律评论》第3期,2005年,第27页。
① I.C.J.Rep.1958, p.101,105.
②原条文为：The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention.
③ Howard Charles Yourow, The National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Dynamics of European Human Rights Jurisprudence, (New York:Kluwer Law International,1996) pp.13-16.
④ TMCMED v. Mexico,43 ILM 133 (2004), paras.122-149.
⑤王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则-国家裁量余地原则》,载于：(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第487-488页。
⑤ Submitted to the Special Committee on the Question of Defining Agression, UN Doc. AC.66/L.9, Sep.15,1953.
⑥ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.192-193。
① Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion and Reprisals by States,13 Virginia Journal of International Law 1,1,5 (1972); Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion:Past and Present. International Law and Economic Coercion,16 Virginia Journal of International Law 2,245,249 (1976).
② Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) p.196.
③ John Muir, The Boycott in International Law,9 Journal of International Law and Economics,186,203 (1974)
④ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.204-205.
① Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.206-207.
② Ian Brownlie, Legal Status of Nature Resource, Recuiel de Cours de l'Academie de Droit International de La Haye, vol.162,245,266 (1974); Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, International Economic Soft Law, Recuiel de Cours de l'Academie de Droit International de La Haye, vol.163 (2) 169,188 (1979)
③ Hersch Lauterpacht, Boycott in International Relations,14BYIL,125,130 (1933) ④ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) p.197.
⑤ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) p.198-199; GA Res.2131,2625.
⑥[美]刘易斯·亨金,胡炜、徐敏译：《真理与强权：国际法与武力使用》,武汉大学出版社2004年版,第95页。
①王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则--国家裁量余地原则》,载于：(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第499页。
②如UNCLOS第58条第3项,《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约》(International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights)第2条3项,《反贪腐公约>(United Nations Convention against Corruption)第39、57条,GATT第20条,TRIPS第4条,《1958年执行外国仲裁与民事判决公约)序言(1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award),《京都议定书>(Kyoto Protocol)第10条,《生物多样性公约)(Convention on Biological Diversity)第19条3项,(联合国教科文组织世界文化多样性宣言)(Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity)第9条等。
③ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.133.
① Admission of a State to the United Nations (Charter, Art.4), Advisory Opinions, ICJ Rep.1948, pp.57,91-92.
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) p.121, Corfu Channel Case, I.C. J. Rep.1949, p.4.
③ J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), p.83.
④ J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), pp.121,124.
⑤ Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) pp.133-134.
⑥契约的当事人不仅要承担契约规定的义务,同时要具备善意、诚实的履行。在诉讼中,承审法官不受契约字面含义的约束,可根据当事人的真实意思对契约进行解释,并可根据公平原则对当事人的约定进行调整以消除某些约定之不公正性。参见:J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth, 1991.),pp.9-13.
⑦ Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) p.105.
① J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), pp.6,37,42,122.
② I.C.J. Rep.1958, p.101.
③ I.C.J. Rep.1958, p.115.
④ I.C.J. Rep.1958, pp.84,85,88,89.
⑤ I.C.J. Rep. Sep. Op. p.48.
①王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则--国家裁量余地原则》,(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第487-488页,第499页。
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) pp.121-129.
③ Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case, I.C.J. Rep.1950, pp.266,275.
④ Nottebohm Case, I.C.J. Rep.1955, p.37.
⑤ Case of Certain Norwegian Loans, I.C.J. Rep.1957, p.9.
⑥ Case of Concerning The Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of Infants (Netherland v. Sweden) I.C.J. Rep.1957, p.50.
⑦ North Continental Shelf Case, I.C.J. Rep.1969, p.26, Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (UK v. Iceland) I.C.J. Rep. 1974, p.33.
⑧ J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), pp.95-96.
① Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An Old Principle, A New Age,47 McGill L. J.389,404-405 (2002)
② A.E M. Maniruzzaman, Expropriation of Alien Property and the Principle of Non-Discrimination in International Law of Foreign Investment:An Overview,8 J. Transnat'l L. Pol'y.57,68 (1998).
③ R. J. McLaughlin, Settling Trade-Related Disputes over the Protection of Marine Living Resources:UNCLOS or the WTO? 10 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.29,66-69 (1997).
④ UN Charter, Preamable; § 90-94 of UNCLOS; Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft,14 September 1963,I.C.A.O. Doc.8364,2 I.L.M.1042, Arts.3,16; The Case of the S.S. Lotus (France v. Turkey) (1927), P.C.I.J. (Ser. A) No.9.
⑤ Gunther Handl, Territorial Sovereignty and the Problem of Transnational Pollution,69 A.J.I.L.50,56. (1975).
⑥ A. D'Amato, "Good Faith" in R. Bernhardt, (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol.2 (Amsterdam: North-Holland,1995) p.599; Patrica Birnie and A. E. Boyle, International Law and the Environment (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1992) p.89.
⑦ Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An Old Principle, A New Age,41 McGill L.J.389,412 (2002)
⑧ George Sch warzenberger and E.D. Brown, A Manual of International Law, (6th ed.) (Milton, U.K.: Professional Books,1976) pp.84-85.
⑨ Harold C. Gutteridge, Abuse of Rights,5 Cambridge L.J.22,31-35 (1935).
⑩ Jerome B. Elkind, Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases:Abuse of Right-A Blind Alley for Environmentalists,9 Vand. J. Transnat'l L.57,71,75 (1976).
① L. Oppenheim, International Law:A Treatise, (8th ed.), H. Lauterpacht (ed.) (London:Longmans, Green & Co.,1955)p.345.
② Hersch Lauterpacht, The Development of International Law by the International Court, (London:Stevens & Sons,1958) p.164.
③ Michael Akehurst, Jurisdiction in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L.145,189-190 (1974).
④ Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An Old Principle, A New Age,47 McGill L. J.389,407-408 (2002).
⑤ Alexander Kiss, Abuse of Rights in R. Bernhardt (ed), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol.1 (Amsterdam:North-Holland,1995) pp.4-8.
⑥名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第79页,第85-92页。
⑦ United Kingdom v. Iceland, Memorial of the Merits of the Dispute Submitted by the Government of the United Kingdom (14 April 1972), [1975] I.CJ. Pleadings (Vol.1) 265 at paras.153-54; United Kingdom v. Norway,
[1951] I.CJ. Rep.116 at 150-51; Memorial Submitted by the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein (26 January 1952), [1955] I.CJ. Pleadings (Vol.1)21 at para.51; Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa, (Second Phase), [1966] I.CJ. Rep.6 at 10; Case Concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain) (Second Phase), [1970] I.CJ. Rep. (Vol.1) 3 at 17; Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v. France), [1974] I.C.J. Rep.253 at 362.
⑧名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第95页。
①名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第90、100页；George P. Fletcher, The Right and the Reasonable,98 Harv. L. Rev.949,949,955 (1985).
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) pp.131-132.
③ R. Jennings & A. Watts (eds), Oppenheim's International Law,9th ed., vol.1 (London:Longman,1992) p.408; Hersch Lauterpacht, The Function of Law in the International Community (Hamden, Conn.:Archon Books,1966)
p.286; Michael Byers, Custom, Power and the Power of Rules:International Relations and Customary International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999) p.172-180.
④名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第108页。
⑤ G. D. S. Taylor, The Content of the Rule Against Abuse of Rights in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L., 323,352(1972-1973).
⑥ Jerome B. Elkind, Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases:Abuse of Right-A Blind Alley for Environmentalists,9 Vand. J. Transnat'l L.57,71、75 (1976).
⑦名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第105、109页。
① Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991) pp. 287-288.
②此概念首见于国际法院在1970年的巴塞罗那电车、电灯和电力公司案(Case concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited.),判决指出：当一个国家许可外国投资和外国国民,无论其为自然人或法人进入领土时东道国必须对他们提供法律保护并且承担给予他们一定待遇的义务。这些义务既非绝对的也非不受限制的。尤其从性质应区分国家对整体国际社会的义务和外交保护领域对另一个国家而产生之义务。前者是所有国家关切的事项。就所涉权利的重要性,所有国家可被认为对保护之事项享有法律利益,是对一切的义务。例如,当代国际法对侵略行为和灭绝种族行为为非法的宣告和有关人的基本权利的原则和规则与免受奴役和种族歧视义务。Available at: http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/ICJ-BarcelonaPreliminary OOl.pdf, (visited on 2009/7/10)。关于历史发展的流程可参照：王曦：《国际法在环境领域的新发展》,载于：《国际法问题专论》,武汉大学出版社2002年版,第269-282页。
③如卫拉曼特雷法官(Judge Gregory Weeramantry)在拦河堰计划案(Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project Case, Hungry v. Slovakia)又称多瑙河水坝案(Danube Dam Case)的个别意见书中指出：我们已进入一个新的国际法时代,国际法不仅促进单个国家的利益,,更应超越区域性利益,着眼于更大的福祉。基此,当面对的问题非当事方之间义务时,以个体的公平和程序的合法为基础的规则可能是不充分的,故面对超越诉讼国之个别权义,国际法的视野应实行对一切而制订超越纯为当事人之间诉讼的程序规则。见：I.C.J. No.92 Judgment,1997, Martin Dixon & Robert McCorquodale. Cases & Materials on International Law, (4th ed.), (New York:Oxford University Press,2003) p.465.
①[英]詹宁斯、瓦兹修订,王铁崖等译,奥本海国际法(第九版),中国大百科全书出版社1995年版,第4页。
②王曦：《国际法在环境领域的新发展》,载于：《国际法问题专论》,武汉大学出版社2002年版,第285,288页。
③ Maurizo Ragazzi, The Concept of International Obligation Erga Omnes, (Oxford:Clarendon Press,1997) p.183.
④王秀梅：《国家对国际社会整体的义务》,法律出版社2009年版,第117-143页。
⑤ United States-Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, (DS21/R-39S/155), para.3.32。Available at: www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/gattpanels/tunadolphinl.pdf, (visited on 2009/7/9).
① Alexandre Kiss, The Implications of Global Change for the International Legal System, in Edith Brown Weiss (ed.), Environmental Change and International Law:New Challenges and Dimensions (Tokyo:United Nations University Press,1992) p.331.
①争端解决机构的用语有international court、international tribunal 或 international judicial body,这些机构都具有共同特性：必须以国际条约所设立,以国际法作为判断的法律依据及具备一定的程序法则,且最终的判定具有法律的拘束力,简言之,具有定争止纷的实质功能的国际司法组织。Cesare P. R. Romano, The Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies:The Pieces of the Puzzles,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L.& POL.,697, 709 (1999); Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties,14 EJIL.1,1,3-9(2003)；黄异：《国际法》,(台湾)国立编译馆1996年版,第192页。
② Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other Treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1081,1111 (2001), L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal,2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,9 (2005)
③相关讨论众多,如：Jagdish Bhagwati & Robert E. Hudec (eds), Fair Trade and Harmonization:Prerequisites for Free Trade? (Cambridge:The MIT Press,1996), pp.57-174, Richard H. Steinberg, Trade-Environment Negotiations in the EU, NAFTA, and WTO:Regional Trajectories of Rule Development,91 Am. J. Int'l L.231, 236-44 (1997); Thomas J. Schoenbaum, International Trade and Protection of the Environment:The Continuing Search for Reconciliation,91 Am. J. Int'l L.268,269,273-80 & passim (1997); John H. Jackson, World Trade Rules and Environmental Policies:Congruence or Conflict,49 Wash.& Lee L. Rev.1227,1239-42 (1992); Cynthia M. Maas, Should the WTO Expand GATTArticle ⅩⅩ:An Analysis of United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,5 Minn. J. Global Trade 415,426-27 (1996); Chris Wold, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GATT:Conflict and Resolution?,26 Envtl. L.841,854-61 (1996); Charles R. Fletcher, Greening World Trade:Reconciling GATT and Multilateral Environmental Agreements Within the Existing World Trade Regime,5 J. Transnat'l L.& Pol'y 341,352-57 (1996); Kazumochi Kometani, Trade and Environment:How Should WTO Panels Review Environmental Regulations Under GATT Articles III and XX?,16 Nw. J. Int'l L.& Bus.441,466-76 (1996); Paul J. Yechout, In the Wake of Tuna II:New Possibilities for GATT-Compliant Environmental Standards,5 Minn. J. Global Trade 247,255-57,264-68 (1996); Shannon Hudnall, Towards a Greener International Trade System:Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the World Trade Organization,29 Colum. J. L.& Soc. Probs.175,186-91 (1996); Diana Hurwitz, Fishing for Compromises Through NAFTA and Environmental Dispute Settlement:The Tuna-Dolphin Controversy,35 Nat. Resources J.501, 508 (1995); Winfried Lang, Is the Protection of the Environment a Challenge to the International Trading System?, 7 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.463,472 (1995); Ilona Cheyne, Environmental Unilateralism and the WTO/GATT System,24 Ga. J. Int'l & Comp. L.433,451-63 (1995); Douglas J. Caldwell, International Environmental Agreements and the GATT:An Analysis of the Potential Conflict and the Role of a GATT "Waiver" Resolution,18 Md. J. Int'l L.& Trade 173,185-87 (1994); Steve Charnovitz, Environmental Trade Sanctions and the GATT:An Analysis of the Pelly Amendment on Foreign Environmental Practices,9 Am. U. J. Int'l L.& Pol'y 751,791-96 (1994); Mathew Hunter Hurlock, The GATT, U.S. Law and the Environments Proposal to Amend the GATT in Light of the Tuna/Dolphin Decision,92 Colum. L. Rev.2098,2106-10 (1992); Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Free International Trade and Protection of the Environment; Irreconcilable Conflict?,86 Am. J. Int'l L.700,710-17 (1992); Christopher D. Stone, Too Many Fishing Boats, Too Few Fish:Can Trade Laws Trim Subsidies and Restore the Balance in Global Fisheries?,24 Ecology L.Q.505 (1997).
① Chile-Measures affecting the Transit and Importing ofSwordfish, WT/DS193. available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/dsl93_e.htm, (visited on 2010/10/22).
②此协定乃智利哥伦比亚厄瓜多秘鲁于2004年8月签署,全文参见：http://www.glin.gov/view.action?glinID=150573 (visited on 2010/10/22)
③ Rosemary Gail Rayfuse, Non-flag State Enforcement in High Seas Fisheries, (Boston:Martius Nijhoff,2004) pp.320-322; Gustavo Capdevila, Chile and EU Caught in Dispute over Swordfish, available at: http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/sword.htm, (visited on 2010/10/22).
①参见:Trade and Environment in the WTO, WT/CTE/1; Julio Garcia Burgues & Mikel Insausti Muguruza, Trade and the Environment in the WTO:The European Community's Participation in the Committee on Trade and Environment,6 Rev. of EUR. C'MTY.& INTL ENVTL. L.163,163 (1997).
②曾有学者指出：欧共体所援引的GATT第5条规定从未适用于渔船或港口准入问题,进入港口相关问题多由习惯法或双边友好通商航海条约调整之,故值得怀疑在乌拉圭回合谈判时,WTO成员是否都同意开放他们的港口,所以欧共体有扩大解释GATT第5条之嫌,可能之用意在于通过贸易体制这道后门,改变关于港口准入的国际法规范。参见：Andrew Serdy, See You in Port:Australia New Zealand as Third Parties in the Dispute between Chile and the European Commumity over Chile's Denial Port Access to Spanish Vessels Fishing for Swordflsh on the High Sea, available at: http://www.mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/issues/archive/2002(1)/04Serdy.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/19).
③ John Shamsey, ITLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EU Swordfish Dispute,12 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Probs.513,524 (2002).
④ Commission Decision of 5 April 2000 under the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No.3286/94 concerning the Chilean prohibition on unloading of swordfish catches in Chilean ports, para.7,15,18,23,2000/296/EC, available at:http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2000/1096/109620000418en00670069.pdf (visited on 2010/10/22).
①类似案件还有里海石油争议,参见：Frarz Sanei, The Caspian Sea Legal Regime, Pipeline Diplomacy, and the Prospects for Iran's Isolation from the Oil and Gas Frenzy:Reconciling Tehran's Legal Options with its Geopolitical Realities,34 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, (2001),available at: http://www.articlearchives.com/trade-development/international-trade-export/974180-1.html, (last visited on 2008/10/26).
② Case Concerning the Conservation and Sustainable Exploitation of Swordfish Stocks in the South -Eastern Pacific Ocean, (Chile/European community) p.6,20 December 2000, available at: http://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html (visited on 2010/10/24).
① Chile-Measures Affecting the Transit and Importation ofSwordfish, WT/DS193/4, G/L/367/Add.l,3 June 2010. available at:http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/july/tradoc 146325.pdf, (visited on 2010/10/24)
②参见：ITLOS/Press 141,17 December 2009.
③ Martti Koskenniemi, Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, Report of the Study of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/L.682,13 April 2006, p.244-245.
④ Bernard H. Oxman, Complementary Agreements and Compulsory Jurisdiction,95 AJIL.,277,277,285-7 (2001).
① Available at:http://www.pict-pcti.org/publications/synoptic chart/synoptic chart2.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/13)
② Matthew Craven, Legal Differentiation and the Concept of Human Rights Treaty in International Law,11 EJIL 3, 489,490 (2000).
③ Judge Shahabuddeen, Implications of the Proliferation of International Adjudicatory Bodies for Dispute Resolution,9 ASIL Bulletin 5,(1995); Gerhard Hafher, Risks Ensuring from Fragmentation of International Law, Report of the ILC for 2000 52nd session, GA. Off. Records of 55th session Supplement No.10 (A/55/10).
④ Joost Pauwelyn, Fragmentation of International Law, available at: http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/pauwelyn/pdf/fragmentation of international law.pdf, (visited on:2008/11/12).
⑤国际私法学者认为同一案件重复系属之情况可以当事人之地位分为重复诉讼(repetitive suit)与对抗诉讼。重复诉讼是指原告基于同一或相近事实在有管辖权的不同国家对于同一被告提起相同的诉讼。对抗诉讼是指先诉讼之被告基于同一案件事实在有管辖权的不同国家另行起诉。本文系以本案当事人之地位相互易位而引用。Allan D. Vestal, Repetitive Litigation,45 Iowa L. Rev.525,525 (1960),徐卉,国际民商事平行诉讼研究,载陈光中、江伟主编：《诉讼法论丛》(第1卷),法律出版社1997年,第345-346页,[英]莫里斯：《法律冲突法》,李东来等译,中国对外翻译出版公司1990年版,第95页。
① Joost Pauwelyn, Conflicts of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to Other Riles of International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003) p.136; Rosemary Gail Rayfuse, Non-flag State Enforcement in High Seas Fisheries (Boston:Martius Nijhoff,2004) pp.320-322; Vaughan Lowe, Overlapping Jurisdiction in International Tribunal,20 Australian Yearbook of International Law,4,48 (2000); Benedict Kingsbury, Is the Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals a Systemic Problem?,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L. & POL.,679,681 (1999), Jonathan I. Charney, The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of International Courts and Tribunals,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L.& POL.,697,701 (1999); John Shamsey, LTLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EU Swordflsh Dispute,12 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Probs.513,533-534 (2002); Andrew Serdy, See You in Port: A ustralia New Zealand as Third Parties in the Dispute between Chile and the European Commumity over Chile's Denial Port Access to Spanish Vessels Fishing for Swordfish on the High Sea, available at: http://www.mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/issues/archive/2002(1)/04Serdy.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/19); 施文真:《由智利—剑鱼案论环保贸易措施所引发之争端：管辖权冲突之探讨》,(台湾)《政大法学评论》,第86期,2005年,第266-267页,唐旗：《从箭鱼争端看贸易与环境之争新动向》,武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007年第1期。
② Jonathan I. Charney, The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of the International Courts and Tribunal,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L.& POL.,697,698,793, (1999), Tomer Broude, Fragmentation(s) of International Law:On Normative Integration as Authority Allocation, available at: http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/ilrsymposium/2008sym/broude_normative_integ_paper.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/12), Joost Pauwelyn, Fragmentation of International Law, available at: http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/pauwelyn/pdf/fragmentation_of_international_law.pdf , (visited on 2008/11/12)
① Philip Bender, Trade Restrictions for Antarctic Conservation Under the Free Trade Principles of the WTO System,14 SE. ENVTL. L.J.,163,219 (2006).
② Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law(Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003) pp.6,135,165f,176f; Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law? 37 Journal of World Trade 6,1027 (2003); Gabrielle Marceau and Anastasios Tomazos, Comment on Joost Pauwelyn's Paper: How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law?, in Stefan Griller (ed), At the Crossroads:The World Trading System and the Doha Round (Austria:Springer-Verlag Wien,2008)p.57; G Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions, The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1083-1086 (2001); Lorand Bartels, Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings,35 Journal of World Trade 3, p.502f. Wilfred Jenks, The Conflict of Law-Making Treaties,30 BYBIL,401,426 (1953), Markus Krajewski, The Dispute Settlement "Chill Factor" and Conflicts of Jurisdiction-Dispute Settlement in MEAs and in the WTO, in Liane Schalatek, Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, Facets of a Complex Relationship, (Washington:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) p.95.
③ Erich Vranes, Comment on Joost Pauwelyn's Paper:How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law?, in Stefan Griller(ed), At the Crossroads:The World Trading System and the Doha Round(Austria:Springer-Verlag Wien,2008) p.87.
④ Guatemala-Anti-Dumping Investigation Regarding Portland Cement from Mexico, (WT/DS60/R) Indonesia-Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry. (WT/DS54/R, WT/DS55/R, WT/DS59/R and WT/DS64/R).
⑤ Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud and Gabrielle Marceau, The Relationship between the Dispute-Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO,11 Reciel 3,278 (2002).
① A. O. Adede, The System for Settlement of Disputes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (Dordrecht:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1987) pp.15-16. B. H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea:The Ninth Session,75 AJIL,211,231-233 (1981).
② WTODOC. WT/DS 152/R,p.313 (1999) at, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/wtds152r.doc, (last visited on 2008/12/26).
③ Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge Univerity Press,2003) p.176.
④ TN/TE/W39, (Mar.24,2004)本说法的立论依据是将UNCLOS当作最广义的MEA；相同意见参见：WTO Ministerial Conference, Singapore, Report of the WTO Committee on Trade and Environment,, WT/CTE/1 (Nov. 12,1996), p.178; Submission by New Zealand to the Committee on Trade and Environment, The Relationship Between the Provisions of the Multilateral Trading System and Trade Measures for Environmental Purposes, Including Those Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), pp.20,73,74,80,89-97 WT/CTE/W/20 (Feb.15,1996), Joanne Scott, International Trade and Environmental Governance:Relating Rules (and Standards) in the EU and the WTO,15 EUR. J. INTL L.,307,338-339 (2004).
① TN/TE/W41, (June 18,2004).
② John Shamsey, ITLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EUSwordflsh Dispute,12 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Probs.513,533-534 (2002).
③关于自足制度的定义与内涵目前并未有定论,本文认为是条约的适用与解释,原则上不应被其它领域条约所补充,除非该领域的条约与相关机制出现空白时,方例外允许引用国际法原则将其它条约引入。精要介绍可参见：《国际法不成体系：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难》,联合国国际法委员会第五十七届会议工作报告,2005,陈喜峰：《国际法自足制度之研究》,载于：《政法论坛》,27卷2期,2009年3月,第58-67页; Bruno Simma, Self-contained Regimes,16 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,111-121 (1985), Bruno Simma and Dirk Pulkowski, Of Planets and the Universe:Self-contained Regimes in International Law, 17 EJIL,483-529 (2006). & Sons,1992)pp.253-257, Judith M. Dean, Trade and Environment:A Survey of the Literature(N.Y.: The World Bank,1992) p.3-5:洪德钦：《生物科技在WTO之研究课题》,载于：《法律哲理与制度,国际私法：马汉宝教授八秩华诞祝寿论文集》,(台湾)元照出版社2005年版,第298-299页。
① John H. Jackson, The World Trading System:Law and Policies of International Economics Relationship, (Cambridge:MIT Press,1989)10-15; John H. Jackson, Restructuring the GATTSystem, (London:Royal Institute of International Affairs,1990) pp.8-14.
②如经济实力欠佳的国家为了提升GNP与GDP,无节制的开采与捕捞天然资源出售给其它国家,虽然计算GNP时,可将这类人力产出转计为生产成本,故大量的开矿,捕鱼,伐木活动不会影响国家资产的损失,但这种假设中的开采成本有别于产品折旧费用,并不是所谓真正贸易成本,这种零成本的开发思考逻辑,不代表自然资源可以无止尽的运用。参见：Robert Repetto et al, Wasting Assets:Natural Resources in the National Income Account, (Washington, DC:World Resources Institute,1989) p.2, Herman E. Daly, Problems with Free Trade:Neoclassical and Steady-State Perspectives, in Durwood Zaelke et al. (eds), Trade and the Environment:Law, Economics, and Policy (St. Louis:Island Press,1993) pp.147-57.
③ WTO Secretariat, Trade and Environment at the WTO, (Apr.2004), available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratope/envire/envirwto2004e.pdf; WTO, Early Years:Emerging Environment Debate in GATT/WTO, http://www.wto.org/english/tratope/envire/histle.htm (last visited Mar.25,2009).
① John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.,1,36-37 (2006).
② WTO Report of the Panel, United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,35 I.L.M. 274, (Jan.29,1996).
③ Lorand Bartels, Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings,35 Journal of World Trade 3,499,502 (2001)
④ Appellate Body Report, E.C.-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/ R, WT/DS48/AB/R, adopted 13 February 1998; Appellate Body Report, United States2Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/R, adopted January 1996, (Adopted as Modified by the Appellate Body 20 May 1996); Panel Report, Korea-Measures government Procurement, WT/DS163/R, adopted June 2000, para.7.
⑤ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals, (Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003), pp.185-186.
①学者认为汽油标准案判决的para.6.15与7.1.呈现尽管依据其公约所制定之国内限制性规范具有保护环境的必要性,但专家组任务是确保GATT/WTO之目标,故对国内外厂商产生差别待遇之美国的清洁空气法(CAA)被宣告构成歧视。这样的结果反而是促成许多高污染的产品假借自由贸易的机制到处流窜。参见：Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.189,201-203 (1988).
② Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law?, Questions of Jurisdiction and Merits,37 Journal of World Trade 6, p.1005 (2003).
③ Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud and Gabrielle Marceau, The Relationship between the Dispute-Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO, in Liane Schalatek (ed), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, Facets of a Complex Relationship, (Washington:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) p.75.
① Michael Lennard, The World Trade Organization and Disputes Involving Multilateral Environmental Agreements,5 Eur. Envtl. L. Rev.306,310 (1996). Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.189, 203-205 (1988).
② Shabtai Rosenne, Breach of Treaty (Cambridge:Grotius Publications,1985), pp.85-86
③ Sabrina Shaw, Trade and Environment:The Post-Singapore WTO Agenda,6 Rev. Eur. Community & Int'l Envtl. L.105-106,(1997).
④ Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?,7 Minn. J. Global Trade 287,296-297 (1998) Gregory C. Shaffer, The World Trade Organization Under Challenge: Democracy and the Law and Politics of the WTO's Treatment of Trade and Environment Matters,25 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV.1,17 (2001).
⑤ Richard J. McLaughlin, Settling Trade-Related Disputes Over the Protection of Marine Living Resources: UNCLOS or the WTO?,10 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.29,47-51,81 (1997), Marcos Orellana, The EU and Chile Suspend the Swordfish Case Proceedings at the WTO and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ASIL INSIGHTS (Feb.2001).
①§§207～212 of UNCLOS.此即为欧盟针对《多哈宣言》第31.1段提出全球事务管理架构的法律基础。
②§§197、237 of UNCLOS.
③§§118、119Ⅰ(a)、Ⅱ of UNCLOS.
① Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?,7 Minn. J. Global Trade 287,302-305 (1998).
① E.C.-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R, adopted 13 February 1998, United States2Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/R, adopted January 1996, (Adopted as Modified by the Appellate Body 20 May 1996); Korea-Measures government Procurement, WT/DS163/R, adopted June 2000, para.7.
② J.G. Starke, Introduction of International Law (9th ed), (Singapore:Butterworths,1989), pp.22,34,82;杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第227页。
① George Schwarzenberger, International Law, (NY:Stevens and Sons Ltd,1943) p.378, Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals, (Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003)p.23.
② Allan R. Stein, Forum Non Conveniens and the Redundancy of Court-Access Doctrine,133 U. Pa. L. Rev.781, 783 (1985). Gary B. Born, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts (3rd ed.), (N.Y.:Wilmer Kluwer,1996).pp.154-57289-318; Eric S. Sherby, Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal:The Quieter Side of Section 1782 Discovery,24 (2) The International Litigation Quarterly,2,3 (2008).
③ §3 (2) of U. S. Constitutions.
④ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals (N. Y.:Oxford,2003) pp. 130-134,174
⑤整理自：刘铁铮：《论国际管辖权冲突之防止》,载于：《国际私法论丛》,(台湾)政治大学1986年版,第258页; J. J. Fawcett, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law,(New York:Oxford University Press, 1995)pp.5-6,10; Willendson v Forsoket 29 Fed Cas 1283 (DC Pa 1801) (No 17,682), Gulf Oil v. Gilbert,330 U.S. 501,508 (1947); R. Maganlal & Co.,942 F.2d 164,167 (2nd Cir.1991); WIWA v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 226 F.3d 88,101 (2d Cir.2000).
①刘铁铮：《论国际管辖权冲突之防止》,载于：《国际私法论从》,(台湾)政治大学1986年版,第258页；Joel R. Paul, Comity in International Law,32 Harvard International Law Journal,1 (1999), Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harvard International Law Journal,191 (2003), Allan R. Stein, Forum Non Conveniens and the Redundancy of Court-Access Doctrine,133 U. Pa. L. Rev.781,783 (1985).
②施文真：《由智利—剑鱼案论环保贸易措施所引发之争端：管辖权冲突之探讨》,(台湾)《政大法学评论》,第86期,2005年10月,第99页。
③ Gary B. Born, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (3rd ed), (N.Y.:Wilmer Kluwer,1996) pp. 289-318.
④ Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.189,226-227 (1998)
⑤ The Lotus Case, available at:http://www.worldcourts.com/pcij/eng/decisions/1927.09.07_lotus/, (visited on 2009/1/9).
⑥ Summaries of Advisory Opinions and Orders of Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/93/14167.pdf, (visited on 2009/1/9).
① Available at:http://treaties.un.org/untc//Pages//doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20320/volume-320-I-4646-English.pdf (visited on 2010/10/27).
② Available at: http://treaties.un.org/untc//Pages//doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%2030/volume-30-I-449-English.pdf (visited on 2010/10/27).
③ Annex to GA Res.2625 (XXV).
④关于本宣言的影响,可参见埃曼努埃尔·鲁库纳斯的评释,available at：：http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/pdf/ha/mdpsid/mdpsid_c.pdf (visited on 2009/1/9).
⑤ Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties,14 EJIL I, 1,10-11(2003).
⑥准则为：当另一个法庭对于同一事件亦有管辖权；且另一法庭的管辖权来自明示的条款或暗示的条款；当其中一个当事人不愿受到第一个法庭管辖之情形。参见：Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) pp.233.
⑦此为阿根廷、巴西、巴拉圭、乌拉圭所签署之协议,旨在建立南美共同市场。原条文为：Disputes falling within the scope of application of this Protocol that may also be referred to the dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organisation or other preferential trade systems that the Mercosur State Parties may have entered into, may be referred to one forum or the other, as decided by the requesting party. Provided, however, that the parties to the dispute may jointly agree on a forum. Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/unts/144078_158780/5/7/13152.pdf (visited on 2010/10/29)
① Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions:The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and Other Treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1081,1112 (2001).
② Eric S. Sherby, Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal:The Quiter side of Section 1782 Discovery,24 The International Litigation Quarterly 2,1,4,5.7 (2008), Hilton v. Guyot,159 U.S.113,163-64 (1895); Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa,482 U.S.522 (1987), available at:http://supreme.justia.com/us/482/522/case.html, (visited on 2009/1/10); Laker Airways Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines, a Foreign Corporationklm, Royal Dutch Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, Appellant.laker Airways Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, Appellant,klm, Royal Dutch Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, available at:http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/731/909/30194/, (visited on 2009/1/10); Accord Mannington Mills Inc v. Congoleum Corp,595 F.2d 1287 (3rd Cir.) (1979).
③ Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO,19 EJIL 3,571,584 (2008).
④ Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An old Principles, a new age,47 McGill Law Journal,389,389 (2002).
⑤ § 26 of VLTC, § 297 of LOSC.
⑥ Corfu Channel Case; Fisheries Case (UK/Norway).
⑦ Bin Cheng, General Principles ofLaw as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (N.Y.:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.121,123.
⑧ Bin Cheng, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals (N. Y.:Oxford University Press, 2003) pp.24,62.
① Southern Bluefin Tuna Case,39 ILM 1359, p.1391 (2000).
② Joel R. Paul, Comity in International Law,32 Harv. Int'l L.J.1,3-4,74-77 (1991).
③ Ian Brownlie, Principles of International Law, (N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) p.20, J. G. Starke, The Introduction of International Law(9th ed),(Singapore:Butterworths,1989), p.20, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Court to Court,92 AJIL,708,708 (1998), Alison Jones & Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases and Materials, (NY:Oxford,2001) p.1236.
④ Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?,7 Minn. J. Global Trade 287,322-323 (1998), Hilton v. Guyot,159 U.S.113,163-64 (1895).
① Hartford Fire Ins Co. v. California,509 U.S.764,817 (1993); Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J.191,204-209 (2003).
② Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J.191,210 (2003).
③罗昌发：《贸易与竞争之法律互动》,(台湾)月旦出版社1994年版,第86页。
④ Available at:http://curia.europa.eu/common/recdoc/convention/en/artidx/b-ii-8.htm (visited on 2009/1/10).
⑤ Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.254.
⑥ Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO,19 EJIL 3,571,584 (2008).
⑦参见：Order No.3, p.9, para.28,24 June 2003.
① Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law, 37 Journal of World Trade 6,1011-1012 (2003).
②杨永红：《从MOX Plant案析国际法庭管辖权之冲突》,《法学家》,2009年3期,第107-114页Paul James, Cardwell Duncan French, Who Decides? The ECJ's Judgment on Jurisdiction in the MOX Plant Dispute,19 Journal of Environmental Law,1,121,126 (2007) available at: http://jel.oxfordjoumals.org/content/19/1/121.full.pdf+html (visited on 2010/10/29).
③国内法建立审级制度目的之一为赋予当事人诉讼救济机会,另一则是处理管辖冲突,除以受理先后处理积极管辖冲突之基本原则外,当彼此争执不下时,例外由上级法院决定管辖法院。
④国内法的观点一事不再理原则是程序法的概念,与欧陆法传统上的ne bis in idem原则以及英美法的Double Jeopardy原则,即禁止双重危险原则相当,指人民同一违法行为,禁止国家为重复之刑事追诉与审判,主旨在维护法安定性,保障任何经判决有罪或无罪开释确定者,无庸就同一行为再受一次刑事诉究,而遭受更不利之后果。如美国宪法第一修正案之第5条,所谓同一案件是：检视附带请求与原请求之主要事实是否具有共同核心关系(common nucleus of operative fact),若答案为肯定则为同一案件available at: http://www.judicial.gov.tw/db/db04/db04-03.asp, (visited on 2008/12/31).
① §59 of I. C. J. Statute, Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.121,340,343, The Spanish-United States Claims Commission(1871), Chorzow Factory Ccase, PCIJ, Series A.13 at 23-7,(1927), Societe commericale de Belgique Case (1929), Trail Smelter Arbitral Tribunal (1935), Final Award (1941)。通说认为lis alibi pendens与 res judiacta二者之差异在于res judiacta指有管辖权的司法组织对一诉已经作出了生效的法律裁判后,当事人不得就案件所涉及之同一事实,同一诉讼标的再行起诉,lis alibi pendens禁止案件未判决之前再诉,resjudiacta必须待判决确定后才有判断的对象,两者之差异在于判断的时点不同,二者不可能同时存在。Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals, (N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) p.212.
②此原则在1968年《布鲁塞尔民商事案件管辖权和判决执行公约》以受理在先决定管辖原则建立基本架构以确定缔约国对特定争议的管辖权(§21 of Brussels Convention,1968.),且规定相同当事人间就同一诉因在不同缔约国法院起诉时,首先受诉的法院以外的其它法院应主动放弃管辖权,让首先受诉的法院审理。如果在两个以上的缔约国提出诉讼,除首先受理诉讼的法院外,所有其它法院必须拒绝管辖并中止诉讼。如果相关的几个诉讼在不同缔约国法院提起,除了首先受理诉讼的法院,其它法院应均中止各自的诉讼(§22of Brussels Convention,1968.),即使是对于几个法院都有专属管辖权的诉讼,首先受理诉讼法院以外的法院也应放弃管辖权,让首先受理诉讼的法院审理(§ 23 of Brussels Convention,1968.)1988年欧洲共同体国家与欧洲自由贸易联盟国家签订的《民商事案件管辖权和判决执行公约》(罗加诺公约),亦采用了布鲁塞尔公约的做法。
③ Ali Sadat-Akhavi, Methods of Resolving Conflicts between Treaties, (Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,2003) p.237.
①张东扬：《美国法院受理外国专利纷争之可能性-以Voda v.s. Cordis案为核心》,advailable at：http://www.saint-island.com.tw/report/data/IPR_200704.htm. (visited on 2008/12/15)
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (N. Y.:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.340-347.
③ Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (N. Y.:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.337,346.
④ United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties,2nd Session, Vienna,9 April～22 May,1969, Official Records, p.253, para.41.
⑤ Chris Wold, Legal Assessment of Compatibility Issues between the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPA W) to the Cartagena Convention and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), available at: http://legacy.lclark.edu/org/ielp/objects/opinion_spaw.pdf (visited on 2010/10/28)
① Chris Wold, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GA TT:Conflict and Resolution?,26 Environmental Law,841,912-913(1996).
② Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.254.
③ Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.113.
④ Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.253
①廖诗评：《条约冲突基础问题研究》,法律出版社2008年版,第47页。
② Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.253
① L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal, 2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,15 (2005).
② Opinion of Judge Treves of The MOX Plant Case (Ireland v. United Kingdom),2001.41 ILM 430-1.
③ Camouco Case, available at:http://www.itlos.org/case_documents/2001/document_en_129.pdf. (visited on: 2009/3/17)。Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) pp.242.
④ Yuval Shany, The Competing jurisdictions of international courts and tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press, 2003) pp.213
① L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal, 2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,17 (2005)
② Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) pp.213-214,在职业运动的仲裁案也可见此原则的利用,available at: http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/106176_8523.pdf (visited on:2009/3/16)
③ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford,2003) pp.23, 212,213.
① Vaughan Lowe, Res Judicata and the Rule of International Arbitration,8 African Journal of International Law, 14 (1996).
② Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of norms and conflicts of jurisdictions:the relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1081,1113 (2001).
③ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y:Oxford,2003) pp.240, 241.
④ George Schwarzenberger, International Law, (London:Stevens & Sons, Ltd.,1943) p.378, Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford,2003) p.23.
⑤ L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal, 2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,12,17 (2005).
① Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2000) p.183.
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.344,345-346.
① Raj Bhala, Trade, Development and Social Justice (Durham:Carolina Academic Press.2003) p.15.
② WT/CTE/M/7,22 March 1996, WT/CTE/M/9,11 June 1996,参见：徐淑萍：《贸易与环境的法律问题研究》,武汉大学出版社2002年版,第93页；李爱年,韩广：《人类社会可持续发展与国际环境法》,法律出版社2005年版,第213页。本文将不讨论是否应修正GATT/WTO协议,修订确能釜底抽薪,但过程旷日废时,若能利用彼此合作,出现判决矛盾的风险将大为降低。
③ Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO,19 EJIL.3,571,583 (2008); Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J., 191,193,206-210 (2003).
④ Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J.,191,194-195 (2003).
⑤ Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Justice as Conflict Resolution:Proliferation, Fragmentation and Decentralization of Dispute Settlement in International Trade, (Italy:European University Institute,2004) p.2. available at http://cadmus.eui.eu/retrieve/1987/law04-10.pdf (visited on 2010/08/23)
① Firew Kebede Tiba, What Caused the Multiplicity of International Courts and Tribunals?,10 GONZ. J. INT'L L. 202,202 (2006).
② Christine Chinkin, Alternative Dispute Resolution under International Law, in Malcolm D. Evans (ed), Remedies in International Law:The Institutional Dilemma (Oxford:Hart,1998)pp.123,124-28, Maglosia A. Fitzmaurice, International Protection of the Environment,293 RECUEIL DES COURS,293,336 (2001); Ruidiger Wolfrum, Means of Ensuring Compliance with and Enforcement of International Environmental Law,272 RECUEIL DES COURS 25 (1998).
③ Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,69 (2007-2008).
④ Prosecutor v. Tadic, Case No. IT-94-1-I, Decision on Defense Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, para.11 (Oct.2,1995). Ruti Teitel & Robert Howse, Cross-Judging:Tribunalization in a Fragmented but Interconnected Global Order,41 International Law and Politics 959,962 (2009).
①[美]戈德史密斯,波斯纳,龚宇译,国际法的局限性,法律出版社2010年版,第33、149-150页。
②参见：Agreement on Cooperation and Relationship between the United Nations and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Art.4.1, available at:http://www.un.org/depts/los/press/itlos/itlos-16.htm. (visited at: 2009/6/8).
③参见：Article 10 paragraph 1 of UN Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer or Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction of 18 Sept.1997,36 ILM,1507 (1997).
① Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties,14 EJIL,1,1,9 (2003)
②其它如国际捕鲸委员会决议要求各会员秉持诚信以公正、合理与诚实之行为进行捕鲸。
③ John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, (Boston:Harvard University Press,1971) p.176.
④ Joost Pauwelyn, WTO Compassion or Superiority Complex? What to Make of the WTO Waiver for "Conflict Diamonds",24 Mich. J. Int'l L.1177,1177 (2003).
⑤ Tomer Brouder, Principles of Normative Integration and the Allocation of International Authority:The WTO, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the Rio Declaration,6 Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev.173,181 (2008).
⑥ ICJ, Advisory Opinions on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,35 ILM (1996) 1345, paras,99-100.
⑦ Lawrence R. Helfer, Regime Shifting:The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking,29 Yale J. Int'l L.26 passim (2004).
① Roberto V. Fiorentino, Luis Verdeja & Christelle Toqueboeuf, The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements:2006 Update, WTO Discussion Paper No.12 at 1 (2007), available at:http://www.wto.org/english/res e/booksp e/discussion papers12a e.pdf (visited at:2009/6/8).
②基于下列原则,以全球事务管理架构思考WTO与MEAs间之关系：一、多边环境协议在解决全球环境问题上具有高度的重要性及必要性；二、多边环境政策的制定应在MEAs而非WTO中制定,以符合各协议所欲达成之目标及专业性；三、为了提升贸易与环境政策之相互支持,国际间各组织应进行充分的信息交流与紧密合作；四、WTO与MEAs在国际具有相同之地位,必须寻求相互的承认及彼此之合作；五、WTO之相关规范不应解释为其它国际组织定力之国际法之例外,当然也包含MEA。参见：’TN/TE/W39, (24 March 2004).
① TN/TE/W66,68, WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.3, (16 February 2005)
②参见：§§4(5)、24o f SCM; TN/RL/GEN/134,Annex §4; EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R,16 January 1998, Part XI, p.68.
③ Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, at 31, available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683 (visited on:2010/3/5); UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP/WWF,2007), p.38.
① FAO, FAO-CITES Agreement Promotes Sustainable Fish Trade:Collaborative Relationship Formalized in MOU, FAO Newsroom, release dated 3 October 2006, available at: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000410/index.html). (visited on 2010/3/22); UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP/WWF,2007), p.39.
① Zhu Lanye, The Effects of the WTO Dispute Settlement Panel and Appellate Body Reports:Is the Dispute Settlement Body Resolving Specific Disputes Only or Making Precedent at the Same Time?,17 Temple International and Comparative Law Journal,1,38 (2003)
② Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,54-57(2007-2008); Donald M. McRae, GATT Article XX and the WTO Appellate Body, in Marco Brockers, Reinhard Quick (ed.), New Directions in International Economic Law, Essays in Honor of John Jackson, (N.Y.:Kluwer Law International,2000) pp.227-230.
③ Raj Bhala, The Myth about Stare Decisis and International Trade Law (Part One of a Trilogy),14 Am. U. INT'L L. REV.845,937-38 (1998-1999); Raj Bhala, The Power of the Past:Towards De Jure Stare Decisis in WTO Adjudication (Part Three of a Trilogy),33 GEO. WASH. INT'L L. REV.873,873-78 (2001).
④ Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,72-75 (2007-2008).
⑤ Carrie Wofford, A Greener Future at the WTO:The Refinement of WTO Jurisprudence on Environmental Exceptions to GATT,24 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV.563,579 (2000).
① Gabrielle Marceau, A Call for Coherence in International Law:Praises for the Prohibition Against "Clinical Isolation" in the WTO Dispute Settlement,33 Journal World Trade,87,107-109 (1999); Thomas J. Schoenbaum, The Decision in the Shrimp-Turtle Case,9 Y.B. INTL ENVTL. L.36,37-38 (1998).; E.C. Biotech Products case, paras.7.93-7.94. available at:http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/ec-biotech(panel).pdf (visited on 2010/10/28).
① In the European Communities' opinion "[t]he fact that trade measures MEAs may contain were negotiated and agreed by consensus in a multilateral context should be a guarantee against discriminatory action and their use for protectionist purposes."参见:Submission by the European Community to the Committee on Trade and Environment, Resolving the Relationship between WTO Rules and Multilateral Environmental Agreements, p 4, WT/CTE/W/170 (Oct.19,2000).
② Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,89-92 (2007～2008)
③吴峰,李志清：《论GATT94第20条在实践中的新发展及前景分析》,载于：《上海理工大学学报》(社会科学版),第26卷4期,2004年,第63页。
④黄辉：‘《论环境保护的国际化与自由贸易的协调》,载于：《武汉科技大学学报》(社会科学版),2006年1期,第17页。
①即 Center for International Environmental Law, Center for Marine Conservation, Environmental Foundation Ltd, Mangrove Action Project, Philippine Ecological Network and Naccionl de accion 这些民间组织。 ② George C. Umbricht, A'Amicus Suriae Briefs'on Amicus Curiae Briefs at the WTO, Journal of International Economic Law,773,783-787 (2001).
③专家组有权酌情决定接受和审议向其提交的信息和建议,有权决定拒绝信息和建议,无论专家组是否要求。专家组可以提出信息本身的要求,这并不约束专家组接受并审查实际提供的信息。专家组可以变更发现事实和法律解释的程序的权限幅度,不会使专家组淹没于未寻求的信息中。基于这些分析,上诉机构裁定：接受非政府组织提交的未寻求的信息数据并不违反DSU的规定,专家组以此为由拒绝接受这些信息数据是错误的。参见：韩立余编着：《WTO案例及评析》,中国人民大学出版社2001年3月版,第415页。
④ AbestosCase, WT/DS135/R, (18 September 2000), paras.8.12-8.13, available at: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/ec-asbestos(panel).pdf, (visited on 2009/6/1), Report of Appellate Body, WT/DS135/AB/R, paras.55-57, available at: http://www.pravo.hr/images/50005731/AB%20-%20EC%20-asbestos.pdf, (visited on 2009/6/1),有认为石绵案的上诉机构虽然在其裁决报告中推翻了原专家组在法庭之友提出陈述这个问题上的决定,但其未明确言及自己是否也有同样的裁量权。参见：郑富霖：《法庭之友》,available at：http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/do/www/readDoc?document_id=79709 (visited on 2009/6/1)
⑤关于专家组与上诉组对于法庭之友的态度与相关裁决,可参见：杨志凯：《「法庭之友」在WTO争端解决机制中之适用、实践与展望—以相关案例解析为主轴》,(台湾地区)《东吴大学法律学研究所硕士论文》,2003年,第28至30页,第63至66页。
①彭心仪：《论WTO争端解决程序下之「法庭之友」介入问题》,available at: www.tradelaw.nccu.edu. tw/pdf/no/no4/4.pdf (visited on 2009/6/1).
② Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WT/DS138/AB/R, available at:
http://www.uchastings.edu/faculty-administration/faculty/paul/class-website/docs/uksteel3.pdf (visited on 2009/6/1).
①李陈国,廖芳仪：《WTO贸易与环境问题之研究》,载于：《2010产业管理创新研讨会论文集》,2010年,205-208页。
[1]Juraj Andrassy, International Law and the Resources of the Sea, Columbia University Press,1970.
[2]David Joseph Attard, The Exclusive Economic Zone in International Law, Oxford University Press,1987.
[3]Gary P. Anderson and Bradnee Chambers, Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), United Nations University Press,2001.
[4]A.O. Adede, The System for Settlement of Disputes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1987.
[5]Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[6]Seyed Ali Sadat-Akhavi, Methods of Resolving Conflicts between Treaties, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,2003.
[1]Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988.
[2]Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, Oxford University Press, 2003.
[3]R.P. Barston and Pactricia Birnie, The Maritime Dimension, Allen & Unwin, 1980.
[4]Hedley Bull, Hugo Grotius and International Relations, Oxford University Press, 1990.
[5]Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources, Cambridge Press,2002.
[6]William T. Burke, The New International Law of Fisheries:UNCLOS 1982 and beyond, Oxford University Press,1994.
[7]Sali Bache, Marcus Haward, Stephen Dovers, Economic, Trade and Environmental Instruments:Their Impact on Australian Fisheries Policy and Management, Centre for Maritime Policy University of Wollongong,2001.
[8]Patrica W. Birnie, A. Boyle, Basic Documents on International Law and the Environment, Clarendon Press,1995.
[9]Edward B. Barbier, Joanne C. Burgess, Joshua Bishop, Bruce Aylward, The Economics of Tropical Timber, Earthscan Publisher,1994.
[10]Raj Bhala, Trade, Development and Social Justice, Carolina Academic Press. 2003.
[11]Gary B. Born, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (3rd ed.), Wilmer Kluwer Publisher,1996.
[12]Duncan Brack and Kevin Gray, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO, Earthscan,2003.
[13]Michael Byers, Custom, Power and the Power of Rules:International Relations and Customary International Law, Cambridge University Press,1999.
[1]Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, Cambridge University Press,1987.
[2]Bin Cheng, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals, Oxford University Press,2003.
[3]R. R. Churchill and A.V. Lowe, The Law of the Sea, Manchester University Press, 1988.
[1]Antony J. Dolman, Resource, Regime and World Order, Pergamon Press,1981.
[2]David Downes, Brennan Van Dyke, Fisheries Conservation and Trade Rules: Ensuring that Trade Law Promotes Sustainable Fisheries, Center for International Environmental Law and Greenpeace,1998.
[3]Martin Dixon, Robert McCorquodale, Cases & Materials on International Law (4th ed.), Oxford University Press,2003.
[4]Michael Decleris, The L aw of Sustainable Development General Principles, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,2000.
[1]Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law, Oxford University Press,1988.
[1]J. E. S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, Oxford University Press,1982.
[2]Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development, Manchester University Press,2005.
[3]J. J. Fawcett, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law, Oxford University Press,1995.
[1]Hugo Grotius, The Freedom of The Seas, trans, by Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown. Oxford University Press,1972.
[2]Harald Hohmann, Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1994.
[3]Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Transboundary Marine Fisheries Resources, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989.
[4]Ellen Hey, Developments in International Fisheries Law, Kluwer Publisher,1999.
[5]H. Lauterpacht, The Development of International Law by the International Court, Stevens & Sons,1958.
[1]John H. Jackson, The Jurisprudence of GATT and the WTO, Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations, Cambridge University Press,2000.
[2]Erin Bain Jones, Law of Sea, Oceanic Resources,1972.
[3]John H. Jackson, The World Trading System:Law and Policies of International Economics Relationship, The MIT Press,1989.
[4]John H. Jackson, Restructuring the GATT System, Royal Institute of International Affairs,1990.
[5]Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law: Text, Cases and Materials, Oxford,2001.
[1]Alexandre Kiss and Dinah Shelton, International Environment Law, Graham and Trotman,1991.
[2]Barbare Kwiatowska, The 200 Mile Exclusive Economic Zone in the New Law of the Sea, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989.
[3]Natalie S. Klein, Dispute settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Cambridge University Press,2005.
[1]Tim Lang, Collin Hines, The New Protectionism, Eathscan Publications Ltd, 1994.
[2]Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, 2003.
[3]H. Lauterpacht, The Function of Law in the International Community, Archon Books,1966.
[1]Myers McDougal and William T. Burke, The Public Order of the Ocean: A Contemporary International Law of the Sea, Kluwer Publisher,1987.
[2]J. B. Morrell, The Law of the Sea: Historical Analysis of the 1982 Treaty and Its Rejection by the United States, McFarland,1992.
[3]Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, Thomson West,2006.
[4]Bedrich Moldan, Economic Instruments for Sustainable Development, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic,1995.
[1]Lassa Oppenheim, International Law:Treatise (8th ed.)by H. Lauterpacht, McKay, 1955.
[2]D. P. O'connell, International Law of the Sea, Clarendon Press,1984.
[3]J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, Dartmouth,1991.
[1]Peter Bautista Payoyo, Cries of the Sea, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1997.
[2]Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law, Cambridge University Press,2003.
[3]Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Justice as Conflict Resolution:Proliferation, Fragmentation and Decentralization of Dispute Settlement in International Trade, European University Institute,2004.
[1]P. Sreenivasa Rao, The public Order of Ocean Resources, M. I. T. Press,1975.
[2]Rosemary Gail Rayfuse, Non-flag State Enforcement in High Seas Fisheries, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,2004.
[3]Maurizo Ragazzi, The Concept of International Obligation Erga Omnes, Clarendon Press,1997.
[4]David Ricardo, The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Introduction by D. Winch, J. H. Dent & Sons,1992.
[5]Robert C. Repetto, Wasting Assets:Natural Resources in the National Income Account, World Resources Institute,1989.
[6]Shabtai Rosenne, Breach of Treaty, Grotius Publications,1985.
[7]R. G Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization:Compatibility or Conflict? TRAFFIC International,2003.
[8]John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press,1971.
[1]J. G Starke, The Introduction of International Law (9th ed.), Butterworths,1989.
[2]Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals, Oxford University Press,2003.
[3]Philip Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law, Cambridge University Press.2003.
[4]Ramanlal Soni, Control of Marine Pollution in International Law, Juta & Co., 1985.
[5]Brian D. Smith, State Responsibility and the Marine Environment:The Rules of Decision, Oxford University Press,1988.
[6]Robert A. Shinn, The International Politics of Marine Pollution Control, Praeger Publishers,1974.
[7]Rashid Sumaila and Daniel Pauly, Catching More Bait:A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies (2nd version), University of British Colombia.2006.
[8]Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991.
[9]Ian Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty, Manchester University Press,1984.
[10]George Schwarzenberger, International Law, Stevens and Sons Ltd,1943.
[11]George Schwarzenberger, E.D. Brown, A Manual of International Law,6th ed., Professional Books,1976.
[12]Nico Schrijver, Sovereignty Over Natural Resources:Balancing Rights and Duties, Cambridge Press,1997.
[13]Ian Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty, Manchester University Press,1984.
[1]Dire Tladi, Sustainable Development in International Law:An Analysis of Key Enviro-Economic Instruments, Pretoria University Press,2007.
[2]J. S. Thomas, M.A. Meyer, The New Rules of Global Trade:A Guide to the World Trade Organization, Carswell,1997.
[3]R. G Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization: Compatibility or Conflict?, TRAFFIC International,2003.
[1]M. Jon Van Dyke, D. Zaelke, G Hewison, Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century, Island Press,1993.
[2]Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, Cambridge University Press,1989.
[1]Peter Weber, Net Loss:Fish, Jobs, and the Marine Environment, Worldwatch Institute,1994.
[2]Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters:Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix II of CITES, TRAFFIC,2002.
[3]S. F. Walmsley, C. T. Barnes, A. I. Payne, C. A. Howard, Comparative Study of the Impact of Fisheries Partnership Agreements, MRAG, Cambridge Resources Economics & NRI,2007.
[4]Peter Weber, Net Loss:Fish, Jobs, and the Marine Environment, Worldwatch Paper no.120, Table 2, Worldwatch Institute,1994.
[1]Howard Charles Yourow, The National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Dynamics of European Human Rights Jurisprudence, Kluwer Law International, 1996.
[1]Alan Boyle, David Freestone (ed.), International Law and Sustainable Development, Past Achievement and Future Challenges, Oxford University Press, 1999.
[2]Gary P. Anderson, Bradnee Chambers (ed.) Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), United Nations University Press,2001.
[1]Jagdish Bhagwati, Robert E. Hudec (ed.), Fair Trade and Harmonization: Prerequisites for Free Trade?, MIT University Press,1996.
[2]Marco Brockers, Reinhard Quick (ed.), New Directions in International Economic Law, Essays in Honor of John Jackson, Kluwer Law International, 2000.
[1]Robin Clarke (ed.), Note for the Future:An Alternative History of the Past Decade, Thames & Hudson,1975.
[1]Malcolm D. Evans (ed.), Remedies in International Law:The Institutional Dilemma, Hart Publishing,1998.
[1]Stefan Griller (ed.), At the Crossroads:The World Trading System and the Doha Round, Springer-Verlag Wien,2008.
[1]Peter Haas, Robert Keohane and Marc A. Levy (ed.), Institutions for the Earth: Sources of Effective International Environmental Protection, The MIT Press, 1993.
[2]Ellen Hey (ed.), Developments in International Fisheries Law, Kluwer,1999.
[1]Albert W. Koers, Bernard H. Oxman (ed.), The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, The Law of the Sea Institute, University of Hawaii,1983.
[2]Steven J. Kennelly (ed.), By-catch Reduction in the World s Fisheries, Springer, 2007.
[1]Elihu Lauterpacht (ed.), Hersch Lauterpacht, International Law: Collected Papers, Cambridge University Press,2009.
[1]Bedrich Moldan (ed.), Economic Instruments for Sustainable Development, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic,1995.
[1]Myron H. Nordquist and John Norton Moore (ed.), Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Center for Oceans Law and Policy, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2000.
[1]Peter φrebech (ed), The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development, Cambridge University Press.2005.
[1]Bruce Phillips, Trevor Ward, Chet Chaffee (ed.), Eco-labelling in Fisheries: What Is It All About, Blackwell Publishing,2003.
[1]Liane Schalatek (ed.), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, Facets of a Complex Relationship, The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001
[2]Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan (ed.), Sustainable Development Law:Principles, Practice, & Prospects, Oxford University Press, 1999.
[1]Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll and Anja Seibert-Fohr (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, Brill Academic Publish,2007.
[2]Edith Brown Weiss (ed.), Environmental Change and International Law:New Challenges and Dimensions, United Nations University Press,1992.
[1]Durwood Zaelke, Rob Housman and Paul Orbuch (ed.), Trade and the Environment: Law, Economics, and Policy, Island Press,1993.
1. R. P. Arnold, Common Heritage of Mankind as a Legal Concept,9 International Lawyer,1975.
2. Michael Akehurst, Jurisdiction in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L. 1974.
3. Michael Akehurst, Custom As a Source in International Law,47 Brit. YB. Int'l L.,1975.
4. Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,2008.
5. Shawkat Alam, Trade Restrictions Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements:Developmental Implications for Developing Countries, Journal of World Trade 41 (5),2007.
6. Ragnar Arnason, Ocean Fisheries Management:Recent International Developments, Marine Policy, September 1993.
1. Tomer Brouder, Principles of Normative Integration and the Allocation of International Authority:The WTO, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the Rio Declaration,6 Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev.,2008.
2. Raj Bhala, The Myth about Stare Decisis and International Trade Law (Part One of a Trilogy),14 Am. U. INT'L L. REV,1998-1999.
3. Raj Bhala, The Power of the Past: Towards De Jure Stare Decisis in WTO Adjudication (Part Three of a Trilogy),33 GEO. WASH. INT'L L. REV,2001.
4. Wilfred Beckerman, Economic Growth and the Environment:Whose Environment? 22 World Development,1992.
5. Jutta Brunee and Stephan J. Toope, Environmental Security and Freshwater Resource: A Case for International Ecosystem Law,41 Yearbook of International Environmental Law,1995.
6. Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An old Principles, a new age,47 McGill Law Journal,2002.
7. Alan Boyle, The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case:New Law in Old Bottles,8 YBIEL,1997.
8. Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment: An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L.J.51,1997.
9. William T. Burke, The Law of the Sea Convention and conditions of access to Fisheries Subject to National Jurisdiction,63 Or. L.R.,1984.
10. William T. Burke, Implications for Fisheries Management of U.S. Acceptance of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea,89 Am. J. Int'l Law,1995.
11. Eric A. Bilsky, Territory without Boundaries:Colonizing Natural Resource:Conserving Marine Wildlife through World Trade Law,30 Mich. J. Int'l L., 2009.
12. Julio Garcia Burgues & Mikel Insausti Muguruza, Trade and the Environment in the WTO:The European Community's Participation in the Committee on Trade and Environment,6 Rev. of EUR. C'MTY. & INT'L ENVTL. L.,1997.
13. Lorand Bartels, Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings, 35 (3) Journal of World Trade,2001.
14. Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An old Principles, a new age,47 McGill Law Journal,2002.
15. Paxton Blair, The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in Anglo-American Law,29 Colum. L. Rev.,1929.
16. Ian Brownlie, Legal Status of Nature Resource,162 Recuiel de Cours de 1' Academie de Droit International de La Haye,1974.
17. Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion and Reprisals by States,13 Virginia Journal of International Law 1,1972.
18. Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion:Past and Present. International Law and Economic Coercion,16 Virginia Journal of International Law 2,1976.
19. Philip Bender, Trade Restrictions for Antarctic Conservation Under the Free Trade Principles of the WTO System,14 SE. ENVTL. L. J.,2006.
1. Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO: Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.,2007-2008.
2. A. Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject:A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proc.13th Coll. On the Law of Outer Space 211, 1972.
3. A. Cocca, The Common Heritage of Mankind--An overview, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, AIAA,1972.
4. Jonathan I. Charney, Third Party Dispute Settlement and International Law, 36 Colum. J Transnat'l L,1997.
5. Jonathan I. Charney, The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of the International Courts and Tribunal,31 NYU J Int. L & Pol.,1999.
6. Steve Charnovitz, The Supervision of Health and Biosafety Regulation by World Trade Rules,13 Tulane Environmental Law Journal,2000.
7. Seung Wha Chang, GATTing A Green Trade Barrier-Eco-Labelling and the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,31 Journal of World Trade,1997.
5. Francis T. Christy Jr., Transitutions in Management and Distribution of International Fisheries,31 Int'l Org.,1977.
6. Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step towards Sustainability,6 J Int'l Econ L.,2003
7. Matthew Craven, Legal Differentiation and the Concept of Human Rights Treaty in International Law, (11) EJIL,2000.
8. Ilona Cheyne, Environmental Unilateralism and the WTO/GATT System,24 Ga.J. Int'l & Comp. L.,1995.
9. Douglas J. Caldwell, International Environmental Agreements and the GATT: An Analysis of the Potential Conflict and the Role of a GATT "Waiver" Resolution, 18 Md. J. Int'l L. & Trade,1994.
10. Steve Charnovitz, Environmental Trade Sanctions and the GATT: An Analysis of the Pelly Amendment on Foreign Environmental Practices,9 Am. U. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y,1994.
11. Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud and Gabrielle Marceau, The Relationship between the Dispute-Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO, Reciel 11 (3),2002.
1. Pierre-Marie Dupuy, The Danger of the Fragmentation or Unification of the International Legal System and the International Court of Justice,31 NYU J Int. L & Pol.,1999.
2. Peter G. G Davis, Catherine Redgwell, The International Legal Regulation of Straddling Fish Stock, BYIL LXVII,1996.
3. Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,2006.
4. William Davey, Has the WTO Dispute Settlement System Exceeded its Authority? 4 JIEL 1,2001.
1. John J. Emslie, Labeling Programs as a reasonably Available Least Restrictive Trade Measure under Article XX's Nexus Requirement",30 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.,2005.
2. Jerome B. Elkind, Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases:Abuse of Right-A Blind Alley for Environmentalists,9 Vand. J. Transnat'l L.,1976.
1. Maglosia A. Fitzmaurice, International Protection of the Environment,293 RECUEIL DES COURS,2001.
2. Roberto V. Fiorentino, Luis Verdeja & Christelle Toqueboeuf, The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements:2006 Update, WTO Discussion Paper No. 12,2007.
3. Charles R. Fletcher, Greening World Trade:Reconciling GATT and Multilateral Environmental Agreements within the Existing World Trade Regime,5 J. Transnat'l L. & Pol'y,1996.
4. Thomas M. Franck, On Proportionality of Countermeasure in International Law,102 AJIL,2008.
5. George P. Fletcher, The Right and the Reasonable,98 Harv. L. Rev.,1985.
1. Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes,7 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade,1998.
2. Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.,1988.
3. Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,2002.
4. Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO? 20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.,2009.
5. Avi Gesser, Canada's Environmental Choice Program:A Model for a "Trade-Friendly" Eco-Labelling Scheme,39 Harv. Int'l. L. J.,1998.
6. S. H. Gorden,'The Economic Theory of a Common Property Resource:The Fishery',62 Journal of Political Economy,1954.
7. Roman Grynberg, Martin Tsamenyi, Fisheries Subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries,32 JTL 127,1998
8. Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,2003
9. John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.,2006.
10. Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and ME As and other Treaties,35 (6) Journal of World Trade,2001.
11. Harold C. Gutteridge, Abuse of Rights,5 Cambridge L.J.,1935.
1. Patricia I. Hansen, Transparency, Standards of Review and the Use of Trade Measures to Protect the Global Environment,39 Va. J. Int'l L.,1999.
2. Shannon Hudnall, Towards a Greener International Trade System: Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the World Trade Organization,29 Colum. J. L. & Soc. Probs.,1996.
3. Diana Hurwitz, Fishing for Compromises Through NAFTA and Environmental Dispute Settlement: The Tuna-Dolphin Controversy,35 Nat. Resources J.,1995.
4. Mathew Hunter Hurlock, The GATT, U.S. Law and the Environment: A Proposal to Amend the GATT in Light of the Tuna/Dolphin Decision,92 Colum. L. Rev.,1992.
5. Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO, The European Journal of International Law, Vol.19, No.3,2008.
6. Lawrence R. Helfer, Regime Shifting:The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking,29 Yale J. Int'l L.26 passim (2004).
7. Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, International Economic Soft Law, Recuiel de Cours de l' Academie de Droit International de La Haye, vol.163 (2),1979.
8. Gunther Handl, Territorial Sovereignty and the Problem of Transnational Pollution,69 AJIL,1975.
1. Lawrence Juda, UNCLOS Ⅲ and the New International Economic Order,7 Ocean Dev. Int. L.,1979.
2. Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 International and Comparative Law Quarterly,1986.
3. Lash Jonathan, Towards a Sustainable Future,12 Natural Resource & Environmental,1997.
4. Jennifer L. Jacquet, and Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy,2008.
5. Wilfred Jenks, The Conflict of Law-Making Treaties,30 BYIL,1953.
6. John H. Jackson, World Trade Rules and Environmental Policies: Congruence or Conflict,49 Wash. & Lee L. Rev.,1992.
7. Paul James, Cardwell Duncan French, Who Decides? The ECJ's Judgment on Jurisdiction in the MOX Plant Dispute,19 Journal of Environmental Law 1,2007.
1. Alexander. C. Kiss, The Common Heritage Principle:Utopia or Reality,40 Int'l J.1984-1985.
2. Alexandre Kiss, The Implications of Global Change for the International Legal System, Environmental Change and International Law:New Challenges and Dimensions, United Nations University Press,1992.
3. Benedict Kingsbury, Foreword: Is the Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals a Systemic Problem?,31 N.Y.U.J. INT'L L. & POL.,1999.
4. Kazumochi Kometani, Trade and Environment: How Should WTO Panels Review Environmental Regulations Under GATT Articles Ⅲ and ⅩⅩ?,16 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus.,1996.
5. Steve Keane, Tradefair Competition Winner:Can a Consumer's Right to Know Survive the WTO?: The Case of Food Labeling,16 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Prob.,2006.
1. Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.1996.
2. Vaughan Lowe, Res Judicata and the Rule of International Arbitration,8 African Journal of International Law,1996.
3. Vaughan Lowe, Overlapping Jurisdiction in International Tribunal,20 Australian Yearbook of International Law,2000.
4. Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law, 16 European Journal of International Law,2005.
5. Winfried Lang, Comment, Is the Protection of the Environment a Challenge to the International Trading System?,7 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.,1995.
6. Jonathan Lash, Towards a Sustainable Future,12 Nat. Resource & Environmental,1997.
7. Michael Lennard, The World Trade Organization and Disputes Involving Multilateral Environmental Agreements,5 Eur. Envtl. L. Rev.,1996.
8. Marian Nash Leich, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,81 AJIL,1987.
9. Hersch Lauterpacht, Boycott in International Relations, BYIL, vol.14,1933.
10. B. Larschan and B. Brennan, The Common Heritage of Mankind Principle in International Law,21 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,1983.
1. Gabrielle Marceau, A Call for Coherence in International Law: Praises for the Prohibition Against "Clinical Isolation" in the WTO Dispute Settlement,33 Journal World Trade,1999.
2. Alex Meijer, How is International Law Made? —The Stages of Growth of International Law and Use of its Customary Rules,9 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,1978.
3. Sean D. Murphy, Progress and Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia,93 Am. J. Int'l L,1999.
4. Petros Mavroidis, Trade and Environment after the Shrimps-Turtles Litigation,34 Journal of World Trad,2000.
5. Carol J. Miller, and Jannifer L. Croston, WTO Scrutiny v. Environmental Objectives:Assement of the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act,37 AM. Bus. L. J.,1999.
6. Cynthia M. Maas, Should the WTO Expand GATT Article XX:An Analysis of United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,5 Minn. J. Global Trade,1996.
7. John Muir, The Boycott in International Law,9 Journal of International Law and Economics,1974.
8. E. M. Maniruzzaman, Expropriation of Alien Property and the Principle of Non-Discrimination in International Law of Foreign Investment: An Overview,8 J. Transnat'l L. Pol'y 57,1998.
9. Richards J. McLaughlin, Settling Trade-Related Disputes over the Protection of Marine Living Resources:UNCLOS or the WTO? 10 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev., 1997.
10. Massimiliano Montini, The Nature and Function of the Necessity and Proportionality Principles in the Trade and Environment Context, Vol.6 issue 2, RECIEL,1997.
11. Thorolfur Matthiasson, Why Fishing Fleets Tend to be Too Big,11 Marine Resources Economics 3,1996.
1. Arthur Nussbaum, The Significance of Roman Law in the History International Law,100 University of Pennsylvania Law Review,1952.
2. Eric Neumayer, Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements and WTO Rules:Potential for Conflict,Scope for Reconciliation, Aussenwirtschaft 55 (3),2000.
3. Nancy Nelson, International Concern for the Sustainability of the World's Fisheries:United Nations Efforts to Combat Over-Fishing and International Debate over State Fishing Subsidies, Colo J Int'l Envt'l L & Pol'y,1999.
4. Kalypso Nicolaidis and Michelle Egan, Transnational Market Governance and Regional Policy Externality:Why Recognize Foreign Standards? Journal of European Public Policy 8:3 Special Issue,2001.
1. Bernard H. Oxman, Complementary Agreements and Compulsory Jurisdiction,95 Am. J. Int'l L.,2001.
2. Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.,1999.
3. Bernard H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: The 1977 New York Session,72 Am. J. Int'l L.,1978.
4. Bernard H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea:The Ninth Session,75 AJIL,1981.
5. Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues,77 UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,2005.
6. Marcos Orellana, The EU and Chile Suspend the Swordfish Case Proceedings at the WTO and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ASIL INSIGHTS,2001.
1. Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties, EJIL, Vol.14, No.1,2003.
2. Joost Pauwelyn, WTO Compassion or Superiority Complex? What to Make of the WTO Waiver for "Conflict Diamonds" 24 Mich. J. Int'l L.,2003.
3. Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law? 37 (6) Journal of World Trade,2003.
4. Joel R. Paul, Comity in International Law,32 Harv. Int'l L.J.1991.
5. Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law,37 Journal of World Trade,2003.
6. Graeme Parkes,'Precautionary Fisheries Management:The CCAMLR Approach', Marine Policy, Vol.24, No.2,2000.
7. Travis Potts, Marcus Howard, International Trade, Eco-labelling, and Sustainable Fisheries-Recent Issues, Concepts and Practice, Environment",9 Development and Sustainability,2007.
1. Cesare P. R. Romano, The Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies:The Pieces of the Puzzles,31 NYU J Int. L & Pol.,1999.
2. Jennifer Ramach, Dolphin-Safe Labeling: Are the Dolphins Finally Safe,15 Va. Envtl. L.J.,1996.
3. A. Rosenberg, M. J. Fogarty, M. P. Sissenwine, J. R. Beddington, J. G Shepherd, Achieving Sustainable Use of Renewable Resources, Science, vol.262, 1993.
1. Anne-Marie Slaughter, Court to Court,92 American Journal of International Law,1998.
2. Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.,1999.
3. Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy,100 Fisheries Research,2009.
4. Jennifer Schultz, The GATT/WTO Committee on Trade and the Environment-Toward Environmental Reform",89 Am. J. Int'l L.,1995.
5. Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening"of World Trade",21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.,1996.
6. Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J., 2003.
7. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, The Decision in the Shrimp-Turtle Case,9 Y.B. INT'L ENVTL. L.,1998.
8. Malcom Shaw, The West Sahara Case,49 BYbIL,1978.
9. Shane Spelliscy, The Proliferation of International Tribunal:A Chink in the Armor,40 Colum. J Transnat'l L.,2001.
10. S. Shaw and R. Schwartz, Trade and Environment in the WTO:State of Play,36 JWT,2002.
11. Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,1999.
12. Philp Sands, International Law in the Field of Sustainable Development, BYIL, LXV,1994.
13. Warren F. Schwartz, Eugene W. Harper, The Regulation of Subsidies Affecting International Trade,70 Michigan Law Review,1972.
14. Alan O. Sykes, Countervailing Duty Law: An Economic Perspective,89 Columbia Law Review,1989.
15. Ussif Rashid Sumaila and Daniel Pauly, Catching More Bait: A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies, (2nd version). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2006, Vol.14, No 6, University of British Colombia.2006.
16. Christopher D. Stone, Too Many Fishing Boats, Too Few Fish: Can Trade Laws Trim Subsidies and Restore the Balance in Global Fisheries? 24 Ecology Law Quarterly,1997.
17. Joanne Scott, International Trade and Environmental Governance:Relating Rules (and Standards) in the EU and the WTO,15 EUR. J. INT'L L.,2004.
18. L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal,2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,2005.
19. Judge Shahabuddeen, Implications of the Proliferation of International Adjudicatory Bodies for Dispute Resolution, (9) ASIL Bulletin 5,1995.
20. John Shamsey, ITLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EU Swordfish Dispute, 12 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs.,2002
21. Frarz Sanei, The Caspian Sea Legal Regime, Pipeline Diplomacy, and the Prospects for Iran's Isolation from the Oil and Gas Frenzy: Reconciling Tehran's Legal Options with its Geopolitical Realities,34 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law,2001.
22. Richard H. Steinberg, Trade-Environment Negotiations in the EU, NAFTA, and WTO:Regional Trajectories of Rule Development,91 Am. J. Int'l L.,1997.
23. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, International Trade and Protection of the Environment: The Continuing Search for Reconciliation,91 Am. J. Int'l L.,1997
24. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Free International Trade and Protection of the Environment; Irreconcilable Conflict?,86 Am. J. Int'l L.,1992.
25. Gregory C. Shaffer, The World Trade Organization Under Challenge: Democracy and the Law and Politics of the WTO's Treatment of Trade and Environment Matters,25 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV.1,17 (2001).
26. Sabrina Shaw, Trade and Environment: The Post-Singapore WTO Agenda, 6 Rev. Eur. Community & Int'l Envtl. L.,1997
27. Allan R. Stein, Forum Non Conveniens and the Redundancy of Court-Access Doctrine,133 U. Pa. L. Rev.,1985.
28. Eric S. Sherby, Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal:The Quieter Side of Section 1782 Discovery,24 The International Litigation Quarterly,2008.
29. Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L.J., 2003
30. Bruno Simma, Self-contained Regimes,16 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,1985.
31. Bruno Simma and Dirk Pulkowski, Off Planets and the Universe:Self-contained Regimes in International Law,17 European Journal of International Law, 2006.
32. William J. Snape Ⅲ and Naomi B. Lefkovitz, Searching for GATT's Environmental Miranda:Are "Process Stranards"Getting "Due Process? ",27 Cornell Int'l L.J.1994. T
1. Firew Kebede Tiba, What Caused the Multiplicity of International Courts and Tribunals?,10 GONZ. J. INT'L L.2006.
2. Ruti Teitel, Robert Howse, Cross-Judging:Tribunalization in a Fragmented but Interconnected Global Order,41 International Law and Politics,2009.
3. Christian Tietje, Voluntary Eco-Labelling Programs and Questions of State Responsibility in the WTO/GATT Legal System,29 Journal of World Trade,1995.
4. G. D. S. Taylor, The Content of the Rule Against Abuse of Rights in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L.,1972-1973.
1. George C. Umbricht, A'Amicus Suriae Briefs'on Amicus Curiae Briefs at the WTO, Journal of International Economic Law,2001.
1. Allan D. Vestal, Repetitive Litigation,45 Iowa L. Rev.,1,1960.
2. Rutidiger Wolfrum, Means of Ensuring Compliance with and Enforcement of International Environmental Law,272 RECUEIL DES COURS,1998.
3. Carrie Wofford, A Greener Future at the WTO:The Refinement of WTO Jurisprudence on Environmental Exceptions to GATT,24 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV., 2000.
4. Sylia M. Williams, The Law of Outer Space and Nature Resources,36 International & Comparative Law Quarterly,1987.
5. Karen West, Ecolabels:The Industrialisation of Environmental Standards, 25The Ecologist, No.1.,3,1995.
6. C. R. Wessells, Ecolabelling and International Seafood Trade:the Roles of Certification Costs and Consumers Willingness to Pay, Fisheries Economics Newsletter 50,2000.
7. Chris Wold, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GATT: Conflict and Resolution?,26 Envtl. L.,1996.
1. Tanaka Yoshifumi, Reflections on the Concept of Proportionality in the Law of Maritime Delimitation,3 The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 16,2001.
2. Paul J. Yechout, In the Wake of Tuna II:New Possibilities for GATT-Compliant Environmental Standards,5 Minn. J. Global Trade,1996.
1. Zhu Lanye, The Effects of the WTO Dispute Settlement Panel and Appellate Body Reports:Is the Dispute Settlement Body Resolving Specific Disputes Only or Making Precedent at the Same Time? Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, Vol.17, No.1,2003.
1. Roberto V. Fiorentino, Luis Verdeja & Christelle Toqueboeuf, The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements:2006 Update, WTO Discussion Paper No.12,2007. Available at:http://www.wto.org/english/res e/booksp e/discussion papers 12a e.pdf, (visited on 2010/7/1)
2. Glenn Sant & Mary Lack, The Use of Trade-related Measure in the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT). Available at: http://www.traffic.org/fish/, (visited on 2010/7/1)
3. Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction: The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law. Available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/so13/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683, (visited on 2010/3/5).
4. Tomer Broude, Fragmentation(s) of International Law: On Normative Integration as Authority Allocation. Available at: http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/ilrsymposium/2008syrm/broude_normat ive_integ_paper.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/12)
5. Francesco Francioni, Resource Sharing in Antarctica:For Whose Benefit?, 1/2 E.J.I.L. Vol.1,1990. Available at: http://www.ejil.org/journal/Voll/Nol/index.html, (visited on 2008/7/10)
6. Joost Pauwelyn, Fragmentation of International Law. Available at: http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/pauwelyn/pdf/fragmentation_of_international_law.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/12)
7. Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law. Available at: http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041 gall.htm, (visited on 2008/7/4.)
8. J. I. Gabrynowwicz, The Province and Heritage of Mankind Reconsidered:A New Beginning. Available at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archieve/nasa/casi.ntre.nasa.gov/1993004830.pdf, (visited on 2008/7/11).
9. Ellis Jaye, Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle: A Rhetorical Analysis (December 22,2008). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1319360 (visited on 2008/7/11).
10. Veniana Qalo, Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines at the WTO:Legal Architecture. Available at: www.thecommonwealth.org/.../6A3006A6-144E-412D-B0A9-47C00B03E17D_Paper OnFisheriesSubsidies.pdf (visited on:2010/3/5).
11. Chris Wold, Legal Assessment of Compatibility Issues between the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) to the Cartagena Convention and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Available at: http://legacy.lclark.edu/org/ielp/objects/opinion_spaw.pdf (visited on 2010/10/28)
12. Lothar Ehring, De Facto Discrimination in WTO Law:National and Most-Favored-Nation Treatment-or Equal Treatment?. Available at: http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/01/013201.html, (visited on 2009/12/29).
13. Ronald Salz, Sea Turtle Mortality, Shrimp Fisheries, and International Trade:A Case Study of a Global Natural Resource Conflict. Available at: www.umass.edu/hd/research/turtle.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23)
14. Renee Johnson, Charles E. Hanrahan, The U.S.-EU Beef Hormone Dispute, Report for Congress,2009. Available at: www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R40449.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9)
15. Erik J. Molenaar & Martin Tsamenyi, Satellite-Based Vessel Monitoring Systems:International Legal Aspects and Development in State Practice. Available at: http://www.fao.org/Legal/prs-ol/lpo7.pdf, (visited on 2010/6/28)
1. Michael Decleris, The Law of Sustainable Development General Principles, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,2000.
1. The Report of the FAO World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development,1984.
2. The Regulation of Driftnet on the High Sea:Legal Iissue,1991.
3. Living Marine Resource and Their Sustainable Development,1995.
4. Implementation of the International Plan of Action to Deter, Prevent and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing,2002.
5. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2004.
6. Guide for Identifying, Assessing and Reporting on Subsidies in the Fisheries Sector,2004.
7. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2006,2007.
8. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2008.
9. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2009.
10. Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector,2009.
11. Judith Swan, Regional Fishery Bodies and Governance: Issues, Actions and Future Directions, FAO Fisheries Circular No.959,2000.
12. Gordon Munro, Annick Van Houtte, Rolf Willmann, The Conservation and Management f Shared Fish Stocks:Legal and Economic Aspects,2004.
13. J. A. Gulland, Some Problems of the Management of Shared Stocks, FAO, 1980.
14. Ellen Hey, William T. Bruke, Doris Ponzoni, Kazuo Sumi, The Regulation of Driftnet on the High Sea:Legal Issue,1991.
15. Kieran Kelleher,《世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物》,2008.
16. Christine Stewart, Legislating for Property Rights in Fisheries,2004.
17. C. R. Wessells, K. Cochrane, C. Deere, P. Wallis & R. Willmann, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422.,2001.
18. Dominique Greboval, (ed.), Managing Fishing Capacity:Selected Papers on Underlying Concepts and Issues,1999.
1. Martti Koskenniemi, Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, A/CN.4/L.682, 13 April 2006.
1. Fisheries, International Trade and Sustainable Development: Policy Discussion Paper, Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series, ICTSD,2006.
2. Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3,ICTSD,2006.
3. Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements- Trade and Development Issues,2006
1. ICUN, UNEP and WWF, World Conservation Strategy:Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development, ICUN,1980.
1. Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries 43,1991 Eco-Labelling: Actual Effects of Selected Programme,1997.
2. OECD Secretariat, Trade and Regulatory Reform:Insights from the OECD Country Reviews and Other Analyses,2000.
3. Trade and Regulatory Reform:Insights from the OECD Country Reviews and Other Analysis,13 World Trade & Arb. Materials 32,2001.
4. Liberalizing Fisheries Markets:Scope and Effects,2002.
5. Subsidies:A Way Towards Sustainable Fisheries,2005.
6. Anthony Cox & Carl-Christian Schmidt, Subsidies in the OECD Fisheries Sector:A Review of Recent Analysis and Future Directions,2002.
1. Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade,1998.
2. Fisheries Subsidies and Marine Resource Management:Lessons Learn from Studies in Argentina and Senegal. UNEP/ETU/2001/7 (Vol. Ⅱ) 2001.
3. Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue,2003.
4. Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond, Geneva 2007.
5. Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, An Introductory Guide,2008.
6. Marcos A. Orellana, EEZ Fisheries Access Arrangement and the WTO Subsidies Agreement:Legal Analysis and Options for Improved Disciplines,2007.
1. UNCTAD, Briefing Paper of Legal and Policy Issues in the Market Access Implication of Labelling for Environment Purposes,2004. World Bank
1. Millazzo, Matteo, Subsidies in World Fisheries:A Re-examination,1998.
2. The Sunken Billions:The economic Justification for Fisheries Reform, 2008.
3. Judith M. Dean, Trade and Environment:A Survey of the Literature,1992.
1. Our Common Future, New York: Oxford University Press,1987.
1. From GATT to the WTO:The Multilateral Trading System in the New Millennium,2000.
2. H. Nordstrom and S. Vaughan, Special Study 4:Trade and Environment, 1999.
1. Hard Facts, Hidden Problems:A View of Current Data on Fishing Subsidies,2001.
2. Turning the Tide of Fishing Subsidies:Can the World Trade Organization Play a Positive Role,2002.
3. Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond,2007.
4. David K. Shorr, Healthy Fisheries, Sustainable Trade:Crafting New Rules on Fishing Subsidies in the World Trade Organization,2004.
1. Gernard Hafner, Risks Ensuring from Fragmentation of International Law, Report of the ILC for 2000 52nd session, GA. Off. Records of 55th session Supplement No.10 (A/55/10).
1.贺其治：《外层空间法》,法律出版社1982年版。
2.赵理海：《海洋法的新发展》,北京大学出版社1984年版。
3.刘楠来：《国际海洋法》,海洋出版社1986年版。
4.陈德恭：《现代国际海洋法》,中国社会科学出版社1988年版。
5.邹克渊：《南极矿物资源与国际法》,北京大学出版社1996年版。
6.邵沙平,余敏友：《国际法问题专论》,武汉大学出版社2002年版。
7.徐淑萍：《贸易与环境的法律问题研究》,武汉大学出版社2002年版。
8.李耀芳：《国际环境法源起》,中山大学出版社2002年版。
9.吴慧：《国际海洋法庭研究》,海洋出版社2002年版。
10.申进忠：《WTO协调环境贸易关系的理论与实践》,中国法制出版社2003年版。
11.周鲠生：《国际法大纲》,中国方正出版社2004年版。
12.李爱年、韩广：《人类社会可持续发展与国际环境法》,法律出版社2005年版。
13.高之国、张海文、贾宁：《国际海洋法的理论与实践》,海洋出版社2006年版。
14.秦天宝：《遗传资源获取与惠益分享管制的国际法律基础》,武汉大学出版社2006年版。
15.杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版。
16.薛桂芳：《国际渔业法律政策与中国的实践》,中国海洋大学出版社2008年。
17.廖诗评：《条约冲突基础问题研究》,法律出版社2008年版。
18.[英]莫里斯：《法律冲突法》,李东来等译,中国对外翻译出版公司1990年版。19.[英]詹宁斯、瓦茨修订：《奥本海国际法》(第一卷第二分册),王铁崖等译,中国大百科全书出版社1998年版。
20.[法]亚历山大·基思：《国际环境法》,张若思译,法律出版社2000年版。
21.[日]水上千之：《船舶国籍与方便船籍》,全贤淑译,大连海事大学出版 社2000年版。
22.[美]约翰.H.杰克逊：《世界贸易体制——国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版。
23.[英]伊恩.H.布朗利：《国际公法原理》,曾令良、余敏友等译,法律出版社2007年版。
24.[美]戈德史密斯,波斯纳：《国际法的局限性》,龚宇译,法律出版社2010年版。
25.刘家琛编：《国际法案例》,法律出版社,1998年版。
26.陈致中编：《国际法案例》,法律出版社1998年版。
27.韩立余编：《WTO案例及评析》,中国人民大学出版社2001年。
28.《诉讼法论丛》,第1卷,法律出版社1997年。
29.王铁崖：《论人类共同继承遗产的概念》,载于《中国国际法年刊》,1984年。
30.陈述彭：《环境保护与资源可持续利用》,载于《中国人口资源与环境》,1995年第3期。
31.郎平：《新一轮多边谈判中贸易与环境问题》,载于《世界经济与政治》,2003年第1期。
32.吴峰,李志清：《论GATT94第20条在实践中的新发展及前景分析》,载于《上海理工大学学报》(社会科学版),2004年第26卷4期。
33.慕永通、朱玉贵：《渔业补贴研究进展及发展(一)》,载于《中国海洋大学学报》(社会科学版,2005年第4期。
34.慕永通、张义龙：《渔业补贴研究进展及方向(二)》,载于《中国海洋大学学报》(社会科学版),2005年第5期。
35.孙世彦：《欧洲人权制度中的自由判断余地原则述评》,载于《环球法律评论》,2005年第3期。
36.黄辉：《论环境保护的国际化与自由贸易的协调》,载于《武汉科技大学学报》(社会科学版),2006年第8卷1期。
37.唐旗：《从箭鱼争端看贸易与环境之争新动向》,载于《武汉大学学报哲学》(社会科学版),2007年第1期。
38.杨永红：《从MOX Plant案析国际法庭管辖权之冲突》,载于《法学家》, 2009年3期。
39.陈喜峰：《国际法自足制度之研究》,载于《政法论坛》,2009年27卷2期。
1.陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上、下),台湾商务印书馆(台湾)1965年版。
2.吴昆吾：《条约论》,台湾商务印书馆(台湾)1977年版。
3.刘铁铮：《国际私法论丛》,政治大学出版社(台湾)1986年版。
4.郑玉波：《法谚》,三民书局(台湾)1988年版。
5.罗昌发：《贸易关系之法律问题》,元照出版公司(台湾)1994年版。
6.罗昌发：《贸易与竞争之法律互动》,元照出版公司(台湾)1994年版。
7.陈治世：《国际法》,商务出版社(台湾)1995年版。
8.黄异：《国际法》,国立编译馆(台湾)1996年版。
9.罗昌发：《国际贸易法》,月旦出版公司(台湾)1996年版。
10.黄异：《渔业法规》,渤海堂文化出版公司(台湾)1999年版。
11.黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,学林文化出版公司(台湾)2000年版。
12.赵明义：《当代国际法导论》,五南出版社出版公司(台湾)2001年版。
13.陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,元照出版公司(台湾)2002年版。
14.吴庚：《行政法之理论与实用》,作者自版(台湾)2005年版。
15.黄立、李贵英、林彩瑜：《WTO：国际贸易法论》,元照出版公司(台湾)2005年。
16.黄异：《国际法在国内法领域中的效力》,元照出版公司(台湾)2006年版。
17.李建良等,《行政法入门》,元照出版公司(台湾)2006年版。
18.黄异：《国际法在国内法领域的适用》,元照出版公司(台湾)2006年版。
19.廖文章：《国际海洋法论》,扬智文化出版公司(台湾)2008年版。
20.《法律哲理与制度,国际私法：马汉宝教授八秩华诞祝寿论文集》,元照出版公司(台湾)2005年版。
21.倪贵荣：《国际渔业组织利用贸易措施遏止IUU渔船作业之研究与我国之因应》,载于《(台湾)行政院农委会渔业署委托研究计划》,2002年。
22.彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,载于《月旦民商法》,2005年3月第七期。
23.施文真：《由智利—剑鱼案论环保贸易措施所引发之争端：管辖权冲突之探讨》,载于《政大法学评论》,2005年10月第86期。
24.廖福特：《区域人权体系研究之必要及缺乏》,载于《新世纪智库论坛》,2006年6月第3期。
25.王冠雄：《永续发展在国际法意涵之探讨》,载于《台湾海洋法学报》,2006年12月5卷2期。
26.黄居正：《无主物、共同遗产与共有物—遗传与生物资源公约中的财产意识》,载于《政大法学评论》,2006年12月第94期。
27.高圣惕：《贸易措施作为促进遵守区域渔业管理组织保育及管理措施之工具—以大西洋鲔类资源保育委员会之法令及实践为中心》,载于《台湾海洋事务及海洋法律国际学术研讨会》,2007年5月。
28.黄异：《鱼在法制上的意义》,载于《台湾海洋法学报》,2007年6月第6卷1期。
29.王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则—国家裁量余地原则》,载于《欧美研究》,2007年9月第37卷第3期。
30.高圣惕：《台湾与区域性渔业管理组织—论大西洋鲔类保育委员会对台湾动用贸易制裁之05-02号前置性决议的合法性》,载于《政大法学评论》,2007年10月第99期。
31. Albert Hoffmann, UNCLOS and the Resource of the Seabed in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction,载于《台湾海洋法学报》,2007年6月第6卷第1期。
32.杨志凯：《「法庭之友」在WTO争端解决机制中之适用、实践与展望—以相关案例解析为主轴》,《(台湾)东吴大学法律学研究所硕士论文》,2003年。
33.张水锴：《您吃到的鳕鱼可能是「油甘」?》,载于《渔业推广》,2007年10月第235期。
1.许惠惊：《食品安全的风险评估》,载于《看守台湾》,2004/年秋季号第六卷三期。Aavailable at: http://www.taiwanwatch.org.tw/magazine/v6n3/v6n3-001.pdf (visited on 2009/8/4).
2.罗锦岚,陈姿妤：《WTO上诉机构就荷尔蒙案之报复措施作出裁决》,载于《经贸法讯》,第77期。Available at: http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no77/1.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
3.罗锦岚,郑黛燕：《欧美荷尔蒙案之最新进展》,载于《经贸法讯》,第82期。Available at:http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no82/3.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
4.施晓恩：《WTO荷尔蒙案建立解除报复性制裁之新规则》,Available at:www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no69/4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
5.林彩瑜：《WTO争端解决机制与美国贸易法301条款之研究》,Available at: http://www.itl.nctu.edu.tw/Thesis/1999/1999_4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/18).
6. Hilary French,郑先佑、郭金泉译：《Challenging the WTO》,载于《看守台湾》,1999年11/12月第二卷一期,Available at: http://staff.pccu.edu.tw/-ayo/5green/WTOpap.htm, (visited on 2009/8/4)
7.黎家维：《国际法中「传统作业渔场」概念之澄清》,Available at: http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/CL/094/CL-C-094-074.htm, (visited on: 2009/7/10).
8.张东扬：《美国法院受理外国专利纷争之可能性-以Voda v.s. Cordis案为核心》,Available at:http://www.saint-island.com.tw/report/data/IPR_200704.htm. (visited on 2008/12/15).
1.小田滋：《海洋资源的国际法Ⅱ》,(东京)有斐阁1972年版。
2.名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,(东京)酒井书店1989年版。
3.望月直树：《现代国际法における对抗措置の法的性质》,载于《国际法外交杂志》,1989年107卷2号。
1.联合国网站：www.un.org
2.联合国农粮组织网站：www.fao.org
3.联合国卫生组织网站：www.who.org
4.联合国食品法典委员会网站：http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp
5.联合国环境规划署网站：www.unep.org
6.联合国儿童基金会网站：www.unicef.org
7.联合国经济社会委员会可持续发展委员会网站：http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev
8.联合国世界卫生组织网站：http://www.who.org/
9.国际法院网站：http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/
10.海洋法法庭网站,http://www.itlos.org/homepage/
11.国际劳工组织网站：http://www.ilo.org
12.世界贸易组织网站：http://www.wto.org
13.国际标准组织网站：http://www.iso.org
14.自然基金会网站：www.panda.org
15.美国国家有机食品标准审议委员会网站：www.nal.usda.gov
16.(台湾地区)行政院环保署网站：www.epa. gov.tw/
17.(台湾地区)工业研究院网站：http://graupel.ihs.ncu.edu.tw
② United Nations Report of the International Law Commission, Covering the Work of its Eighth Session, April 23-July 4,1956,51 AJIL, Vol.1,155,246-247 (1957).
③参见：Shawkat Alam, Trade Restrictions Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements: Developmental Implications for Developing Countries, Journal of World Trade 41 (5), p.1008 (2007); D. Brack and K. Gray, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO, (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs,2003)p.5～6;中进忠：《WTO协调环境贸易关系的理论与实践》,中国法制出版社2003年版,第51至55页。
① Tim Lang and Collin Hines, The New Protectionism, (London:Earthscan Publication Ltd.,1994), p.126.
② Wilfred Beckerman, Economic Growth and the Environment:Whose Environment?, World Development, vol. 20, Issue 4,81～496 (1992).
③参见：《外空条约》(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies)第1条,《月球协定》(Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies)第11条1、5、7项,UNCLOS第11部分。
④濒临绝种野生动植物国际贸易公约前言,联合国气候变化纲要公约前言,生物多样性公约前言,21世纪议程。
①陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上),(台湾)商务印书馆1965年版,第2,84,89-90、98页。
② J. G. Starke, The Introduction of International Law, (Singapore: Butterworth Co. & Ltd.,1986) pp.71-74;[英]伊恩·布朗利,曾令良、余敏友等译,《国际法原理》,法律出版社2002年版,第38-41页。
③ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), p.58.④陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上),(台湾)商务印书馆1965年版,第89页; Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,41 (2005).
⑤黄居正：《无主物、共同遗产与共有物—遗传与生物资源公约中的财产意识》,载于：《政大法学评论》,2006年12月,第94期,第19页。
⑥ Erin Bain Jones, Law of Sea, Oceanic Resources, (Dallas:South Methodist University Press,1972) pp.13,33.
① Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988) p.46.
② Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), p.29.; B. Larschan and B. Brennan, The Common Heritage of Mankind Principle in International Law,21 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,305-337,306(1983); John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, available at: http://www.netlibrary.com/Reader/, (visited on 2008/7/7).
③ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul: Thomson/West Group,2006) pp.358-359.
④ UNCLOS 第63条1项、87条、117条～120条2项;1985年《美加鲑鱼条约》 (Treaty Concerning Pacific Salmon, U.S.-Can., Jan 28,1985),T.I.A.S.11,091,1469 U.N.T.S.357 (further amended in June 1999).
⑤英汉法律辞典,法律出版社1998年版,第683页,陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上),(台湾)商务印书馆1965年版,第89-90页；Hugo Grotius, The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.24, 28.
⑥ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.28-29; Erin Bain Jones, Law of Sea, Oceanic Resources, (Dallas:South Methodist University Press,1972) pp.13,34,102-103; Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,194 (1986).
⑦ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.30,36-37; Juraj Andrassy, International Law and the Resources of the Sea (New York: Columbia Universty Press,1970),p.133; P. Sreenivasa Rao, The public Order ofOcean Resources (Cambridge: The M.I.T. Express,1975), pp.77、82.
① Available at: Http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1945/450928a.html, (visited on 2008/7/10).
② Available at:Http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/common%20property, (visited 2008/7/10).
③ Christine Stewart, Legislating for Property Rights in Fisheries, (Rome: FAO,2004) p.21-28, Cristina Leria, Annick Van Houtte, Rights Based Fisheries: A Legal Overview, in Myron H. Nordquist and John Norton Moore (ed.), Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Center for Oceans Law and Policy, (Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2000) pp.263-299.
④ J. B. Morrell, The Law of the Sea: Historical Analysis of the 1982 Treaty and Its Rejection by the United States, (London:McFarland & Company Inc.,1992),p.174.
①黄居正：《无主物、共同遗产与共有物—遗传与生物资源公约中的财产意识》,载于：《政大法学评论》,2006年12月,第94期,第19-20页。
②黄异：《鱼在法制上的意义》,载于：《台湾海洋法学报》,台湾海洋大学海洋法律研究所,2007年6月,第6卷1期,第152页。
③黄异：《鱼在法制上的意义》,载于：《台湾海洋法学报》,台湾海洋大学海洋法律研究所,2007年6月,第6卷1期,第154页。
① Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Amo Express,1972), pp.23.; Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL, 25,33-38 (2005).
②杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版,第321-328页,Arthur Nussbaum, The Significance of Roman Law in the History International Law, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol.100,682-683. (1952).
③Res这一词是多义字,通常为物之代表或形容物体的物理外观本质,还有thing或property之意,也有event或business等意思,如Res ipsa loquitur, The thing speaks for itself,事情本身说明一切。Res accessoria sequitur
rem principalem, The accessory follows the principal,从物随主物。参见：郑玉波：《法谚》,(台湾)三民书局1988年版,第44,135页；Kemal Baslar, The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.40.
④ "Although this is a Latin phrase, it does not come from Roman law.",参见：Kemal Baslar, The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988) p.42.
⑤ Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,40-41 (2005).
① Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,35～36,40～41 (2005).
② J.G. Stark, The Introduction of International Law, (Singapore:Butterworth Co. & Ltd.,1986) p.159;周鲠生：《国际法大纲》,中国方正出版社2004年版,第65页。
③ L. Oppenheim, H. Lauterpacht (ed.), International Law.-Treatise, Vol.1 (8th ed.) (New York:David McKay, 1955),p.555; J.G. Stark, The Introduction of International Law, (Singapore:Butterworth Co. & Ltd.,1986)p.88；关于该土地上面是否应有人的争议,参见：联合国大会对于西撒哈拉案(West Sahara Case)的咨询意见(UNGA Res.3292,1974/12/13)、国际法院针对西撒哈拉案判决(ICJ Rep.12,1975)以及学说的看法M. N. Shaw, The West Sahara Case,49 BYbIL,119,121～124 (1978)
④ Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law,16 EJIL,25,43、45 (2005).
⑤ Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.44.
⑥ G. Hardin, Tragedy of the Commons, in Robin Clarke (ed.), Note for the Future:An Alternative History of the Past Decade, (London:Thames & Hudson,1975), p.64.; Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988) pp.41,46-47,52.
①目前有关贸易措施是国际社会对于抵制非法、无报告和不受规范渔业活动的普遍应对作法,2007年11月6日ICCAT颁布相关的决议供作贸易措施之法源依据。虽说这种作法有部分合法性争议,但RFMO似乎朝这方向进行。相关论点参见：高圣惕：《贸易措施作为促进遵守区域渔业管理组织保育及管理措施之工具—以大西洋鲔类资源保育委员会之法令及实践为中心》,载于：《台湾海洋事务及海洋法律国际学术研讨会》,2007年5月,第1-89-93页。高圣惕：《台湾与区域性渔业管理组织—论大西洋鲔类保育委员会对台湾动用贸易制裁之05-02号前置性决议的合法性》,载于：《政大法学评论》,2007年6月,第66页。
② Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.),The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972),p.24; A. A.Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject:A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proceeding 13th Colloquium On the Law of Outer Space,1-214,212 (1972).
③ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), pp.349-350,359.
④ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), p.23-24.
⑤ A. A. Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject: A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proceeding 13th Colloquium On the Law of Outer Space 21,1-214,212 (1972); A. A. Cocca, The Common Heritage of Mankind-An overview. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, A1AA, New York, p.17; Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law, available at: http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041gall.htm, (visited on 2008/7/4.), J. I. Gabrynowwicz, The Province and Heritage of Mankind Reconsidered: A New Beginning, available at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archieve/nasa/casi.ntre.nasa.gov/1993004830.pdf, (visited on 2008/7/11).
⑥ Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972), pp.23～24; Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), pp.60～64.
⑦ Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law,学者认为:"... for the first time in history mankind was recognized in positive law by the international legal order as a subject of this order.", available at:http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041gall.htm, (visited on 2008/7/4.).
⑧这群人必须有文化、道德、历史、种族、语言、宗教等的相同背景,且尚未建立自己的国家。如身处伊朗、伊拉克、土耳其与阿富汗的库德族,见：Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law,(Si. Paul:Thomson /West Group,2006), p.61.
① Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,191 (1986); Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.50.
② Hugo Grotius, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown (trans.), The Freedom of The Seas, (New York: Arno Express,1972),pp.28-29; A. Dolman, Resources, Regime, World Order, (Oxford:Pergamon Policy Studies,,1981), p.227.
③ R. P. Arnold, Common Heritage of Mankindas a Legal Concept,9 International Lawyer,153-155 (1975); Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,190 (1986); Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.39,45.
① Preamble of Convention of Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext (visited on:2010/11/25)
②《关于各国探索和利用包括月球和其它天体在内外层空间活动的原则条约》(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies),或简称《外层空间条约》或《外空条约》。是1963年联合国大会通过的《各国探索与利用外层空间活动的法律原则的宣言》的补充和发展,又称为《外层空间宪章》是有关外层空间的基本法,联合国大会于1966年12月19日通过后,1967年1月27日在伦敦、莫斯科和华盛顿三地开放供签署,同年10月10日生效。1985年6月30日时已有84个缔约国和30个签署国。参见：贺其治：《外层空间法》,法律出版社1982年版,第315页。
③ Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law,(Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.40～43.
④ Sylia M. Williams, The Law of Outer Space and Nature Resources,36 INTL & COMP. L.Q.142,142-145. (1987).
⑤简称《关于月球的协定》或《月球协议》的《指导各国在月球和其它天体上活动的协议》(AgreementGoverning the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies)于1979年12月5口由第34届联合
国大会未经投票通过,同年12月18日开放签字,1984年7月11日生效。
⑥详细的介绍可以参考：赵理海：《海洋法的新发展》,法律出版社1984年版,第140页；邹克渊：《南极矿物资源与国际法》,法律出版社1996年版,第202-209页：小田滋：《海洋资源的国际法Ⅱ》,东京有斐阁1972年版,第137页；J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford: Oxford Press,1982) p.110; Abdul Koroma, The future of the Common Heritage of Mankind, The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, in Albert W. Koers and Bernard H. Oxman (ed.), The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, (Honolulu:Law of the Sea Institute, University of Hawaii,1983) p.25-27.
⑦南极比较有争议,南极条约(Treaty on Antarctica)前言中指出:”为了全体人类的利益,南极将永远只使用于和平目的。"Recognizing that it is in the interest of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord虽然接近人类共同遗产的概念,但实际上目前南极的开发研究都操控于南极俱乐部(Antarctic Club)原始12个成员以及其它参加谘商会议国家之手,并未开放给其它国家,有论者认为根据条约前言已能证明南极是人类共同的遗产,也有论者认为这样的说法值得考虑。见：邹克渊：《南极矿物资源与国际法》,法律出版社1996年版,第210页Francesco Francioni, Resource Sharing in Antarctica:For Whose Benefit?, EJIL Vol.1, No.1/2, (1990) available at:http://www.ejil.org/journa/Voll/Nol/index.html, (visited on 2008/7/10).
① Lawrence Juda, UNCLOS Ⅲ and the. New International Economic Order,7 Ocean Dev. Int. L.,221,221 (1979).
②王铁崖：《论人类共同继承遗产的概念》,《中国国际法年刊》,1984年,第22页;A. C. Kiss, The Common Heritage Principle:Utopia or Reality, International Law,425 (1985); Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,196,198 (1986); 学者认为这是一种信托管理模式。见：Kemal Baslar, The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.37,60,61,64,65,69,89.
③《月球协定》第11条；月球协议虽然没有明言,目前月球上没有生物是不争的事实；UNCLOS第133条1项、136条、137条；但有学者认为前述条约的解释不应局限非生物性资源。见：Albert Hoffmann, UNCLOS and the Resource of the Seabed in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction,载于：《台湾海洋事务及海洋法律国际学术研讨会》,2007年,第2-28-29页。
④ Kemal Baslar, The Cconcept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988),p.45.
⑤学者认为：“…,the CHM regime can only start where the PSNR regime ends....". Available at:
www.dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/jur/1995/n.j.schrijver/h7.pdf, (visited on 2008/7/1)
⑥ Alexandre Kiss & Dinah Shelton, International Environment Law, (N.Y.:Transnational Publisher Inc.,1991), pp.9～11.
⑦ U.N. Doc. A/C.1/PV 1787, p.32.⑥标准为：1、人类共同遗产不能以任何形式占有,从而在法律上排除任何国家对其主张主权。2、人类共同遗产在利益归属必须依循公平分享原则。3、人类共同遗产必须有任何国家都参加的国际管理机制进行管理；4、人类共同遗产的利用必须为和平目的。J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1982) p.117,[法]亚历山大‘基思,张若思译,《国际环境法》,法律出版社2000年版,第111-113页,Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,191 (1986).
⑨ A. A. Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject:A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proc.13th Coll. On the Law of Outer Space 21,1-214,211 (1972); A. A. Cocca, The Common Heritage of Mankind-An Overview, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, AIAA, New York, p.17; Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,195 (1986); Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law, available at:http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041gal 1.htm, (visited on2008/7/4.)
① Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988),p.39;即着重在思想与创作的文化共同遗产,《世界遗产条约》或称为《有关保护世界文化遗产暨自然遗产之条约》(Convention Concerning Protecting the World Culture and Heritage),该条约于1972年经联合国教科文组织采认,1975年正式生效,迄今至少有155国参与缔约。目前被世界遗产委员会登录的遗产总数有552件,分别有418件文化遗产和114件自然遗产,以及20件复合遗产。available at:http://typo38.unesco.org/zh/unesco-home.html>, (last visited 2008/7/7).
② Alexander Kiss, Nature, the Common Heritage of Mankind, available at: http://www.nature.coe.int/english/main/naturopa/magazine/nat91.htm, (last visited 2008/7/1)
③如：1979年在德国波昂(Bonn)签署的《保护野生动物迁移公约》(Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals)之理念。
③ Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources (N.Y.:Cambridge Press,2002)pp.92-99,123,446, 449～450; John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals: The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006).
⑤ Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 Int'l & Comp. L. Q.190,194-195 (1986); Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), pp.72-73.
⑥ J. E. S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1982) pp.117,193.
①又称《原住民和部落民族公约》(Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries),国际劳工组织于1989年6月通过。available at: http://www.pts.org.tw/～abori/law/un/3-c.html, (last visited 2008/07/16).
② A. J. Dolman, Resource, Regime and World Order, (New York: Pegramon Press,1981), pp.247-248.; Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, (Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988),p.39.
③ Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law,(Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988), p.49.
④ Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, (St. Paul:Thomson/West Group,2006), p.61. ⑤ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development(U.K.:Manchester University Press, 2005) pp.59,73、81.
⑥秦天宝：《遗传资源获取与惠益分享管制的国际法律基础》,武汉大学出版社2006年版,第82页。
①或称使用自己财产不应损他人财产(Sie utere tuo ut alienum non ladedas),此原则是透过司法判例所确认的习惯法,如：科甫海峡案(Corfu Cannel Case,1949)、特雷尔冶炼场案(Trail Smelter Arbitration,1938,1941)、拉孥湖仲裁案(Lac Lanoux Arbitration,1957)与核试验案(Nuclear Test Case,1974),参见：陈致中编：《国际法案例》,法律出版社1998年版,第272-278、283-286页。
②秦天宝：《遗传资源获取与惠益分享管制的国际法律基础》,武汉大学出版社2006年版,第83,96-108页。
③ J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1982) p.116.
④ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (U.K.:Manchester University Press, 2005) p.59.
⑤《气候变迁公约》与《生物多样性公约》都在1992年6月5日开放签署,前者在1994年3月21日生效,目前有189个缔约国；后者在1993年12月29日生效,目前有188个缔约国。
⑥ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (U.K.:Manchester University Press. 2005) pp.59、73、81该学者更认为人类共同关切事项在国际环境法领域是习惯法。
⑦ Jutta Brunee and Stephan J. Toope, Environmental Security and Freshwater Resource：A Case for International Ecosystem Law, Yearbook of International Environmental Law, Vol.5,41,73 (1995);李耀芳：《国际环境法源起》,中山大学出版社2002年版,第145页。
⑧ Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development, available at: http://www.eldis.org/go/display/?id=23186&type=Document; http://www.iucn.org/themes/law/pdfdocuments/EPLP31 ENsecond.pdf, (both visited 2008/07/28).
①杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版,第146、148页。
② ICUN, UNEP and WWF, World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development, (Switzerland:ICUN,1980) pp.2-3.
③ Nico Schrij ver, Sovereignty Over Natural Resources：Balancing Rights and Duties, (N.Y.:Cambridge Press, 1997) pp.368,387.
④ Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (U.K.:Manchester University Press, 2005),pp.101,113,116,164,166,212.
②杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版,第157页。
① The United States of America and the Republic of Costa Rica considering their mutual interest in maintaining the populations of yellow fin and skipjack tuna and of other kinds of fish taken by tuna fishing vessels in the eastern Pacific Ocean which by reason of continued use have come to be of common concern and desiring to co-operate in the gathering and interpretation of factual information to facilitate maintaining the populations of these fishes at a level which will permit maximum sustained catches year after year, have agreed to conclude a Convention for these purposes and to that end have named as their Plenipotentiaries:who, having communicated to each other their full powers, found to be in good and due form, have agreed as follows:... (底线部分作者自加)
②国际条约如：《经济社会文化权利国际盟约》第1条；国际宣言如：《斯德哥尔摩宣言》第21条；联合国大会决议如：1952年第7届之第626号决议、1962年第17届之第1803号决议、1970年第25届之第2692号与3016号决议。司法判例如：渔业管辖权案(Fishery Jurisdiction Case,1974)、利比亚美国石油仲裁案 (Libyan American Oil Company vs. Libya,1977)与科威特石油国有化仲裁案(Kuwait v.s. Aminoil, 1982)也确立国家对于自然资源的主权管辖。
① J.E.S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1982) p.117.
① IUCN, UNEP and WWF, Caring for the Earth:A Strategy for Sustainable Living, available at:Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/, (visited on:2009/11/4).
①更详细的介绍可参见：全球永续发展的源起与发展,(台湾地区)工业技术研究院能源与资源研究所,Available at:http://graupel.ihs.ncu.edu.tw/earth_sys/climate/develop2.htm, (visited on 2009/11/5).
② Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) p.16.
③《斯德哥尔摩宣言》又称《人类环境宣言》,为维护和改善人类生存环境的纲领性文件。本宣言开宗明义指出人类有权生活于有尊严和福利的环境中,享有自由、平等和生活环境安全的基本权利,并负有保护和改善当代和未来环境的责任。宣言分为共同观点及共同原则两部分。共同观点叙述对环境问题的看法和态度；26项的共同原则强调保护自然资源的要求。available at：http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=97&ArticleID=1503, (visited on 2009/11/3).
④ Principle 2、3、5 of Stockholm Declaration, available at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=97&ArticleID=, (visited on 2009/11/3)
⑤ WCED, Our Common Future,(New York:Oxford University Press,1987)pp.3,43.亦称为”布兰特报告’'(Gro Harlem Brundland Report),摘要参见：Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.18-19.
⑥联合国于1992年于巴西里约召开联合国环境及发展会议(The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development),共有176国政府代表参加,其中104国由领袖出席。多数国家于此次会议中共同签署《里约宣言》与《21世纪议程》外,还签署《气候变迁公约》、《生物多样性公约》及《森林原则》。
① Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.21-22.
② Principle 1、3、4、27 of Rio Declaration.
③ Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.25-43.
④ A/Res.47/191, available at:http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd.htm, (visited on 2009/11/3).
⑤ Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) pp.234-240.
⑥ WCED, Our Common Future, (New York:Oxford University Press,1987) pp.43,46.
⑦ IUCN, UNEP and WWF, Caring for the Earth:A Strategy for Sustainable Living, available at: http://coombs.anu.edu.au/～vern/caring/care-earth1.txt, (visited on:2009/9/21).
①陈述彭：《环境保护与资源可持续利用》,载于：《中国人口资源与环境》,中国可持续发展研究会,1995年,第3期,第12页。
② Jonathan Lash, Towards a Sustainable Future,12 Natural Resource & Environmental,83 (1997).
③王冠雄：《永续发展在国际法意涵之探讨》,载于：《台湾海洋法学报》,台湾海洋大学海洋法律研究所,2006年,5卷2期,第190-191页。
④ Philippe Sands, Sustainable Development:Treaty, Custom, and the Cross-fertilization of International Law, in Alan Boyle and David Freestone (ed.), International Law and Sustainable Development Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999), p.45, ILA Resolution 3/2002:New Delhi Declaration Of Principles Of International Law Relating to Sustainable Development, in ILA, Report of the Seventieth Conference, New Delhi (London:ILA, 2002). Available at:http://www.ila-hq.org. (visited on:2009/10/27).
⑤发生法律效力的国际法规则称为硬法(hard law),包括条约,习惯,一般法律原则和国际组织和国际法庭根据前述所做成有约束力之判决。软法(soft law)则是国际组织和国际会议所通过的一些决议、宣言、宪章、行动计划等,并不发生拘束力的国际性纲领文件。
①捷克斯洛伐克与匈牙利在多瑙河共同进行开发投资计划,计划进行后约五年,匈牙利认为水坝的蓄水中的沉积物可能会对水域、水质产生污染以及生态影响,于是要求中止计划。判决中文参见：http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/ch/files/sum_1997-2002.pdf, (visited on:2009/10/27).
② Dispute Concerning Access to Information Under Article 9 of the OSPAR Convention (July 2,2003),42 ILM (2003) 1118, para.101,103, available at:http://www.asil.org/ilib/ilib0613. htm#j6, (visited on:2009/10/27).
③ Ellis Jaye, Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle:A Rhetorical Analysis (December 22,2008). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1319360 (visited on 2009/1/31).
④ Rosalyn Higgins, Natural Resources in the Case Law of the International Court, in A. Boyle and D. Freestone (eds), International Law and Sustainable Development:Past Achievement and Future Challenges (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999) p.111.
⑤ Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) p.48.
⑥ Vaughn Lowe, Sustainable Development and Unsustainable Arguments, in A. Boyle and D. Freestone (eds) International Law and Sustainable Development:Past Achievement and Future Challenges (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999) 20,24,25,31.
① Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project, para,140, Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,266,404 (1999), Alan Boyle, The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case:New Law in Old Bottles,8 YBIEL 13,19(1997).
② Peter (?)rebech and Martin Chanock, Toward Sustainability:The Basis in International law, in Peter (?)rebech (ed.), The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.385
③国际法由国家创设,在缺乏统一之国际法立法机关之下,判断某特定规则是否为国际法应是从国际法院规约第38条第1项规定之条约,习惯与一般法律原则为判断。
④ Peter (?)rebech and Fred Bosselman, The Linkage Between Sustainable Development and Customary Law, in, Peter (?)rebech (ed.), The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.16、23.
⑤ Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, (New York:Oxford University Press,2003) p.6、8.
① Judge Manfred Lachs, Dissenting Opinion of North Sea Continental Cases, available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/52/5583.pdf?PHPSESSID=4cb073f7a7543d67c06ed83bff416bc9, (visited on 2009/11/3).
②国际法院在1951年之庇护权案认为庇护的要件在国家外交实践出现之重大分歧,且现有之大量国家实践与系争国际法规范定义不符,将导致某规则无法形成习惯国际法。Asylum Case (Colombia/Peru),1951 I.C.J., pp.269,273,276,277. available at:http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/7/1849.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30), North Sea Continental Cases (Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands),1969, ICJ Rep. pp.3,14,28.
③ Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,1996 I.C.J.254, available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/95/7495.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30)
① Ramsar Convention on Wetland, Available at http://www.ramsar.org/cda/ramsar/display/main/main.jsp?zn=ramsar&cp=1-31-38A20671_4000_0__ (visited on 2009/10/30).
② Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, CITES, available at: http://www.cites.org/(visited on 2009/10/30).
③ Convention on Biological Diversity, available at:http://www.cbd.int/convention/convention.shtml (visited on 2009/10/30)
④ Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, available at:www.cbd.int/biosafety/protocol.shtml (visited on 2009/10/30)
⑤ Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, London Convention, available at:http://www.londonconvention.org/(visited on 2009/10/30)
⑥ Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, available at: http://www.unep.ch/Ozone/Treaties and Ratification/2A_vienna_convention.asp (visited on 2009/10/30)
⑦ Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, available at: http://ozone.unep.org/Treaties and Ratification/2B_montreal_protocol.asp (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑧ Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, available at:http://www.basel.int/(visited on 2009/10/30).
⑨ Convention on International Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Trade Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade Rotterdam, available at: http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/hazardous.chemicals.and.pesticides.prior.informed.consent.trade.rotterdam.convention.1 998/index.html (visited on 2009/10/30)
Stockholm Convention, available at:www.epa.gov.tw/FileLink/FileHandler.ashx?file=11856 (visited on 2009/10/30).
Available at:http://unfccc.int/2860.php (visited on 2009/10/30)/
Kyoto Protocol, available at:http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpchinese.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30)。哥本哈根会议是国际社会本诸于可持续发展原则讨论温室效应,碳排放与气候变迁的重要会议,原本要讨论终止京都议定书,基于众多国际因素,最终未能签署有国际法拘束力之条约,仅形成降低碳排量,控制温升2℃,但不对个别国家设立目标的共识。各国也认知此项结果。相关讨论可参见：胡思聪,哥本哈根COP15一事无成,(台湾地区)国政评论,2009年12月31日。available at:www.npf.org.tw/post/1/6890 (visited on 2009/10/30). UN Millennium Development Goals, MDG 2000, available at:http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/(visited on 2009/10/30).
① Reykjavik Declaration on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem, available at: www.fao.org/docrep/005/y2198t/y2198t01.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
② WHO Health for All Strategy, available at:www. who.int/occupational_health/en/oehstrategy.pdf (visited on 2009/10/30)
③ Declaration of the World Summit for Children, available at:www.unicef.org/wsc/declare.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
④ Copenhagen Declaration of the World Summit for Social Development, available at: www.un.org/documents/ga/conf166/aconf166-9.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑤ ILO Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work,1998, available at: www.ilo.org/declaration/thedeclaration/textdeclaration/lang-en/index.htm (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑥ Declaration of the International Conference on Population and Development,1994, available at: http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/conference/bkg/egypt.html (visited on 2009/10/30).
⑦ UN General Assembly Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS A/RES/S-26/2 available at: http://www.un.org/ga/aids/coverage/FinalDeclarationHIVAIDS.html, (visited on 2009/11/4).
⑧ John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in InternationalJurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006); Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources (N.Y.:Cambridge Press,2002)pp.441-442,446,449-450.
⑨ John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability"in InternationalJurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,47,49 (2006); Andrew Serdy, How Long Has the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement Been in Force?,34 Ocean Dev.& Int'l L.29-39 (2003).
① Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) p.103.
② Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) p.52.
③ Philip Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003) p.232-234.
④ Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) pp.52-53.
① John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J. Int'l L.,1,10-14 (2006).
② Michael Decleris, The Law of Sustainable Development General Principles, (Luxembourg:Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,2000) p.65.
③生态原则包含环境有限承载力与同化力。环境承载力是指一个生态系统维持一定人口和其它生命的能力。人类活动必须维持在环境承载能力范围内,避免对环境造成不可逆的损害。环境同化力是指一个生态系统吸收废物的能力。人类活动必须维持在环境同化能力范围内,避免对环境造成不可逆的损害。参见Philip Sands, International Law in the Field of Sustainable Development, BYIL LXV,303,338 (1994).
④有将代际公平称为世代公平,包括当代人之间的横向的代内公平与纵向的代际公平。代内公平要求消灭贫困,缩小地区差异,满足全社会成员的基本需求。代际公平要求任何一代人都不能处于支配地位,不能出现生态赤字,各代人都享有同样的选择发展的机会和权利,本代人不能因自身的发展和需求而损害后代人赖以生存和发展的资源环境基础。参见Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,266,404 (1999)
⑤为了保护环境,各国应根据它们的能力广泛地采取预防性措施。凡遇到有可能造成严重或不可挽回的损害地步,虽缺乏充分的科学肯定性,但不能当作延迟采取防止环境退化有成本效益措施的理由。参见Duncan French, Law and Policy of Sustainable Development (Manchester:Manchester University Press,2005) pp.54, 136; Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,266,404 (1999)
⑥ William Edeson, Towards Long-term Sustainable Use:Some Recent Developments in the Legal Regime of Fisheries, in A. Boyle and D. Freestone (eds), International Law and Sustainable Development Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999) p.166.
⑦ Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan, Sustainable Development Law (New York:Oxford University Press,2004) p.98.
① Jaye Ellis, Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle:A Rhetorical Analysis. Available at: http://ssm.com/abstract=1319360 (visited on 2009/11/4).
② Dire Tladi, Sustainable Development in International Law:An Analysis of Key Enviro-Economic Instruments (Cape Town:Pretoria University Press,2007) p.108-110.
①黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第123页。
① Hugo Grotius, The Freedom of The Seas, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin (trans.) (New York: Oxford University Press,1972) p.22,27-28,34-35,37.
②海洋自由的主张提出后,受到许多学者的批判,参见：黄异,：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化
2000年版,第155-173页；陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)元照出版社2002年版,第325-330页。W. E. Butler, Grotius and Law of the Sea, in Hedley Bull (ed.), Hugo Grotius and International Relations (New York:Oxford University Press,1990) pp.209-212.
③黄异,：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第128-129页。
④ Catherine Floit, Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resource on the High Seas, in Jon Van Dyke (ed.) Freedom of the Seas in the 21st Century, (Washington D.C.:Island Press,1993), p.322,n.14.
⑤ Catherine Floit, Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resource on the High Seas, in Jon Van Dyke (ed.) Freedom of the Seas in the 21st Century, (Washington D.C.:Island Press,1993), p. 312, n.24.
①相关讨论见：黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第121-133页。
②黄异,：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第142页。
③ Robert A. Shinn, The International Politics of Marine Pollution Control, (Santa Barbra： Praeger Publishers, 1974) p.48.
④ Brian D. Smith, State Responsibility and the Marine Environment: The Rules of Decision (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1988) p.71.
⑤ Ramanlal Soni, Control of Marine Pollution in International Law, (Cape Town:Juta,1985) p.136; Brian D. Smith, State Responsibility and the Marine Environment: The Rules of Decision (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) pp.84-85.
①如：1949年《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》(Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,日内瓦第3公约)、1949年《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,日内瓦第4公约)与《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)第5条。国际法是国家间的行为规范,自然人或法人都是处于国家主权管辖。以条约保障个人权利是发展的趋势,但个人成为国际法主体并非常态,应透过条约赋予其法律地位。现今国际法上的权利与义务仍必须通过国家才能及于个人,或者是由国家转化为国内法,由国内法贯彻到个人。
②黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第138-139,426页。
③ Peter G.G. Davis and Catherine Redgwell, The International Legal Regulation of Straddling Fish Stock,67 BYIL, p.265 n.24 (1996).
④整理自：刘楠来：《国际海洋法》,海洋出版社1986年版,第282页,陈德恭：《现代国际海洋法》,中国 社会科学出版社1988年版,第116页,陈治世：《国际法》,(台湾)商务出版社1995年版,第261页,赵明义：《当代国际法导论》,(台湾)五南出版社2001年版,第227页。
① Behring Sea Fur Seals Fisheries Arbitration,1867, available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Sea_Arbitration, (visited on:2009/10/25)，全文： http://www.archive.org/stream/behringseaarbitOOarbigoog/behringseaarbitOOarbigoog_djvu.txt (visited on: 2009/10/25).
② The Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean And Bering Sea, available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/intlagree/docs/IPHC%20-05.doc (visited on:2009/11/2).
③ Dolliver Nelson, The Development of the Legal Regime of High Seas Fisheries, in Alan Boyle and David Freestone (ed.), International Law and Sustainable Development Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999) p.113-115.
④ Catherine Floit, Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resource on the High Seas, in Jon Van Dyke (ed.) Freedom of the Seas in the 21st Century, (Washington D.C.:Island Press,1993), p. 312.
⑤ Convention Concerning Fishing in the Black Sea, available at: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/texts/tre-0230.txt, (visited on:2009/10/23)
① International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas,available at: http://www.fao.org/legal/treaties/014s-e.htm, (visited on:2009/10/25).
②Conservation of the Living Resources of the Southeast Atlantic,available at: http://www.ecolex.org/server2.php/libcat/docs/multilateral/en/TRE000097.txt,(visited on:2009/10/25).
③Baltic Sea Fisheries Convention,本公约虽于2006年1月1口停止运作,但仍有效拘束缔约方。available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/rfb/ibsfc/en.(visited on:2009/9/21).
④Convention on Conservation of Nature in the South Pacific,available at: http://sedac.ciesin.org/entri/texts/nature.south.pacific.1976.html,(visited on:2009/10/25).
⑤Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean,available at: http://eelink.net/～asilwildlife/salmon.html,(visited on:2009/10,25).
⑥参见：公海公约第2条,公海捕鱼公约第1条。
⑦即：所有国家有权由其国民在公海上捕鱼,但受条约义务、本公约规定的沿海国利益和权利与其它公约规定之限制。
⑧Fisheries Jurisdiction Case,1974 ICJ Reports 31,para.72.
⑨Dolliver Nelson,The Development of thee Legal Regime of High Seas Fisheries,in Alan Boyle and David Freestone(ed.),International Law and Sustainable Development Law(Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999) p.120.
①参见：UNCLOS第63条第2款和第64至第67条规定。
② William T. Burke, The New International Law of Fisheries:UNCLOS 1982 and beyond (New York:Oxford University Press,1994) p.94-98.
①以上公约乃整理自FAO官方网站。available at:http://www.fao.org/fibody/rfb/chooserfb.htm, (visited on: 2009/7/30).
② Agenda 21, Chap.17, para.46.
③根据FAO的2009年之数据显示,全球的金枪鱼捕获量从1950年不到60万吨,到2005年的6百万吨,足足增加了近10倍,且未来会持续增加。Available at:http://www.fao.org/fi/Resrcsc.asp#marine, (visited on:2009/10/27).
① Available at:http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_fish_stocks.htm, (visited on:2009/10/27).
② §2 of UNFSA.
① John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006); Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources (N.Y.:Cambridge Press,2002) pp.92-99,123,446,449-450.
② S. H. Gorden, The Economic Theory of a Common Property Resource:The Fishery,62 Journal of Political Economy,124-142(1954).有以最适宜持续生产量(Optimum Sustainable Yield, OSY)与MSY混称,就UNCLOS而言,两者为不同概念,MSY是生物性因素,OSY则是涵盖非生物因素,本文认为两者均在可持续发展的理念阐述如何维持种群的可持续发展性,纵考虑的层面有所不同,也未改变这特性。参见：陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)元照出版社2002年版,第109页。
③陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)元照出版社2002年版,第106页。
④学者阐释MSY为：若不采捕鱼类之情形,自然死亡与再生可趋向平衡而保持最大库存,一旦开始采补,库存将开始降低,为回复采补造成之损失,库存必须成长到原始的水平,此成长的速率极大,当库存降到特定的比率,此水平便是最大可持续捕获量。参见：R. R. Churchill and A. V. Lowe, Law of Sea, (Manchester: Manchester University Press,1985) p.226。另有学者认为TAC可取代MSY, TAC (total allowable catch)之功能在于建立每一鱼种捕捉限量界线,可基于再生的预估量,每年调整可捕获量。参见：R. P. Barston and Pactricia Birnie, The Maritime Dimension (London:Allen & Unwin,1980) p.39.
① Harald Hohmann, Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff,1994) p,189-190.
② World Charter for Nature, available at:www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm, (visited on: 2009/10/27).
③ Graeme Parkes, Precautionary fisheries management:the CCAMLR Approach, Marine Policy, vol.24, no.2, 83-91.(2000).
①所谓幽灵捕捞,系指渔船作业时,因意外或绞断,导致渔具遗失或掉落海中,这些遗失的渔具,随着洋流漂流或沉入海底,造成鱼类意外被捕捞,海底珊瑚生态被破坏。Available at：www.fao.org/fishery/topic/14798/en, (visited on:2009/10/27)
② FAO, Progress in the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and Related Plans of Action, (Rome:FAO,2005).
③ Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas. FAO Compliance Agreement, available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/MEETING/003/X3130m/X3130E00.HTM, (visited on:2009/10/27).
①权宜船相关论述,参见：[日]水上千之,全贤淑译,船舶国籍与方便船籍,大连海事大学出版社2000年版。权宜船的解决之道,可另参见：黄异：《权宜船旗现象与限制授权自由的尝试》,载于：《海洋秩序与国际法》,(台湾)学林文化2000年版,第290-296页。
② Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, available at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/generalassembly/contributions2004/FAO2004.pdf, (visited on:2009/10/27); http://www.ofdc.org.tw/organization/01/fao/01C_fao01.pdf, (visited on:2009/10/27).
③生物多样性公约也间接催化人类对生物资源方面保育之意识,促使FAO召开海洋渔业技术谘商会议产生责任渔业之规范。
④黄异：《渔业法规》,(台湾)渤海堂文化1999年版,第12页。
⑤责任渔业行为准则第1条：本准则系自愿的,但其某些部分系依据国际法相关规定而来,包括由1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约所反映者。本准则也包含可能或已对缔约国间具有拘束力之义务性法律文件之条款规定,例如依联合国粮农组织会议第15/93号决议第3段,1993年促进公海渔船遵守国际养护与管理措施条约,构成本准则完整的一部分。
①黄异：《渔业法规》,(台湾)渤海堂文化1999年版,第13-14页。
② International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity; IPOA-capacity, available at: http://www.fao.org/figis/servlet/static?dom=org&xml=ipoa capacity.xml, (visited on:2009/10/27)
③ International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing; IPOA-IUU,
①Available at:http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4470e/y4470e06.htm#bm06.2, (visited on:2009/10/27)
①详细讨论见：FAO, The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries, FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No.4 Supplement 2, (Rome:FAO,2003),国际社会并未形成新做法出现就必须扬弃先前分析法的见解。
② John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.1,43 (2006); Andrew Serdy, How Long Has the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement Been in Force?,34 Ocean Dev.& Int'l L.29-39 (2003).
① Principle 4、12 of Rio Declaration, Agenda 21, para.2.3.
② David R. Downes and Van Dyke Brennan, Fisheries Conservation and Trade Rules:Ensuring that Trade Law Promotes Sustainable Fisheries (Washington, DC.:Center for International Environmental Law and Greenpeace, 1998),p.17.
③贸易与环境委员会(Committee on Trade and Environment, CTE),已认定目前有两百个左右的多边环境协议中的14个含有特定贸易义务。分别是《国际植物保护公约》(International Plant Protection Convention, IPPC)、《保育大西洋金枪鱼国际公约》(International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, ICCAT)、《华盛顿公约中的濒临绝种野生动植物国际贸易公约》(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, CITEs)、《南极生物资源保育公约》(Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, CCAMLR)、蒙特娄公约(Motreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer)、《巴赛尔公约》(Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal)、《生物多样性公约》 (Convention on Biological Diversity, CBD)、《生物安全议定书》(Cartagena Protocol on Bio-safety)、《联合国气候变迁纲要》(United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC)、《京都议定书》(Kyoto Protocol)、《国际热带木材协议》(International Tropical Timer Agreement, ITTA)、《联合国有关养护与管理跨界鱼类种群和高度洞游鱼类种群规定之协议》(UN Fish Stocks Agreement)、《鹿特丹公约》(Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade)、《斯德哥尔摩公约》(Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, POPs,)等。参见：WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.3, TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1.
④ Philip Sands, Principles of International Environmen Law (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1995) p.261; Richard Blackhurst, Alternative Motivations for Including Trade Provisions in Multilateral Environmental Agreements,131 (3) Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics,329,332(1995), Jake Caldwell, Multilateral Environment Agreements and the GATT/WTO Regime, in Liane Schalatek (ed.), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, (Washington D. C.:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) p.43-45.
① Massimiliano Montini, The Nature and Function of the Necessity and Proportionality Principles in the Trade and Environment Context, Vol.6 issue 2, RECIEL,121 (1997).
② §§6V,6X、17Ⅳ、20Ⅶ、23Ⅲ、33 Ⅱ of FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing.
③ §§31 (2)、3 III (1) of IPOA-IUU.
④ § 1 (b) of FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas.
① ICTSD, Fisheries, International Trade and Sustainable Development:Policy Discussion Paper, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series., (Geneva:ICTSD,2006), p.83.
② Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Papcr No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.2-7; Judith Swan,. Regional Fishery Bodies and Governance:Issues, Actions and Future Directions. FAO Fisheries Circular No.959.(Rome:FAO,2000) p.2-3.
①§§2；3；4；5；6；7；8；9；13 of CITES.
②§§4 Ⅰ-Ⅲ of Montreal Protocol；Philip Sands,Principles of International Environmenf Law(Manchester: Manchester Universitt Press,1995)p.261.
③§§4；6；8 of Basel Convention.
④§§2Ⅳ；6；7；8；9:10；11；12；14；15；16；18；26 of Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
⑤“鼓励”意味着该公约对于非会员的贸易相关措施不会被彻底执行,还会造成搭便车行为(free-rider)的产生,使该公约渐渐失去强制力。例如,当1987年签署蒙特娄公约时,有些不愿签署国家的企业或公司,便采取投机的作法,将生产主力迁移到未有签署国家继续生产臭氧层破坏物质,对于环境继续造成伤害。
⑥分别是美洲间热带金枪鱼委员会、大西洋金枪鱼委员会、南方蓝鳍金枪鱼养护委员会、印度洋金枪鱼委员会和中西部太平洋渔业委员会。
① R. G Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization:Compatibility or Conflict? (Cambridge:TRAFFIC International,2003), p.2-7.
② Duncan Brack and Kevin Gray, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO, Report for the International Institute for Sustainable Development, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, Sustainable Development Programme, (London:Earthscan,2003), p.6,11-13, available at: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/articles/graymeawto.pdf, (visited on 2010/7/1), Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters: Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix II of CITES., (Cambridge: TRAFFIC,2002) p.13.
③研究数据显示欧盟、日本、突尼西亚、摩洛哥已经同意将大西洋蓝鳍金枪鱼每年的捕捞限额从19,500降至13,500吨,但遗憾的是,即便是降至8,000吨,到2023年恢复至原本安全族群数量的机率也只有50%,只有完全禁止捕捞,才有可能恢复至稳定族群数量。Available at： http://wwf.panda.org/wwf news/news/?uNewsID=180682, (visited on 2010/6/24).
①本计划主要依据ⅠCCAT 92-01建议所成立,并由ICCAT 93-02、97-04、01-21三个决议所构成。92-01决议关于冷冻蓝鳍金枪鱼之部分于1993年生效,93-02决议关于新鲜蓝鳍金枪鱼于1994年生效,97-04决议要求转卖蓝鳍金枪鱼鱼体亦需证明文件,01-21则是规范大目金枪鱼出口与转卖相关事宜。
②即该计划附件一B所要求之捕获证明。美国规定所有相关旗鱼的运输必须检附经出口国官员或授权机构签署的合格证明(certificate of eligibility, COE)文件。为进入美国市场,加拿大亦实行替代方案,但并未建立管制进口的制度,因为加拿大是旗鱼出口国而非进口国。
③参见：WT/CTE/W/87; WT/CTE/W/152.
④ Paragraph 13 of the Report of the Sixth Annual Meeting (Second Part) of the CCSBT, March 2000, and Attachment Ⅰ to that Report;纽澳两国自2000年起便认为TIS制度可由CDS制度取代,理由是CDS较为透明,涵盖非进出口产品且能增加委员会效能与信用,此建议尚未被接受。参见Glenn Sant and Mary Lack, The Use of Trade-related Measure in the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), available at:http://www.traffic.org/fish/, (visited on 2010/7/1).
⑤ Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.3.
⑥ IOTC Resolution 01/06, Recommendation by IOTC Concerning the IOTC Bigeye Tuna Statistical Document Programme.
① FAO, Implementation of the International Plan of Action to Deter, Prevent and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, (Rome:FAO,2002) p.51-52, available at: http://ww.fao.org/DOCREP/005/y536E/y3536e0a.htm#fn93, (visited on:2010/7/1); Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters:Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix Ⅱ of CITES., (Cambridge:TRAFFIC,2002), p.7-11.
② Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters:Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix II of CITES, (Cambridge:TRAFFIC,2002) p.9,委员会并于2002年重申此作法。Available at: http://www.ccamlr.org/English/e_pubs/e_app_to_manag/e_app_page3.htm#Top%20of%20Page. May., (visited on 2010/6/28).
③ WT/CTE/W/160.Rev.3., TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1.,16 February 2005. available at:http://docsonline.wto.org, (visited on 2010/6/28)
① Bertrand Le Gallic, Using Trade Measures in the Fight against IUU Fishing:Opportunities and Challenges, available at:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/44/34227035.pdf, (visited on 2010/6/28); Terje Lobach, Measures to be Adopted by the Port State in Combating IUU fishing, available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y3274E/y3274e0h.htm, (visited on 2010/6/28)
② Available at:http://www.oecd.org/document/28/0,2340,en_2649_33901_23649436_1_1_1,00.html, (visited on 2010/6/28).
③ Erik J. Molenaar & Martin Tsamenyi, Satellite-Based Vessel Monitoring Systems:International Legal Aspects and Development in State Practice, p.7. available at:http://www.fao.org/Legal/prs-ol/lpo7.pdf, (visited on 2010/6/28)
④ WT/CTE/W/160.Rev.3., TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1.
① Available at:http://www.fao.org/fishery/vmsprogramme/VMS NEAFC/en, (visited on 2010/6/28)
② Emily Andrews-Chouicha,Kathleen Gray, Why Fish Piracy Prisist:The Economics of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (Paris: OECD Publishing,2005) p.128. ③ Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006),p.7.
④与白名单制度类似,日本社团法人责任渔业推广组织(Organization for the Promotion of Responsibility Tuna Fisheries, OPRT)要求其成员(包括大陆、台湾地区、韩国、菲律宾、印度尼西亚等国/地区的金枪鱼民间机构)将所属管辖超低温金枪鱼渔船名单通报给OPRT.凡没有在OPRT名单上的非日本籍渔船,其渔获不得进入日本市场。Available at:www.oprt.or.jp, (visited on 2010/7/9).
① Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006),p.6.
①§4 of EU Regulation 104/2000,电子追踪系统,可参见：www.tracefish.org.
②Available at:http://agritrade.cta.int/en/content/vicw/full/4725, (visitcd on 2009/12/21).
③参见:Permeable 1-5 of EU-IUU.
①§69 of IPOA-IUU.
②§47.2.49.50 of IOPA-IUU.
③§66 of IPOA-IUU.
④§17.2 of EU-IUU.
⑤§17.6 of EU-IUU.
⑥§17.7 of EU-IUU.
⑦§18.3 of EU-IUU.
⑧§18.4 of EU-IUU.
⑨§56.63 of IPOA-IUU.
⑩§19 of EU-IUU.
①CCAMLR Conservation Measure 10-06, paras.16、19, (2002).
① Decision regarding Cambodia, Honduras and Equatorial Guinea pursuant to the 2000 Action plan (adopted at the Eight Annual Meeting-15-19 October 2001), para 3.
② Decision regarding Belize pursuant to the 2000 Action plan (adopted at the Ninth Annual Meeting-15-18 October 2002), paras.3,4.
① ICCAT Resolution 94-3 and Resolution 95-13.
② ICCAT Resolution 98-18, Resolution 03-15, Recommendation 06-13.
③ ICCAT Recommendations 96-11,96-12.
④ ICCAT Recommendations 99-9,99-10,01-15.
⑤ ICCAT Recommendations 96-14.
⑥参见：WT/CTE/W/87, WT/CTE/W/152.
⑦ FAO, Implementation of the International Plan of Action to Deter, Prevent and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, (Rome:FAO,2002) p.49-51, available at: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y3536E/y3536e0a.htm#fin93, (visited on:2010/7/1).
⑧ R. G. Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization:Compatibility or Conflict? (Cambridge:TRAFFIC International,2003), p.5.
① ICCAT Recommendations,99-10,00-16,04-13.
② Cathy Roheim and Jon G Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.12.
③参见：WT/DS58/AB/R, paras.128-130.
④参见：Tuna Dolphin Case Ⅱ,33 I.L.M.895 (1994).
①参见：Shrimp and Turtle Case,37 I.L.M. (1998), para.7.43.
②参见：Tuna Dolphin Case Ⅱ,33 I.L.M.896-7 (1994)
③ Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.193-196 (1998).
① Gabrielle Marceau and Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud, The Relationship Between the Dispute Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO, in Liane Schalatek (ed.), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, (Washington D. C.:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) pp.82-83.
② Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3. (Geneva: ICTSD,2006) p.22.
①比例原则在国内法领域发展几近成熟,国内法通认国家机关在行使法定职权的过程中,如果出于社会公益不得不就私人权利进行限制,使用之手段要有助于目的的实现,尚须选择对私人权利损害程度最小之手段,且行为对权利造成之可能损害不得大于行为所能保护之社会公益,以保持公共利益与私人利益的均衡,如果追求目的所运用之手段造成的副作用过大,应放弃对目的之追求。目前国际法比例原则的相关运用与条约实践见于1907年又称海牙第四公约之《陆战法规和惯例公约》(Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land);23条c项,《公民权利与政治权利公约》(International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)第19条3项,《欧洲人权公约》 (Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms)第10条2项,《美洲人权公约》(American Convention on Human Rights)第13条2项等。海洋划界之实践虽不甚明显,国际法院在北海大陆架案中即表示若要根据衡平原则划定大陆架边界时,比例性是一项考虑的因素。比例性不是划界的标准,而在非常特殊的地理条件下,为衡平解决划界过程之指导性原则,相关的案例并未就比例原则做定义与要件的阐述,但相关的司法实践显示比例原则是划界中一项重要的参考因素。或许有质疑比例原则在国内法与国际法的实践是大相径庭,国际法之体系通常是依据或模拟某些法律概念所形成,虽然所属的法域不同,然基本精神均在调和法律利益冲突,以过犹不及的核心理念调整利益冲突,实现公平正义。另可参照：Hersch Lauterpacht, International Law:Collected Papers, Elihu Lauterpacht (ed), (New York:Cambridge University Press,2009) p.173,180.
② John H. Jackson, The Jurisprudence of GATT and the WTO, Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2000) p.159.
③ Panel Report, United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/R, (May 15, 1998). Appellate Body Report, United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/R, (Oct.12,1998).
④ Rudiger Wolfrum, Article XX GATT1994, in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (London:Maritus Nijhoff Publisher,2007) p.72-73.
①Petros Mavroidis,Trade and Environment after the Shrimps-Turtles Litigation,34 JWT,1,73,74,79(2000).
②§2Ⅱof TBT.
③§§2 I.2Ⅱ.3Ⅱ.5Ⅳ、Ⅵ of SPS.
①§5VII of SPS.
②§2(c) of ASCM.
①§§8 Ⅰ(b). (c)；11 Ⅰ.Ⅱ；13Ⅲ(b)of GATT。其它如:§10 ofTBT；§§3Ⅳ、4Ⅱof GATS.
②Panel Report,Japan-Restrications on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products,(Mar.22,1988),GATT B.I.S.D. (35th Supp.),163(1989)；Patricia I.Hansen,Transparency,Standards of Review and the Use of Trade Measures to Protect the Global Environment,39 Va.J.Int'l L.1017,1059(1999)
③Appellate Body Report,United States-Restrictions on Cotton and Man-made Fiber Underwear, WT/DS24/AB/R,(Feb.10,1997).
① OECD Secretariat, Trade and Regulatory Reform:Insights from the OECD Country Reviews and Other Analyses,(OECD:Trade Directorate,2000), Kalypso Nicolaidis and Michelle Egan, Journal of European Public Policy 8:3 Special Issue,454,455,469 (2001).
① Oliver Landwehr, Agreement on Application of Sanitary & Phytosanitary Measures Article 3,in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (Boston:The Martius Nijhoff Publisher,2007) p.419-429.
② §§SⅡ、3Ⅲ、5Ⅳ、Ⅴ、Ⅶ of SPS.
③此案源于1989年欧盟禁止由美国与加拿大进口以六种荷尔蒙促进生长之牛肉,认为残留在牛肉中之荷尔蒙可能具有致癌性,会危及欧盟消费者之健康：但美国与加拿大认为其牛肉中贺尔蒙含量极低,不致造成健康危害,则认为欧盟此项措施不符科学原则,要求当时的GATT加以解决,多年的缠讼仍未能解决,WTO曾做成裁决(WT/DS48/11, WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R 5.), available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu e/cases e/ds26 e.htm, (visited on 2009/8/9)近日亦有最新发展。参见：罗锦岚,陈姿妤：《WTO上诉机构就荷尔蒙案之报复措施作出裁决》,《(经贸法讯》77期,2008年12月23日,available at:http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no77/1.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9);罗锦岚,郑黛燕：《欧美荷尔蒙案之最新进展》,《经贸法讯》82期,2009年3月16日,available at: http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no82/3.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9);施晓恩,WTO荷尔蒙案建立解除报復性制裁之新规则,available at:www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no69/4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
①专家小组的理由是欧盟相关措施违反SPS第3条1项、5条1项与同条5项。上诉机构则是认为欧盟之措施违反SPS协议第3条3项及5条1项,但驳回专家小组所作违反3条1项及5条5项之判决。
②不歧视原则是WTO最重要的原则之一,其规定缔约方一方在实施某种限制或禁止措施时,不得对其它缔约方实施歧视待遇,要求各缔约国在任何贸易活动都要给予其它缔约方以平等待遇,使所有缔约国能在同样的条件下进行贸易。
③ Oliver Landwehr, Agreement on Application of Sanitary & Phytosanitary Measures Article 3,in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (Leiden:The Martius Nijhoff Publisher,2007) p.423-424.
①许惠悰：《食品安全的风险评估》,载于：《Taiwan Watch》, Vol.6, No.3,2004/Autumn, available at: http://www.taiwanwatch.org.tw/magazine/v6n3/v6n3-001.pdf (visited on 2009/8/4) ② Assuring Food Safety and Quality:Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems, available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/capacity/en/Chinese_Guidelines_Food_control.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/4).
③食品法典委员会是负责汇整食品安全的标准、操作准则、指导原则及提供建议的一个委员会。Available at: http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp, (visited on 2009/8/4).
④ Steve Charnovitz, The Supervision of Health and Biosafety Regulation by World Trade Rules,13 Tulane Environmental Law Journal,271,276,302 (2000).
⑤ Steve Charnovitz, The Supervision of Health and Biosafety Regulation by World Trade Rules,13 Tulane Environmental Law Journal,271,276,302 (2000); Report of Appellate Body, Australia-Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon, WT/DS18. (Sep.17,1998), available at: www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/australia-salmon(panel).pdf, (visited on 2009/8/4).
① Hilary French,郑先佑,郭金泉译：《Challenging the WTO》, 《World Watch》,1999年11/12月。available at:http://staff.pccu.edu.tw/-ayo/5green/WTOpap.htm, (visited on 2009/8/4).
②罗昌发：《国际贸易法》,(台湾)元照出版社1996年版,第371页。
③ Renee Johnson, Charles E. Hanrahan, The U.S.-EU Beef Hormone Dispute, Report for Congress,7 (2009), available at:www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R40449.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
④ Panel Report, Japan-Measure Affecting Argicultural Products, WT/DS/76/1, (Oct.27,1998) available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/76r.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
① Panel Report, United States-Prohibitions of Imports of Tuna and Tuna Products from Canada, L/5198-29S/91, available at:www.sice.oas.org/dispute/gatt/80tuna.asp, (visited on 2009/8/9).
②黄异：《国际法在国内法领域中的效力》,(台湾)元照出版社2006年版,第38页。
③ GATT Panel Report, US-Superfund, paras.5.2.9.-5.2.10. available at: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/gattpanels/superfund.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
① GATT Panel Report, Thailand-Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, GATT B.I.S.D. (37th Supp.), (Nov.7,1990)
②论者称为”裁量/强制”原则。参见：彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第15页。
①美国法典(USC)第2411节规定301法案：如果美国贸易代表依第2414条A项1款确定：(A)美国依任一贸易协议所享有的权利遭到否定；或(B)外国的一项法令、政策或者做法(i)违反了任一贸易协议的规定,或者与该协议的规定不符,或者否定了美国依该协议所享有的权利,或(ii)是不正当的,并且对美国的商业造成了负担或限制；那贸易代表就应采取(c)项所规定的措施。如果总统对这种措施有特别的指示,贸易代表应该遵守。贸易代表还应在总统的权限内,采取总统依该分节可能要求采取的所有其它适当、可行的措施,以实施这种权利或者消除这一法令、政策或依法采取措施。
②林彩瑜：《WTO争端解决机制与美国贸易法301条款之研究》,available at: http://www.itl.nctu.edu.tw/Thesis/1999/1999_4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/18).
③ WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.53-7.56.
①彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第14页。
② WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.30.
③ Holger Hestermeyer, Atricle 3 GATT 1994, in Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll, Anja Seiber-Foher (ed.) WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, (Boston:Martius Nijhoff,2007) p.21.
④ Panel Report, Report of the Panel on Uruguayan Recourse to Article XXIII, L/1923-11S/95, (Nov.16,1962), available at:http://www.sice.oas.org/dispute/gatt/62resmea.asp, (visited on 2009/9/6).
⑤根据学者考察,自本案之后,上诉机构至少在10个案件内承认此种分类,而本案也没有扬弃这种分类。彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第19页。
⑥ WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.98.
⑦即考察美国之行政措施声明(Statement of Administrative Action)已有效地限制USTR的裁量权,消除美国贸易法第304、306条的文义之内之违反WTO相关原则之因素。WTO Panel Report, US-Section 301, para.7.112-7.113.
①裁量萎缩又称为裁量收缩至零,为大陆法系国家国内法解构行政裁量之特殊型态,指行政机关依法规原有决定裁量或选择裁量之空间,惟为因应具体个案中特殊情事,行政机关裁量权应受限制,如不赋予相对人该当法律效果或多数法律效果中特定之一时,即属违法。整理自吴庚：《行政法之理论与实用》,(台湾)作者自版2005年8月增订九版,李建良等：《行政法入门》,,(台湾)元照出版社2006年1月第三版,(台湾地区)司法院大法官释字第469号解释。
②彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第17-19页。
③ William Davey, Has the WTO Dispute Settlement System Exceeded its Authority? 4(1) JIEL.79,87,96,103 (2001).
④彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,(台湾)《月旦民商法》,第七期,2005年3月,第22页。
① La Grand case (Germany v.United States of America), Judgment of 27 June 2001. available at: http://www.icj-cij.or g/icjwww/idocket/igua/igusframe.htm, (visited on.2009/8/23).
① Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, Mexico v. United States of America, DS21/R-39S/15,30 ILM 1594 (1991)。除前开争议外,美国与加拿大,欧盟都曾为金枪鱼捞捕作业的意外捕获海豚问题发生争端,参见：United States-Restrictions on Imports of Tuna from the EEC, GATT Doc. DS29/R reprinted in 33 I.L.M.839 (1994).
② Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,82-84 (2005).
③ US Measures Concerning the Importation Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products, Request for Establishment of a Panel by Mexico, WTO Doc, WT/DS 381/4, (Mexico Initiates WTO Dispute Proceeding Against U.S. "Dolphin-Safe" Label for Tuna, Mar.10,2009).
④ Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific-The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,84 (2005).
⑤该案主要背景为海豚与金枪鱼有共游现象,美国认为在围网(purse seine nets)过程中,无鳃的海豚很容易因为惊吓而受困网中,导致无法换气而死亡,即便捕获后放走,也容易成为掠食者的食物。为避免意外死亡的情况加剧,美国要求输入美国域内的金枪鱼根据其国内法规定加入自愿性遵守的无害海豚标签(Dolphin Safe Label),目的在于确保海豚的数量不会因捕捞金枪鱼的意外捕获造成影响族群,但不禁止任何金枪鱼产品(包含鱼体)进入美国境内。墨西哥认为此标签将使得该国以围网方式所捕得的金枪鱼无法进入美国市场。围网捕鱼虽有可能在捞捕的过程中捕获海豚,但捕获后将海豚放走是符合《国际海豚养护协议》(Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation, AIDCP)与《美洲热带金枪鱼公约》管理委员会(Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission)的标准。美国要求的标签为美国国家环境政策法规定,必须以标签上显示海洋哺乳动物保护法的相关内容,在市场有主导消费者选择的能力,没有标签的产品可能不受进口商青睐,即便贩卖,民众也可能不购买,使得该国出产的金枪鱼及产品处于市场劣势,造成实质上的销售障碍。为取得相同产品之在与美国市场之竞争地位,墨西哥籍的渔船必须改变捞捕方式,将增加不必要技术障碍与市场进入障碍,便向WTO提出成立争端解决小组,解决上述争议。
① Available at: http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2009/november/united-states-initiates-nafta-dispute-mexi co-over (visited on 2009/12/13).
②学术领域研究意外捕获对生态影响的文献颇多,本段仅择定渔具与渔法造成的影响。
③ Matt K. Boardhurst, Steven J. Kennelly and Charles Gray, Strategies for Improving the Selectivity of Fishing Gears, in Steven J. Kennelly (ed), By-catch Reduction in the World's Fisheries, (Netherlands:Springer,2007) p.2-5.
④通常两艘竹筏一组,每筏两人,以网目大小不拘的沉底拖网,上方网缘约在海面下3公尺,下方则在水面下50公尺左右,底纹不是通电就是加上滚轮或铁链,藉由这些电流或铁链锁发出的声响驱出藏身礁岩或泥沙中的鱼、贝、虾、蟹。是否开放此种渔法捕鱼取决于当地民情、地形与生态系统。目前有部分渔民极力反对此种渔法,认为此破坏性渔法有极大的可能将生态复育的成果将毁于一旦。参见：http://udn.com/NEWS/DOMESTIC/DOM5/5283972.shtml, (visited on 2009/12/20).
① Available at:www.mongabay.com/sea_turtles/fisheries.html, (visited on 2009/12/20)
②延绳钓是由渔船放出一条长达一百公里的母绳,绳上最多可系3,000个子线和鱼钩,许多鱼、海龟和鸟類会被鱼饵吸引且意外上钩,支线上绑有饵料的钓钩。其它辅助工具,例如浮标和雷达定位仪,主要是使钓线保持漂浮以及协助搜寻渔具。延绳钓船队捕捉许多鱼种,例如：鬼头刀(mahi-mahi)和剑旗鱼(swordfish)以及鲨鱼(shark)等。一本钓渔船不同于围网和延绳钓渔船使用船上储存的活饵料鱼捕捉金枪鱼,是利用停留在渔船附近的饵料鱼吸引海水表层的金枪鱼,船上的渔夫再使用长鱼竿和鱼饵去捕捉金枪鱼。
③自然保护联盟(International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, IUCN)认为信天翁都已经濒临生存危机。Available at:http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/144900/0, (visited on
2009/12/20)
④美国1996年Magnuson-Stevens法案(MSA)第3条2项的定义是：”渔业中收获的鱼类,但不是供出售或个人用途,而且包括经济性丢弃物和规定性丢弃物。不包括休闲性捕捞/释放渔业管理计划中放生的鱼类”。FAO的定义是”丢弃物或丢弃渔获物是所捕获的动物类有机物质总量中无论任何原因而被丢掉或在海上倾倒的那部分。它不包括植物和内脏等收获后废料。丢弃渔获物可以是死的,也可以是活的。”参见Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第3-5页。
⑤ Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第22页。
⑥ Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第56页。
①各国部长同意明确和改进适用于渔业补贴的WTO规则为多哈回合结论之一(TN/RL/W/213)。Available at:http://worldtradelaw.typepad.com/ielpblog/2008/10/doha-negotiatio.html?no_prefetch=1, (visited on 2009/12/24)
②海龟、鲨鱼等是在浅水性地带活动,若将延绳钩垂降到100公尺以下的水域,不但可以降低混获的比例,同时由于鲔鱼偏好活动于深水域的习性,显示此方法可增加鲔鱼捕获量。
③根据FAO的官方文件指出改变意外捕获物的利用方式亦可减缓海中生物的锐减速度。参见Kieran Kelleher,世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物,Tech. Papers No.470 (FAO:Rome,2008)第23-34页。但根据世界自然基金会(World Wildlife Foundation, WWF)截至2009年的统计,平均每两分钟就有一头鲸豚遭渔网缠勒溺毙,每年有高达25万只海龟和10万只信天翁因延绳钓而死亡,其中有19种信天翁濒临绝种。Available at:http://www.panda.org/what we do/footprint/smart fishing/bycatch/(visited on 2009/11/16)。
④如：§2 of CITES;§§8 (j)、10 (b)、15、16 (2) (3)、19 (3)、22 of CBD。但须注意CBD仅系设定目标,并未纳入特定贸易措施或其它特定措施。另卡塔赫纳生物安全议定书前言与第2条4项则规定贸易与环境协议应相互支持；缔约国可以实行较本议定书更为保育生物多样性及可持续利用的保护措施,惟此等措施仍应符合本议定书之目标及规范,以及缔约国于其它国际规范下应遵行的义务。ICCAT公约本身并无贸易措施,但缔约国通过的议案涵盖贸易限制措施。不具法律拘束力之负责任渔业行为准则(Code of Conduct) 11.1-11.3段；IPOA-IUU 65-76段亦有规以贸易相关措施达成目的之规定。
⑤ S. Bache, M. Howard and S. Dovers, Economic, Trade and Environmental Instruments:Their Impact on Australian Fisheries Policy and Management, (Wollongong:Centre for Maritime Policy University of Wollongong,2001), p.76.
⑥ C. R. Wessells, K. Cochrane, C. Deere, P. Wallis & R. Willmann, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.83.
① Travis Potts and Marcus Howard, International Trade, Eco-labelling, and Sustainable Fisheries-Recent Issues, Concepts and Practice, Environment,9 Development and Sustainability,91 (2007) ② Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316,318-9 (2002), Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy?, Fisheries Research, Vol.100, Issue 3,185,185-186(2009). Kieran Kelleher, 世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物. Tech. Papers No. 470 (FAO:Rome,2008) 第44页。
③ Bruce Phillips, Trevor Ward & Chet Chaffee (ed.), Eco-labelling in Fisheries:What Is It All About, (Oxford:Blackwell Publishing,2003) p.4-10.
④ OECD, Eco-Labelling:Actual Effects of Selected Programme, (Paris:OECD,1997) p.1, Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.5, C. R. Wessells, Ecolabelling and International Seafood Trade:the Roles of Certification Costs and Consumers Willingness to Pay, Fisheries Economics Newsletter 50, p.44-49 (2000).
⑤ Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy?, Fisheries Research, Vol.100, Issue 3,185,185 (2009).
⑥ Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy, 309,315 (2008).
⑦油鱼(蔷薇带鰆)和鳕鱼虽然同是幅鳍鱼纲,但鳕鱼是鳕型目,有别于油鱼的鲈形目,油鱼也不是圆鳕(Gadus macrocephalus)。详细介绍可参见：张水锴：《您吃到的鳕鱼可能是「油甘」?》,《渔业推广》第235期,(台湾地区)行政院农委会渔业署,2007年10月,第24页。
①蜡酯非有毒物质,一般人体难以消化。消费者进食后30分钟就会出现腹泻、肠胃痉挛等不适症状,且蜡酯会从肛门流出。
② Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy, 315 (2008).
③ Karen West, Ecolabels:The Industrialisation of Environmental Standards, (25) The Ecologist, No.1.,3 (1995).
④ Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316,318-9 (2002), Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy?, Fisheries Research, Vol.100, Issue 3,185,185-186 (2009)
⑤ Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316 (2002), Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,375 (1999), Bruce Phillips, Trevor Ward & Chet Chaffee (ed.), Eco-labelling in Fisheries:What Is It All About, (Oxford:Blackwell Publishing,2003) p.4-10, Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Jennifer L. Jacquet & Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy,309,314-315 (2008).
⑥ Bruce Phillips et al., Eco-labelling in Fisheries:What Is It All About, (Oxford:Blackwell Publishing,2003) pp.97-100,107,114,138,143,161.
⑦ISO的分类方式除着重标签表达内容外,也强调标签的认证单位。第一類的生态标签以预先设定之规格 标准,并经过第三者验证对环境产生不利冲击较小的产品,颁发专用标签,需强制经无利害关系的”第三者”确认或验证,多由为政府或政府支持之非营利组织执行验证。第二類是指由产品制造商、进口商、配销商、零售商或任何藉此诉求而获益的人士设计之提供讯息的符号或图形,自行验证的环境诉求；以及由厂商或营利性验证组织执行验证先前预设之科学数据后,提供给消费者信息的符号或图形的第三類环境宣告。available at:http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=34425, (visited on 2009/12/24); http://www.greenmark.org.tw/main4.asp, (visited on 2009/12/24).
① Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.13.
②美国国家有机食品标准审议委员会(Natioanl Organic Standards Board)指出,”有机食品是将产销过程中的污染毒害减至最低的一种食品,但不保证有机食品可以完全免除化肥杀虫剂的残留”。参见：RE：AMS-TM-07-0032-0001, National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) Aquaculture Standards, USDA Organic Standards for Seafood, March 21,2007, available at: http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/AFSIC_pubs/afnotes5.htm#chapl, (visited on 2009/11/18); http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/fish/seafood/labeling/organic-seafood/usda-organic-standards-for-seafood (visited on 2009/11/18).(台湾地区)有机农业管理作业要点第二条,有机农产品及有机农产加工品验证管理办法第三条为有机农产品及有机农产加工品验证基础。(台湾地区)目前并无渔产品标签,只有根据(台湾地区)水产食品业实施食品安全管制系统所着重的产销履历,避免制造过程受物质污染的安全管制,而(台湾地区)水产动物类卫生标准所规范的是重金属含量,乃着重在制成品。(台湾地区)农委会目前正在拟定整合相关授予有机农、渔产品的检测标准与认证标章之规范
③欧洲民间组织(Naturaland)只就完全圈养封闭系统与食物链低端的鱼种的认证。美国2002年有机食品计划(National Organic Program in 2002)没有将海鲜纳入,引发相当争议。多数人认为此举是可持续发展 的严重挫败。否定标章者认为有机着重生产的流程控管,而有机海鲜是无法确知海洋与养殖水域的受污染程度,永远不知道鱼在哪吃到什么。即便是箱网圈养(net-pens),圈养内的排泄物污染,疾病传递以及基因污染也是难以判断的重要因素。倡议者认为有机标章的迫切需要性,目前美国研拟联邦立法有机海鲜标章,除加州明确禁止任何食品以有机名义贩卖外,任何国家的有机海鲜标章食品都可以在美国各州贩卖,如此标准不一将会将造成误导消费者。根据报导目前美国形成之共识部分主要是先针对圈养,半圈养与野生鱼种订定不同的标准,但内容尚未定论。available at: http://naturalfoodsmerchandiser.com/tabld/109/itemId/2529/NOSB-debates-organic-seafood.aspx, (visited on 2009/12/16)
①此联合标签计划适用的对象因组织团体不同而有差异,美国责任渔业协会是美国国内的海鲜产品,而全球水产养殖联盟是全球的养殖虾业者。此联合生态标章为开放性质,以各养殖业者努力促进可持续生产海鲜为成立宗旨。使用此联合标章的业者代表已赞同此计划所提倡的责任渔业行为,并把这些原则纳入执行业务中。见：Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.12.
②海洋管理委员会为非营利之全球性国际组织。判断授予标签(The Best Environmental Choice in Seafood)之准则为：渔业管理应建置于一套有效率管理系统之上,并遵守区域渔业组织、国家及国际法令和标准。渔业行为必须不会造成过渔或鱼种减少的结果,如果是已枯竭的鱼种,渔业行为必须展现出使其恢复存量的事实。捕捞操作必须要维系生态系统的结构、生产力、功能性、及多样性。available at：http://www.msc.org/assets/docs/fishery%20certification/MSCPrinciples&Criteria.doc, (visited on 2009/12/16).
③ Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.13.
①为保持可持续的渔群数量,RFMO每年均会制订特定鱼种的总量后分配给区域渔业组织的成员,并要求在区域内作业的渔船在捕捞日志详实记录并将数量回报捕获数量,一旦超过数量就必须停止捕鱼。实际上许多作业船只都备有两套日志登记确实捕获数量。溢捕的鱼货不会回港卸货,直接在公海以装有冷冻设备的渔船载去管制较为宽松的港口卸货。
② FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2009) p.18-19.
③于2010年1月1日正式生效之新法规其它重要内容包含强化口岸检查制度,进入欧盟成员国港口进行装卸货物,转运和港口服务的非欧盟国家渔船应在指定的港口接受检查。进港船只需在进港前3天通知欧盟成员国港口检查机关,并申报所装载的渔产品数量、品种、捕捞日期和捕捞地点及捕捞工具。available at: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/extemal_relations/illegal_fishing_en.htm, (visited on 2009/12/21)相关讨论参见本文第二章第一节。
④ Jennifer Schultz, The GATTfWTO Committee on Trade and the Environment-Toward Environmental Reform,89 Am. J. Int'l L.423,428,435-436. (1995).
⑤ OECD, Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries 43, (Paris:OECD,1991), p.33, WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, Information Relevant to Consideration of the Market Access Effects of Ecolabeling Schemes, WT/CTE/W/150, p.6-10 (June 29,2000), UNCTAD, Briefing Paper of Legal and Policy Issues in the Market Access Implication of Labelling for Environment Purposes, (Bangkok:UNCTAD,2004) p.5-6, Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,116 (1997), Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,605 (1999), Christian Tietje, Voluntary Eco-Labelling Programs and Questions of State Responsibility in the WTO/GATT Legal System,29 J. World Trade,123,127-28 (1995), John J. Emslie, Labeling Programs as a reasonably Available Least Restrictive Trade Measure under Article XX's Nexus Requirement,30 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.485,494-498 (2005).
① Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,211-213 (1996), Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,316,317 (2002)
② 42 U.S.C.A. Subsection 4321; 1994 Clean Air Act,42 U.S.C.7671 (j).
③ 7 U.S.C.136-136y; 40 C.F.R.721.72 (b) (1997);(台湾地区)食品卫生管理法10条与食品中多氯联苯限量标准规定食品中之多氯联苯含量不应超过一定数值,但同法17条却没有要求制造者应强制标示。
④ Steve Keane, Tradefair Competition Winner:Can a Consumer's Right to Know Survive the WTO?:The Case of Food Labeling,16Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Prob.297-301 (2006).
⑤此标签目前涵盖数百种产品,available at:http://www.blauer-engel.de/en/index.php, (visited on 2009/12/21).
⑥E之花标签,available at:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/index en.htm, (visited on 2009/12/21)其它相类似者：加拿大咨询委员会(Advisory Board)管理的政府性组织(governmental organization)的Environmental Choice, available at:http://www.ecoconceptsusa.com/EnvironmentalChoice.aspx, (visited on 2009/12/21),口本由准政府行政计划(quasigovernmental project) 的 Eco-Mark, www.ecomark.jp/english, (visited on 2009/12/21)详细讨论可参见Avi Gesser, Canada"s Environmental Choice Program:A Model for a "Trade-Friendly" Eco-Labelling Scheme,39 Harv. Int'l. L. J.501,503-505 (1998), Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,382 (1999).
⑦ Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.,373,378-380 (1999).
① U. S. C. Titles 16, Section 1385, (Dolphin Protection Consumer Protection Act); Code of Federal Regulation, Title 50, Section 216.91, (Dolphin Safe Labeling Standards); Section 216.92 (Dolphin Safe Requirements for Tuna Harvested in the East Topical Pacific by Large Purse Seine Vessels).
② Available at:http://www.dolphinsafe.gov/, (visited on 2009/12/23)
③ Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 607 (1999), Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBTAgreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,57 (1997).
④ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,57-58 (1997).
⑤ Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.7, Steve Keane, Tradefair Competition Winner:Can a Consumer's Right to Know Survive the WTO?:The Case of Food Labeling,16 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Prob.306 (2006)
⑥ Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,382 (1999)
⑦ Available at:http://www.earthtrust.org/fsa.html, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑧ Available at:http://www.greenseas.com.au/, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑨ Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,383-4 (1999).
⑩ Available at:http://www.johnwest.com.au/Environment/, (visited on 2009/12/23).
① Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.7.
② C. R. Wessells, K. Cochrane, C. Deere, P. Wallis & R. Willmann, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.60; Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,621,623 (1999).
③ Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,136-7 (1996).
① Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO?,20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.195,206-208 (2009), Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,129-131 (1996), Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,390-393 (1999), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,240 (1996)
② Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va.Envtl. L. J.51,69-70 (1997).
① Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,393 (1999), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205, 243-44 (1996).
② Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,82-84 (2005).
③ Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,133 (1996).
④ Panel Report, Tuna/Dolphin I, para.5.42-5.44, Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment: An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,65-69 (1997).
⑤ Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO?,20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.195,209 (2009), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,251-52 (1996).
① Panel Report,Tuna/Dolphin I, para.1618,1622-1623; Panel Report, Tuna/Dolphin Ⅱ, para.894,896.
② Jennifer Ramach, Dolphin-Safe Labeling:Are the Dolphins Finally Safe,15 Va. Envtl. L. J.743,748,749,753 (1996), Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,622 (1999), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,252(1996), Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,133 (1996)
③墨西哥是主张违反GATT 1994第9条产地证明(Marks of origin)。
④ William J. Snape, III and Naomi B. Lefkovitz, Searching for GATT's Environmental Miranda:Are "Process Stranards"Getting "Due Process? ",27 Cornell Int'l L. J.777,784-785 (1994), Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade, 21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,253 n.309 (1996)
⑤ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,66 (1997).
① Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,121,124 (1996).
② Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,66 (1997).
③ William J. Snape III and Naomi B. Lefkovitz, Searching for GATT's Environmental Miranda:Are "Process Stranards"Getting "Due Process? ",27 Cornell Int'l L. J.777,785,789 (1994).
④ Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine Fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,84 (2005).
⑤ Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 618-619 (1999).
⑥ UNCLOS与UNFSA便是以MSY计算,目前在FAO的倡导之下,另辅以生态系(Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries; EAF)作为族群数量科学数据之评估。相关分析与的介绍,available at: www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0191e/a0191e00.HTM, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑦ Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening" of World Trade,21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.205,247-51.253 (1996).
① Carol J. Miller and Jannifer L. Croston, WTO Scrutiny v. Environmental Objectives:Assement of the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act,37 AM. Bus. L. J.73,98 (1999), Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO?,20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.195,209(2009),本文认为自由放任的贸易制度是集短视近利之大成,资本市场的自我调节机制甚少具有明智的决定,特别是为了攫取自然资源的独占地位,看不见的手根本就是蒙蔽消费者的知的权利,以方便跨国企业独占全球市场。
② United States-Import Prohibitions of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/RW; AB Report WT/DS58/RW, para.164-168,172, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds58_e.htm, (visited on 2009/12/25), Ronald Salz, Sea Turtle Mortality, Shrimp Fisheries, and International Trade:A Case Study of a Global Natural Resource Conflict, available at:www.umass.edu/hd/research/turtle.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23), John J. Emslie, Labeling Programs as a reasonably Available Least Restrictive Trade Measure under Article XX's Nexus Requirement,30 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.485,525-528 (2005).
① Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118,135 (1996), WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, Communication from Canada, WT/CTE/W/21, (Feb.21,1996), p.2, Discusses Proposals on Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements and on Eco-Labelling, PRESS/TE/008, (Apr.29,1996), p.10, Report (1996) of the Committee on Trade and Environment, WT/CTE/1, (Nov.12,1996) p.6.
② United States-Measures Affecting Alcoholic and Malt Beverages (1992), GATT B.I.S.D. (39th Supp.) 206, 296-97(1993).
① Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 622 (1999)
② S. W. Chang, GATTingA Green Trade Barrier-Eco-Labelling and the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,31 (1) Journal of World Trade,138,156 (1997), Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51, 73 (1997)
③ Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 628 (1999).
④ Canada-Measures Affecting the Sale of Gold Coins, GATT Doc.45863 (1985),pp.61-62 available at:LEXIS, Intlaw Library, GATT pdf file, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑤ OECD, Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries 43, (Paris:OECD,1991 p.33, Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.373,383 (1999).
① V. Jha, Eco-labeling and International Trade, UNTAD, UN Doc 70 at 10, UNCTAD/OSG/DP/70(1993), cited by Atsuko Oukbo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev. 599,606 (1999).
②1.1就本协议之目的而言,如有下列情况应视为有补贴之存在：(a)(1)会员(本协议简称为「政府」)境内有由政府或任何公立机构提供之财务补助者,即政府措施涉及资金(诸如补助金、贷款及投入股本)之直接转移资金或债务可能之直接转移(例如贷款保证)；(ⅰ)政府抛弃或未催缴原已届期应缴纳之税收(例如抵减税之财务奖励)；(ⅱ)政府提供一般基本设施以外之商品或劳务,或收购商品；(ⅲ)政府提供给付予募集基金之机构,或委托或指示一民营机构执行通常归属政府之前述第(ⅰ)点至第(ⅲ)点所到之一种或多种功能,且其做法与政府通常做法实际上并无差异者：(a)(2)存有GATT1994第十六条所指任何形式之所得补贴或价格维持者；且(b)因而授与利益者。1.2前项定义之补贴应受第二篇规定之规范,或若其构成第二条规定之特定性要件者,应受第三篇或第四篇规定之规范。
③ EC-Countervailing Measures on Drams Chips, Panel Report, (WT/DS299/R) (17 June 2005) para.7.48, available at:http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/ec-dramscvd(panel).pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23).US-Countervailing Duty Investigation on Drams, Appellate Body Report, (WT/DS296/R) (21 February 2005) para.52, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/296r_a_e.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23)
④国家为了不同的国家目的及各种的经济政策,可以给予私人企业一定的财产价值之利益给予,称为行政补助或经济补助。在德国及我国学界大致上已经形成共识：如果涉及对受补助者、或第三人基本权利的限制或侵犯其它宪法原则时,则必须适用法律保留原则；否则,仅需有预算法的依据、并且透过主管机关公布的法规、依循依法行政的原则行使之只要不违反平等权,不会有行政滥权之虞,即可为之。
⑤此处所指之行政委托是指行政机关依法规将其权限之一部分,委托民间团体或个人办理。行政契约是乃行政机关与人民缔结,用以创设、变更或修改公法法律关系之契约；或二以上之法律主体,以设定、变更或消灭行政法法律关系为目的,互相为意思表示而合致成立之法律行为。本文不讨论两者的管辖变动与其它国内法问题。主要藉以说明此二者都属于国家行为的一种。另FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector (Rome:FAO,2009), p.18,忧虑是否会造成过度授与公权力问题,本文认为属该国内法的行政监督层次,非本文讨论重点。
① United States-Final Dumping Determination on Softwood Lumber from Canada, Appellate Body Report (WT/DS257/AB/R), (19 January 2004) para.46.47. available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/257abr_e.doc, (visited on 2009/12/23).
② Canda-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, Appellate Body Report (2 August 1999), para.149,154,161. available at: http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/do/www/readDoc?document_id=63655, (visited on 2009/12/23).
③ Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.28, FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2009) p.17, Erik P. Bartengen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,77 (1997), Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599,642-643 (1999)
④ §§8 Ⅰ (b)、(c);11Ⅰ、Ⅱ;13 Ⅲ(b) of GATT。其它如: §10 of TBT:3 Ⅳ、4Ⅱ of GATS.
①罗昌发：《国际贸易法》,(台湾)月旦出版社1997年版,第213页,Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.118, 123 (1996);如,石油标准案(.U.S.-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline)即是美国以强制性技术法规影响他国产品进入本国市场。参见：WT/DS2/R (29 January 1996), para.3.73-3.76,6.10,6.13. available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/2-9.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23)
② P.W. Birnie and A. Boyle, Basic Documents on International Law and the Environment, (Oxford:Clarendon Press,1995). p.12; United States-Taxes on Automobiles, Panel report, GATT Doc.31/R, reprinted in 33 I.L.M. 1397, (1994), at 1448., Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,67 (1997). ③ WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, Communication from Canada, WT/CTE/W/21, (Feb.21,1996), p. 2.
① Astuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.599, 623 (1999), UNCTAD, Briefing Paper of Legal and Policy Issues in the Market Access Implication of Labelling for Environment Purposes, (Bangkok:UNCTAD,2004) p.12.
② Carolyn Deere, Eco-labelling and Sustainable Fisheries, (Rome:FAO,1999), p.18, C. R. Wessells et al, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.59-60.
③ C. R. Wessells et al., Product Certification and Ecolabellingfor Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422. (Rome:FAO,2001), p.61.
④ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,74 (1997).
⑤ Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment:An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L. J.51,76 (1997).
① Report of the Committee on Trade and Environment:Background, Analysis, Discussion and Proposals, WT/CTE/1, (Geneva:WTO,1996) p.1,15,32.
② U.S.C.Titles 16, at Section 1371 (a) (2)& Section 1385.
③ Available at:http://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/IATTC-Resolution-on-LJ-Agreement-Apr-1992.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23).
④ Available at:http://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/Declaration of Panama.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23).
⑤ Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine Fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues,23 UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,77,83 (2005)
⑥以下整理自 Ronald Salz, Sea Turtle Mortality, Shrimp Fisheries, and International Trade:A Case Study of a Global Natural Resource Conflict。美国公众法第609章(Section 609 of Public Law)与濒临绝种法(Endangered Species Act, ESA)禁止进口捕捉方式危及濒临绝种海龟生存的虾只,但经美国查证许可的国家则不受到前述进口禁令的影响。目的在于保护如海龟濒临灭绝的动物,未取得商务部部长或内政部部长许可之前,禁止在美国境内、美国所辖海域以及公海从事捕获海龟之行为。其后美国根据ESA要求所有美国籍拖网虾船在对海龟有重大伤害的规定区域捕虾时,应使用批准的海龟逃脱器(Turtle Excluder Devices, TEDs)或限制 低于九十分钟的拖网时间。并制订Section 609与相关执行规则,要求所有进口美国的虾必须附有虾颊出口商申报表(Shrimp Exporter's Declaration Form),陈明是在海龟无害的条件下捕虾或是Section 609所认可之作业水域。印度、马来西亚、巴基斯坦以及泰国分别要求WTO争端解决小组就美国公众法第609章法案内容进行审查。四国共同主张为违反GATT 1994第11条、第13条且非为GATT 1994第20条(b)、(g)二款所涵盖之范围与损害第二十三条第一项(a)款之权益。印度、巴基斯坦及泰国另主张违反GATT 1994第1条第1项；印度单独要求争端解决小组作成美国应立即撤销Section 609,余三国则要求争端解决小组作成要求美国修改该法案及相关执行措施。
① United States-Import Prohibitions of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/RW; AB Report WT/DS58/RW, paras.164-168,172, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds58 e.htm, (visited on 2009/12/25).
②详细介绍参照：李嘉沂,林良怡：《欧盟海豹产品进口禁令》,《经贸法讯》88期,2009年6月22日。(?)vailable at:www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no88/2.pdf, (visited on 2009/10/14);陈姿妤,黄滋立：《加拿大及挪威对欧盟海豹产品进口法令提出谘商请求》,《经贸法讯》第94期,2009年12月11日。available at: http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no94/2.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/24).
③ FAO, Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2009) pp.4,11,13.
① David Downes and Brennan Van Dyke, Fisheries Conservation and Trade Rules:Ensuring that Trade Law Promotes Sustainable Fisheries, (Washington, D.C.:Center for International Environmental Law and Greenpeace, 1998),p.1,34.
① Lothar Ehring, De Facto Discrimination in WTO Law:National and Most-Favored-Nation Treatment-or Equal Treatment?, p.4-5,31, available at:http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/01/013201.html, (visited on 2009/12/29).
① FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2004, part Ⅱ (Rome:FAO,2004), p.86, Roman Grynberg and Martin Tsamenyi, Fisheries Subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries,32 JTL 127,134(1998), Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified?,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,341,348 (2006); Negotiating Group on Rules on Rules Fisheries Subsidies, The Doha Mandate to Address Fish Subsidies:Issue, Reported in TN/RL/W/3
② Warren F. Schwartz and Eugene W. Harper, The Regulation of Subsidies Affecting International Trade,70 Michigan Law Review,831,839-842 (1972); Alan O. Sykes, Countervailing Duty Law:An Economic Perspective, 89 Columbia Law Review,199,204(1989), H. Siebert, What Does Globalization Mean for the World Trading System? in The WTO Secretasrial, From GATT to the WTO:The Multilateral Trading System in the New Millenium, (Hague:Kluwer Law International,2000) p.139.
① Benedict J. Clements, Public Expenditure Policy and the Environment: A Review and Synthesis, in Bedrich Moldan, (ed.), Economic Instruments for Sustainable Development (Prague:Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic,1995) p.124; Edward B. Barbier, Joanne C. Burgess, Joshua Bishop and Bruce Aylward, The Economics of Tropical Timber (London:Earthscan,1994), p.67.
② FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2008 (Rome: FAO,2009) p.28.
③ U. R Sumaila, L. Watson, R. Teh, P. Tyedmers and D. Pauly, Fuel Price Increase, Subsidies, Overcapacity and Resource Sustainability, ICES Journal of Marine Science, Vol.65 No.6, pp.832-840. (2008) ④ T.L. McDorman, Fisheries Conservation and Management and International Trade Law, in Ellen Hey (ed.), Developments in International Fisheries Law, (Hague: Kluwer,1999) p.510.
⑤ R. Sumaila & D. Pauly, Catching More Bait: A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies, (2nd version). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2006, Vol.14, No 6, (Canada:University of British Colombia.2006), p.7.
⑥ WT/CTE/W/121.
⑦ Anthony Cox & Carl-Christian Schmidt, Subsidies in the OECD Fisheries Sector: A Review of Recent Analysis and Future Directions (Paris:OECD,2002), p.2.
⑧ World Bank, The Sunken Billions: The economic Justification for Fisheries Reform, (Washington, DC:The World Bank,2008), p.10.
① Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.16-18.
②相关文献如：R. Arnason, Ocean Fisheries Management:Recent International Developments, Marine Policy, 334-340, September 1993, T. Matthiasson, Why Fishing Fleets Tend to be Too Big, Marine Resources Economics, Vol.11, Issue,3,173-179,1996, D. Greboval, and G. Munro, Overcapitalization and Excess Capacity in World Fisheries:Underlying Economics and Methods of Control, in D. Greboval (ed.), Managing Fishing Capacity: Selected Papers on Underlying Concepts and Issues, (Rome:FAO,1999), C. D. Stone, Too Many Fishing Boats, Too Few Fish:Can Trade Laws Trim Subsidies and Restore the Balance in Global Fisheries?,24 Ecology Law Quarterly,505-44.1997, H. Nordstrom and S. Vaughan, Special Study 4:Trade and Environment (Geneva:WTO, 1999), Environmental Benefits of Removing Trade Restrictions and Distortions:The Fisheries Sector.Note by the Secretariat, WT/CTE/W/167.
③ Peter Weber, Net Loss:Fish, Jobs, and the Marine Environment, Worldwatch Paper no.120, Table 2, (Washington, D.C.:Worldwatch Institute,1994), p.15., FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2004, part Ⅱ (Rome:FAO,2004), p.8, Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade, (Geneva:UNEP, 1998), p.11.
① Roman Grynberg and Martin Tsamenyi, Fisheries Subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries,32 JTL 127,134(1998)。日本曾主张这类论点, 见:WT/CTE/W/226, paras.2-5.
② Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified?,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,341,349 (2006).
③ UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p.1.
④ OECD, Subsidies:A Way Towards Sustainable Fisheries? (Paris:OECD,2005) p.18.
⑤ Matteo Millazzo, Subsidies in World Fisheries:A Re-examination, Technical paper No 406, (Washington, DC: World Bank,1998) p.74, Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?,6 J Int'l Econ L.879,907(2003).
⑥ Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,150-151 (2008).
⑦ UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p.3.
⑧ Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,156 (2008).
① A. A. Rosenberg et al, Achieving Sustainable Use of Renewable Resources, Science, vol.262,828 (1993).
② §§64、118 of UNCLOS; § 8 I of UNFSA.
③ M. J. Peterson, International Fisheries Management, in Peter Haas, Robert Keohane and Marc Levy (ed), Institutions for the Earth:Sources of Effective International Environmental Protection (Cambridge, The MIT Press:1993) p.249,300.
④ Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, p.5, 8-9, available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683, (visited on 2009/12/21); Martti Koskenniemi, Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, A/CN.4/L.682,13 April 2006.
⑤ J.S. Thomas and M.A. Meyer, The New Rules of Global Trade:A Guide to the World Trade Organization, (Toronto:Carswell,1997) p.150.
⑥ TN/RL/W/3, WT/CTE/W/121.
⑦ WTO, History:30 years of Trade and Environment in GATT/WTO, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envir_e.htm#history; WTO, Early years:emerging environment debate in GATT/WTO, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/histl_e.htm (also visited on: 2010/3/3).
① J. M Van Dyke, D. Zaelke, G. Hewison, Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century (Washington:Island Press. 1993) p.231, Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,153 (2008).
②即1999年3月于WTO环境贸易委员会开会时,冰岛、澳大利亚、纽西兰美国发表共同宣言(Communication from Iceland to the WTO reported in WT/CTE/w/132),嗣后陆续有国家加入所形成之团体,成员主要有阿根廷、澳大利亚、纽西兰、挪威、智利、菲律宾、美国等。
③ UN Commission on Sustainable Development, Report on the Seventh Session, E/CN.17/1999/20,14, Nancy Nelson, International Concern for the Sustainability of the World's Fisheries:United Nations Efforts to Combat Over-Fishing and International Debate over State Fishing Subsidies, Colo J Int'l Envt'l L & Pol'y 157,162. (1999).
④ Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,503. (2003).
⑤ FAO, Guide for Identifying, Assessing and Reporting on Subsidies in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2004) p.7.
⑥直接财政转移如投资补助、安全设备补助、渔船报废计划、股本注入、收入保证计划、灾害救济支付、价格支持、直接出口激励等；间接转移之服务,如优惠投资贷款、贷款担保、港口设施、签署入渔协议后将移转入渔权、政府资助的研发计划、国际合作与谈判、提供燃油或免除燃料税等；管制如进口配额、外国直接投资限制、环境保护作为、渔具管制、渔业管理等；自由不干预例如自由入渔、不采取污染控制措施、不采取管理措施、执行现有法令规章等。前述整理自：FAO, Guide for Identifying, Assessing and Reporting on Subsidies in the Fisheries Sector, (Rome:FAO,2004) p.16-22.
①直接支付为如补助金、渔船报废奖励、直接给付收入、失业保险等；降低成本转移,如燃料免税、补贴贷款、运输补贴、所得税减免贷款担保、政府提供入渔费；一般服务,如科学研究与管销+行政计划之施行、兴建或投资港口设施等；市场价格支持,如透过贸易限制措施使国内外市场价格形成差异,从而构成消费者和纳税人向渔民的财政转移。前述内容整理自：慕永通、朱玉贵：《渔业补贴研究进展及发展(一)》,《中国海洋大学学报》,(社会科学版),2005年第4期,第9页。与OECD, Liberalizing Fisheries Markets:Scope and Effects,2002, available at: http://www.oecd.org/document/57/0,3343,en_2649_33901_17788601_1_1_1_1,00.html (visited on 2010/3/22).
① Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.11-20.
② UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies and Marine Resource Management:Lessons Learn from Studies in Argentina and Senegal. UNEP/ETU/2001/7 (Vol. Ⅱ) 2001.
③ Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade (Geneva:UNEP,1998) p.39,43; Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.36、39.
④慕永通,朱玉贵：《渔业补贴研究进展及发展(一)》,《中国海洋大学学报》,(社会科学版),2005年第4期,第3页。
⑤ Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.30,32.
① W.W.F., Hard Facts, Hidden Problems:A View of Current Data on Fishing Subsidies, Technical Papers, (Switzland:WWF,2001) p.126, Turning the Tide of Fishing Subsidies:Can the World Trade Organization Play a Positive Role?, Issue Brief, (Switzland:WWF,2002), pp.38-62, David K. Shorr, Healthy Fisheries, Sustainable Trade:Crafting New Rules on Fishing Subsidies in the World Trade Organization, (Switzland: WWF,2004) p.95.
②相关历史演变参见：History:30 years of Trade and Environment in GATT/WTO, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envir_e.htm#history; Early years:emerging environment debate in GATT/WTO, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/histl_e.htm (also visited on:2010/3/3)。 反对的主要论点主要根据WTO功能目的与Tuna Dolphin Case, US Gasoline Case与EC Asbetos Case不同意见所示,认为WTO本身为经济性组织,涉及生态保育的问题实非职权所及,应为各国内法范畴,WTO之争端解决机制不宜涉入。相关讨论参见：牛惠之《论由WTO「补贴暨平衡税措施协议」规范渔业补贴之法理》,载于：《经社法制论丛》,第三十二期,1998年,第75至120页；Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?,6 J Int'l Econ L.,907,913-915 (2003). ① Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?,6 J Int'l Econ L.,907,917-918(2003).
② David Schorr, Fisheries Subsidies and the WTO, in Gary P. Anderson and Bradnee Chambers (eds) Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), (Tokyo:United Nations University Press,2001) p.150,194-195.
③ WT/CTE/W/67.
④ TN/RL/W/3.
⑤译文为：忆及在多哈会议就加强贸易与环境之间的相互配合作出承诺；知悉成员普遍同意,谈判小组应加强渔业补贴的规章制度,包括禁止导致生产力过剩和过度捕捞的某些形式渔业补贴；并呼吁参与成员迅速展开进一步细节工作,包括确立上述规章制度的性质和范围,例如透明度和可执行范围等。考虑到渔业在优先发展范畴、灭贫、生活保障和粮食保障等问题上的重要性,给予发展中和最不发达成员适当及有效的特殊和差别待遇,应该是渔业补贴谈判的重要组成部分。Hong Kong Declaration, Annex D, § 1.9, Ministerial Text Mandate on Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines, WT/MIN(05)
⑥ TN/RL/W/196.
⑦本表以UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p.4为基础修改而成。
①如：TN/RL/W/3, TN/RL/W/12, TN/RL/W/21, TN/RL/W/58, TN/RL/W/77, TN/RL/W/154, TN/RL/W/166, TN/RL/W/169, TN/RL/W/196 and TN/RL/GEN/145都是以现行SCM文本所以出的讨论意见。
② TN/RL/W/77, para.5、WT/CTE/W/154, (Communication from the United States.), para.9,16.
① TN/RL/W/12, (Submission from New Zealand), para 4, TN/RL/W/115, (Submission from Chile),para 8, Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,502 (2003).
② TN/RL/W/77, para.6, TN/RL/W/115, para.8 (ii) 1.4.
③ TN/RL/W/82, (Submission of the European Communities), para.4、5.
④ TN/RL/W/164.
⑤ WT/CTE/W/173, (Submission from Japan).
⑥ TN/RL/W/159日本认为纽西兰TN/RL/W/154文件提议渔业补贴应予以一般性的禁止,并订定除外清单(negative list)的建议仅顾及禁止渔业补贴的面向,却忽略多哈宣言所揭橥的面向,例如：厘清与改进WTO禁止性渔业补贴规范、确保永续发展、考虑发展中国家渔业部门之重要性、确保透明性以及鼓励与其它国际组织合作等。同时,对于纽西兰所提出的一般性禁止渔业补贴,日本认为其并未考虑不同类型之补贴,例如：UNEP所提出的矩阵模式(matrix approach)、OECD渔业委员会对渔业补贴所提之环境、经济以及社会的考虑等,日本也建议应加强会员通知义务的规范,并对于开发中国家与低度开发国家提供特殊与差别待遇,而相关国际组织的研讨均可作为其分类的参考,。
① TN/RL/W/11, (Japan's Basic Position), paras 2-5,20,; TN/RL/W/17, (Korea's Views on Fisheries Subsidies), para Ⅲ、Ⅳ,,相似论点如：TN/RL/W/52、69、97. ② TN/RL/W/136,para3.,这些国家又称SVE 集团 (Small Vulnerable Economies)且持续坚持此提案的立场到现在。
③学者认为WTO的成员数绝对超过任何一个国际渔业组织与FAO,虽部分渔业组织可以渔业实体身份加入,但WTO的成员,即以关税地区的加入也较其它的国际组织宽,故认为单以渔业组织规范过渔略嫌不足,更何况单凭一己之力所搜集的数据信息如何侈言建立良好的渔业管理制度。Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, p.19, available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=1313683, (visited on 2009/12/21).
④ Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified?,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,341,358 (2006), Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade, (Geneva:UNEP,1998), p.30,32.
⑤ TN/RL/M/18.
①TN/RL/W/164；Roman Grynberg,WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management,Marine Policy 27,503(2003)；笔者观察日本处理黑金枪鱼,鲸鱼,海豚等作法发现认为该国以搭便车的心态面对国际渔业资源,先享尽权利,不得已时再付出的作法,面对国际意见相左的困境时,先主导民间舆论抨击非政府组织的论点,再以政府间贸易互惠措施谄媚经济实力强大的国家,以两面手法充分换取攫取资源的时间,此种以拖待变的作法恰是天然资源的幕后杀手。以鲸鱼为例,多数鲸鱼被CITES列为濒危物种,但日本以UNCLOS赋予之科学研究权利作为名义,持续捕捞鲸鱼。面对非政府组织抗议,除以军舰护航外,渔船或驻在港民众以强烈手段对抗非政府组织。根据媒体报导2010年CITES年会讨论黑鲔鱼列入濒危物种议题,日本游说团体积极穿梭会中,且该国官员表示即便做成决议,该国也不会遵守。Available at:http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/100316/19/224ws.html (visited on 2101/03/16),嗣后表决未通过将黑鲔列入濒危物种,也未能禁止交易红珊瑚,足见日本游说之能,也使得国际质疑CITES之功能是否陷入危机。
②Eric A.Bilsky,Territory without Boundaries:Colonizing Natural Resource:Conserving Marine Wildlife through World Trade Law,30 Mich.J.Int'l L.599,632(2009).
③Eric A.Bilsky,Territory without Boundaries:Colonizing Natural Resource:Conserving Marine Wildlife through World Trade Law,30 Mich.J.Int'l L.599,633(2009)
①条文说明即是纳入历次争端解决小组的意见,形成补贴应具备两要件：政府或任何公立机构提供之财务补助或价格维持者；且因而授与利益者。如Panel Report,EC-Countervailing Measures on DRAM Chips,para. 7.173.；Appellate Body Report,Canada-Aircraft,para.150.；Appellate Body Report,US-Softwood Lumber Ⅳ,Para.84-5.
②TN/RL/W/213,Art.I.1-2.主席版草案使用之累积适用(accumulation)之目的并非发生条约冲突,而是原SCM之补贴定义较为广义,若毫无限制的将间接事项引入,难免造成规定容过苛,便以累积适用的方式将造成过渔因素较模糊之行为纳入规范,与论者引用累积适用作为解决规范冲突的方式不同,盖此处并无发生规范冲突。关于累积适用不同的阐释可参见：张南熏：《WTO协定间法律适用关系之研究》,《政治大学法律学系博士论文》,2008年,第59至61页。
③TN/RL/W/232,Annex C at 2,(3rd column).
④被各国广泛使用的燃料补贴具有特殊的国情与政治因素,且结合环保议题和产业竞争力,但燃料补贴直接增加捕捞压力,因此前述的不确定性,更增添燃料补贴与过渔的处理难度。此争论在韩国提出TN/RL/W/245后,依然持续发烧,尚未形成共识。
① TN/RL/W/213,Art.2.
② TN/RL/W/213,Art.1.2、3.1.
③ TN/RL/W/213, at 88, n 81.
④ UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP, 2007) p.8、14、15、20、30、36.
⑤本表整理自：UNEP, Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, A Introductory Guide, (Geneva:UNEP,2008), p 10.
① UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva: UNEP, 2007) p.37.
② TN/RL/GEN/134, Annex § 4; Report of the Appellate Body, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R,16 January 1998, Part XI, p.68.
③ Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, p.31, available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683, (visited on 2009/12/21), UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP,2007) p.38.
④ FAO, FAO-CITES Agreement Promotes Sustainable Fish Trade:Collaborative Relationship Formalized in MOU, FAO Newsroom release dated 3 October 2006, available at: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000410/index.html). (visited on 2010/3/22)
① UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP, 2007) p.39.
② TN/RL/W/9 (Submission by China), Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,499 (2003).
③ Doha Declaration p.2,28; Hong Kong Declaration p.2.
④有认为此种作法并不适宜,因为难以定义规模大小,破坏性捕鱼不受限船舶大小。UNEP/WWF, Summary Report of the WTO Fishery Subsidies Negotiations:Update and Introductory Briefing for New Delegates, para.28, (1 April 2009).
⑤ TN/RL/W/213,Art.3.
①整理自：(台湾地区)参加世界贸易组织(WTO)贸易规则谈判小组会议出国报告。本文内容系整理自网络搜集到三不同版本。详细内容可参：http://open.nat.gov.tw/OpenFront/report/report detail,jsp?sysId=C09900140 (visited on:2010/3/5)
② Veniana Qalo, Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines at the WTO:Legal Architecture, available at: www.thecommonwealth.org/.../6A3006A6-144E-412D-B0A9-47C00B03E17D_PaperOnFisheriesSubsidies.pdf (visited on:2010/3/5).
③ TN/RL/W/245, paras.15-28.
④ TN/RL/W/245, para.21,29-32.
⑤参见前研究显示,台湾地区发言支持韩国的立场。而大陆在谈判初始,曾提出不可控诉(non-actional)之渔业补贴的单一类型(TN/RL/W/9),复提出渔业补贴分类可建立有助环境保育的项目(Green light) (TN/RL/W/88)。
⑥巴西于TN/RL/GEN/79Rev.1就已经提出三分法,并融合智利的通知义务要求所有成员通知WTO补贴的实施情形。日本这种说词实则是维持该国向来的一致立场。
① UNCLOS第57；62条4项a款；除此,FAO的责任渔业守则(FAO Code of Conduct, Art.5.2,6.18,11.2.7)也论及入渔协议,强调沿海国在发展自己的渔业的同时,也应确保加工和小型渔业的渔民生计能力；各国不应调节市场之通路以配合进入取得资源,但不排除国与国之间订定包括：入渔、贸易及市场进入、技术移转、科学研究、培训及其它项目之渔业协议可能性。责任渔业守则论及入渔协议的得以捕鱼(right to fish)是在阐明入渔国与沿海国相同之义务,须以负责任的态度确保有效地养护和管理海洋资源,并非代表此守则具有法律拘束力,而是入渔协议引入责任渔业守则成为协议内容的效力。
②除此还有欧盟退除役渔船转籍阿根廷后,以阿根廷籍到其它国家入渔的型态(second generation agreement), 见:Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva:International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.13; 美国与太平 洋岛国有Treaty on Fisheries Between the Governments of Certain Pacific Island States and the Government of the United States of America (2003)为主要依据,见:Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations: Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499, 505-507(2003).
③ WT/CTE/W/154, Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,501,503. (2003).
④ Matteo Milazzo, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.73.
⑥ TN/RL/W/3, para.14; Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva:International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.25,30.
⑥本表整理自：TN/RL/W/209; Marcos A. Orellana, EEZ Fisheries Access Arrangement and the WTO Subsidies Agreement:Legal Analysis and Options for Improved Disciplines (Geneva:UNEP,2007) p.23-24.
①台湾地区也支持这类方案。
② Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements-Trade and Development Issues, Issue Paper no.2, (Geneva:International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development,2006), p.29.
③ TN/RL/W/209, paras 3,8,9,11; TN/RL/GEN/150; Marcos A. Orellana, EEZ Fisheries Access Arrangement and the WTO Subsidies Agreement:Legal Analysis and Options for Improved Disciplines (Geneva:UNEP,2007) p.20.
① TN/RL/W/213,n80.
② TN/RL/W/236, paras.10; 11.
③原文为：As we understand, has not proposed a textual language, but has expressed willingness to consider suggestions along the lines of mandating the fishing industry of developed Members to pay back their governments for the financing of such arrangements.
④ Matteo Milazzo, Subsidies in World Fisheries:A Re-examination, Technical paper No 406, (Washington, DC: World Bank,1998) p.73.
① TN/RL/W/209, para.3,8,9.
②学者指出韩国与台湾地区也常用此种模式,见：Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:
Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,507(2003).
③呼应《约翰内斯堡宣言与行动计划》,配合欧盟共同渔业政策所做的改变,参见：Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,499,503 (2003); S. F. Walmsley, C. T. Barnes, A. I. Payne,& C. A. Howard, Comparative Study of the Impact of Fisheries Partnership Agreements, (Cambridge:MRAG, Cambridge Resources Economics & NRI.,2007)p.183.
① David K. Schorr, Fisheries Subsidies and the WTO, in Gary P. Anderson and Bradnee Chambers (eds) Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), (Tokyo:United Nations University Press,,2001) p.154-155; Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue, (Geneva:UNEP,2003), p.35.
①陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,(台湾)作者自版2002年,第142至145页。
①文义解释是指以文字的惯常用法语上下文关系阐释条文意义的方法。体系解释是指条文在条约中的关系了解条文的意思,因条文经常与其它相关条文共形成一个系统。目的解释是以条约的缔结或规范目的作为依据的解释方法。参见：吴昆吾：《条约论》,(台湾)商务印书馆1977年版,第73至77页；黄异：《国际法在国内法领域的适用》,(台湾)元照出版社2006年版,第31至34页；an Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1984), p.114; Palestine Concessions Case, Judgment, PCIJ (Ser. A) No.5,1925; Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case, Judgment, ICJ Rep.1950, Interpretation of the Convention of 1919 concerning Employment of Women during the Night (advisory opinion of 15 November 1932), Series A/B, No.50, p.365.
② R.R. Churchill & A. V. Lowe, The Law of Sea, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1999) p.137, Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, (New York:Cambridge University Press,1989) p.44.
③ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.132.
④原条文为：所有国家均有权由其国民在公海上捕鱼,但受下列限制：甲、其条约义务；乙、沿海国按照本公约规定的利益和权利；丙、以下各条所在关于养护公海生物资源的规定。因此,在专属经济区划定之后,其它国家之权利不应被受到限制。
⑤学者讨论问题的重心是在专属经济区内的适用原有的公海自由问题,如专属经济区内之倾倒自由,飞越航行自由与铺设管线自由等问题,参见：Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, (New York: Cambridge University Press,1989) p.44, Bernard H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea:The 1977 New YorkSession,72 Am. J. Int'l L.57 (1978) p.67, ITLOS M/V "Saiga" (No.2) 2007, Merit, para.125.
⑥ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.136,173.
⑦ R.R. Churchill & A. V Lowe, The Law of Sea, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1999) p.234.
① Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991.) pp.287-288,黎家维,国际法中「传统作业渔场」概念之澄清,available at: http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/CL/094/CL-C-094-074.htm, (visited on:2009/7/10).
② Barbare Kwiatowska, The 200 Mile Exclusive Economic Zone in the New Law of the Sea, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989)pp.15,60, Ellen Hey, The Provisions of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention on Fisheries Resource and Current International Fisheries Management Needs, in FAO, The Regulation of Driftnet on the High Sea:Legal Iissue, (Rome:FAO,1991) p.3.
③ William T. Burke, The Law of the Sea Convention and Conditions of Access to Fisheries Subject to National Jurisdiction,63 Or. L.R.73,81 (1984).
④ Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Transboundary Marine Fisheries Resources, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989) p.48.
⑤ William T. Burke, Implications for Fisheries Management of U.S. Acceptance of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea,89 Am. J. Int'l Law,792,800 (1995)
⑥ Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Transboundary Marine Fisheries Resources, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989) p.77
① Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991.) p. 286.
② Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.179.
③ Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Trans boundary Marine Fisheries Resources, (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989) p.77.
④ Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, (New York:Cambridge University Press,1989) p.41.
⑤ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.136.
① Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.183, Francis T. Christy Jr., Transitutions in Management and Distribution of International Fisheries,31 Int'l Org., p.258.
② R.R. Churchill & A. V. Lowe, The Law of Sea, (Manchester:Manchester University Press,1999) p.234、238.
③参见：Principles 3 of Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,1972. International Union for Conversation of Nature and Natural Resource, World Conversation Strategy,1980. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future,1987. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Report, Doc. A/CONF.151/26/Rev.l, Vol.1, Chap.17.,1993.
④ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.181, William T. Burke, The Law of the Sea Convention and Conditions of A ccess to Fisheries Subject to National Jurisdiction,63 Or. L.R.73,93 (1984).
①薛桂芳：《国际渔业法律政策与中国的实践》,中国海洋大学出版社2008年版,第21页。
② Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.130
③ David Joseph Attard, The Exclusive Economic Zone in International Law, (New York:Oxford University Press, 1987)p.165, D. P. O'Connell, International Law of the Sea, (Oxford:Clarendon Press,1984)p.566-567, Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.182.
① Marian Nash Leich, Contemporary Practice of the United Stares Relating to International Law,81 AJIL, 940-943 (1987).
② US — Upland Cotton, DS267, available at:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds267_e.htm, (visited on:2010/9/1).
③林君宜：《抵制美国补贴棉农,巴西祭出智财权武器》,载于：(台湾地区)《商业周刊》第921期,2005年7月18日,第130-131页。
④ Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003) p.106-107.
⑤ Lassa Francis Lawrence Oppenheim, International Law, Vol.2, (London:Longmans Green & Co.,1948) pp.34-36,259-260.
⑥ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.37-41.
⑦或认为广义的自力救济。参见：望月直树：《现代国际法における对抗措置の法的性质》,载于：《国际法 外交杂志》,107卷2号,2009年,第72页。
① Thomas M. Franck, On Proportionality of Countermeasure in International Law,102 A J I L.715,715 (2008).②根据牛津字典,appreciation除表示了解或尊重外,亦有discretion,即自由裁量,margin表示一个有界限之空间,margin of appreciation表示容许自由判断裁量的界限。对于原则的中译可有自由裁量原则、国家裁量原则或判断余地,均表达国家就条约所涉及之不确定法律概念与条约要件涵摄的判断关系,本文采用与下列文献相同之译法。王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则--国家裁量余地原则》,载于：(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第487-488页,2007年9月；廖福特：《区域人权体系研究之必要及缺乏》,载于：(台湾地区)《新世纪智库论坛》第3期,2006年6月,第36页；孙世彦：《欧洲人权制度中的自由判断余地原则述评》,《环球法律评论》第3期,2005年,第27页。
① I.C.J.Rep.1958, p.101,105.
②原条文为：The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention.
③ Howard Charles Yourow, The National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Dynamics of European Human Rights Jurisprudence, (New York:Kluwer Law International,1996) pp.13-16.
④ TMCMED v. Mexico,43 ILM 133 (2004), paras.122-149.
⑤王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则-国家裁量余地原则》,载于：(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第487-488页。
⑤ Submitted to the Special Committee on the Question of Defining Agression, UN Doc. AC.66/L.9, Sep.15,1953.
⑥ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.192-193。
① Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion and Reprisals by States,13 Virginia Journal of International Law 1,1,5 (1972); Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion:Past and Present. International Law and Economic Coercion,16 Virginia Journal of International Law 2,245,249 (1976).
② Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) p.196.
③ John Muir, The Boycott in International Law,9 Journal of International Law and Economics,186,203 (1974)
④ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.204-205.
① Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) pp.206-207.
② Ian Brownlie, Legal Status of Nature Resource, Recuiel de Cours de l'Academie de Droit International de La Haye, vol.162,245,266 (1974); Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, International Economic Soft Law, Recuiel de Cours de l'Academie de Droit International de La Haye, vol.163 (2) 169,188 (1979)
③ Hersch Lauterpacht, Boycott in International Relations,14BYIL,125,130 (1933) ④ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) p.197.
⑤ Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law (New York: Oxford University Press,1988) p.198-199; GA Res.2131,2625.
⑥[美]刘易斯·亨金,胡炜、徐敏译：《真理与强权：国际法与武力使用》,武汉大学出版社2004年版,第95页。
①王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则--国家裁量余地原则》,载于：(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第499页。
②如UNCLOS第58条第3项,《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约》(International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights)第2条3项,《反贪腐公约>(United Nations Convention against Corruption)第39、57条,GATT第20条,TRIPS第4条,《1958年执行外国仲裁与民事判决公约)序言(1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award),《京都议定书>(Kyoto Protocol)第10条,《生物多样性公约)(Convention on Biological Diversity)第19条3项,(联合国教科文组织世界文化多样性宣言)(Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity)第9条等。
③ Natalie S. Klein, Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (New York:Cambridge University Press,2005) p.133.
① Admission of a State to the United Nations (Charter, Art.4), Advisory Opinions, ICJ Rep.1948, pp.57,91-92.
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) p.121, Corfu Channel Case, I.C. J. Rep.1949, p.4.
③ J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), p.83.
④ J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), pp.121,124.
⑤ Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) pp.133-134.
⑥契约的当事人不仅要承担契约规定的义务,同时要具备善意、诚实的履行。在诉讼中,承审法官不受契约字面含义的约束,可根据当事人的真实意思对契约进行解释,并可根据公平原则对当事人的约定进行调整以消除某些约定之不公正性。参见:J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth, 1991.),pp.9-13.
⑦ Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) p.105.
① J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), pp.6,37,42,122.
② I.C.J. Rep.1958, p.101.
③ I.C.J. Rep.1958, p.115.
④ I.C.J. Rep.1958, pp.84,85,88,89.
⑤ I.C.J. Rep. Sep. Op. p.48.
①王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则--国家裁量余地原则》,(台湾地区)《欧美研究》第37卷第3期,第487-488页,第499页。
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) pp.121-129.
③ Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case, I.C.J. Rep.1950, pp.266,275.
④ Nottebohm Case, I.C.J. Rep.1955, p.37.
⑤ Case of Certain Norwegian Loans, I.C.J. Rep.1957, p.9.
⑥ Case of Concerning The Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of Infants (Netherland v. Sweden) I.C.J. Rep.1957, p.50.
⑦ North Continental Shelf Case, I.C.J. Rep.1969, p.26, Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (UK v. Iceland) I.C.J. Rep. 1974, p.33.
⑧ J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, (Vermont:Dartmouth,1991.), pp.95-96.
① Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An Old Principle, A New Age,47 McGill L. J.389,404-405 (2002)
② A.E M. Maniruzzaman, Expropriation of Alien Property and the Principle of Non-Discrimination in International Law of Foreign Investment:An Overview,8 J. Transnat'l L. Pol'y.57,68 (1998).
③ R. J. McLaughlin, Settling Trade-Related Disputes over the Protection of Marine Living Resources:UNCLOS or the WTO? 10 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.29,66-69 (1997).
④ UN Charter, Preamable; § 90-94 of UNCLOS; Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft,14 September 1963,I.C.A.O. Doc.8364,2 I.L.M.1042, Arts.3,16; The Case of the S.S. Lotus (France v. Turkey) (1927), P.C.I.J. (Ser. A) No.9.
⑤ Gunther Handl, Territorial Sovereignty and the Problem of Transnational Pollution,69 A.J.I.L.50,56. (1975).
⑥ A. D'Amato, "Good Faith" in R. Bernhardt, (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol.2 (Amsterdam: North-Holland,1995) p.599; Patrica Birnie and A. E. Boyle, International Law and the Environment (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1992) p.89.
⑦ Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An Old Principle, A New Age,41 McGill L.J.389,412 (2002)
⑧ George Sch warzenberger and E.D. Brown, A Manual of International Law, (6th ed.) (Milton, U.K.: Professional Books,1976) pp.84-85.
⑨ Harold C. Gutteridge, Abuse of Rights,5 Cambridge L.J.22,31-35 (1935).
⑩ Jerome B. Elkind, Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases:Abuse of Right-A Blind Alley for Environmentalists,9 Vand. J. Transnat'l L.57,71,75 (1976).
① L. Oppenheim, International Law:A Treatise, (8th ed.), H. Lauterpacht (ed.) (London:Longmans, Green & Co.,1955)p.345.
② Hersch Lauterpacht, The Development of International Law by the International Court, (London:Stevens & Sons,1958) p.164.
③ Michael Akehurst, Jurisdiction in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L.145,189-190 (1974).
④ Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An Old Principle, A New Age,47 McGill L. J.389,407-408 (2002).
⑤ Alexander Kiss, Abuse of Rights in R. Bernhardt (ed), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol.1 (Amsterdam:North-Holland,1995) pp.4-8.
⑥名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第79页,第85-92页。
⑦ United Kingdom v. Iceland, Memorial of the Merits of the Dispute Submitted by the Government of the United Kingdom (14 April 1972), [1975] I.CJ. Pleadings (Vol.1) 265 at paras.153-54; United Kingdom v. Norway,
[1951] I.CJ. Rep.116 at 150-51; Memorial Submitted by the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein (26 January 1952), [1955] I.CJ. Pleadings (Vol.1)21 at para.51; Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa, (Second Phase), [1966] I.CJ. Rep.6 at 10; Case Concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain) (Second Phase), [1970] I.CJ. Rep. (Vol.1) 3 at 17; Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v. France), [1974] I.C.J. Rep.253 at 362.
⑧名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第95页。
①名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第90、100页；George P. Fletcher, The Right and the Reasonable,98 Harv. L. Rev.949,949,955 (1985).
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (New York: Cambridge University Press,1994) pp.131-132.
③ R. Jennings & A. Watts (eds), Oppenheim's International Law,9th ed., vol.1 (London:Longman,1992) p.408; Hersch Lauterpacht, The Function of Law in the International Community (Hamden, Conn.:Archon Books,1966)
p.286; Michael Byers, Custom, Power and the Power of Rules:International Relations and Customary International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999) p.172-180.
④名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第108页。
⑤ G. D. S. Taylor, The Content of the Rule Against Abuse of Rights in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L., 323,352(1972-1973).
⑥ Jerome B. Elkind, Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases:Abuse of Right-A Blind Alley for Environmentalists,9 Vand. J. Transnat'l L.57,71、75 (1976).
⑦名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,东京酒井书店1989年版,第105、109页。
① Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice (Boston:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991) pp. 287-288.
②此概念首见于国际法院在1970年的巴塞罗那电车、电灯和电力公司案(Case concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited.),判决指出：当一个国家许可外国投资和外国国民,无论其为自然人或法人进入领土时东道国必须对他们提供法律保护并且承担给予他们一定待遇的义务。这些义务既非绝对的也非不受限制的。尤其从性质应区分国家对整体国际社会的义务和外交保护领域对另一个国家而产生之义务。前者是所有国家关切的事项。就所涉权利的重要性,所有国家可被认为对保护之事项享有法律利益,是对一切的义务。例如,当代国际法对侵略行为和灭绝种族行为为非法的宣告和有关人的基本权利的原则和规则与免受奴役和种族歧视义务。Available at: http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/ICJ-BarcelonaPreliminary OOl.pdf, (visited on 2009/7/10)。关于历史发展的流程可参照：王曦：《国际法在环境领域的新发展》,载于：《国际法问题专论》,武汉大学出版社2002年版,第269-282页。
③如卫拉曼特雷法官(Judge Gregory Weeramantry)在拦河堰计划案(Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project Case, Hungry v. Slovakia)又称多瑙河水坝案(Danube Dam Case)的个别意见书中指出：我们已进入一个新的国际法时代,国际法不仅促进单个国家的利益,,更应超越区域性利益,着眼于更大的福祉。基此,当面对的问题非当事方之间义务时,以个体的公平和程序的合法为基础的规则可能是不充分的,故面对超越诉讼国之个别权义,国际法的视野应实行对一切而制订超越纯为当事人之间诉讼的程序规则。见：I.C.J. No.92 Judgment,1997, Martin Dixon & Robert McCorquodale. Cases & Materials on International Law, (4th ed.), (New York:Oxford University Press,2003) p.465.
①[英]詹宁斯、瓦兹修订,王铁崖等译,奥本海国际法(第九版),中国大百科全书出版社1995年版,第4页。
②王曦：《国际法在环境领域的新发展》,载于：《国际法问题专论》,武汉大学出版社2002年版,第285,288页。
③ Maurizo Ragazzi, The Concept of International Obligation Erga Omnes, (Oxford:Clarendon Press,1997) p.183.
④王秀梅：《国家对国际社会整体的义务》,法律出版社2009年版,第117-143页。
⑤ United States-Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, (DS21/R-39S/155), para.3.32。Available at: www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/gattpanels/tunadolphinl.pdf, (visited on 2009/7/9).
① Alexandre Kiss, The Implications of Global Change for the International Legal System, in Edith Brown Weiss (ed.), Environmental Change and International Law:New Challenges and Dimensions (Tokyo:United Nations University Press,1992) p.331.
①争端解决机构的用语有international court、international tribunal 或 international judicial body,这些机构都具有共同特性：必须以国际条约所设立,以国际法作为判断的法律依据及具备一定的程序法则,且最终的判定具有法律的拘束力,简言之,具有定争止纷的实质功能的国际司法组织。Cesare P. R. Romano, The Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies:The Pieces of the Puzzles,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L.& POL.,697, 709 (1999); Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties,14 EJIL.1,1,3-9(2003)；黄异：《国际法》,(台湾)国立编译馆1996年版,第192页。
② Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other Treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1081,1111 (2001), L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal,2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,9 (2005)
③相关讨论众多,如：Jagdish Bhagwati & Robert E. Hudec (eds), Fair Trade and Harmonization:Prerequisites for Free Trade? (Cambridge:The MIT Press,1996), pp.57-174, Richard H. Steinberg, Trade-Environment Negotiations in the EU, NAFTA, and WTO:Regional Trajectories of Rule Development,91 Am. J. Int'l L.231, 236-44 (1997); Thomas J. Schoenbaum, International Trade and Protection of the Environment:The Continuing Search for Reconciliation,91 Am. J. Int'l L.268,269,273-80 & passim (1997); John H. Jackson, World Trade Rules and Environmental Policies:Congruence or Conflict,49 Wash.& Lee L. Rev.1227,1239-42 (1992); Cynthia M. Maas, Should the WTO Expand GATTArticle ⅩⅩ:An Analysis of United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,5 Minn. J. Global Trade 415,426-27 (1996); Chris Wold, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GATT:Conflict and Resolution?,26 Envtl. L.841,854-61 (1996); Charles R. Fletcher, Greening World Trade:Reconciling GATT and Multilateral Environmental Agreements Within the Existing World Trade Regime,5 J. Transnat'l L.& Pol'y 341,352-57 (1996); Kazumochi Kometani, Trade and Environment:How Should WTO Panels Review Environmental Regulations Under GATT Articles III and XX?,16 Nw. J. Int'l L.& Bus.441,466-76 (1996); Paul J. Yechout, In the Wake of Tuna II:New Possibilities for GATT-Compliant Environmental Standards,5 Minn. J. Global Trade 247,255-57,264-68 (1996); Shannon Hudnall, Towards a Greener International Trade System:Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the World Trade Organization,29 Colum. J. L.& Soc. Probs.175,186-91 (1996); Diana Hurwitz, Fishing for Compromises Through NAFTA and Environmental Dispute Settlement:The Tuna-Dolphin Controversy,35 Nat. Resources J.501, 508 (1995); Winfried Lang, Is the Protection of the Environment a Challenge to the International Trading System?, 7 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.463,472 (1995); Ilona Cheyne, Environmental Unilateralism and the WTO/GATT System,24 Ga. J. Int'l & Comp. L.433,451-63 (1995); Douglas J. Caldwell, International Environmental Agreements and the GATT:An Analysis of the Potential Conflict and the Role of a GATT "Waiver" Resolution,18 Md. J. Int'l L.& Trade 173,185-87 (1994); Steve Charnovitz, Environmental Trade Sanctions and the GATT:An Analysis of the Pelly Amendment on Foreign Environmental Practices,9 Am. U. J. Int'l L.& Pol'y 751,791-96 (1994); Mathew Hunter Hurlock, The GATT, U.S. Law and the Environments Proposal to Amend the GATT in Light of the Tuna/Dolphin Decision,92 Colum. L. Rev.2098,2106-10 (1992); Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Free International Trade and Protection of the Environment; Irreconcilable Conflict?,86 Am. J. Int'l L.700,710-17 (1992); Christopher D. Stone, Too Many Fishing Boats, Too Few Fish:Can Trade Laws Trim Subsidies and Restore the Balance in Global Fisheries?,24 Ecology L.Q.505 (1997).
① Chile-Measures affecting the Transit and Importing ofSwordfish, WT/DS193. available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/dsl93_e.htm, (visited on 2010/10/22).
②此协定乃智利哥伦比亚厄瓜多秘鲁于2004年8月签署,全文参见：http://www.glin.gov/view.action?glinID=150573 (visited on 2010/10/22)
③ Rosemary Gail Rayfuse, Non-flag State Enforcement in High Seas Fisheries, (Boston:Martius Nijhoff,2004) pp.320-322; Gustavo Capdevila, Chile and EU Caught in Dispute over Swordfish, available at: http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/sword.htm, (visited on 2010/10/22).
①参见:Trade and Environment in the WTO, WT/CTE/1; Julio Garcia Burgues & Mikel Insausti Muguruza, Trade and the Environment in the WTO:The European Community's Participation in the Committee on Trade and Environment,6 Rev. of EUR. C'MTY.& INTL ENVTL. L.163,163 (1997).
②曾有学者指出：欧共体所援引的GATT第5条规定从未适用于渔船或港口准入问题,进入港口相关问题多由习惯法或双边友好通商航海条约调整之,故值得怀疑在乌拉圭回合谈判时,WTO成员是否都同意开放他们的港口,所以欧共体有扩大解释GATT第5条之嫌,可能之用意在于通过贸易体制这道后门,改变关于港口准入的国际法规范。参见：Andrew Serdy, See You in Port:Australia New Zealand as Third Parties in the Dispute between Chile and the European Commumity over Chile's Denial Port Access to Spanish Vessels Fishing for Swordflsh on the High Sea, available at: http://www.mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/issues/archive/2002(1)/04Serdy.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/19).
③ John Shamsey, ITLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EU Swordfish Dispute,12 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Probs.513,524 (2002).
④ Commission Decision of 5 April 2000 under the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No.3286/94 concerning the Chilean prohibition on unloading of swordfish catches in Chilean ports, para.7,15,18,23,2000/296/EC, available at:http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2000/1096/109620000418en00670069.pdf (visited on 2010/10/22).
①类似案件还有里海石油争议,参见：Frarz Sanei, The Caspian Sea Legal Regime, Pipeline Diplomacy, and the Prospects for Iran's Isolation from the Oil and Gas Frenzy:Reconciling Tehran's Legal Options with its Geopolitical Realities,34 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, (2001),available at: http://www.articlearchives.com/trade-development/international-trade-export/974180-1.html, (last visited on 2008/10/26).
② Case Concerning the Conservation and Sustainable Exploitation of Swordfish Stocks in the South -Eastern Pacific Ocean, (Chile/European community) p.6,20 December 2000, available at: http://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html (visited on 2010/10/24).
① Chile-Measures Affecting the Transit and Importation ofSwordfish, WT/DS193/4, G/L/367/Add.l,3 June 2010. available at:http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/july/tradoc 146325.pdf, (visited on 2010/10/24)
②参见：ITLOS/Press 141,17 December 2009.
③ Martti Koskenniemi, Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, Report of the Study of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/L.682,13 April 2006, p.244-245.
④ Bernard H. Oxman, Complementary Agreements and Compulsory Jurisdiction,95 AJIL.,277,277,285-7 (2001).
① Available at:http://www.pict-pcti.org/publications/synoptic chart/synoptic chart2.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/13)
② Matthew Craven, Legal Differentiation and the Concept of Human Rights Treaty in International Law,11 EJIL 3, 489,490 (2000).
③ Judge Shahabuddeen, Implications of the Proliferation of International Adjudicatory Bodies for Dispute Resolution,9 ASIL Bulletin 5,(1995); Gerhard Hafher, Risks Ensuring from Fragmentation of International Law, Report of the ILC for 2000 52nd session, GA. Off. Records of 55th session Supplement No.10 (A/55/10).
④ Joost Pauwelyn, Fragmentation of International Law, available at: http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/pauwelyn/pdf/fragmentation of international law.pdf, (visited on:2008/11/12).
⑤国际私法学者认为同一案件重复系属之情况可以当事人之地位分为重复诉讼(repetitive suit)与对抗诉讼。重复诉讼是指原告基于同一或相近事实在有管辖权的不同国家对于同一被告提起相同的诉讼。对抗诉讼是指先诉讼之被告基于同一案件事实在有管辖权的不同国家另行起诉。本文系以本案当事人之地位相互易位而引用。Allan D. Vestal, Repetitive Litigation,45 Iowa L. Rev.525,525 (1960),徐卉,国际民商事平行诉讼研究,载陈光中、江伟主编：《诉讼法论丛》(第1卷),法律出版社1997年,第345-346页,[英]莫里斯：《法律冲突法》,李东来等译,中国对外翻译出版公司1990年版,第95页。
① Joost Pauwelyn, Conflicts of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to Other Riles of International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003) p.136; Rosemary Gail Rayfuse, Non-flag State Enforcement in High Seas Fisheries (Boston:Martius Nijhoff,2004) pp.320-322; Vaughan Lowe, Overlapping Jurisdiction in International Tribunal,20 Australian Yearbook of International Law,4,48 (2000); Benedict Kingsbury, Is the Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals a Systemic Problem?,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L. & POL.,679,681 (1999), Jonathan I. Charney, The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of International Courts and Tribunals,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L.& POL.,697,701 (1999); John Shamsey, LTLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EU Swordflsh Dispute,12 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Probs.513,533-534 (2002); Andrew Serdy, See You in Port: A ustralia New Zealand as Third Parties in the Dispute between Chile and the European Commumity over Chile's Denial Port Access to Spanish Vessels Fishing for Swordfish on the High Sea, available at: http://www.mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/issues/archive/2002(1)/04Serdy.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/19); 施文真:《由智利—剑鱼案论环保贸易措施所引发之争端：管辖权冲突之探讨》,(台湾)《政大法学评论》,第86期,2005年,第266-267页,唐旗：《从箭鱼争端看贸易与环境之争新动向》,武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007年第1期。
② Jonathan I. Charney, The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of the International Courts and Tribunal,31 N.Y.U. J. INTL L.& POL.,697,698,793, (1999), Tomer Broude, Fragmentation(s) of International Law:On Normative Integration as Authority Allocation, available at: http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/ilrsymposium/2008sym/broude_normative_integ_paper.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/12), Joost Pauwelyn, Fragmentation of International Law, available at: http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/pauwelyn/pdf/fragmentation_of_international_law.pdf , (visited on 2008/11/12)
① Philip Bender, Trade Restrictions for Antarctic Conservation Under the Free Trade Principles of the WTO System,14 SE. ENVTL. L.J.,163,219 (2006).
② Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law(Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003) pp.6,135,165f,176f; Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law? 37 Journal of World Trade 6,1027 (2003); Gabrielle Marceau and Anastasios Tomazos, Comment on Joost Pauwelyn's Paper: How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law?, in Stefan Griller (ed), At the Crossroads:The World Trading System and the Doha Round (Austria:Springer-Verlag Wien,2008)p.57; G Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions, The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1083-1086 (2001); Lorand Bartels, Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings,35 Journal of World Trade 3, p.502f. Wilfred Jenks, The Conflict of Law-Making Treaties,30 BYBIL,401,426 (1953), Markus Krajewski, The Dispute Settlement "Chill Factor" and Conflicts of Jurisdiction-Dispute Settlement in MEAs and in the WTO, in Liane Schalatek, Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, Facets of a Complex Relationship, (Washington:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) p.95.
③ Erich Vranes, Comment on Joost Pauwelyn's Paper:How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law?, in Stefan Griller(ed), At the Crossroads:The World Trading System and the Doha Round(Austria:Springer-Verlag Wien,2008) p.87.
④ Guatemala-Anti-Dumping Investigation Regarding Portland Cement from Mexico, (WT/DS60/R) Indonesia-Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry. (WT/DS54/R, WT/DS55/R, WT/DS59/R and WT/DS64/R).
⑤ Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud and Gabrielle Marceau, The Relationship between the Dispute-Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO,11 Reciel 3,278 (2002).
① A. O. Adede, The System for Settlement of Disputes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (Dordrecht:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1987) pp.15-16. B. H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea:The Ninth Session,75 AJIL,211,231-233 (1981).
② WTODOC. WT/DS 152/R,p.313 (1999) at, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/wtds152r.doc, (last visited on 2008/12/26).
③ Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law (Cambridge:Cambridge Univerity Press,2003) p.176.
④ TN/TE/W39, (Mar.24,2004)本说法的立论依据是将UNCLOS当作最广义的MEA；相同意见参见：WTO Ministerial Conference, Singapore, Report of the WTO Committee on Trade and Environment,, WT/CTE/1 (Nov. 12,1996), p.178; Submission by New Zealand to the Committee on Trade and Environment, The Relationship Between the Provisions of the Multilateral Trading System and Trade Measures for Environmental Purposes, Including Those Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), pp.20,73,74,80,89-97 WT/CTE/W/20 (Feb.15,1996), Joanne Scott, International Trade and Environmental Governance:Relating Rules (and Standards) in the EU and the WTO,15 EUR. J. INTL L.,307,338-339 (2004).
① TN/TE/W41, (June 18,2004).
② John Shamsey, ITLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EUSwordflsh Dispute,12 Transnat'l L.& Contemp. Probs.513,533-534 (2002).
③关于自足制度的定义与内涵目前并未有定论,本文认为是条约的适用与解释,原则上不应被其它领域条约所补充,除非该领域的条约与相关机制出现空白时,方例外允许引用国际法原则将其它条约引入。精要介绍可参见：《国际法不成体系：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难》,联合国国际法委员会第五十七届会议工作报告,2005,陈喜峰：《国际法自足制度之研究》,载于：《政法论坛》,27卷2期,2009年3月,第58-67页; Bruno Simma, Self-contained Regimes,16 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,111-121 (1985), Bruno Simma and Dirk Pulkowski, Of Planets and the Universe:Self-contained Regimes in International Law, 17 EJIL,483-529 (2006). & Sons,1992)pp.253-257, Judith M. Dean, Trade and Environment:A Survey of the Literature(N.Y.: The World Bank,1992) p.3-5:洪德钦：《生物科技在WTO之研究课题》,载于：《法律哲理与制度,国际私法：马汉宝教授八秩华诞祝寿论文集》,(台湾)元照出版社2005年版,第298-299页。
① John H. Jackson, The World Trading System:Law and Policies of International Economics Relationship, (Cambridge:MIT Press,1989)10-15; John H. Jackson, Restructuring the GATTSystem, (London:Royal Institute of International Affairs,1990) pp.8-14.
②如经济实力欠佳的国家为了提升GNP与GDP,无节制的开采与捕捞天然资源出售给其它国家,虽然计算GNP时,可将这类人力产出转计为生产成本,故大量的开矿,捕鱼,伐木活动不会影响国家资产的损失,但这种假设中的开采成本有别于产品折旧费用,并不是所谓真正贸易成本,这种零成本的开发思考逻辑,不代表自然资源可以无止尽的运用。参见：Robert Repetto et al, Wasting Assets:Natural Resources in the National Income Account, (Washington, DC:World Resources Institute,1989) p.2, Herman E. Daly, Problems with Free Trade:Neoclassical and Steady-State Perspectives, in Durwood Zaelke et al. (eds), Trade and the Environment:Law, Economics, and Policy (St. Louis:Island Press,1993) pp.147-57.
③ WTO Secretariat, Trade and Environment at the WTO, (Apr.2004), available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratope/envire/envirwto2004e.pdf; WTO, Early Years:Emerging Environment Debate in GATT/WTO, http://www.wto.org/english/tratope/envire/histle.htm (last visited Mar.25,2009).
① John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.,1,36-37 (2006).
② WTO Report of the Panel, United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,35 I.L.M. 274, (Jan.29,1996).
③ Lorand Bartels, Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings,35 Journal of World Trade 3,499,502 (2001)
④ Appellate Body Report, E.C.-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/ R, WT/DS48/AB/R, adopted 13 February 1998; Appellate Body Report, United States2Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/R, adopted January 1996, (Adopted as Modified by the Appellate Body 20 May 1996); Panel Report, Korea-Measures government Procurement, WT/DS163/R, adopted June 2000, para.7.
⑤ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals, (Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003), pp.185-186.
①学者认为汽油标准案判决的para.6.15与7.1.呈现尽管依据其公约所制定之国内限制性规范具有保护环境的必要性,但专家组任务是确保GATT/WTO之目标,故对国内外厂商产生差别待遇之美国的清洁空气法(CAA)被宣告构成歧视。这样的结果反而是促成许多高污染的产品假借自由贸易的机制到处流窜。参见：Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.189,201-203 (1988).
② Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law?, Questions of Jurisdiction and Merits,37 Journal of World Trade 6, p.1005 (2003).
③ Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud and Gabrielle Marceau, The Relationship between the Dispute-Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO, in Liane Schalatek (ed), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, Facets of a Complex Relationship, (Washington:The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001) p.75.
① Michael Lennard, The World Trade Organization and Disputes Involving Multilateral Environmental Agreements,5 Eur. Envtl. L. Rev.306,310 (1996). Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.189, 203-205 (1988).
② Shabtai Rosenne, Breach of Treaty (Cambridge:Grotius Publications,1985), pp.85-86
③ Sabrina Shaw, Trade and Environment:The Post-Singapore WTO Agenda,6 Rev. Eur. Community & Int'l Envtl. L.105-106,(1997).
④ Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?,7 Minn. J. Global Trade 287,296-297 (1998) Gregory C. Shaffer, The World Trade Organization Under Challenge: Democracy and the Law and Politics of the WTO's Treatment of Trade and Environment Matters,25 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV.1,17 (2001).
⑤ Richard J. McLaughlin, Settling Trade-Related Disputes Over the Protection of Marine Living Resources: UNCLOS or the WTO?,10 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.29,47-51,81 (1997), Marcos Orellana, The EU and Chile Suspend the Swordfish Case Proceedings at the WTO and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ASIL INSIGHTS (Feb.2001).
①§§207～212 of UNCLOS.此即为欧盟针对《多哈宣言》第31.1段提出全球事务管理架构的法律基础。
②§§197、237 of UNCLOS.
③§§118、119Ⅰ(a)、Ⅱ of UNCLOS.
① Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?,7 Minn. J. Global Trade 287,302-305 (1998).
① E.C.-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R, adopted 13 February 1998, United States2Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/R, adopted January 1996, (Adopted as Modified by the Appellate Body 20 May 1996); Korea-Measures government Procurement, WT/DS163/R, adopted June 2000, para.7.
② J.G. Starke, Introduction of International Law (9th ed), (Singapore:Butterworths,1989), pp.22,34,82;杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2003年版,第227页。
① George Schwarzenberger, International Law, (NY:Stevens and Sons Ltd,1943) p.378, Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals, (Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003)p.23.
② Allan R. Stein, Forum Non Conveniens and the Redundancy of Court-Access Doctrine,133 U. Pa. L. Rev.781, 783 (1985). Gary B. Born, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts (3rd ed.), (N.Y.:Wilmer Kluwer,1996).pp.154-57289-318; Eric S. Sherby, Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal:The Quieter Side of Section 1782 Discovery,24 (2) The International Litigation Quarterly,2,3 (2008).
③ §3 (2) of U. S. Constitutions.
④ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals (N. Y.:Oxford,2003) pp. 130-134,174
⑤整理自：刘铁铮：《论国际管辖权冲突之防止》,载于：《国际私法论丛》,(台湾)政治大学1986年版,第258页; J. J. Fawcett, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law,(New York:Oxford University Press, 1995)pp.5-6,10; Willendson v Forsoket 29 Fed Cas 1283 (DC Pa 1801) (No 17,682), Gulf Oil v. Gilbert,330 U.S. 501,508 (1947); R. Maganlal & Co.,942 F.2d 164,167 (2nd Cir.1991); WIWA v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 226 F.3d 88,101 (2d Cir.2000).
①刘铁铮：《论国际管辖权冲突之防止》,载于：《国际私法论从》,(台湾)政治大学1986年版,第258页；Joel R. Paul, Comity in International Law,32 Harvard International Law Journal,1 (1999), Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harvard International Law Journal,191 (2003), Allan R. Stein, Forum Non Conveniens and the Redundancy of Court-Access Doctrine,133 U. Pa. L. Rev.781,783 (1985).
②施文真：《由智利—剑鱼案论环保贸易措施所引发之争端：管辖权冲突之探讨》,(台湾)《政大法学评论》,第86期,2005年10月,第99页。
③ Gary B. Born, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (3rd ed), (N.Y.:Wilmer Kluwer,1996) pp. 289-318.
④ Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.189,226-227 (1998)
⑤ The Lotus Case, available at:http://www.worldcourts.com/pcij/eng/decisions/1927.09.07_lotus/, (visited on 2009/1/9).
⑥ Summaries of Advisory Opinions and Orders of Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/93/14167.pdf, (visited on 2009/1/9).
① Available at:http://treaties.un.org/untc//Pages//doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20320/volume-320-I-4646-English.pdf (visited on 2010/10/27).
② Available at: http://treaties.un.org/untc//Pages//doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%2030/volume-30-I-449-English.pdf (visited on 2010/10/27).
③ Annex to GA Res.2625 (XXV).
④关于本宣言的影响,可参见埃曼努埃尔·鲁库纳斯的评释,available at：：http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/pdf/ha/mdpsid/mdpsid_c.pdf (visited on 2009/1/9).
⑤ Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties,14 EJIL I, 1,10-11(2003).
⑥准则为：当另一个法庭对于同一事件亦有管辖权；且另一法庭的管辖权来自明示的条款或暗示的条款；当其中一个当事人不愿受到第一个法庭管辖之情形。参见：Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) pp.233.
⑦此为阿根廷、巴西、巴拉圭、乌拉圭所签署之协议,旨在建立南美共同市场。原条文为：Disputes falling within the scope of application of this Protocol that may also be referred to the dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organisation or other preferential trade systems that the Mercosur State Parties may have entered into, may be referred to one forum or the other, as decided by the requesting party. Provided, however, that the parties to the dispute may jointly agree on a forum. Available at: http://untreaty.un.org/unts/144078_158780/5/7/13152.pdf (visited on 2010/10/29)
① Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions:The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and Other Treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1081,1112 (2001).
② Eric S. Sherby, Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal:The Quiter side of Section 1782 Discovery,24 The International Litigation Quarterly 2,1,4,5.7 (2008), Hilton v. Guyot,159 U.S.113,163-64 (1895); Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa,482 U.S.522 (1987), available at:http://supreme.justia.com/us/482/522/case.html, (visited on 2009/1/10); Laker Airways Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines, a Foreign Corporationklm, Royal Dutch Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, Appellant.laker Airways Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, Appellant,klm, Royal Dutch Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, available at:http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/731/909/30194/, (visited on 2009/1/10); Accord Mannington Mills Inc v. Congoleum Corp,595 F.2d 1287 (3rd Cir.) (1979).
③ Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO,19 EJIL 3,571,584 (2008).
④ Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An old Principles, a new age,47 McGill Law Journal,389,389 (2002).
⑤ § 26 of VLTC, § 297 of LOSC.
⑥ Corfu Channel Case; Fisheries Case (UK/Norway).
⑦ Bin Cheng, General Principles ofLaw as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (N.Y.:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.121,123.
⑧ Bin Cheng, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals (N. Y.:Oxford University Press, 2003) pp.24,62.
① Southern Bluefin Tuna Case,39 ILM 1359, p.1391 (2000).
② Joel R. Paul, Comity in International Law,32 Harv. Int'l L.J.1,3-4,74-77 (1991).
③ Ian Brownlie, Principles of International Law, (N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) p.20, J. G. Starke, The Introduction of International Law(9th ed),(Singapore:Butterworths,1989), p.20, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Court to Court,92 AJIL,708,708 (1998), Alison Jones & Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases and Materials, (NY:Oxford,2001) p.1236.
④ Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes?,7 Minn. J. Global Trade 287,322-323 (1998), Hilton v. Guyot,159 U.S.113,163-64 (1895).
① Hartford Fire Ins Co. v. California,509 U.S.764,817 (1993); Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J.191,204-209 (2003).
② Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J.191,210 (2003).
③罗昌发：《贸易与竞争之法律互动》,(台湾)月旦出版社1994年版,第86页。
④ Available at:http://curia.europa.eu/common/recdoc/convention/en/artidx/b-ii-8.htm (visited on 2009/1/10).
⑤ Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.254.
⑥ Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO,19 EJIL 3,571,584 (2008).
⑦参见：Order No.3, p.9, para.28,24 June 2003.
① Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law, 37 Journal of World Trade 6,1011-1012 (2003).
②杨永红：《从MOX Plant案析国际法庭管辖权之冲突》,《法学家》,2009年3期,第107-114页Paul James, Cardwell Duncan French, Who Decides? The ECJ's Judgment on Jurisdiction in the MOX Plant Dispute,19 Journal of Environmental Law,1,121,126 (2007) available at: http://jel.oxfordjoumals.org/content/19/1/121.full.pdf+html (visited on 2010/10/29).
③国内法建立审级制度目的之一为赋予当事人诉讼救济机会,另一则是处理管辖冲突,除以受理先后处理积极管辖冲突之基本原则外,当彼此争执不下时,例外由上级法院决定管辖法院。
④国内法的观点一事不再理原则是程序法的概念,与欧陆法传统上的ne bis in idem原则以及英美法的Double Jeopardy原则,即禁止双重危险原则相当,指人民同一违法行为,禁止国家为重复之刑事追诉与审判,主旨在维护法安定性,保障任何经判决有罪或无罪开释确定者,无庸就同一行为再受一次刑事诉究,而遭受更不利之后果。如美国宪法第一修正案之第5条,所谓同一案件是：检视附带请求与原请求之主要事实是否具有共同核心关系(common nucleus of operative fact),若答案为肯定则为同一案件available at: http://www.judicial.gov.tw/db/db04/db04-03.asp, (visited on 2008/12/31).
① §59 of I. C. J. Statute, Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.121,340,343, The Spanish-United States Claims Commission(1871), Chorzow Factory Ccase, PCIJ, Series A.13 at 23-7,(1927), Societe commericale de Belgique Case (1929), Trail Smelter Arbitral Tribunal (1935), Final Award (1941)。通说认为lis alibi pendens与 res judiacta二者之差异在于res judiacta指有管辖权的司法组织对一诉已经作出了生效的法律裁判后,当事人不得就案件所涉及之同一事实,同一诉讼标的再行起诉,lis alibi pendens禁止案件未判决之前再诉,resjudiacta必须待判决确定后才有判断的对象,两者之差异在于判断的时点不同,二者不可能同时存在。Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals, (N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) p.212.
②此原则在1968年《布鲁塞尔民商事案件管辖权和判决执行公约》以受理在先决定管辖原则建立基本架构以确定缔约国对特定争议的管辖权(§21 of Brussels Convention,1968.),且规定相同当事人间就同一诉因在不同缔约国法院起诉时,首先受诉的法院以外的其它法院应主动放弃管辖权,让首先受诉的法院审理。如果在两个以上的缔约国提出诉讼,除首先受理诉讼的法院外,所有其它法院必须拒绝管辖并中止诉讼。如果相关的几个诉讼在不同缔约国法院提起,除了首先受理诉讼的法院,其它法院应均中止各自的诉讼(§22of Brussels Convention,1968.),即使是对于几个法院都有专属管辖权的诉讼,首先受理诉讼法院以外的法院也应放弃管辖权,让首先受理诉讼的法院审理(§ 23 of Brussels Convention,1968.)1988年欧洲共同体国家与欧洲自由贸易联盟国家签订的《民商事案件管辖权和判决执行公约》(罗加诺公约),亦采用了布鲁塞尔公约的做法。
③ Ali Sadat-Akhavi, Methods of Resolving Conflicts between Treaties, (Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,2003) p.237.
①张东扬：《美国法院受理外国专利纷争之可能性-以Voda v.s. Cordis案为核心》,advailable at：http://www.saint-island.com.tw/report/data/IPR_200704.htm. (visited on 2008/12/15)
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (N. Y.:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.340-347.
③ Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (N. Y.:Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.337,346.
④ United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties,2nd Session, Vienna,9 April～22 May,1969, Official Records, p.253, para.41.
⑤ Chris Wold, Legal Assessment of Compatibility Issues between the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPA W) to the Cartagena Convention and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), available at: http://legacy.lclark.edu/org/ielp/objects/opinion_spaw.pdf (visited on 2010/10/28)
① Chris Wold, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GA TT:Conflict and Resolution?,26 Environmental Law,841,912-913(1996).
② Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.254.
③ Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.113.
④ Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.253
①廖诗评：《条约冲突基础问题研究》,法律出版社2008年版,第47页。
② Martti Koskenniemi, Report of Study Group of the International Law Commission:Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising From the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. para.253
① L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal, 2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,15 (2005).
② Opinion of Judge Treves of The MOX Plant Case (Ireland v. United Kingdom),2001.41 ILM 430-1.
③ Camouco Case, available at:http://www.itlos.org/case_documents/2001/document_en_129.pdf. (visited on: 2009/3/17)。Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) pp.242.
④ Yuval Shany, The Competing jurisdictions of international courts and tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press, 2003) pp.213
① L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal, 2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,17 (2005)
② Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford University Press,2003) pp.213-214,在职业运动的仲裁案也可见此原则的利用,available at: http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/106176_8523.pdf (visited on:2009/3/16)
③ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford,2003) pp.23, 212,213.
① Vaughan Lowe, Res Judicata and the Rule of International Arbitration,8 African Journal of International Law, 14 (1996).
② Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of norms and conflicts of jurisdictions:the relationship between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and other treaties,35 Journal of World Trade 6,1081,1113 (2001).
③ Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y:Oxford,2003) pp.240, 241.
④ George Schwarzenberger, International Law, (London:Stevens & Sons, Ltd.,1943) p.378, Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals,(N. Y.:Oxford,2003) p.23.
⑤ L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal, 2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,12,17 (2005).
① Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2000) p.183.
② Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1987) pp.344,345-346.
① Raj Bhala, Trade, Development and Social Justice (Durham:Carolina Academic Press.2003) p.15.
② WT/CTE/M/7,22 March 1996, WT/CTE/M/9,11 June 1996,参见：徐淑萍：《贸易与环境的法律问题研究》,武汉大学出版社2002年版,第93页；李爱年,韩广：《人类社会可持续发展与国际环境法》,法律出版社2005年版,第213页。本文将不讨论是否应修正GATT/WTO协议,修订确能釜底抽薪,但过程旷日废时,若能利用彼此合作,出现判决矛盾的风险将大为降低。
③ Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO,19 EJIL.3,571,583 (2008); Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J., 191,193,206-210 (2003).
④ Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J.,191,194-195 (2003).
⑤ Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Justice as Conflict Resolution:Proliferation, Fragmentation and Decentralization of Dispute Settlement in International Trade, (Italy:European University Institute,2004) p.2. available at http://cadmus.eui.eu/retrieve/1987/law04-10.pdf (visited on 2010/08/23)
① Firew Kebede Tiba, What Caused the Multiplicity of International Courts and Tribunals?,10 GONZ. J. INT'L L. 202,202 (2006).
② Christine Chinkin, Alternative Dispute Resolution under International Law, in Malcolm D. Evans (ed), Remedies in International Law:The Institutional Dilemma (Oxford:Hart,1998)pp.123,124-28, Maglosia A. Fitzmaurice, International Protection of the Environment,293 RECUEIL DES COURS,293,336 (2001); Ruidiger Wolfrum, Means of Ensuring Compliance with and Enforcement of International Environmental Law,272 RECUEIL DES COURS 25 (1998).
③ Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,69 (2007-2008).
④ Prosecutor v. Tadic, Case No. IT-94-1-I, Decision on Defense Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, para.11 (Oct.2,1995). Ruti Teitel & Robert Howse, Cross-Judging:Tribunalization in a Fragmented but Interconnected Global Order,41 International Law and Politics 959,962 (2009).
①[美]戈德史密斯,波斯纳,龚宇译,国际法的局限性,法律出版社2010年版,第33、149-150页。
②参见：Agreement on Cooperation and Relationship between the United Nations and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Art.4.1, available at:http://www.un.org/depts/los/press/itlos/itlos-16.htm. (visited at: 2009/6/8).
③参见：Article 10 paragraph 1 of UN Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer or Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction of 18 Sept.1997,36 ILM,1507 (1997).
① Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties,14 EJIL,1,1,9 (2003)
②其它如国际捕鲸委员会决议要求各会员秉持诚信以公正、合理与诚实之行为进行捕鲸。
③ John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, (Boston:Harvard University Press,1971) p.176.
④ Joost Pauwelyn, WTO Compassion or Superiority Complex? What to Make of the WTO Waiver for "Conflict Diamonds",24 Mich. J. Int'l L.1177,1177 (2003).
⑤ Tomer Brouder, Principles of Normative Integration and the Allocation of International Authority:The WTO, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the Rio Declaration,6 Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev.173,181 (2008).
⑥ ICJ, Advisory Opinions on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,35 ILM (1996) 1345, paras,99-100.
⑦ Lawrence R. Helfer, Regime Shifting:The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking,29 Yale J. Int'l L.26 passim (2004).
① Roberto V. Fiorentino, Luis Verdeja & Christelle Toqueboeuf, The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements:2006 Update, WTO Discussion Paper No.12 at 1 (2007), available at:http://www.wto.org/english/res e/booksp e/discussion papers12a e.pdf (visited at:2009/6/8).
②基于下列原则,以全球事务管理架构思考WTO与MEAs间之关系：一、多边环境协议在解决全球环境问题上具有高度的重要性及必要性；二、多边环境政策的制定应在MEAs而非WTO中制定,以符合各协议所欲达成之目标及专业性；三、为了提升贸易与环境政策之相互支持,国际间各组织应进行充分的信息交流与紧密合作；四、WTO与MEAs在国际具有相同之地位,必须寻求相互的承认及彼此之合作；五、WTO之相关规范不应解释为其它国际组织定力之国际法之例外,当然也包含MEA。参见：’TN/TE/W39, (24 March 2004).
① TN/TE/W66,68, WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.3, (16 February 2005)
②参见：§§4(5)、24o f SCM; TN/RL/GEN/134,Annex §4; EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R,16 January 1998, Part XI, p.68.
③ Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction:The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law, at 31, available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683 (visited on:2010/3/5); UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP/WWF,2007), p.38.
① FAO, FAO-CITES Agreement Promotes Sustainable Fish Trade:Collaborative Relationship Formalized in MOU, FAO Newsroom, release dated 3 October 2006, available at: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000410/index.html). (visited on 2010/3/22); UNEP/WWF, Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond (Geneva:UNEP/WWF,2007), p.39.
① Zhu Lanye, The Effects of the WTO Dispute Settlement Panel and Appellate Body Reports:Is the Dispute Settlement Body Resolving Specific Disputes Only or Making Precedent at the Same Time?,17 Temple International and Comparative Law Journal,1,38 (2003)
② Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,54-57(2007-2008); Donald M. McRae, GATT Article XX and the WTO Appellate Body, in Marco Brockers, Reinhard Quick (ed.), New Directions in International Economic Law, Essays in Honor of John Jackson, (N.Y.:Kluwer Law International,2000) pp.227-230.
③ Raj Bhala, The Myth about Stare Decisis and International Trade Law (Part One of a Trilogy),14 Am. U. INT'L L. REV.845,937-38 (1998-1999); Raj Bhala, The Power of the Past:Towards De Jure Stare Decisis in WTO Adjudication (Part Three of a Trilogy),33 GEO. WASH. INT'L L. REV.873,873-78 (2001).
④ Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,72-75 (2007-2008).
⑤ Carrie Wofford, A Greener Future at the WTO:The Refinement of WTO Jurisprudence on Environmental Exceptions to GATT,24 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV.563,579 (2000).
① Gabrielle Marceau, A Call for Coherence in International Law:Praises for the Prohibition Against "Clinical Isolation" in the WTO Dispute Settlement,33 Journal World Trade,87,107-109 (1999); Thomas J. Schoenbaum, The Decision in the Shrimp-Turtle Case,9 Y.B. INTL ENVTL. L.36,37-38 (1998).; E.C. Biotech Products case, paras.7.93-7.94. available at:http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/ec-biotech(panel).pdf (visited on 2010/10/28).
① In the European Communities' opinion "[t]he fact that trade measures MEAs may contain were negotiated and agreed by consensus in a multilateral context should be a guarantee against discriminatory action and their use for protectionist purposes."参见:Submission by the European Community to the Committee on Trade and Environment, Resolving the Relationship between WTO Rules and Multilateral Environmental Agreements, p 4, WT/CTE/W/170 (Oct.19,2000).
② Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO:Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.43,89-92 (2007～2008)
③吴峰,李志清：《论GATT94第20条在实践中的新发展及前景分析》,载于：《上海理工大学学报》(社会科学版),第26卷4期,2004年,第63页。
④黄辉：‘《论环境保护的国际化与自由贸易的协调》,载于：《武汉科技大学学报》(社会科学版),2006年1期,第17页。
①即 Center for International Environmental Law, Center for Marine Conservation, Environmental Foundation Ltd, Mangrove Action Project, Philippine Ecological Network and Naccionl de accion 这些民间组织。 ② George C. Umbricht, A'Amicus Suriae Briefs'on Amicus Curiae Briefs at the WTO, Journal of International Economic Law,773,783-787 (2001).
③专家组有权酌情决定接受和审议向其提交的信息和建议,有权决定拒绝信息和建议,无论专家组是否要求。专家组可以提出信息本身的要求,这并不约束专家组接受并审查实际提供的信息。专家组可以变更发现事实和法律解释的程序的权限幅度,不会使专家组淹没于未寻求的信息中。基于这些分析,上诉机构裁定：接受非政府组织提交的未寻求的信息数据并不违反DSU的规定,专家组以此为由拒绝接受这些信息数据是错误的。参见：韩立余编着：《WTO案例及评析》,中国人民大学出版社2001年3月版,第415页。
④ AbestosCase, WT/DS135/R, (18 September 2000), paras.8.12-8.13, available at: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanels/ec-asbestos(panel).pdf, (visited on 2009/6/1), Report of Appellate Body, WT/DS135/AB/R, paras.55-57, available at: http://www.pravo.hr/images/50005731/AB%20-%20EC%20-asbestos.pdf, (visited on 2009/6/1),有认为石绵案的上诉机构虽然在其裁决报告中推翻了原专家组在法庭之友提出陈述这个问题上的决定,但其未明确言及自己是否也有同样的裁量权。参见：郑富霖：《法庭之友》,available at：http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/do/www/readDoc?document_id=79709 (visited on 2009/6/1)
⑤关于专家组与上诉组对于法庭之友的态度与相关裁决,可参见：杨志凯：《「法庭之友」在WTO争端解决机制中之适用、实践与展望—以相关案例解析为主轴》,(台湾地区)《东吴大学法律学研究所硕士论文》,2003年,第28至30页,第63至66页。
①彭心仪：《论WTO争端解决程序下之「法庭之友」介入问题》,available at: www.tradelaw.nccu.edu. tw/pdf/no/no4/4.pdf (visited on 2009/6/1).
② Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WT/DS138/AB/R, available at:
http://www.uchastings.edu/faculty-administration/faculty/paul/class-website/docs/uksteel3.pdf (visited on 2009/6/1).
①李陈国,廖芳仪：《WTO贸易与环境问题之研究》,载于：《2010产业管理创新研讨会论文集》,2010年,205-208页。
[1]Juraj Andrassy, International Law and the Resources of the Sea, Columbia University Press,1970.
[2]David Joseph Attard, The Exclusive Economic Zone in International Law, Oxford University Press,1987.
[3]Gary P. Anderson and Bradnee Chambers, Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), United Nations University Press,2001.
[4]A.O. Adede, The System for Settlement of Disputes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1987.
[5]Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[6]Seyed Ali Sadat-Akhavi, Methods of Resolving Conflicts between Treaties, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,2003.
[1]Kemal Baslar, The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1988.
[2]Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, Oxford University Press, 2003.
[3]R.P. Barston and Pactricia Birnie, The Maritime Dimension, Allen & Unwin, 1980.
[4]Hedley Bull, Hugo Grotius and International Relations, Oxford University Press, 1990.
[5]Eyal Benvenisti, Sharing Transboundary Resources, Cambridge Press,2002.
[6]William T. Burke, The New International Law of Fisheries:UNCLOS 1982 and beyond, Oxford University Press,1994.
[7]Sali Bache, Marcus Haward, Stephen Dovers, Economic, Trade and Environmental Instruments:Their Impact on Australian Fisheries Policy and Management, Centre for Maritime Policy University of Wollongong,2001.
[8]Patrica W. Birnie, A. Boyle, Basic Documents on International Law and the Environment, Clarendon Press,1995.
[9]Edward B. Barbier, Joanne C. Burgess, Joshua Bishop, Bruce Aylward, The Economics of Tropical Timber, Earthscan Publisher,1994.
[10]Raj Bhala, Trade, Development and Social Justice, Carolina Academic Press. 2003.
[11]Gary B. Born, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (3rd ed.), Wilmer Kluwer Publisher,1996.
[12]Duncan Brack and Kevin Gray, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO, Earthscan,2003.
[13]Michael Byers, Custom, Power and the Power of Rules:International Relations and Customary International Law, Cambridge University Press,1999.
[1]Bin Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunal, Cambridge University Press,1987.
[2]Bin Cheng, The Competing Jurisdictions of International Courts and Tribunals, Oxford University Press,2003.
[3]R. R. Churchill and A.V. Lowe, The Law of the Sea, Manchester University Press, 1988.
[1]Antony J. Dolman, Resource, Regime and World Order, Pergamon Press,1981.
[2]David Downes, Brennan Van Dyke, Fisheries Conservation and Trade Rules: Ensuring that Trade Law Promotes Sustainable Fisheries, Center for International Environmental Law and Greenpeace,1998.
[3]Martin Dixon, Robert McCorquodale, Cases & Materials on International Law (4th ed.), Oxford University Press,2003.
[4]Michael Decleris, The L aw of Sustainable Development General Principles, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,2000.
[1]Omer Youself Elagab, The Legality of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in International Law, Oxford University Press,1988.
[1]J. E. S. Fawcett and Audrey Parry, Law and International Resource Conflict, Oxford University Press,1982.
[2]Duncan French, International Law and Policy of Sustainable Development, Manchester University Press,2005.
[3]J. J. Fawcett, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law, Oxford University Press,1995.
[1]Hugo Grotius, The Freedom of The Seas, trans, by Ralph Van Deman Magoffin and James Brown. Oxford University Press,1972.
[2]Harald Hohmann, Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1994.
[3]Ellen Hey, The Regime for the Exploitation of Transboundary Marine Fisheries Resources, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989.
[4]Ellen Hey, Developments in International Fisheries Law, Kluwer Publisher,1999.
[5]H. Lauterpacht, The Development of International Law by the International Court, Stevens & Sons,1958.
[1]John H. Jackson, The Jurisprudence of GATT and the WTO, Insights on Treaty Law and Economic Relations, Cambridge University Press,2000.
[2]Erin Bain Jones, Law of Sea, Oceanic Resources,1972.
[3]John H. Jackson, The World Trading System:Law and Policies of International Economics Relationship, The MIT Press,1989.
[4]John H. Jackson, Restructuring the GATT System, Royal Institute of International Affairs,1990.
[5]Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law: Text, Cases and Materials, Oxford,2001.
[1]Alexandre Kiss and Dinah Shelton, International Environment Law, Graham and Trotman,1991.
[2]Barbare Kwiatowska, The 200 Mile Exclusive Economic Zone in the New Law of the Sea, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1989.
[3]Natalie S. Klein, Dispute settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Cambridge University Press,2005.
[1]Tim Lang, Collin Hines, The New Protectionism, Eathscan Publications Ltd, 1994.
[2]Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, 2003.
[3]H. Lauterpacht, The Function of Law in the International Community, Archon Books,1966.
[1]Myers McDougal and William T. Burke, The Public Order of the Ocean: A Contemporary International Law of the Sea, Kluwer Publisher,1987.
[2]J. B. Morrell, The Law of the Sea: Historical Analysis of the 1982 Treaty and Its Rejection by the United States, McFarland,1992.
[3]Sean D. Murphy, Principles of International Law, Thomson West,2006.
[4]Bedrich Moldan, Economic Instruments for Sustainable Development, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic,1995.
[1]Lassa Oppenheim, International Law:Treatise (8th ed.)by H. Lauterpacht, McKay, 1955.
[2]D. P. O'connell, International Law of the Sea, Clarendon Press,1984.
[3]J. F. O'connor, Good Faith in International Law, Dartmouth,1991.
[1]Peter Bautista Payoyo, Cries of the Sea, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,1997.
[2]Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law, Cambridge University Press,2003.
[3]Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Justice as Conflict Resolution:Proliferation, Fragmentation and Decentralization of Dispute Settlement in International Trade, European University Institute,2004.
[1]P. Sreenivasa Rao, The public Order of Ocean Resources, M. I. T. Press,1975.
[2]Rosemary Gail Rayfuse, Non-flag State Enforcement in High Seas Fisheries, Martinus Nijhoff Publisher,2004.
[3]Maurizo Ragazzi, The Concept of International Obligation Erga Omnes, Clarendon Press,1997.
[4]David Ricardo, The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Introduction by D. Winch, J. H. Dent & Sons,1992.
[5]Robert C. Repetto, Wasting Assets:Natural Resources in the National Income Account, World Resources Institute,1989.
[6]Shabtai Rosenne, Breach of Treaty, Grotius Publications,1985.
[7]R. G Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization:Compatibility or Conflict? TRAFFIC International,2003.
[8]John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press,1971.
[1]J. G Starke, The Introduction of International Law (9th ed.), Butterworths,1989.
[2]Yuval Shany, The Competing Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals, Oxford University Press,2003.
[3]Philip Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law, Cambridge University Press.2003.
[4]Ramanlal Soni, Control of Marine Pollution in International Law, Juta & Co., 1985.
[5]Brian D. Smith, State Responsibility and the Marine Environment:The Rules of Decision, Oxford University Press,1988.
[6]Robert A. Shinn, The International Politics of Marine Pollution Control, Praeger Publishers,1974.
[7]Rashid Sumaila and Daniel Pauly, Catching More Bait:A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies (2nd version), University of British Colombia.2006.
[8]Oscar Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1991.
[9]Ian Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty, Manchester University Press,1984.
[10]George Schwarzenberger, International Law, Stevens and Sons Ltd,1943.
[11]George Schwarzenberger, E.D. Brown, A Manual of International Law,6th ed., Professional Books,1976.
[12]Nico Schrijver, Sovereignty Over Natural Resources:Balancing Rights and Duties, Cambridge Press,1997.
[13]Ian Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty, Manchester University Press,1984.
[1]Dire Tladi, Sustainable Development in International Law:An Analysis of Key Enviro-Economic Instruments, Pretoria University Press,2007.
[2]J. S. Thomas, M.A. Meyer, The New Rules of Global Trade:A Guide to the World Trade Organization, Carswell,1997.
[3]R. G Tarasofsky, Regional Fisheries Organizations and the World Trade Organization: Compatibility or Conflict?, TRAFFIC International,2003.
[1]M. Jon Van Dyke, D. Zaelke, G Hewison, Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century, Island Press,1993.
[2]Francisco Orrego Vicuna, The Exclusive Economic Zone, Cambridge University Press,1989.
[1]Peter Weber, Net Loss:Fish, Jobs, and the Marine Environment, Worldwatch Institute,1994.
[2]Anna Willock, Uncharted Waters:Implementation Issues and Potential Benefits of Listing Toothfish in Appendix II of CITES, TRAFFIC,2002.
[3]S. F. Walmsley, C. T. Barnes, A. I. Payne, C. A. Howard, Comparative Study of the Impact of Fisheries Partnership Agreements, MRAG, Cambridge Resources Economics & NRI,2007.
[4]Peter Weber, Net Loss:Fish, Jobs, and the Marine Environment, Worldwatch Paper no.120, Table 2, Worldwatch Institute,1994.
[1]Howard Charles Yourow, The National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Dynamics of European Human Rights Jurisprudence, Kluwer Law International, 1996.
[1]Alan Boyle, David Freestone (ed.), International Law and Sustainable Development, Past Achievement and Future Challenges, Oxford University Press, 1999.
[2]Gary P. Anderson, Bradnee Chambers (ed.) Trade, Environment and the Millennium (2nd ed.), United Nations University Press,2001.
[1]Jagdish Bhagwati, Robert E. Hudec (ed.), Fair Trade and Harmonization: Prerequisites for Free Trade?, MIT University Press,1996.
[2]Marco Brockers, Reinhard Quick (ed.), New Directions in International Economic Law, Essays in Honor of John Jackson, Kluwer Law International, 2000.
[1]Robin Clarke (ed.), Note for the Future:An Alternative History of the Past Decade, Thames & Hudson,1975.
[1]Malcolm D. Evans (ed.), Remedies in International Law:The Institutional Dilemma, Hart Publishing,1998.
[1]Stefan Griller (ed.), At the Crossroads:The World Trading System and the Doha Round, Springer-Verlag Wien,2008.
[1]Peter Haas, Robert Keohane and Marc A. Levy (ed.), Institutions for the Earth: Sources of Effective International Environmental Protection, The MIT Press, 1993.
[2]Ellen Hey (ed.), Developments in International Fisheries Law, Kluwer,1999.
[1]Albert W. Koers, Bernard H. Oxman (ed.), The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, The Law of the Sea Institute, University of Hawaii,1983.
[2]Steven J. Kennelly (ed.), By-catch Reduction in the World s Fisheries, Springer, 2007.
[1]Elihu Lauterpacht (ed.), Hersch Lauterpacht, International Law: Collected Papers, Cambridge University Press,2009.
[1]Bedrich Moldan (ed.), Economic Instruments for Sustainable Development, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic,1995.
[1]Myron H. Nordquist and John Norton Moore (ed.), Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Center for Oceans Law and Policy, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2000.
[1]Peter φrebech (ed), The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development, Cambridge University Press.2005.
[1]Bruce Phillips, Trevor Ward, Chet Chaffee (ed.), Eco-labelling in Fisheries: What Is It All About, Blackwell Publishing,2003.
[1]Liane Schalatek (ed.), Trade and Environment, the WTO, and MEAs, Facets of a Complex Relationship, The Heinrich Boll Foundation,2001
[2]Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Ashfaq Khalfan (ed.), Sustainable Development Law:Principles, Practice, & Prospects, Oxford University Press, 1999.
[1]Rudiger Wolfrum, Peter-Tobias Stoll and Anja Seibert-Fohr (ed.), WTO-Technical Barriers and SPS Measures, Brill Academic Publish,2007.
[2]Edith Brown Weiss (ed.), Environmental Change and International Law:New Challenges and Dimensions, United Nations University Press,1992.
[1]Durwood Zaelke, Rob Housman and Paul Orbuch (ed.), Trade and the Environment: Law, Economics, and Policy, Island Press,1993.
1. R. P. Arnold, Common Heritage of Mankind as a Legal Concept,9 International Lawyer,1975.
2. Michael Akehurst, Jurisdiction in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L. 1974.
3. Michael Akehurst, Custom As a Source in International Law,47 Brit. YB. Int'l L.,1975.
4. Ekaterina Anyanova, Rescuing the Inexhaustible, The Issue of Fisheries Subsidies in the International Trade policy, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, Vol.3, Issue 3,2008.
5. Shawkat Alam, Trade Restrictions Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements:Developmental Implications for Developing Countries, Journal of World Trade 41 (5),2007.
6. Ragnar Arnason, Ocean Fisheries Management:Recent International Developments, Marine Policy, September 1993.
1. Tomer Brouder, Principles of Normative Integration and the Allocation of International Authority:The WTO, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the Rio Declaration,6 Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev.,2008.
2. Raj Bhala, The Myth about Stare Decisis and International Trade Law (Part One of a Trilogy),14 Am. U. INT'L L. REV,1998-1999.
3. Raj Bhala, The Power of the Past: Towards De Jure Stare Decisis in WTO Adjudication (Part Three of a Trilogy),33 GEO. WASH. INT'L L. REV,2001.
4. Wilfred Beckerman, Economic Growth and the Environment:Whose Environment? 22 World Development,1992.
5. Jutta Brunee and Stephan J. Toope, Environmental Security and Freshwater Resource: A Case for International Ecosystem Law,41 Yearbook of International Environmental Law,1995.
6. Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An old Principles, a new age,47 McGill Law Journal,2002.
7. Alan Boyle, The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case:New Law in Old Bottles,8 YBIEL,1997.
8. Erik P. Bartenhagen, The Intersection of Trade and Environment: An Examination of the Impact of the TBT Agreement on Ecolabeling Programs,17 Va. Envtl. L.J.51,1997.
9. William T. Burke, The Law of the Sea Convention and conditions of access to Fisheries Subject to National Jurisdiction,63 Or. L.R.,1984.
10. William T. Burke, Implications for Fisheries Management of U.S. Acceptance of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea,89 Am. J. Int'l Law,1995.
11. Eric A. Bilsky, Territory without Boundaries:Colonizing Natural Resource:Conserving Marine Wildlife through World Trade Law,30 Mich. J. Int'l L., 2009.
12. Julio Garcia Burgues & Mikel Insausti Muguruza, Trade and the Environment in the WTO:The European Community's Participation in the Committee on Trade and Environment,6 Rev. of EUR. C'MTY. & INT'L ENVTL. L.,1997.
13. Lorand Bartels, Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings, 35 (3) Journal of World Trade,2001.
14. Michael Byers, Abuse of Right:An old Principles, a new age,47 McGill Law Journal,2002.
15. Paxton Blair, The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in Anglo-American Law,29 Colum. L. Rev.,1929.
16. Ian Brownlie, Legal Status of Nature Resource,162 Recuiel de Cours de 1' Academie de Droit International de La Haye,1974.
17. Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion and Reprisals by States,13 Virginia Journal of International Law 1,1972.
18. Derek Bowett, Economic Coercion:Past and Present. International Law and Economic Coercion,16 Virginia Journal of International Law 2,1976.
19. Philip Bender, Trade Restrictions for Antarctic Conservation Under the Free Trade Principles of the WTO System,14 SE. ENVTL. L. J.,2006.
1. Miguel A. Elizalde Carranza, MEAs with Trade Measures and The WTO: Aiming Toward Sustainable,15 Buff. Envt'l. L.J.,2007-2008.
2. A. Cocca, Mankind as a New Legal Subject:A New Juridical Dimension Recognized by the United Nations, Proc.13th Coll. On the Law of Outer Space 211, 1972.
3. A. Cocca, The Common Heritage of Mankind--An overview, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, AIAA,1972.
4. Jonathan I. Charney, Third Party Dispute Settlement and International Law, 36 Colum. J Transnat'l L,1997.
5. Jonathan I. Charney, The Impact on the International Legal System of the Growth of the International Courts and Tribunal,31 NYU J Int. L & Pol.,1999.
6. Steve Charnovitz, The Supervision of Health and Biosafety Regulation by World Trade Rules,13 Tulane Environmental Law Journal,2000.
7. Seung Wha Chang, GATTing A Green Trade Barrier-Eco-Labelling and the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,31 Journal of World Trade,1997.
5. Francis T. Christy Jr., Transitutions in Management and Distribution of International Fisheries,31 Int'l Org.,1977.
6. Seung Wha Chang, WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies:A Historic Step towards Sustainability,6 J Int'l Econ L.,2003
7. Matthew Craven, Legal Differentiation and the Concept of Human Rights Treaty in International Law, (11) EJIL,2000.
8. Ilona Cheyne, Environmental Unilateralism and the WTO/GATT System,24 Ga.J. Int'l & Comp. L.,1995.
9. Douglas J. Caldwell, International Environmental Agreements and the GATT: An Analysis of the Potential Conflict and the Role of a GATT "Waiver" Resolution, 18 Md. J. Int'l L. & Trade,1994.
10. Steve Charnovitz, Environmental Trade Sanctions and the GATT: An Analysis of the Pelly Amendment on Foreign Environmental Practices,9 Am. U. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y,1994.
11. Alexandra Gonzalez-Calatayud and Gabrielle Marceau, The Relationship between the Dispute-Settlement Mechanisms of MEAs and those of the WTO, Reciel 11 (3),2002.
1. Pierre-Marie Dupuy, The Danger of the Fragmentation or Unification of the International Legal System and the International Court of Justice,31 NYU J Int. L & Pol.,1999.
2. Peter G. G Davis, Catherine Redgwell, The International Legal Regulation of Straddling Fish Stock, BYIL LXVII,1996.
3. Oliver Delvos, Trade Special Issue:WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies-should the "SCM Agreement" be Modified,37 Victoria University of Wellington Law Review,2006.
4. William Davey, Has the WTO Dispute Settlement System Exceeded its Authority? 4 JIEL 1,2001.
1. John J. Emslie, Labeling Programs as a reasonably Available Least Restrictive Trade Measure under Article XX's Nexus Requirement",30 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.,2005.
2. Jerome B. Elkind, Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases:Abuse of Right-A Blind Alley for Environmentalists,9 Vand. J. Transnat'l L.,1976.
1. Maglosia A. Fitzmaurice, International Protection of the Environment,293 RECUEIL DES COURS,2001.
2. Roberto V. Fiorentino, Luis Verdeja & Christelle Toqueboeuf, The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements:2006 Update, WTO Discussion Paper No. 12,2007.
3. Charles R. Fletcher, Greening World Trade:Reconciling GATT and Multilateral Environmental Agreements within the Existing World Trade Regime,5 J. Transnat'l L. & Pol'y,1996.
4. Thomas M. Franck, On Proportionality of Countermeasure in International Law,102 AJIL,2008.
5. George P. Fletcher, The Right and the Reasonable,98 Harv. L. Rev.,1985.
1. Lakshman D. Guruswamy, Should UNCLOS or GATT/WTO Decide Trade and Environment Disputes,7 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade,1998.
2. Lakshman Guruswamy, The Promise of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):Justice in Trade and Environment Disputes,25 Ecology L.Q.,1988.
3. Ibon Galarraga Gallastegu, The Use of Eco-Label:A Review of the Literature, Eur. Env.12,2002.
4. Dominic A. Gentile, International Trade and the Environment:What is the Role of the WTO? 20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.,2009.
5. Avi Gesser, Canada's Environmental Choice Program:A Model for a "Trade-Friendly" Eco-Labelling Scheme,39 Harv. Int'l. L. J.,1998.
6. S. H. Gorden,'The Economic Theory of a Common Property Resource:The Fishery',62 Journal of Political Economy,1954.
7. Roman Grynberg, Martin Tsamenyi, Fisheries Subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island Tuna Fisheries,32 JTL 127,1998
8. Roman Grynberg, WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations:Implications for Fisheries Access Arrangements and Sustainable Management, Marine Policy 27,2003
9. John Martin Gillroy, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and International Tribunals:The Status of "Environmental Sustainability" in International Jurisprudence,42 Stan. J Int'l L.,2006.
10. Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions The Relationship between the WTO Agreement and ME As and other Treaties,35 (6) Journal of World Trade,2001.
11. Harold C. Gutteridge, Abuse of Rights,5 Cambridge L.J.,1935.
1. Patricia I. Hansen, Transparency, Standards of Review and the Use of Trade Measures to Protect the Global Environment,39 Va. J. Int'l L.,1999.
2. Shannon Hudnall, Towards a Greener International Trade System: Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the World Trade Organization,29 Colum. J. L. & Soc. Probs.,1996.
3. Diana Hurwitz, Fishing for Compromises Through NAFTA and Environmental Dispute Settlement: The Tuna-Dolphin Controversy,35 Nat. Resources J.,1995.
4. Mathew Hunter Hurlock, The GATT, U.S. Law and the Environment: A Proposal to Amend the GATT in Light of the Tuna/Dolphin Decision,92 Colum. L. Rev.,1992.
5. Caroline Henckel, Overlapping Jurisdictional Isolationism at the WTO-FTA Nexus:A Potential Approach for the WTO, The European Journal of International Law, Vol.19, No.3,2008.
6. Lawrence R. Helfer, Regime Shifting:The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking,29 Yale J. Int'l L.26 passim (2004).
7. Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, International Economic Soft Law, Recuiel de Cours de l' Academie de Droit International de La Haye, vol.163 (2),1979.
8. Gunther Handl, Territorial Sovereignty and the Problem of Transnational Pollution,69 AJIL,1975.
1. Lawrence Juda, UNCLOS Ⅲ and the New International Economic Order,7 Ocean Dev. Int. L.,1979.
2. Christopher C. Joyner, Legal Implication of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind,35 International and Comparative Law Quarterly,1986.
3. Lash Jonathan, Towards a Sustainable Future,12 Natural Resource & Environmental,1997.
4. Jennifer L. Jacquet, and Daniel Pauly, Trade Secrets:Renaming and Mislabeling of Seafood,32 Marine Policy,2008.
5. Wilfred Jenks, The Conflict of Law-Making Treaties,30 BYIL,1953.
6. John H. Jackson, World Trade Rules and Environmental Policies: Congruence or Conflict,49 Wash. & Lee L. Rev.,1992.
7. Paul James, Cardwell Duncan French, Who Decides? The ECJ's Judgment on Jurisdiction in the MOX Plant Dispute,19 Journal of Environmental Law 1,2007.
1. Alexander. C. Kiss, The Common Heritage Principle:Utopia or Reality,40 Int'l J.1984-1985.
2. Alexandre Kiss, The Implications of Global Change for the International Legal System, Environmental Change and International Law:New Challenges and Dimensions, United Nations University Press,1992.
3. Benedict Kingsbury, Foreword: Is the Proliferation of International Courts and Tribunals a Systemic Problem?,31 N.Y.U.J. INT'L L. & POL.,1999.
4. Kazumochi Kometani, Trade and Environment: How Should WTO Panels Review Environmental Regulations Under GATT Articles Ⅲ and ⅩⅩ?,16 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus.,1996.
5. Steve Keane, Tradefair Competition Winner:Can a Consumer's Right to Know Survive the WTO?: The Case of Food Labeling,16 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Prob.,2006.
1. Samuel N. Lind, Eco-Labels and International Trade Law:Avoiding Trade Violations While Regulating the Environment,8 Int'l Legal Persp.1996.
2. Vaughan Lowe, Res Judicata and the Rule of International Arbitration,8 African Journal of International Law,1996.
3. Vaughan Lowe, Overlapping Jurisdiction in International Tribunal,20 Australian Yearbook of International Law,2000.
4. Randall Lesaffer, Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law, 16 European Journal of International Law,2005.
5. Winfried Lang, Comment, Is the Protection of the Environment a Challenge to the International Trading System?,7 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.,1995.
6. Jonathan Lash, Towards a Sustainable Future,12 Nat. Resource & Environmental,1997.
7. Michael Lennard, The World Trade Organization and Disputes Involving Multilateral Environmental Agreements,5 Eur. Envtl. L. Rev.,1996.
8. Marian Nash Leich, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law,81 AJIL,1987.
9. Hersch Lauterpacht, Boycott in International Relations, BYIL, vol.14,1933.
10. B. Larschan and B. Brennan, The Common Heritage of Mankind Principle in International Law,21 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,1983.
1. Gabrielle Marceau, A Call for Coherence in International Law: Praises for the Prohibition Against "Clinical Isolation" in the WTO Dispute Settlement,33 Journal World Trade,1999.
2. Alex Meijer, How is International Law Made? —The Stages of Growth of International Law and Use of its Customary Rules,9 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,1978.
3. Sean D. Murphy, Progress and Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia,93 Am. J. Int'l L,1999.
4. Petros Mavroidis, Trade and Environment after the Shrimps-Turtles Litigation,34 Journal of World Trad,2000.
5. Carol J. Miller, and Jannifer L. Croston, WTO Scrutiny v. Environmental Objectives:Assement of the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act,37 AM. Bus. L. J.,1999.
6. Cynthia M. Maas, Should the WTO Expand GATT Article XX:An Analysis of United States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline,5 Minn. J. Global Trade,1996.
7. John Muir, The Boycott in International Law,9 Journal of International Law and Economics,1974.
8. E. M. Maniruzzaman, Expropriation of Alien Property and the Principle of Non-Discrimination in International Law of Foreign Investment: An Overview,8 J. Transnat'l L. Pol'y 57,1998.
9. Richards J. McLaughlin, Settling Trade-Related Disputes over the Protection of Marine Living Resources:UNCLOS or the WTO? 10 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev., 1997.
10. Massimiliano Montini, The Nature and Function of the Necessity and Proportionality Principles in the Trade and Environment Context, Vol.6 issue 2, RECIEL,1997.
11. Thorolfur Matthiasson, Why Fishing Fleets Tend to be Too Big,11 Marine Resources Economics 3,1996.
1. Arthur Nussbaum, The Significance of Roman Law in the History International Law,100 University of Pennsylvania Law Review,1952.
2. Eric Neumayer, Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements and WTO Rules:Potential for Conflict,Scope for Reconciliation, Aussenwirtschaft 55 (3),2000.
3. Nancy Nelson, International Concern for the Sustainability of the World's Fisheries:United Nations Efforts to Combat Over-Fishing and International Debate over State Fishing Subsidies, Colo J Int'l Envt'l L & Pol'y,1999.
4. Kalypso Nicolaidis and Michelle Egan, Transnational Market Governance and Regional Policy Externality:Why Recognize Foreign Standards? Journal of European Public Policy 8:3 Special Issue,2001.
1. Bernard H. Oxman, Complementary Agreements and Compulsory Jurisdiction,95 Am. J. Int'l L.,2001.
2. Atsuko Okubo, Environmental Labeling Programs and the GATT/WTO Regime,11 Geo. Int'l Envtl. L. Rev.,1999.
3. Bernard H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: The 1977 New York Session,72 Am. J. Int'l L.,1978.
4. Bernard H. Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea:The Ninth Session,75 AJIL,1981.
5. Denis A. O'Connell, Tuna, Dolphin, and Purse Seine fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific:The Controversy Continues,77 UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy,2005.
6. Marcos Orellana, The EU and Chile Suspend the Swordfish Case Proceedings at the WTO and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ASIL INSIGHTS,2001.
1. Anne Peters, International Dispute Settlement:A Network of Cooperational Duties, EJIL, Vol.14, No.1,2003.
2. Joost Pauwelyn, WTO Compassion or Superiority Complex? What to Make of the WTO Waiver for "Conflict Diamonds" 24 Mich. J. Int'l L.,2003.
3. Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a WTO Dispute Based on Non-WTO Law? 37 (6) Journal of World Trade,2003.
4. Joel R. Paul, Comity in International Law,32 Harv. Int'l L.J.1991.
5. Joost Pauwelyn, How to Win a World Trade Organization Dispute Based on Non-World Trade Organization Law,37 Journal of World Trade,2003.
6. Graeme Parkes,'Precautionary Fisheries Management:The CCAMLR Approach', Marine Policy, Vol.24, No.2,2000.
7. Travis Potts, Marcus Howard, International Trade, Eco-labelling, and Sustainable Fisheries-Recent Issues, Concepts and Practice, Environment",9 Development and Sustainability,2007.
1. Cesare P. R. Romano, The Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies:The Pieces of the Puzzles,31 NYU J Int. L & Pol.,1999.
2. Jennifer Ramach, Dolphin-Safe Labeling: Are the Dolphins Finally Safe,15 Va. Envtl. L.J.,1996.
3. A. Rosenberg, M. J. Fogarty, M. P. Sissenwine, J. R. Beddington, J. G Shepherd, Achieving Sustainable Use of Renewable Resources, Science, vol.262, 1993.
1. Anne-Marie Slaughter, Court to Court,92 American Journal of International Law,1998.
2. Surya P. Subedi, Balancing International Trade with Environmental Protection:International Legal Aspects of Eco-labels,25 Brooklyn J. Int'l L.,1999.
3. Peter A. Shelton, Eco-certification of Sustainably Managed Fisheries—Redundancy or Synergy,100 Fisheries Research,2009.
4. Jennifer Schultz, The GATT/WTO Committee on Trade and the Environment-Toward Environmental Reform",89 Am. J. Int'l L.,1995.
5. Elliot B. Staffin, Trade Barrier or Trade Boon? A Crtitical Evaluation of Environmental Labeling and It's Role in the "Greening"of World Trade",21 Colum. J. Envtl. L.,1996.
6. Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L. J., 2003.
7. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, The Decision in the Shrimp-Turtle Case,9 Y.B. INT'L ENVTL. L.,1998.
8. Malcom Shaw, The West Sahara Case,49 BYbIL,1978.
9. Shane Spelliscy, The Proliferation of International Tribunal:A Chink in the Armor,40 Colum. J Transnat'l L.,2001.
10. S. Shaw and R. Schwartz, Trade and Environment in the WTO:State of Play,36 JWT,2002.
11. Philip Sands, International Court and Application of Concept of Sustainable Development,3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,1999.
12. Philp Sands, International Law in the Field of Sustainable Development, BYIL, LXV,1994.
13. Warren F. Schwartz, Eugene W. Harper, The Regulation of Subsidies Affecting International Trade,70 Michigan Law Review,1972.
14. Alan O. Sykes, Countervailing Duty Law: An Economic Perspective,89 Columbia Law Review,1989.
15. Ussif Rashid Sumaila and Daniel Pauly, Catching More Bait: A Bottom-up Re-estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies, (2nd version). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2006, Vol.14, No 6, University of British Colombia.2006.
16. Christopher D. Stone, Too Many Fishing Boats, Too Few Fish: Can Trade Laws Trim Subsidies and Restore the Balance in Global Fisheries? 24 Ecology Law Quarterly,1997.
17. Joanne Scott, International Trade and Environmental Governance:Relating Rules (and Standards) in the EU and the WTO,15 EUR. J. INT'L L.,2004.
18. L. G. P. Specker, Remedying the Normative Impacts of Forum Shopping in International Human Rights Tribunal,2 The New Zealand Postgraduate Law E-Journal,2005.
19. Judge Shahabuddeen, Implications of the Proliferation of International Adjudicatory Bodies for Dispute Resolution, (9) ASIL Bulletin 5,1995.
20. John Shamsey, ITLOS vs. Goliath:The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Stands Tall with the Appellate Body in the Chilean-EU Swordfish Dispute, 12 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs.,2002
21. Frarz Sanei, The Caspian Sea Legal Regime, Pipeline Diplomacy, and the Prospects for Iran's Isolation from the Oil and Gas Frenzy: Reconciling Tehran's Legal Options with its Geopolitical Realities,34 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law,2001.
22. Richard H. Steinberg, Trade-Environment Negotiations in the EU, NAFTA, and WTO:Regional Trajectories of Rule Development,91 Am. J. Int'l L.,1997.
23. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, International Trade and Protection of the Environment: The Continuing Search for Reconciliation,91 Am. J. Int'l L.,1997
24. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Free International Trade and Protection of the Environment; Irreconcilable Conflict?,86 Am. J. Int'l L.,1992.
25. Gregory C. Shaffer, The World Trade Organization Under Challenge: Democracy and the Law and Politics of the WTO's Treatment of Trade and Environment Matters,25 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV.1,17 (2001).
26. Sabrina Shaw, Trade and Environment: The Post-Singapore WTO Agenda, 6 Rev. Eur. Community & Int'l Envtl. L.,1997
27. Allan R. Stein, Forum Non Conveniens and the Redundancy of Court-Access Doctrine,133 U. Pa. L. Rev.,1985.
28. Eric S. Sherby, Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal:The Quieter Side of Section 1782 Discovery,24 The International Litigation Quarterly,2008.
29. Anne-Marie Slaughter, A Global Community of Courts,44 Harv. Int'l L.J., 2003
30. Bruno Simma, Self-contained Regimes,16 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,1985.
31. Bruno Simma and Dirk Pulkowski, Off Planets and the Universe:Self-contained Regimes in International Law,17 European Journal of International Law, 2006.
32. William J. Snape Ⅲ and Naomi B. Lefkovitz, Searching for GATT's Environmental Miranda:Are "Process Stranards"Getting "Due Process? ",27 Cornell Int'l L.J.1994. T
1. Firew Kebede Tiba, What Caused the Multiplicity of International Courts and Tribunals?,10 GONZ. J. INT'L L.2006.
2. Ruti Teitel, Robert Howse, Cross-Judging:Tribunalization in a Fragmented but Interconnected Global Order,41 International Law and Politics,2009.
3. Christian Tietje, Voluntary Eco-Labelling Programs and Questions of State Responsibility in the WTO/GATT Legal System,29 Journal of World Trade,1995.
4. G. D. S. Taylor, The Content of the Rule Against Abuse of Rights in International Law,46 Brit. YB. Int'l L.,1972-1973.
1. George C. Umbricht, A'Amicus Suriae Briefs'on Amicus Curiae Briefs at the WTO, Journal of International Economic Law,2001.
1. Allan D. Vestal, Repetitive Litigation,45 Iowa L. Rev.,1,1960.
2. Rutidiger Wolfrum, Means of Ensuring Compliance with and Enforcement of International Environmental Law,272 RECUEIL DES COURS,1998.
3. Carrie Wofford, A Greener Future at the WTO:The Refinement of WTO Jurisprudence on Environmental Exceptions to GATT,24 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV., 2000.
4. Sylia M. Williams, The Law of Outer Space and Nature Resources,36 International & Comparative Law Quarterly,1987.
5. Karen West, Ecolabels:The Industrialisation of Environmental Standards, 25The Ecologist, No.1.,3,1995.
6. C. R. Wessells, Ecolabelling and International Seafood Trade:the Roles of Certification Costs and Consumers Willingness to Pay, Fisheries Economics Newsletter 50,2000.
7. Chris Wold, Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GATT: Conflict and Resolution?,26 Envtl. L.,1996.
1. Tanaka Yoshifumi, Reflections on the Concept of Proportionality in the Law of Maritime Delimitation,3 The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 16,2001.
2. Paul J. Yechout, In the Wake of Tuna II:New Possibilities for GATT-Compliant Environmental Standards,5 Minn. J. Global Trade,1996.
1. Zhu Lanye, The Effects of the WTO Dispute Settlement Panel and Appellate Body Reports:Is the Dispute Settlement Body Resolving Specific Disputes Only or Making Precedent at the Same Time? Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, Vol.17, No.1,2003.
1. Roberto V. Fiorentino, Luis Verdeja & Christelle Toqueboeuf, The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements:2006 Update, WTO Discussion Paper No.12,2007. Available at:http://www.wto.org/english/res e/booksp e/discussion papers 12a e.pdf, (visited on 2010/7/1)
2. Glenn Sant & Mary Lack, The Use of Trade-related Measure in the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT). Available at: http://www.traffic.org/fish/, (visited on 2010/7/1)
3. Margaret A. Young, Fragmentation or Interaction: The WTO, Fisheries Subsidies and International Law. Available at:http://papers.ssrn.com/so13/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313683, (visited on 2010/3/5).
4. Tomer Broude, Fragmentation(s) of International Law: On Normative Integration as Authority Allocation. Available at: http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/ilrsymposium/2008syrm/broude_normat ive_integ_paper.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/12)
5. Francesco Francioni, Resource Sharing in Antarctica:For Whose Benefit?, 1/2 E.J.I.L. Vol.1,1990. Available at: http://www.ejil.org/journal/Voll/Nol/index.html, (visited on 2008/7/10)
6. Joost Pauwelyn, Fragmentation of International Law. Available at: http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/pauwelyn/pdf/fragmentation_of_international_law.pdf, (visited on 2008/11/12)
7. Gyula Gal, Some Remarks to General Clauses of Treaty Space Law, Miskolc Journal of International Law. Available at: http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/-wwwdrint/20041 gall.htm, (visited on 2008/7/4.)
8. J. I. Gabrynowwicz, The Province and Heritage of Mankind Reconsidered:A New Beginning. Available at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archieve/nasa/casi.ntre.nasa.gov/1993004830.pdf, (visited on 2008/7/11).
9. Ellis Jaye, Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle: A Rhetorical Analysis (December 22,2008). Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1319360 (visited on 2008/7/11).
10. Veniana Qalo, Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines at the WTO:Legal Architecture. Available at: www.thecommonwealth.org/.../6A3006A6-144E-412D-B0A9-47C00B03E17D_Paper OnFisheriesSubsidies.pdf (visited on:2010/3/5).
11. Chris Wold, Legal Assessment of Compatibility Issues between the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) to the Cartagena Convention and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Available at: http://legacy.lclark.edu/org/ielp/objects/opinion_spaw.pdf (visited on 2010/10/28)
12. Lothar Ehring, De Facto Discrimination in WTO Law:National and Most-Favored-Nation Treatment-or Equal Treatment?. Available at: http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/01/013201.html, (visited on 2009/12/29).
13. Ronald Salz, Sea Turtle Mortality, Shrimp Fisheries, and International Trade:A Case Study of a Global Natural Resource Conflict. Available at: www.umass.edu/hd/research/turtle.pdf, (visited on 2009/12/23)
14. Renee Johnson, Charles E. Hanrahan, The U.S.-EU Beef Hormone Dispute, Report for Congress,2009. Available at: www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R40449.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9)
15. Erik J. Molenaar & Martin Tsamenyi, Satellite-Based Vessel Monitoring Systems:International Legal Aspects and Development in State Practice. Available at: http://www.fao.org/Legal/prs-ol/lpo7.pdf, (visited on 2010/6/28)
1. Michael Decleris, The Law of Sustainable Development General Principles, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,2000.
1. The Report of the FAO World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development,1984.
2. The Regulation of Driftnet on the High Sea:Legal Iissue,1991.
3. Living Marine Resource and Their Sustainable Development,1995.
4. Implementation of the International Plan of Action to Deter, Prevent and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing,2002.
5. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2004.
6. Guide for Identifying, Assessing and Reporting on Subsidies in the Fisheries Sector,2004.
7. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2006,2007.
8. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2008.
9. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2009.
10. Round Table on Eco-lablling and Certification in the Fisheries Sector,2009.
11. Judith Swan, Regional Fishery Bodies and Governance: Issues, Actions and Future Directions, FAO Fisheries Circular No.959,2000.
12. Gordon Munro, Annick Van Houtte, Rolf Willmann, The Conservation and Management f Shared Fish Stocks:Legal and Economic Aspects,2004.
13. J. A. Gulland, Some Problems of the Management of Shared Stocks, FAO, 1980.
14. Ellen Hey, William T. Bruke, Doris Ponzoni, Kazuo Sumi, The Regulation of Driftnet on the High Sea:Legal Issue,1991.
15. Kieran Kelleher,《世界海洋渔业中的丢弃物》,2008.
16. Christine Stewart, Legislating for Property Rights in Fisheries,2004.
17. C. R. Wessells, K. Cochrane, C. Deere, P. Wallis & R. Willmann, Product Certification and Ecolabelling for Fisheries Sustainability, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No.422.,2001.
18. Dominique Greboval, (ed.), Managing Fishing Capacity:Selected Papers on Underlying Concepts and Issues,1999.
1. Martti Koskenniemi, Fragmentation of International Law:Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, A/CN.4/L.682, 13 April 2006.
1. Fisheries, International Trade and Sustainable Development: Policy Discussion Paper, Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series, ICTSD,2006.
2. Cathy Roheim and Jon G. Sutinen, Trade and Marketplace Measures to Promote Sustainable Fishing Practices, ICTSD Natural Resources, International Trade and Sustainable Development Series Issue Paper No.3,ICTSD,2006.
3. Stephen Mbithi Mwikya, Fisheries Access Agreements- Trade and Development Issues,2006
1. ICUN, UNEP and WWF, World Conservation Strategy:Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development, ICUN,1980.
1. Environmental Labelling in OECD Countries 43,1991 Eco-Labelling: Actual Effects of Selected Programme,1997.
2. OECD Secretariat, Trade and Regulatory Reform:Insights from the OECD Country Reviews and Other Analyses,2000.
3. Trade and Regulatory Reform:Insights from the OECD Country Reviews and Other Analysis,13 World Trade & Arb. Materials 32,2001.
4. Liberalizing Fisheries Markets:Scope and Effects,2002.
5. Subsidies:A Way Towards Sustainable Fisheries,2005.
6. Anthony Cox & Carl-Christian Schmidt, Subsidies in the OECD Fisheries Sector:A Review of Recent Analysis and Future Directions,2002.
1. Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing and Trade,1998.
2. Fisheries Subsidies and Marine Resource Management:Lessons Learn from Studies in Argentina and Senegal. UNEP/ETU/2001/7 (Vol. Ⅱ) 2001.
3. Gareth Porter, Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing:Substantive Issue,2003.
4. Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond, Geneva 2007.
5. Fisheries Subsidies:A Critical Issue for Trade and Sustainable Development at the WTO, An Introductory Guide,2008.
6. Marcos A. Orellana, EEZ Fisheries Access Arrangement and the WTO Subsidies Agreement:Legal Analysis and Options for Improved Disciplines,2007.
1. UNCTAD, Briefing Paper of Legal and Policy Issues in the Market Access Implication of Labelling for Environment Purposes,2004. World Bank
1. Millazzo, Matteo, Subsidies in World Fisheries:A Re-examination,1998.
2. The Sunken Billions:The economic Justification for Fisheries Reform, 2008.
3. Judith M. Dean, Trade and Environment:A Survey of the Literature,1992.
1. Our Common Future, New York: Oxford University Press,1987.
1. From GATT to the WTO:The Multilateral Trading System in the New Millennium,2000.
2. H. Nordstrom and S. Vaughan, Special Study 4:Trade and Environment, 1999.
1. Hard Facts, Hidden Problems:A View of Current Data on Fishing Subsidies,2001.
2. Turning the Tide of Fishing Subsidies:Can the World Trade Organization Play a Positive Role,2002.
3. Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies:Options for the WTO and Beyond,2007.
4. David K. Shorr, Healthy Fisheries, Sustainable Trade:Crafting New Rules on Fishing Subsidies in the World Trade Organization,2004.
1. Gernard Hafner, Risks Ensuring from Fragmentation of International Law, Report of the ILC for 2000 52nd session, GA. Off. Records of 55th session Supplement No.10 (A/55/10).
1.贺其治：《外层空间法》,法律出版社1982年版。
2.赵理海：《海洋法的新发展》,北京大学出版社1984年版。
3.刘楠来：《国际海洋法》,海洋出版社1986年版。
4.陈德恭：《现代国际海洋法》,中国社会科学出版社1988年版。
5.邹克渊：《南极矿物资源与国际法》,北京大学出版社1996年版。
6.邵沙平,余敏友：《国际法问题专论》,武汉大学出版社2002年版。
7.徐淑萍：《贸易与环境的法律问题研究》,武汉大学出版社2002年版。
8.李耀芳：《国际环境法源起》,中山大学出版社2002年版。
9.吴慧：《国际海洋法庭研究》,海洋出版社2002年版。
10.申进忠：《WTO协调环境贸易关系的理论与实践》,中国法制出版社2003年版。
11.周鲠生：《国际法大纲》,中国方正出版社2004年版。
12.李爱年、韩广：《人类社会可持续发展与国际环境法》,法律出版社2005年版。
13.高之国、张海文、贾宁：《国际海洋法的理论与实践》,海洋出版社2006年版。
14.秦天宝：《遗传资源获取与惠益分享管制的国际法律基础》,武汉大学出版社2006年版。
15.杨泽伟：《国际法析论》,中国人民大学出版社2007年版。
16.薛桂芳：《国际渔业法律政策与中国的实践》,中国海洋大学出版社2008年。
17.廖诗评：《条约冲突基础问题研究》,法律出版社2008年版。
18.[英]莫里斯：《法律冲突法》,李东来等译,中国对外翻译出版公司1990年版。19.[英]詹宁斯、瓦茨修订：《奥本海国际法》(第一卷第二分册),王铁崖等译,中国大百科全书出版社1998年版。
20.[法]亚历山大·基思：《国际环境法》,张若思译,法律出版社2000年版。
21.[日]水上千之：《船舶国籍与方便船籍》,全贤淑译,大连海事大学出版 社2000年版。
22.[美]约翰.H.杰克逊：《世界贸易体制——国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版。
23.[英]伊恩.H.布朗利：《国际公法原理》,曾令良、余敏友等译,法律出版社2007年版。
24.[美]戈德史密斯,波斯纳：《国际法的局限性》,龚宇译,法律出版社2010年版。
25.刘家琛编：《国际法案例》,法律出版社,1998年版。
26.陈致中编：《国际法案例》,法律出版社1998年版。
27.韩立余编：《WTO案例及评析》,中国人民大学出版社2001年。
28.《诉讼法论丛》,第1卷,法律出版社1997年。
29.王铁崖：《论人类共同继承遗产的概念》,载于《中国国际法年刊》,1984年。
30.陈述彭：《环境保护与资源可持续利用》,载于《中国人口资源与环境》,1995年第3期。
31.郎平：《新一轮多边谈判中贸易与环境问题》,载于《世界经济与政治》,2003年第1期。
32.吴峰,李志清：《论GATT94第20条在实践中的新发展及前景分析》,载于《上海理工大学学报》(社会科学版),2004年第26卷4期。
33.慕永通、朱玉贵：《渔业补贴研究进展及发展(一)》,载于《中国海洋大学学报》(社会科学版,2005年第4期。
34.慕永通、张义龙：《渔业补贴研究进展及方向(二)》,载于《中国海洋大学学报》(社会科学版),2005年第5期。
35.孙世彦：《欧洲人权制度中的自由判断余地原则述评》,载于《环球法律评论》,2005年第3期。
36.黄辉：《论环境保护的国际化与自由贸易的协调》,载于《武汉科技大学学报》(社会科学版),2006年第8卷1期。
37.唐旗：《从箭鱼争端看贸易与环境之争新动向》,载于《武汉大学学报哲学》(社会科学版),2007年第1期。
38.杨永红：《从MOX Plant案析国际法庭管辖权之冲突》,载于《法学家》, 2009年3期。
39.陈喜峰：《国际法自足制度之研究》,载于《政法论坛》,2009年27卷2期。
1.陈朝璧：《罗马法原理》(上、下),台湾商务印书馆(台湾)1965年版。
2.吴昆吾：《条约论》,台湾商务印书馆(台湾)1977年版。
3.刘铁铮：《国际私法论丛》,政治大学出版社(台湾)1986年版。
4.郑玉波：《法谚》,三民书局(台湾)1988年版。
5.罗昌发：《贸易关系之法律问题》,元照出版公司(台湾)1994年版。
6.罗昌发：《贸易与竞争之法律互动》,元照出版公司(台湾)1994年版。
7.陈治世：《国际法》,商务出版社(台湾)1995年版。
8.黄异：《国际法》,国立编译馆(台湾)1996年版。
9.罗昌发：《国际贸易法》,月旦出版公司(台湾)1996年版。
10.黄异：《渔业法规》,渤海堂文化出版公司(台湾)1999年版。
11.黄异：《海洋秩序与国际法》,学林文化出版公司(台湾)2000年版。
12.赵明义：《当代国际法导论》,五南出版社出版公司(台湾)2001年版。
13.陈荔彤：《海洋法论》,元照出版公司(台湾)2002年版。
14.吴庚：《行政法之理论与实用》,作者自版(台湾)2005年版。
15.黄立、李贵英、林彩瑜：《WTO：国际贸易法论》,元照出版公司(台湾)2005年。
16.黄异：《国际法在国内法领域中的效力》,元照出版公司(台湾)2006年版。
17.李建良等,《行政法入门》,元照出版公司(台湾)2006年版。
18.黄异：《国际法在国内法领域的适用》,元照出版公司(台湾)2006年版。
19.廖文章：《国际海洋法论》,扬智文化出版公司(台湾)2008年版。
20.《法律哲理与制度,国际私法：马汉宝教授八秩华诞祝寿论文集》,元照出版公司(台湾)2005年版。
21.倪贵荣：《国际渔业组织利用贸易措施遏止IUU渔船作业之研究与我国之因应》,载于《(台湾)行政院农委会渔业署委托研究计划》,2002年。
22.彭心仪,黄渝清：《内国裁量性法规在WTO架构下之定位》,载于《月旦民商法》,2005年3月第七期。
23.施文真：《由智利—剑鱼案论环保贸易措施所引发之争端：管辖权冲突之探讨》,载于《政大法学评论》,2005年10月第86期。
24.廖福特：《区域人权体系研究之必要及缺乏》,载于《新世纪智库论坛》,2006年6月第3期。
25.王冠雄：《永续发展在国际法意涵之探讨》,载于《台湾海洋法学报》,2006年12月5卷2期。
26.黄居正：《无主物、共同遗产与共有物—遗传与生物资源公约中的财产意识》,载于《政大法学评论》,2006年12月第94期。
27.高圣惕：《贸易措施作为促进遵守区域渔业管理组织保育及管理措施之工具—以大西洋鲔类资源保育委员会之法令及实践为中心》,载于《台湾海洋事务及海洋法律国际学术研讨会》,2007年5月。
28.黄异：《鱼在法制上的意义》,载于《台湾海洋法学报》,2007年6月第6卷1期。
29.王玉叶：《欧洲人权法院审理原则—国家裁量余地原则》,载于《欧美研究》,2007年9月第37卷第3期。
30.高圣惕：《台湾与区域性渔业管理组织—论大西洋鲔类保育委员会对台湾动用贸易制裁之05-02号前置性决议的合法性》,载于《政大法学评论》,2007年10月第99期。
31. Albert Hoffmann, UNCLOS and the Resource of the Seabed in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction,载于《台湾海洋法学报》,2007年6月第6卷第1期。
32.杨志凯：《「法庭之友」在WTO争端解决机制中之适用、实践与展望—以相关案例解析为主轴》,《(台湾)东吴大学法律学研究所硕士论文》,2003年。
33.张水锴：《您吃到的鳕鱼可能是「油甘」?》,载于《渔业推广》,2007年10月第235期。
1.许惠惊：《食品安全的风险评估》,载于《看守台湾》,2004/年秋季号第六卷三期。Aavailable at: http://www.taiwanwatch.org.tw/magazine/v6n3/v6n3-001.pdf (visited on 2009/8/4).
2.罗锦岚,陈姿妤：《WTO上诉机构就荷尔蒙案之报复措施作出裁决》,载于《经贸法讯》,第77期。Available at: http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no77/1.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
3.罗锦岚,郑黛燕：《欧美荷尔蒙案之最新进展》,载于《经贸法讯》,第82期。Available at:http://www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no82/3.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
4.施晓恩：《WTO荷尔蒙案建立解除报复性制裁之新规则》,Available at:www.tradelaw.nccu.edu.tw/epaper/no69/4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/9).
5.林彩瑜：《WTO争端解决机制与美国贸易法301条款之研究》,Available at: http://www.itl.nctu.edu.tw/Thesis/1999/1999_4.pdf, (visited on 2009/8/18).
6. Hilary French,郑先佑、郭金泉译：《Challenging the WTO》,载于《看守台湾》,1999年11/12月第二卷一期,Available at: http://staff.pccu.edu.tw/-ayo/5green/WTOpap.htm, (visited on 2009/8/4)
7.黎家维：《国际法中「传统作业渔场」概念之澄清》,Available at: http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/CL/094/CL-C-094-074.htm, (visited on: 2009/7/10).
8.张东扬：《美国法院受理外国专利纷争之可能性-以Voda v.s. Cordis案为核心》,Available at:http://www.saint-island.com.tw/report/data/IPR_200704.htm. (visited on 2008/12/15).
1.小田滋：《海洋资源的国际法Ⅱ》,(东京)有斐阁1972年版。
2.名岛芳：《国际法における权利滥用》,(东京)酒井书店1989年版。
3.望月直树：《现代国际法における对抗措置の法的性质》,载于《国际法外交杂志》,1989年107卷2号。
1.联合国网站：www.un.org
2.联合国农粮组织网站：www.fao.org
3.联合国卫生组织网站：www.who.org
4.联合国食品法典委员会网站：http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp
5.联合国环境规划署网站：www.unep.org
6.联合国儿童基金会网站：www.unicef.org
7.联合国经济社会委员会可持续发展委员会网站：http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev
8.联合国世界卫生组织网站：http://www.who.org/
9.国际法院网站：http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/
10.海洋法法庭网站,http://www.itlos.org/homepage/
11.国际劳工组织网站：http://www.ilo.org
12.世界贸易组织网站：http://www.wto.org
13.国际标准组织网站：http://www.iso.org
14.自然基金会网站：www.panda.org
15.美国国家有机食品标准审议委员会网站：www.nal.usda.gov
16.(台湾地区)行政院环保署网站：www.epa. gov.tw/
17.(台湾地区)工业研究院网站：http://graupel.ihs.ncu.edu.tw
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |