联合国制裁措施的国内执行研究

详细信息    本馆镜像全文|  推荐本文 |  |   获取CNKI官网全文

英文题名：National Implementation of United Nations Sanctions 作者：刘筱萌 论文级别：博士 学科专业名称：国际法学 中文关键词：国际法执行 ; 国际法与国内法 ; 国际制裁 ; 联合国制裁国内执行 ; 中国与联合国 英文关键词：International law enforcement ; Domestic implementation of 英文关键词：international sanctions ; International and domestic law ; the United Nations and China 学位年度：2012 导师：余敏友 学科代码：030109 学位授予单位：武汉大学 论文提交日期：2012-05-01

摘要

毫无疑问，现代国际组织的产生和发展使国际法的执行出现了不仅是集体的、而且是集中的新机制。作为目前国际社会最具权威性的普遍性的国际组织，联合国也对其决议的执行设计了严格的遵守机制，使得传统意义上国际法的执行措施被大大强化了。制裁措施即是联合国安理会强制执行其决定的一种重要手段。
     自联合国确立制裁机制以来，已经对数十个目标国使用了制裁，制裁方式包括全面的经济和贸易制裁或更为具体的制裁措施，如武器禁运、旅行禁令、财政或外交限制等。但不论何种制裁方式，最终都需要面临在世界各国的执行问题。目前联合国的制裁体系之中，制裁的整个进程是由联合国体系众多执行者共同完成。这些众多的行为主体互相独立而又不可分离，使得制裁措施的执行面临国际和国内两个执行层面，而在这其中，各成员国保护其国内利益从而损害集体行动的承诺又是联合国在制裁决议制定之初所不能控制的。因此，联合国制裁机制成功的核心在于国家的普遍遵从，而各个不同的会员国在国内立法和执行方式上却不尽相同，从而使得联合国制裁措施在各国的执行面临碎片化的风险。
     除绪论和结论之外，本文主体部分共分为四章。
     绪论部分主要简要介绍问题的缘起，对论文的研究背景和意义进行阐述，提出本文研究的中心问题，并对目前国内外主要学术研究的现状进行整理和论述；并对论文的研究思路和研究方法作出说明。
     第一章对联合国制裁措施的法律性质、内容以及其沿革和所面临的挑战进行了整理和界定。立足于当今国际社会现实来看，深层次经济发展问题所引起的郁积社会矛盾的爆发，正使得国际社会逐渐割裂：无论是单边主义大国越来越倾向于绕过多边国际机制采取行动，还是欧洲联盟债务危机所引发的“去组织化”趋向，使得对制裁措施更需要有效控制和规范，并且一致行使。联合国制裁措施在实施中面临着与人道主义原则之间的冲突、施加制裁的双重标准等传统挑战。尽管联合国已经在“定向制裁”以及“金伯利进程”对制裁措施进行了较大的改革，但更为严重的国内执行层面却一直面临着碎片化、无法有效执行的危险。
     第二章主要就建立联合国制裁措施国内执行的理论框架进行初步探索。尽管许多国家在法律中均对国际法和国内法的层级作出了规定，但是却很少有国家法律对联合国的制裁措施做出相应的国内法效力规定。即使是采取国际法优先态度的国家，安理会制裁措施在其国内是否能够直接得到执行也依然是不确定的。此外，实践中也有多个国家和地区法院开始对国内执行法律乃至安理会制裁决议进行司法审查。因此，从理论建设的角度而言，联合国制裁措施在各国内部的执行问题，事实上包括了理论架构、国内有效和法律冲突三个重要方面的问题，在联合国的制裁措施执行中，应当建立国际和国内两级层面的完善执行系统。
     第三章从实证考察和比较研究的角度，对联合国制裁措施在国内法上的执行体系作出分析。发达国家、发展中国家以及阿拉伯国家在涉及执行联合国制裁的法律上均有不同，甚至发达国家中也存在着截然相反的立法模式。此外，对于特殊的区域性国际组织欧盟而言，还面临着其组织层面的法律与成员国法律的冲突与协调问题。从目前世界各国在涉及联合国制裁机制执行的立法模式来看，主要分为：以美国、德国为代表，通过框架性授权立法确立国内执行总机制，进而以个别行政命令的形式在国内执行的模式；以日本为代表，通过援引既有立法执行全部制裁措施，并不订立框架授权立法，也不制定特别法的立法模式；以及通过特别立法的方式执行制裁的模式。
     第四章对我国的立法模式和实践进行全面的考察。一方面，在目前我国的国内法律体系上存在着相当的空白，国际法与国内法层级的法律制度并不清晰，而是分散于各个单行法律之中。而在联合国制裁的执行上，法律规定更是处于完全空白的状态；另一方面，在我国的现实实践中，往往通过外交部通知函和行政文件的形式笼统宣示对联合国制裁的执行，事实上并不利于对联合国制裁措施的良好执行。即使是重要的实践部门，如海关和金融系统，执行联合国制裁的方式仍然是行政规范性文件而非法律手段。从利于我国法律体系的完善、提升我国负责任大国的形象角度出发，应当在统一框架性授权立法的基础之上，建立我国的联合国制裁措施国内执行体系。
     结论部分总结全文主要论述，对联合国制裁措施的国内执行理论和实践进行总结阐述，对历史分析、实践考察和个案研究的结果作出说明，并进一步强调我国立法模式的选择和执行法律体系的建设。
There is no doubt that the emergence and development of modern internationalorganizations contributed enormously to the enforcement of international law. It is nownot only a collective, but also a centralized mechanism. As the most authoritativeinternational organization, the United Nations designed its implementation of theresolution through strictly compliance mechanisms, greatly strengthened internationallaw enforcement measures in the traditional sense. The sanctions employed by the UNSecurity Council to enforce its decisions are important means.
     United Nations sanctions regime has been deployed widely through dozens ofcountries, including a comprehensive economic and trade sanctions, or more specificsanctions such as arms embargoes, travel bans, financial or diplomatic restrictions. Butregardless of the types of the sanction, it has to face implementation issues in thedomestic area.
     In spite of the introduction and conclusion, the main part of this paper is dividedinto four chapters.
     Introduction begins with brief history of the very origin of the UN Sanctions,describes the research background and significance of proposed research focus in thispaper, and the status of domestic and international academic research; and thesis researchideas and research methods explanations.
     Chapter I focus on the legal nature of the UN sanctions, as well as its evolution andthe challenges. Based on a realistic view of today's international community, theeconomic development of deep-seated problems caused by the outbreak of the pent-upsocial contradictions, is making the international community gradually split: whether thebypassing of multilateral international mechanism of unilateralism countries to takeaction, or the EU debt crisis triggered by the "de-organized" the tendency. Although theUN "targeted sanctions" and "Kimberley Process" on the sanctions of a larger reform, atdomestic implementation level, it still facing the danger of fragmentation.
     Chapter II focus on the establishment of a theoretical framework for domesticimplementation of UN sanctions to conduct a preliminary exploration. Although manycountries make clear the relationship between international law and domestic law, very
     few provide the appropriate provisions on the implementation of the UN sanctions. Evenin the countries taking the primacy of international law, whether the sanctions can beimplemented directly in their countries is still uncertain. In addition, a number of nationaland regional courts claimed judicial review on the domestic implementation of laws,even the sanctions themselves. Therefore, from the perspective of theoreticalconstruction, the implementation issues of UN sanctions, de facto contains three aspects,namely, the theoretical framework, the effectiveness of domestic implementation, and theconflict of laws.
     Chapter III investigates national legal systems from an empirical point of view,about how the United Nations sanctions implemented in the domestic plane. Generally,three patterns of implantation have been found from the empirical study: through theframework of “enabling legislation” to transfer the power from the legislative branch tothe executive branch; through present legal systems, without “enabling legislation”, norspecial legislation; and through special legislation.
     Chapter IV analyzes the patterns and practices of China's legislative conduct. On theone hand, there are considerable gaps in China's domestic legal system, concerning therelationship between international law and domestic law. No constitutional provisionswere taken to clarify the issue, but scattered in various ordinary laws. On the otherhand, the practice of implementing UN sanctions often through the Ministry of ForeignAffairs’ notification letters, and administrative documents in the form of a generaldeclaration of the implementation of United Nations sanctions. Even in some sensitivesectors, such as customs and financial branches, the implementation means of UnitedNations sanctions are still administrative normative documents, rather than legal means.
     The concluding section summarizes the main discourse described on the above, andfurther emphasizes the construction of the legal system implementing UN sanctions inChina.

引文

①沃尔夫冈·格拉夫·魏智通主编，吴越等译：《国际法》，法律出版社2002年中文版，第359-360页。
    ②Edward Newman, A Crisis in Global Institutions? Multilateralism and International Security, Abingdon: Routledge,2007, p.35.
    ③Paul Taylor and A. J. R. Groom, The United Nations and the Gulf War,1990-91: Back to the Future? London: TheRoyal Institute of International Affairs Discussion Paper38,1992.
    ①United States Institute of Peace, American Interests and UN Reform, Report of the Task Force on the United Nations,Washington D.C.,2005, p.5.
    ①Quincy Wright, Enforcement of International Law, American Society of International Law Proceedings, vol.38(1944), p.78.
    ②Hans Morgenthau, Politics among Nations, New York: Alfred A. Knopf1960, p.283.
    ③John K. Setear, An Iterative Perspective on Treaties: A Synthesis of International Relations Theory and InternationalLaw,37Harvard International Law Journal139,147;1996; John K. Setear, Responses to Breach of a Treaty andRationalist International Relations Theory: The Rules of Release and Remediation in the Law of Treaties and theLaw of State Responsibility,83Virginia law review1,123;1997.
    ④托马斯·弗兰克（Thomas Franck）的“合法性理论”以解释国际法的遵守则认为，国家遵守国际法规则是由于他们认为这些规则“来自于正当程序”。 Thomas M. Franck, Legitimacy in the International System, AmericanJournal of International Law, vol.82(1988), pp.705,706.
    ⑤Philip R. Trimble, International Law, World Order, and Critical Legal Studies, Stanford Law Review, vol.42(1990),pp.811,833.
    ①Oona A. Hathaway, Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference?, Yale Law Journal, vol.111(2002), pp.1935,1958.
    ②Roger Fisher, Improving Compliance with International Law,127-140;1982.
    ③Abram Chayes and Antonia Handler Chayes, The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International RegulatoryAgreements3,1995.
    ④Edward Newman, A Crisis in Global Institutions? Multilateralism and International Security, Abingdon: Routledge,2007, p.24.
    ⑤Laurie Rosensweig, United Nations Sanctions: Creating a More Effective Tool for the Enforcement of InternationalLaw, Austrian Journal of Public International Law, vol.48(1995), pp.161-195.
    ①Iain Cameron, Targeted Sanctions and Legal Safeguards, Report to the Swedish Foreign Office on Legal Safeguardsand Targeted Sanctions, October2002; and see, Andrew Mack and Asif Khan, The Efficacy of UN Sanctions,Security Dialogue200031:279, The online version of this article can be found at:http://sdi.sagepub.com/content/31/3/279, visited on12December2011. Golnoosh Hakimdavar, UN Sanctions: ASynthesis of Strategic Factors Affecting Implementation, From the Selected Works of Golnoosh Hakimdavar,available at http://works.bepress.com/golnoosh_hakimdavar/1/, visited on15January,2012.
    ②Clara Portela, National Implementation of United Nations Sanctions, International Journal, winter2009-2010, p.13.
    ①http://www.smartsanctions.se
    ②Peter Wallensteen, Carina Staibano and Mikael Eriksson, Making Targeted Sanctions Effective: Guidelines for theImplementation of UN Policy Options, Results from the Stockholm Process on the Implementation of TargetedSanctions, Uppsala University Department of Peace and Conflict Research,2003.
    ③See “Stockholm Process” Findings-Year-Long Study on targeted Sanctions Presented to Security Council, UnitedNations Press Release SC/7672,25/02/2003.
    ④Targeted Financial Sanctions—Harmonizing National Legislation and Regulatory Practices, Prepared by theTargeted Financial Sanctions Research Project at the Watson Institute for International Studies, Brown University,available at http://www.watsoninstitute.org/project_detail.cfm?id=4, visited on15January,2012.
    ①Andrea Charron, Canada’s Domestic Implementation of U.N. Sanctions: Keeping Pace? Canadia Foreign PolicyJournal, vol.14, no.2, pp.1-18.
    ②Shigeo Kawagishi, UN Economic Sanctions and Domestic Implementation in Japan, American Society ofInternational Law Proceedings, vol.89, p.344.
    ③Hazel Fox and C. Wickremasinghe, UK Implementation of UN Economic Sanctions, The International andComparative Law Quarterly, Vol.42, No.4, pp.945-970.
    ④United States General Accounting Office, Report to the Honorable Edward M. Kennedy, US Senate,Serbia-Montenegro Implementation of UN Economic Sanctions, available athttp://www.gao.gov/assets/220/217680.pdf, visited on15January,2012.
    ①See Jost Delbrück ed., The Future of International Law Enforcement: New Scenarios-New Law? Proceedings of anInternational Symposium of the Kiel Institute of International Law, Berlin: Duncker&Humblot,1993, p.21.
    ②Jeremy Carver and Jenine Hulsmann, The Role of Article50of the UN Charter in the Search for International Peaceand Security, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol.49, No.3, July2000, p.577.
    ③G. L. Burci, The Indirect Effect of United Nations Sanctions on Third States: The Role of Article50of the UNCharter, African Yearbook of International Law,1995, p.162.
    ④See Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Collective Responses to Illegal Acts in International Law: UnitedNations Action in the Question of Southern Rhodesia, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Martinus NijhoffPublishers,1990, pp.557-632.
    ①温树斌：《国际法强制执行问题研究》，武汉大学博士学位论文，2009年4月。
    ②Peter Malanczuk, Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law,7threv. ed., Routledge,1997, pp.3-4.
    ③刘达人、袁国钦：《国际法发达史》，中国方正出版社2007年版，第233页。
    ④Kim Richard Nossal, Economic Sanctions in the League of Nations and the United Nations, in David Leyton-Brown(ed.), The Utility of International Economic Sanctions, ST Martin’s Press,1986, p.11.
    ①James L. Brierly, The Law of Nations: An Introduction to the International Law of Peace,4th ed., Clarendon Press,1949, p.93.
    ②Black's Law Dictionary,8th ed.,2004, p.4178.“An economic or military coercive measure taken by one or morecountries toward another to force it to comply with international law.”
    ③Quincy Wright, Enforcement of International Law, American Society of International Law Proceedings, Vol.38,1944, p.78.
    ④N. J. Schrijver, The Use of Economic Sanctions by the UN Security Council: An International Law Perspective, inHarry H.G. Post (ed.), International Economic Law and Armed Conflict, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1994, p.125.
    ⑤Steve Charnovitz, Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions, American Journal of International Law, Vol.95,2001, p.794.
    ①YILC,1979, Vol.II, part2, p.121.
    ②Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Fifty-third Session, UN Doc.A/56/10, p.75.
    ③温树斌：《国际法强制执行问题研究》，武汉大学博士学位论文，2009年4月。
    ④[德]沃尔夫冈格拉夫魏智通主编，吴越等译：《国际法》，法律出版社2002年版，第773页。
    ⑤余敏友：《论世贸组织争端解决机制的强制执法措施》，载《暨南学报》2008年第1期，第24页。
    ⑥贺其治：《国家责任法及案例浅析》，法律出版社2003年版，第306页。
    ⑦李寿平：《现代国际法律责任制度》，武汉大学出版社2003年版，第171页。
    ①《卡梅伦访法国“遇冷”英国脱离欧盟公投呼声高》，载《人民日报》2011年12月5日。事实上，希腊债务危机只是欧盟成员内部发展不平衡所造成分裂的表层现象，欧盟在更深层面上则面临急速东扩所带来的成员国阶层脱节、传统成员的保守倾向迅速蔓延等危机，使得欧盟组织正在经受严峻的考验。关于这一问题将在后文详述。
    ①Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law,5thed., Cambridge University Press,2005, p.1100.
    ②[奥]阿·菲德罗斯等著，李浩培译：《国际法》（下），商务印书馆1981年中文版，第599页。
    ③简基松：《联合国制裁之定性问题研究》，载《法律科学》2005年第6期，第95页。
    ④Kim Richard Nossal, Economic Sanctions in the League of Nations and the United Nations, in David Leyton-Brown(ed.), The Utility of International Economic Sanctions, ST Martin’s Press,1986, p.14.
    ⑤Manley O. Hudsion, The Report of the Assembly of the League of Nations on the Sino-JapanDispute, The AmericanJournal of International Law, Vol.27, No.2(April1933), pp.300-305.
    ⑥Vaughan Lowe, International Law, Oxford University Press,2007, p.270.
    ⑦Margaret P. Doxey, International Sanctions in Contemporary Perspective, London: The MacMillanPress,1987, pp.24-27.
    ⑧梁西：《国际组织法（总论）》（修订第五版），武汉大学出版社2001年版，第54页。
    ⑨John Paxman and George Boggs, eds., United Nations: A Reassessment-Sanctions, Peacekeeping and HumanitarianAssistance, Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press,1973, p.21.
    ①Leland M. Goodrich, Edvard Hambro and Anne Patricia Simons, Charter of the United Nations: Commentary andDocument, p.311.
    ②UN Doc. S/RES/57/4(2002), October10,2002.
    ①Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, I.C.J. Reports1986, p.14.
    ②UN Doc. S/PV.2704(1986), July31,1986; UN Doc. S/PV.2718(1986), October28,1986.
    ③Hans Kelsen, THE LAW OF THE UNITED NATIONS, New York: Frederick A. Praeger, Inc.,1950, pp.721-724.
    ④Leland M. Goodrich, Edvard Hambro and Anne Patricia Simons, Charter of the United Nations: Commentary andDocuments, p.334; Rosalyn Higgins, The Development of International Law Through the Political Organs of theUnited Nations, London: Oxford University Press,1963, p.334.
    ⑤和平之威胁、和平之破坏及侵略行为之间的界限并不明晰。“和平之威胁”没有定义，似乎可认为是，有可能在短期或中期引起国际武装冲突的国际危机。See Erika De Wet, The Chapter VII Powers of the United NationsSecurity Council, Oxford University Press,2004, p.139.“和平之破坏”似乎是指两个国家间武装敌对的任何情势。See N. D. White, Keeping the Peace: the United Nations and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security,Manchester University Press,2nded.,1997, p.48.“侵略行为”的定义见于1974年联合国大会《关于侵略定义的决议》，但根据定义的第2条和第4条，安理会拥有侵略行为的最终决定权。《联合国宪章》对“和平之破坏”与“侵略行为”的区分有点儿令人吃惊，因为后者只是前者的一种特殊形式。区别似乎在于后者明显地将责任归于当事国一方。See Kenneth Manusama, The United Nations Security Council in the Post-Cold War Era:Applying the Principle of Legality, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2006, pp.50-51.
    ①Erika De Wet, The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council, Oxford and Portland Oregon,2004,p.184.
    ②在第43条的特别协定缔结之前，第106条作为“过渡安全办法”仍具有效力。See Albrecht Randelzhofer, Article2(4), in Bruno Simma et al.(eds.), The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Oxford University Press,1995, p.120.
    ③Paul Conlon, United Nations Sanctions Papers, Special Collection1991-1995, available at University of IowaLibraries, Special Collections Department; see also, Paul Conlon, Historical Note on the Issue of Oil Belonging tothe Kuwait petroleum Company in Aden, Collected Papers of Paul Conlon, Director of UN Security CouncilSanctions Committee, University of Iowa Special Collections.
    ①David Cortright and George A. Lopez, The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UN Strategies in the1990s, Boulder: LynneRienner Publishers, Inc.,2000, p.1.
    ②UN Doc. S/RES/169(1961), November24,1961.
    ③UN Doc. S/RES/312(1972), February4,1972.
    ④UN Doc. S/RES/183(1961), August7,1963.
    ⑤David Cortright and George A. Lopez, The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UN Strategies in the1990s, p.1.
    ①UN Doc. S/RES/661(1990), August6,1990.
    ②UN Doc. S/PV.2933(1990), August6,1990.
    ③UN Doc. S/RES/665(1990), August25,1990.
    ④UN Doc. S/RES/670(1990), September25,1990.
    ⑤UN Doc. S/PV.2943(1990), September25,1990.
    ①Thomas G. Weiss and David Cortright, George A. Lopez, and Larry Minear, eds., Political Gain and Civilian Pain:Humanitarian Impacts of Economic Sanctions, Lanham: Rowman＆Littlefield Publishers, Inc.,1997.
    ②Supplement to an Agenda for Peace: position paper of the Secretary-General on the occasion of the50th anniversaryof the United Nations, UN Doc. A/50/60(1995), January25,1995.
    ③Kofi Annan, Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, UN Doc. A/53/1, August27,1998, para.64.
    ④Peter Wallensteen, Carina Staibano and Mikael Eriksson, eds., Making Targeted Sanctions Effective: Guidelines forthe Implementation of UN Policy Options, p. iii.
    ⑤UN Doc. S/PV.4128(2000), April17,2000.
    ①High-Level panel on Threats, Challenges and Changes, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, p.55.
    ②Peter Wallensteen, Carina Staibano and Mikael Eriksson, eds. Making Targeted Sanctions Effective: Guidelines forthe Implementation of UN Policy Options.
    ③苗军：《滴血的非洲钻石》，载《生活时报》2002年8月27日。
    ①联合国：《冲突钻石：制裁与战争》，参见http://www.un.org/chinese/peace/africa/Diamond.html,访问日期2012年2月28日。
    ②UN Doc. S/2007/734(2007), December12,2007.
    ③Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Security Council Enforcement Action and Issues of State Responsibility, International andComparative Law Quarterly, Vol.43, January1994, p.59.
    ①例如，《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系及合作之国际法原则宣言》注明，“以上各项不得解释为对宪章内关於维持国际和平与安全之有关规定有所影响”；《各国经济权利和义务宪章》第33条第1款规定：“本宪章任何部分不得解释为有损於或贬低《联合国宪章》条款或据以采取的行动”；《发展权利宣言》第9条第2款也明确指出：“本宣言不得作违背联合国宗旨和原则的解释”；《维也纳人权宣言暨行动纲领》第14条规定：“保护和促进人权的近程应当按照《联合国宪章》的宗旨和原则以及国际法推动。”
    ②Leland M. Goodrich, Edvard Hambro and Anne Patricia Simons, Charter of the United Nations: Commentary andDocuments, p.334.
    ③赵冠峰：《略论国际制裁的困境与对策——对“伊拉克悖论”的思考》，载《同济大学学报（社会科学版）》2008年第2期，第95页。
    ④例如美国在联合国通过针对南罗德西亚的制裁决议之后，仍然通过了立法坚持与南罗德西亚的铬矿石贸易，具体分析详见后文。
    ⑤Regional Hearings in the Preparation for the Millennium Assembly of the United Nations: Hearing Held for theRegion of the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia at Beirut on23and24may1999, UN Doc.A/54/280(2000), January20,2000.
    ①赵冠峰：《略论国际制裁的困境与对策——对“伊拉克悖论”的思考》，载《同济大学学报（社会科学版）》2008年第2期，第95页。
    ②[美]菲利斯·本尼斯（Phyllis Bennis）著，陈遥遥、张筱春译，《发号施令：美国是如何控制联合国的》，北京：新华出版社1999年版，第213页。
    ③参见顾婷：《安理会反恐“聪明制裁”之困境及其出路》，载《法学》2011年第10期，第119页。
    ④See Bernd Martenczuk, The Security Council, the International Court and Judicial Review: What Lessons fromLockerbie? European Journal of International Law, Vol.10,1999, p.545.
    ①See Hans Kelsen, The law of the United Nations: A Critical Analysis of Its Fundamental Problems (withSupplement), New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange Ltd.,2000, p.294.
    ②前南国际刑事法庭在Tadi一案中指出，“无论是宪章条文还是宪章精神都没有认同安理会是不受法律约束的。”此外，国际法院也承认，“国际组织作为国际法主体应受它们在一般国际法规则之下的义务的限制，受它们的组成条约的限制以及它们作为成员的国际条约的限制。”See Prosecutor v. Tadi,Appeal on Jurisdiction,Case IT-94-I-AR72(2October1995, para.28; and, Interpretation of the Agreement of25March1951between theWHO and Egypt, ICJ Reports1980, pp.89-90.
    ③Separate Opinion of Judge Lauterpacht, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of theCrime of Genocide, Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro, ICJ Reports1993, p.440.
    ①P. R Baehr, Leon Gordenker, The United Nations: Reality and Ideal, New York,1984, at173.
    ②C. Lloyd Brown-John, Multilateral Sanctions in International Law, New York,1975.
    ③The Brookings Institution, Conversation with H. M. Queen Noor of Jordan, Federal News Service,3October1990.事实上，约旦的经济极大地依赖于与伊拉克的贸易：将近40%的约旦水果、蔬菜以及轻工业产品出口伊拉克，而伊拉克也相应提供了约旦90%的石油。
    ④Reuters,24September1990. The closing of the pipeline carrying one-million barrels of Iraqi oil a day to the Turkishport of Yumurtalik cost Turkey$312-million in revenues during the first year of sanctions.''Turkey Says 'No' toReopening Pipeline,"1Mid-East Markets23(24June1991). p.5.
    ⑤Reuters,9June1992. Bulgaria also reported-losses of up to$1.2-billion through its adherence to sanctions againstIraq.
    ⑥Reuters,31August1992. The Hungarian Ministry for International Economic Relations reported in the summerof1992that with half of Hungary's$250-million annual trade with the former Yugoslavia going to Serbia, lossescould reach$160million. The Financial Times,12June1992.
    ①R. Renwick, Economic Sanctions, Cambridge, MA,1981, at26.
    ②See Doxey, International Sanctions in Contemporary Perspective, New York,1987, at120.
    ③New York Times,23May1994. Eight hours after the newly tightened sanctions in United Nations Security CouncilResolution917took effect; boats were already carrying hundreds of gallons of embargoed oil from the DominicanRepublic to Haiti.
    ④“伊拉克与我们是兄弟。尽管我们是约旦人，但在内心上我们都是为伊拉克工作。”See Newsday,13September1990, p.14.
    ⑤M. Doxey, Economic Sanctions and International Enforcement, London,1971, at87.南非与南罗德西亚安全部队甚至还经常采取联合行动打击罗德西亚境内的游击队。
    ①The New York Times,31January1993, Section4, p.18.
    ②Financial Times,12June1992. The Bulgarian Government has expressed similar fears about reprisals toward the65,000Bulgarians living in Serbia. The Iraqi Government demonstrated its willingness to use threats to prevent theenforcement of sanctions as well: Hussein stated that foreign nationals would suffer the same shortages as Iraqis,motivating States to send supplies in contravention of the embargo. Reuters,16September1990.
    ③R. Renwick, Economic Sanctions, Cambridge, MA,1981, at78.
    ④Washington Post,19November1992. p.31.
    ⑤由此，在1992年8月10日，数十艘悬挂独联体旗帜的船舶通过多瑙河前往塞尔维亚境内之时，罗马尼亚政府没有采取任何行动予以制止。国际社会认为，上述船舶具有明显从事违法行为的特征，而罗马尼亚政府却无动于衷无疑是违反联合国制裁措施决议的。Reuters,28January1993.
    ①R. Renwick, Economic Sanctions, Cambridge, MA,1981, at18.
    ①See Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Collective Responses to Illegal Acts in International Law: United Nations Action in theQuestion of Southern Rhodesia, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1990, pp.557-632.
    ②例如安理会针对科特迪瓦的第1572(2004)号决议（S/RES/1572(2004)），以及第1643(2005)号决议（S/RES/1643(2005)），即表示“对……下列人员实行这些措施：阻止实施经第1633（2005）号决议和国际工作组最后公报明确规定的和平进程的人、被认定应对2002年9月19日以来科特迪瓦境内严重侵犯人权和违反国际人道主义法的行为负责的人、公开煽动仇恨和暴力的人、以及被认定违反军火禁运的人”。类似安理会制裁决议还包括针对塔利班和本拉登恐怖主义组织个人的第1267（1999）号、第1333（2000）号、第1390（2002）号、第1455（2003）号、第1526（2004）号、第1617（2005）号、第1735（2006）号、第1822（2008）号和第1904（2009）号决议等。
    ①[英]劳特派特修订：《奥本海国际法》（上卷）第一分册，王铁崖、陈体强译，商务印书馆1981年版，第24页。
    ②[英]劳特派特修订：《奥本海国际法》（上卷）第一分册，王铁崖、陈体强译，商务印书馆1981年版，第25页。
    ③See Daniel Patrick O'Connell, International Law,1970, Vol.1, pp.43-46.
    ④“A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty. This ruleis without prejudice to article46”, Article27, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,1969.
    ⑤事实上在1945年联合国制宪会议上就有国家表达了相应的担心，比利时代表即提交了相应的提案。参见UNCIO Docs., Vol.13, p.759.
    ⑥联合国宪章第25条：“联合国会员国同意依宪章之规定接受并履行安全理事会之决议。”
    ⑦Importation of Rhodesian Chrome, Congressional Hearings and Mission Reports: U.S. Relations with SouthernAfrica, available athttp://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d095&querybd=@FIELD(FLD001+@4(Rhodesia)), visited on18December2011.
    ⑧联合国安理会1972年9月29日第320（1972）号决议，参见http://www.un.org/zh/documents/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/320(1972)&referer=http://www.un.org/chinese/aboutun/prinorgs/sc/sres/sres72.htm&Lang=C,访问日期2011年12月18日。
    ①日本宪法第98条：“この憲法は、国の最高法規であつて、その条規に反する法律、命令、詔勅及び国務に関するその他の行為の全部又は一部は、その効力を有しない。日本国が締結した条約及び確立された国際法規は、これを誠実に遵守することを必要とする。”参见《日本国憲法》第10章第98条，http://www.houko.com/00/01/S21/000.HTM,访问日期2011年12月21日。
    ②参见宋云城：《条约在日本国内法体系中之地位的研究－以日本国宪法及国际人权条约为核心》，淡江大学日本研究所2005年硕士学位论文。
    ③参见衆議院憲法調査会事務局、最高法規としての憲法のあり方に関する調査小委員会：《「憲法と国際法（特に、人権の国際的保障）」に関する基礎的資料》，衆憲資第50号，第7页。
    ④黄瑶：《国际人权法与国内法的关系》，载《外国法译评》1999年第3期。
    ⑤美国宪法第6条规定：“在美国的权力下缔结的一切条约，与美国宪法和根据该宪法制定的法律一样，都是美国的最高的法律；即使任何州的宪法或者法律与之相抵触，每一州的法官仍受其约束。”
    ①Singapore Academy of Law, Singapore and International Law, Section4. Available athttp://www.singaporelaw.sg/content/IntLaw.html, visited on23December2011.
    ②慕亚平、周建海、吴费：《当代国际法论》，北京：法律出版社1998年版，第26页。
    ①[荷]亨利·范·马尔赛文、格尔·范·德·唐：《成文宪法的比较研究》，北京：华夏出版社1987年版，第371页。
    ②[美]阿尔文·托夫勒·海迪：《“主权”概念的变化》，载《参考消息》2002年10月9日。
    ③尽管“自动执行”条约的概念出自于美国法，但目前对此并没有统一而精确的概念界定。国内法上的自动执行条约通常指可以在国内法体系中无需借助于国内立法即可直接予以实施，且能够在国内法院得到适用的国际条约；而非自动执行条约通常指在一国之内发生效力之前要求制定使其能够实施的法令。此外学界经常适用的术语还包括“直接适用”（direct applicability）以及“直接效力”（direct effect），但严格而言二者并不是同义词。直接效力以直接适用为前提,但是直接适用并不必然导致直接效力。而且直接适用性所针对的是条约在国际法层面上的效力问题，即条约在国际法上是否被其缔约国认为具有在国内法直接适用的效力。不过，鉴于直接适用的条约范围较为狭窄并且对国际法律要求较高，这一概念多在联系紧密的区域性超国家组织例如欧盟法上使用。参见罗国强：《论国际条约的国内适用问题》，载《兰州学刊》2010年第6期；唐颖侠：《国际法与国内法的关系及国际条约在中国国内法中的适用》，载《社会科学战线》2003年第1期；See also, ThomasBurgenthal, Self-Executing and Non-Self-Executing Treaties in National and International Law, RCADI, vol.235(1992), pp.317-340.
    ④唐颖侠：《国际法与国内法的关系及国际条约在中国国内法中的适用》，载《社会科学战线》2003年第1期，第177页。
    ①Thomas Burgenthal, Self-Executing and Non-Self-Executing Treaties in National and International Law, RCADI,vol.235(1992), pp.317-340.
    ②United States, Decision of the District Court for the District of Columbia in Diggs v. Dent, May1975, ILM, vol.14,pp.803-804.甚至在美国不同的法院，对安理会制裁措施的认定均有不同。具体参阅Thomas A. Schweitzer, theUnited Nations as a Source of Domestic Law: Can Security Council Resolutions be Enforced in American Courts,Yale Studies in World Public Order, vol.4(1977), pp.224-230.
    ③Gilbert Guillaume, The Introduction and Implementation in the Legal State of the Resolutions of the SecurityCouncil of the United Nations Adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter, International Journal of Comparative Law,vol.50(1998), p.546.
    ④United Nations ParticipationAct (“UNPA”),22USCS Section287c.
    ①Resolution concerning the Economic Weapon adopted by the Assembly on October4,1921.
    ②A. E. Highley, The First Sanctions Experiment: A Study of League Procedures, Geneva,1938, pp.33-34.
    ③Act on the Implementation of Certain Obligations of Finland as a Member of the United Nations, No659/1967,Issued at Helsinki on29December1967.随后在芬兰成为欧盟成员国之后将该案于1997年作出了修正，目前有效的法案为Act on the Enforcement of Certain Obligations of Finland as a Member of the United Nations and ofthe European Union, title amended by Act No705/1997.
    ④Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Djacoba Liva Tehindrazanarivelo, eds., National Implementation of United NationsSanctions: A Comparative Study, the Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers2004, p.42.
    ①Law on the Implementation of Decisions of the United Nations Security Council, Belgium,1995.
    ②Lag om vissa internationella sanktioner (Act on Certain International Sanctions),1999. Available at,http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19960095.htm, visited on26December2011.
    ③Government Gazette15350, State President's Office, No.2433,17December1993.
    ①See e.g., Section8B (5), Immigration and Asylum Act1999.
    ②United States, Decision of the District Court for the District of Columbia in Diggs v. Dent, May1975, ILM, vol.14,pp.803-804.
    ③International Emergency Economic Powers Act,50USC Sec.1705.
    ④See e.g., Fact Sheet: Pressuring Syrian Regime, Supporting Universal Rights, The White House Office of the PressSecretary, August18,2011, available athttp://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2011/08/20110818101148su0.1598736.html#ixzz1hhIRrgTp,visited on27December2011.
    ⑤Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Djacoba Liva Tehindrazanarivelo, eds., National Implementation of United NationsSanctions: A Comparative Study, the Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers2004, p.44.
    ①Resolution232(1966) of16December1966. Available athttp://www.un.org/zh/documents/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/232%281966%29&referer=http://www.un.org/chinese/aboutun/prinorgs/sc/sres/sres66.htm&Lang=E, visited on29December2011.
    ①Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Djacoba Liva Tehindrazanarivelo, eds., National Implementation of United NationsSanctions: A Comparative Study, the Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers2004, p.48.
    ②Sixth Report of the Security Council Committee Established in Pursuance of Resolution253(1968) Concerning theQuestion of Southern Rhodesia, UN Doc. S/11178/REV.1(OR),9January1974, p.33.
    ③Sixth Report of the Security Council Committee Established in Pursuance of Resolution253(1968) Concerning theQuestion of Southern Rhodesia, UN Doc. S/11178/REV.1(OR),9January1974, p.34.
    ①The S.S. Lotus Case (France v. Turkey), P.C.I.J. Ser. A, No.10, p.4(1927).
    ②Trading with the EnemyAct,1939,2&3Geo.6., Ch.89.“…it would be at variance (moreover) with both law andprecedent, to assert that public international law precludes a State from enacting laws having extraterritorial effectand providing for enforcement within the territory of the legislating State.”
    ③Trading With the Enemy Act of1917, Act Oct.6,1917, Ch.106,40Stat.411.
    ④The Southern Rhodesia (Petroleum) Order1965, ST/1965, No.2140, The London Gazette,24December1965.
    ⑤The Southern Rhodesia (Prohibited Exports and. Imports) Order1966, SI/1966, No.41, The London Gazette,21January1966.
    ⑥Sixth Report of the Security Council Committee Established in Pursuance of Resolution253(1968) Concerning theQuestion of Southern Rhodesia, UN Doc. S/11178/REV.1(OR),9January1974, p.34.
    ⑦Council Regulation (EEC) No990/93of26April1993concerning trade between the European EconomicCommunity and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), Official journal of the EuropeanCommunities, No. L102/14.
    ⑧See Case C-177/95, Ebony Maritime SA and Loten Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Prefetto della Provincia di Brindisi andOthers,27February1997, ECR I-1114, para.35.
    ⑨但同时规定有例外，例如如果涉及到军火贸易时，属人范围则得到更大的扩展。
    ①Paul Tavernier, Research on the Application in Time for the Acts and Rules in Public InternationalLaw, Problems of Intertemporal Law or Transitional Law, Paris: LGDJ,1970.
    ②典型的例外如美国针对南罗德西亚制裁措施的行政法令：Executive Order11322Relating to trade andother transactions involving Southern Rhodesia, January5,1967.
    ①See Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Collective Responses to Illegal Acts in International Law: United Nations Action in theQuestion of South Rhodesia, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1990, p.557.
    ②See Antonios Tzanakopoulos, From Interpretation to Defiance, Abdelrazik v. Canada and United Nations Sanctionsin Domestic Courts, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol.8,2010, p.263.
    ③例如2008年9月，欧洲法院推翻了欧洲初审法院对卡迪案的一审判决，裁定欧盟理事会制定的执行联合国相关制裁决议的第881/2002号条例因违反基本人权而应予以废止（annul）；此后欧洲初审法院也基于该判例，废除了欧盟妨碍当事人财产权和辩护权的相关执行措施。See Joined Cases C-402/05P and C-415/05P, YassinAbdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of the European Union and Commission of theEuropean Communities; Case T-318/01, Judgment of the Court of First Instance of11June2009-Othman v.Council and Commission, Official Journal of the European Union, C180/37.此外，2010年，英国最高法院也在类似的案例中指出英国行政机关执行制裁的国内措施《基地组织法令》因剥夺了当事人获得有效救济的权利而部分无效。Her Majesty’s Treasury (Respondent) v. Mohammed Jabar Ahmed and others (FC)(Appellants), HerMajesty’s Treasury (Respondent) v. Mohammed al-Ghabra (FC)(Appellant), R (on the application of Hani El SayedSabaei Youssef)(Respondent) v. Her Majesty’s Treasury (Appellant)(No.2),[2010] UKSC5,4February2010.
    ①See Abdelrazik v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs),2009FC580(CanLII),[2010]1FCR267.
    ②See Marian Lloyd Nash, Digest of United States Practice in International Law, Superintendent of Documents,Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office (1980), p.436.
    ③United States v. Steinberg,478F.Supp.29,33(N.D.Ill.1979).
    ①Charles Coles Diggs et al., Appellants, v. George P. Shultz, Secretary of Treasury, et al., United States Court ofAppeals, District of Columbia Circuit,152U.S. App. D.C.313.
    ②Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Djacoba Liva Tehindrazanarivelo, eds., National Implementation of United NationsSanctions: A Comparative Study, the Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers2004, p.59.
    ③例如法国法院曾将上述行为定义为“政府行为（an act of government）”而拒绝进行审查。See Milan Petrovi, The"Acts of Government" and the Legal Notion of Politics, Facta Universitatis Series: Law and Politics, Vol.9, No.2,2011, pp.85-97.
    ①Judgments-Kuwait Airways Corporation v. Iraqi Airways Company and Others,[2002] UKHL19,16May2002.
    ②Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom&Ors., Court of Appeal-Queen'sBench Division, December17,2002,[2002] EWHC2759(QB).
    ③Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret AS v. Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications and others,Irish High Court, No.352JR,2The Irish Law Reports Monthly, June1994, p.551.
    ④Council Regulation (EEC) No990/93of26April1993concerning trade between the European EconomicCommunity and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), Official Journal of the EuropeanUnion, L102.
    ①但事实上，联合国制裁委员会已经在许多案例中重申了“有效控制”原则，并得到联合国相关制裁决议的承认，例如安理会第787号决议即指出，“……任何船舶的过半数股权或控制股权如果属于在南斯拉夫联邦共和国（塞尔维亚和黑山）境内或从该国对外营业的任何个人或机构，无论该船舶悬挂何国国旗，为执行安全理事会有关决议的目的，均应视为南斯拉夫联邦共和国（塞尔维亚和黑山）的船舶。”参见安理会第787（1992）号决议，S/RES/787(1992),1992年11月16日。
    ②在先决裁判程序中，成员国法院在对特定案件做出判决前，根据欧盟基础条约第234条的规定就特定问题向欧洲法院请求做出解释性判决或有效性判决，并根据欧洲法院的先决判决对特定案件做出判决。参见陈敏合：《浅谈欧洲法院的先决裁判》，载中国法院网，http://www.chinacourt.org/html/article/200811/17/330741.shtml,访问日期2012年1月1日。
    ③Opinion of the Advocate General, Case C-177/95, ECR I-1122, para.21.
    ①目前在此框架之下已经拟订了16份反对国际恐怖主义的世界性文书，其中包括13份正式文件和3份修正案。参见联合国反恐框架，http://www.un.org/chinese/terrorism,访问日期2012年1月1日。
    ②Report of the Secretary-General, Uniting Against Terrorism: Recommendations for a Global
    Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/60/825,27April2006.
    ③OAU Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism, Algiers, Algeria,14July1999.
    ④2001ASEAN Declaration on Joint Action to Counter Terrorism, Bandar Seri Begawan,5November2001.
    ⑤Council Common Position of27December2001on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism,2001/931/CFSP, Official Journal of the European Communities, L344/93.
    ⑥Council Regulation (EC) No2580/2001of27December2001on specific restrictive measures directed againstcertain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, Official Journal of the European Communities, L344/70.
    ①鉴于恐怖主义的定义问题并不属于本文的研究范围，故不再详述。SeeArticle1(3), Council Common Position of27December2001on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism,2001/931/CFSP, Official Journal ofthe European Communities, L344/93.
    ②See, e.g., Case T-306/01, Ahmed Ali Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of the EuropeanUnion and Commission of the European Communities, Order of the President of the Court of First Instance,7May,2002; and, Order of the President of the Court of First Instance, Case T-47/03R, JoséMaria Sison v. Council andCommission,15May2003.
    ①The Federal Council, A Swiss Government White Paper on Relations between Switzerland and the United Nations,Swiss Government, June18,1997, p.4.
    ②Swiss Federal Council to H.E. Kofi Annan, Secretary of the United Nations, Switzerland’sApplication to Join theUnited Nations including a Declaration of Neutrality, Berne,20June2002.
    ③李广民、欧斌主编：《国际法》，清华大学出版社2006年版，第35页。
    ④包括拒绝与种族隔离政权建立关系，对南罗德西亚军事物资的出口限制，限制经济往来等，随后在1970年关闭了瑞士驻Salisbury（Harare）领馆。See Bilateral relations between Switzerland and Zimbabwe, FederalDepartment of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland, available athttp://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/reps/afri/vzwe/bilzim.html, visited on2January2012.
    ①Micha Bühler, Choice of Swiss Law No Escape Route To Avoid Application of International Sanctions, WalderWyss&Partners Attorneys at Law, No.29October2001.
    ②SR946.231, Bundesgesetz über die Durchsetzung von internationalen Sanktionen (Embargogesetz, EmbG),22M rz2002(Stand am27. Juli2004).
    ①See Jost Delbrück ed., The Future of International Law Enforcement: New Scenarios-New Law? Proceedings of anInternational Symposium of the Kiel Institute of International Law, Berlin: Duncker&Humblot,1993, p.21.
    ②不过，也有学者认为，依据宪章第49条“联合国会员国应通力合作，彼此协助，以执行安全理事会所决定之办法”的规定，应当对因执行而引起困难的国家进行援助。See Hans Kelsen, The Law of the United Nations:A Critical Analysis of Its Fundamental Problems (with supplement), New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange,2000,pp.97-98.但是这一观点却忽略了宪章的文本差异，在于上述因执行制裁而引起经济困难的国家，还有可能是联合国非会员国，而第49条仅仅规定了会员国间的协助义务。
    ③S/9853/Add.1,1October1970, Annex I. available athttp://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N70/216/53/PDF/N7021653.pdf?OpenElement, visited on2January2012.
    ④Resolution253(1968), S/RES/253(1968),29May1968.
    ⑤“I wish to report with deep regret that no Member States, specialized agencies or other international organizationshave given Zambia effective assistance as a result of these resolutions.” S/9853/Add.1,1October1970, Annex I, p.6.
    ⑥S/26705,8November1993, p.6.
    ①UN Doc. S/AC.25/SR.14,5October,1990; S/AC.25/SR.15,12October,1990.
    ②G. L. Burci, The Indirect Effect of United Nations Sanctions on Third States: The Role of Article50of the UNCharter, African Yearbook of International Law,1995, p.162.
    ③S/22382,25March,1991.
    ④S/1996/776,24September1996.
    ⑤Jeremy Carver and Jenine Hulsmann, The Role of Article50of the UN Charter in the Search for International Peaceand Security, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol.49, No.3, July2000, p.577.
    ①Ley12838/1946, Aprobando ratificación a la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, formulada por el P.E. el08/09/1945.-(Approving ratification to the Charter of the United Nations, made by e.g. the08/09/1945.-),21November,1946.
    ②Section31, Chapter I, Constitution of the Argentine Nation.
    ③Paragraph22, Section75, Chapter IV, Constitution of theArgentine Nation.“Treaties and concordats have a higherhierarchy than laws.”
    ④Paragraph24, Section75, Chapter IV, Constitution of theArgentine Nation.“…treaties of integration whichdelegate powers and jurisdiction to supranational organizations under reciprocal and equal conditions, and whichrespect the democratic order and human rights. The rules derived therefrom have a higher hierarchy than laws.”
    ①典型的阿根廷执行联合国制裁措施行政命令正文包括如下内容：“The President of Argentina Decrees:Article1: Approval of Resolution No.917adopted by the Security Council of the United Nations on May6,1994,which certified copy as Annex I is an integral part of this Decree.Article2: The National Executive and government departments and National Government agencies, provinces andmunicipalities, will take in their respective jurisdictions whatever measures necessary to comply with the decisionscontained in the resolution that was approved by the previous article.Article3: Contact, published, submitted to the National Official Registry and filed.” Decreto Nacional784/94,Restricciones Acordadas por el Consejo de Seguridad Internacional de las Naciones Unidas a la Republica de Haiti(Restrictions Agreed by the Security Council of the United Nations to the Republic of Haiti), Buenos Aires, May18,1994(Official Gazette, May27,1994)
    ②Communication C5778, Banco Central de la Republica Argentina,11October1990.
    ③J. Barberis, The Formation of the International Law, Buenos Aires, Ed Abaco, de R. Depalma,1994, pp.1994, p.159.
    ④G. Bidart Campos, Manual of the Reformed Constitution, Buenos Aires: Ediar,1996, p.287.
    ①Section96, Spain Constitution, sanctioned by His Majesty the King on August27,1992.“Validly concludedinternational treaties, once officially published in Spain, shall be part of the internal legal system. Their provisionsmay only be repealed, amended or suspended in the manner provided for in the treaties themselves or in accordancewith the general rules of international law.”
    ②On the Establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for SeriousViolations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia, S/RES/827(1993),25May,1993.
    ③See M. Martin Martinez, NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, The Hague: Kluwer LawInternational,1996, pp.226-227.
    ④J. D. González Campos, COURSE OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW, Complutense University of Madrid,1990,pp.231-233.
    ⑤Section99, para.3, Chapter III, Constitution of theArgentine Nation.“The President of the Nation has the followingpowers:…3.-He takes part in the making of laws according to the Constitution, promulgates them and has thempublished.”
    ⑥Ley24080, Tratados Y Convenciones Internacionales, Establécese la publicación en el Boletín Oficial de actos yhechos referidos a tratados o convenciones internacionales en los que la Nación Argentina sea parte (Treaties andInternational Conventions: Set the publication in the official bulletin of acts and facts relating to treaties orinternational conventions to which the Argentina nation is a party), Issued on June10,1992
    ①Miguel A. Ekmekdjian, c. Gerardo Sofovich, Buenos Aires, julio7de1992, Fallos315:1492.
    ②Raúl H. Guerrero, The Relationship between the International Standard and The National Constitution: Correctionafter Its Reform, La Ley, Vol.16(December1999), No.3, p.133.
    ③Section19, Chapter I, Constitution of theArgentine Nation.“The private actions of men which in no way offendpublic order or morality, nor injure a third party, are only reserved to God and are exempted from the authority ofjudges. No inhabitant of the Nation shall be obliged to perform what the law does not demand nor deprived of whatit does not prohibit.”
    ④Articulo3o, Ley24080.“The international treaties and conventions laying down obligations for natural and legalpersons other than the State are mandatory only after its publication in the Official Gazette, observed in this regardas prescribed by article2of the Civil Code.”(emphasis added).
    ①Unilever NV c. Instituto Nacional de la Propiedad Industrial, Fallos323:3160,24October,2000. See also, AntonioBoggiano, International Law: Law of the Relationship between the Legal and Human Rights, Buenos Aires: La Ley,2001.
    ②Unilever NV c. Instituto Nacional de la Propiedad Industrial, Fallos323:3160,24October,2000.“An internationaltreaty has, under the conditions of its validity, precedence over the laws and principles immediately integrate theArgentine legal order. The good faith interpretation of this important result leads to dismiss the order under anysolution to behave in a frustration of the objectives of the treaty or that compromises the future fulfillment of theobligations of the result.”
    ③此外，还涉及到国际人权条约和联合国宪章的效力层级问题，尽管这个问题并不属于本文研究的范围，但在笔者看来，非常遗憾的是，从国际法上而言，安理会的制裁决议不可避免的会对人权产生负面影响（例如对制裁目标个体基本权利的限制），因此在联合国制裁机制中包含了人道主义例外制度（尽管在实践中还面临着许多缺陷和问题），但只能由联合国本身对其决议是否符合国际人权法进行自觉审查。一方面，这是由于国际人权条约通常是在联合国框架之下起草订立（例如世界人权宣言）；另一方面，国际人权在当今强调人本化和“对一切义务”、“保护责任”的国际社会中已成为深入各国法律的基本理念，因此，在由各国组成的联合国以及安理会的次级立法活动中，必然存在保护人权的自觉。
    ①日本宪法第98条：“この憲法は、国の最高法規であつて、その条規に反する法律、命令、詔勅及び国務に関するその他の行為の全部又は一部は、その効力を有しない。日本国が締結した条約及び確立された国際法規は、これを誠実に遵守することを必要とする。”参见《日本国憲法》第10章第98条，http://www.houko.com/00/01/S21/000.HTM,访问日期2011年12月21日。
    ①谷内正太郎：《国際法規の国内的実施》，载《国際法と国内法》，勁草書房，1991年版。
    ②辛崇阳：《国际条约在日本国内法体系中的地位——兼对“砂川事件”的透视》，载《海南大学学报人文社会科学版》2000年第3期，第100页。
    ③谷内正太郎：《国際法規の国内的実施》，载《国際法と国内法》，勁草書房，1991年版。
    ④辛崇阳：《国际条约在日本国内法体系中的地位——兼对“砂川事件”的透视》，载《海南大学学报人文社会科学版》2000年第3期，第100页。
    ①参见「外国為替及び外国貿易法」，第21条。“財務大臣は、居住者又は非居住者による資本取引（第二十四条第一項に規定する特定資本取引に該当するものを除く。）が何らの制限なしに行われた場合には、我が国が締結した条約その他の国際約束を誠実に履行することを妨げ、若しくは国際平和のための国際的な努力に我が国として寄与することを妨げることとなる事態を生じ、この法律の目的を達成することが困難になると認めるとき又は第十条第一項の閣議決定が行われたときは、政令で定めるところにより、当該資本取引を行おうとする居住者又は非居住者に対し、当該資本取引を行うことについて、許可を受ける義務を課することができる。”（“当财务大臣发现对某一国民或非国民的外汇资金交易，如若不进行限制，就将会妨碍日本诚实履行国际条约或其他国际文件项下的义务，包括日本基于此对国际和平的贡献，以及阻碍本法目的的实现时；财务大臣得根据上述第10条第1款的规定发布政令，对实施该项外汇资金交易的国民或非国民施加义务，使其交易必须接受政令的许可。”）
    ②参见「外国為替及び外国貿易法」，第48条。“国際的な平和及び安全の維持を妨げることとなると認められるものとして政令で定める特定の地域を仕向地とする特定の種類の貨物の輸出をしようとする者は、政令で定めるところにより、経済産業大臣の許可を受けなければならない。”（“当出口特定产品至特定区域的行为构成内阁政令所认定的对国际和平与安全的阻碍时，任何人都应当在此时根据政令的规定取得经济产业大臣的许可。”）
    ①参见《日本“武器出口三原则”名存实亡》，载《人民日报》2011年12月28日。
    ②事实上早在1983年，该原则就被修改为同意在一定条件下仅向同盟国美国提供武器技术。2004年，日本首相咨询机构“安全保障与防卫力量恳谈会”向时任首相小泉纯一郎提交的研究报告认为，为确保日本安保的“核心技术”，必须研究日本参加联合开发与生产的策略，因此有必要修改“武器出口三原则”。但2011年底这一次修改是首次对该原则从根本上进行放宽。对日本政府内有人极力主张放宽“武器出口三原则”，日本媒体早就提出质疑。日本《朝日新闻》25日发表的名为《不能放宽“武器出口三原则”》的社论指出，“武器出口三原则”是二战后日本限制性防卫政策的核心支柱，目的在于专守防卫，不对他国构成威胁，这是一个和平国家的招牌。日本政府正式宣布放宽限制后，在野党日本共产党书记局长市田忠义27日表示，“这明显是对宪法和平原则及其精神的践踏，今后将对日本政府的这一方针进行严厉追究”。参见王洋：《日本政府宣布放宽“武器出口三原则”》，国际在线，http://gb.cri.cn/27824/2011/12/27/2625s3498283.htm,访问日期2012年1月5日。
    ③《武器輸出三原則の緩和、正式決定：国際共同開発を容認》，朝日新聞社，2011年12月27日。参见http://www.asahi.com/special/minshu/TKY201112270195.html,访问日期2012年1月5日。See also, CoreyWallace, Japan’s ‘Three Principles ofArms Exports’ about to Enter A New Phase, Japan Security Watch, NewPacific Institute.
    ①参见2010年8月6日日本常驻联合国代表团给委员会主席的普通照会：《日本为严格执行第1929（2010）号决议相关段落所采取步骤的临时报告》，S/AC.50/2010/12，2010年8月26日。
    ①安理会第820（1993）号决议，S/RES/820(1993)，1993年4月17日。
    ②「出入国管理及び難民認定法」，昭和二十六年十月四日政令第三百十九号，最終改正：平成二三年六月二四日法律第七四号。参见http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S26/S26SE319.html,访问日期2012年1月6日。
    ③例如安理会针对安哥拉局势的1997年第1127（1997）号决议，“决定所有国家应采取必要的措施：（a）禁止依照下文第11（a）段所指定的安盟所有高级官员及其成年直系亲属入境或过境，……”；针对塞拉利昂局势的第1132（1997）号决议，“决定所有国家均应禁止依照下文第10（f）段所指定的军政府成员及其成年家属入境或过境，……”等。
    ④参见第二節：外国人の上陸，「出入国管理及び難民認定法」，昭和二十六年十月四日政令第三百十九号，最終改正：平成二三年六月二四日法律第七四号。http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S26/S26SE319.html,访问日期2012年1月6日。
    ⑤例如针对前南斯拉夫的第757（1992）号决议，“又决定所有国家均应：（b）采取必要步骤，制止代表南斯拉夫联邦共和国（塞尔维亚和黑山）的人员或团体在其领土内参加体育比赛项目；（c）暂停涉及由南斯拉夫联邦共和国（塞尔维亚和黑山）官方赞助的或代表该国的人员或团体所参与的科技合作和文化交流和访问。”
    ①As amended in the Official Gazette of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, No.1396,1September,1958.
    ②The Constitution of The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Official Gazette of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,No.1093,8January,1952.“(i) The King declares war, concludes peace and ratifies treaties and agreements.(ii)Treaties and agreements which involve financial commitments to the Treasury or affect the public or private rights ofJordanians shall not be valid unless approved by the National Assembly. In no circumstances shall any secret termscontained in any treaty or agreement be contrary to their overt terms.”
    ③Article55, The Constitution of The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.“Ministers shall be tried by a High Tribunal foroffences which may be attributed to them in the course of the performance of their duties.”
    ④根据约旦宪法，立法权并不专属于国民议会，而在国民议会闭会期间可以由部长理事会代行。其宪法第94条第1款的规定，“在国民议会闭会期间，经国王同意后，部长理事会有权就刻不容缓需要采取紧急措施的事项或为批准不容迟延的紧急开支而公布暂行法，上述暂行法在不违背本宪法规定的情况下具有法律效力。但应在议会下次会期开始时提交议会审批，议会得予以追认或加以修正。如果上述暂行法被否决，部长理事
    ①约旦在联合国一直分担大约0.013%左右的会费额度，2009年分担额为0.012%（326341美元），2010年为0.014%（329085美元），2011年为0.014%（370796美元），每年均足额缴纳。参见联合国会员国会费，http://www.un.org/zh/members/contribution.shtml,访问日期2012年1月7日。
    ②例如在针对朝鲜进行制裁的安理会第1718（2006）号决议的执行中，约旦即通过官方金融机构（包括中央银行）对制裁决议指定人员或实体的资金、金融资产或经济资源进行监督，还通过官方安全总局分发了安理会的制裁名单，防止清单所列人员在所有边境哨所入境或过境。参见2007年2月20日约旦哈希姆王国常驻联合国代表给委员会主席的普通照会：《约旦哈希姆王国政府在执行第1718（2006）号决议方面所采取步骤的报告》，S/AC.49/2007/18，2007年2月28日。
    ③D. L. Bethlehem, The Kuwait Crisis: Sanctions and Their Economic Consequences, Vol.2, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1994, p.659.
    ①不过在实践中，1994年约旦政府与英国劳氏认证集团（Lloyd’s Register Group）订立了承包协议，允许劳氏集团在约旦亚喀巴（aqaba）港口建立海岸检查站，对所有前往伊拉克的货物进行检查。但随后在2000年11月，约旦政府收回了对劳氏集团的授权，终止双方的协议，并且将终止协议的情形通知了联合国，从而将所有陆地检查权收归约旦政府机构。See Saad G. Hattar, Official: Lloyd's Register inspectors left Aqaba, JordanTimes, January10,2001.
    ②安理会第661（1990）号决议，S/RES/661(1990)，1990年8月6日。
    ①See Jost Delbrück ed., The Future of International Law Enforcement: New Scenarios-New Law? Proceedings of anInternational Symposium of the Kiel Institute of International Law, Berlin: Duncker&Humblot,1993, p.21.
    ②Amman Chamber of Commerce, The Effects of the Gulf Crisis and the Embargo on the Gulf of Aqaba on theJordanian Economy especially the Industrial Sector,16April,1994. Available athttp://capital.osd.wednet.edu/media/capital/library/pdf/jordan.pdf, visited on7January2012.
    ③不过，也有学者认为，依据宪章第49条“联合国会员国应通力合作，彼此协助，以执行安全理事会所决定之办法”的规定，应当对因执行而引起困难的国家进行援助。See Hans Kelsen, The Law of the United Nations:A Critical Analysis of Its Fundamental Problems (with supplement), New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange,2000,pp.97-98.但是这一观点却忽略了宪章的文本差异，在于上述因执行制裁而引起经济困难的国家，还有可能是联合国非会员国，而第49条仅仅规定了会员国间的协助义务。
    ④Letter from the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Jordan addressed to the President of the SecurityCouncil,20August,1990. See also, E. Lauterpacht, C. J. Greenwood and Marc Weller, The Kuwait Crisis: BasicDocuments, Cambridge International Documents Series, Vol.1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1991,p.238.
    ①1991年3月22日孟加拉国、保加利亚、捷克斯洛伐克、吉布提、印度、约旦、黎巴嫩、波兰、罗马尼亚、塞舌尔、斯里兰卡、苏丹、阿拉伯叙利亚共和国、突尼斯、毛里塔尼亚、巴基斯坦、菲律宾、乌拉圭、越南、也门和南斯拉夫常驻联合国代表给安理会主席的信，S/22382，1991年3月25日。
    ②Chapter XLI, An Act to authorize the President of United States to lay, regulate and revoke Embargoes,1U.S.Statutes at Large372,4June1794.“The President of United States,…whenever, in his opinion, the public safetyshall so require, to lay an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports of the United States, or upon the ships andvessels of the United States, or the ships and vessels of any foreign nation,…”
    ①U.S. Supreme Court, Reid v. Covert,354U.S.1(1957).
    ②关于习惯国内法与美国国内法冲突的问题，请参见黄瑶：《习惯国际法与美国国内法的冲突问题》，载《中山大学学报（社会科学版）》1997年11月增刊，第188页。
    ①具体该规则的内容和司法实践，请参见陈卫东：《论条约在美国国内适用中的“后法优先规则”》，载《甘肃政法学院学报》2009年第1期，第22页。
    ②Section5, Trading with the Enemy Act,50U.S.C. App., Act Oct.6,1917, Ch.106,40Stat.411.
    ③Presidential Proclamation No.2039of6March1933,48Stat.1689; No.2040of9March1933,48Stat.1691.
    ①United Nations ParticipationAct (“UNPA”), Title22, Chapter7,22U.S.C. Section287c.“(a) Notwithstanding theprovisions of any other law, whenever the United States is called upon by the Security Council to apply measureswhich said Council has decided, pursuant to article41of said Charter, are to be employed to give effect to itsdecisions under said Charter, the President may, to the extent necessary to apply such measures, through any agencywhich he may designate, and under such orders, rules, and regulations as may be prescribed by him, investigate,regulate, or prohibit, in whole or in part, economic relations or rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and othermeans of communication between any foreign country or any national thereof or any person therein and the UnitedStates or any person subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or involving any property subject to the jurisdiction of theUnited States.”
    ②House Committee on Foreign Affairs, United Nations Participation Act of1945, H.R. Rep. No.1383,12December1945,1945U.S.C. Cong. Service, p.932. See also, Economic Sanctions Against Rhodesia, Hearings Before theSubcommittee on International Organizations and Movements of The Committee on Foreign Affairs House ofRepresentatives, Ninety-Second Congress, First Session, H.J. Res.172; H. Con. Res.5,6,12; H. Res.45; and H.R.5445, June17and22,1971.
    ①安理会第217（1965）号决议，S/RES/217(1965)，1965年11月20日。“促请所有各国勿作协助及鼓励非法政权之任何行动，尤勿供给武器、设备及军事器材，并竭力断绝与南罗德西亚之一切经济关系，包括石油及石油产品之禁运。”
    ②Executive Order11419, Relating to trade and other transactions involving Southern Rhodesia,33F.R.10783, July30,1968.该行政法令在1970年随着制裁的终止而撤销。See Executive Order11509, February11,1970,available at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/1968.html, visited on10January2012.
    ③The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Title II of Pub.L.95-223,91Stat.1626, October28,1977.
    ④Executive Order12170,44F.R.65729, November15,1979.
    ⑤See Andreas F. Lowenfeld, Lawrence W. Newman, John M. Walker, Revolutionary Days: The Iran Hostage Crisisand the Hague Claims Tribunal: A Look Back, Juris Publishing,1998, pp.40-46.
    ⑥Executive Order13129, Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With the Taliban,64F.R.36759, July7,1999. Executive Order13224, Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threatento Commit, or Support Terrorism,66F.R.49079, September25,2001.
    ①Foreign Assets Control Regulation,31C.F.R. part500,329.
    ①Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States, Amer. Law Inst.(June1986), also available atwww.macalester.edu/courses/intl114/docs/restatement.pdf, visited on10January2012; see also, Kathleen Hixson,Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Under the Third Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States, FordhamInternational Law Journal, Vol.12, Issue1,1988, p.127.
    ②See31C.F.R. Part550,308, Libya.条例中采纳了“美国人”（United States Person）的概念，而并没有适用“出于美国管辖权之下的任何人”（Person Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States）的定义。
    ③See31C.F.R. Part585,317.
    ④United States of America v. David S. McKeeve, No.96-2273, United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit,131F.3d1,48Fed. R. Evid. Serv.348, December5,1997.
    ①U.S. Companies Pay Penalties for Trade with Certain Nations, New York Times,3July2002; See also, U.S.Department of the Treasury, http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Documents/document25.pdf, visitedon10January2012.
    ②See31C.F.R. Part591.
    ③安理会第1192（1998）号决议，S/RES/1192(1998)，1998年8月27日。
    ④Arms Export Control Act (AECA),22U.S.C.2778.
    ①C.F.31C.F.R. Part550,308, Libya;31C.F.R. Part585,317.
    ②尽管理论上美国国会完全有权对行政机关的广泛权力进行限制，在美国的立法实践中也存在相应的限制尝试，例如1969年美国国会对出口控制法的修订，即将“出口控制”（Export Control）修改为“ExportAdministration”，试图放松行政机关对出口的控制并且限制了“国家安全”的范围，但从随后的实践可以看出，行政机关仍然没有受到有效的限制。See, e.g., Andreas F. Lowenfeld, Trade Controls for Political Ends, MatthewBender Publisher,1983, pp.132-136.
    ③Article249, EC Treaty (formerly Article189of the EEC Treaty).
    ④Case34/73, Variola,[1973] ECR981, paras.10-11.
    ①在洛克比空难临时措施案中，国际法院即指出，“考虑到利比亚以及英国、美国同为联合国成员国，应当遵守和执行联合国宪章第25条所规定的安理会决议，……法院初步（prima facie）认定，这一义务应扩展至安理会第748决议，并且由于第103条的规定，这一义务应优先于任何其他国际协定，包括《蒙特利尔公约》。”See Case Concerning Questions of Interpretation and Application of the1971Montreal Convention arising from theAerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United Kingdom, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United Statesof America), Provisional Measures, Orders of14April1992, I.C.J. Reports1992, p.114.
    ②Article307, EC Treaty.“The rights and obligations arising from agreements concluded before1January1958, or,for acceding States, before the date of their accession, between one or more Member States on the one hand, and oneor more third countries on the other, shall not be affected by the provisions of this Treaty.”事实上该条经过1997《阿姆斯特丹条约》的修正，重新将日期具体化以避免歧义。多数学者认为，该条的订立和修正是为了保障1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第30条强制规则的顺利实施避免冲突。See Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law andPractice,2000, p.183; Trevor C. Hartley, The Foundations of European Community Law, Oxford University Press,2007, p.96.
    ③Case C-124/95, R. v. HM Treasury and Bank of England, ex parte Centro-Com Srl.,[1997]1CMLR555.
    ④Case C-124/95, R. v. HM Treasury and Bank of England, ex parte Centro-Com Srl.,[1997]1CMLR555,paras.44-49.
    ①Case C-177/95, Ebony Maritime SA v. Prefetto Della Provincia di Brindisi,[1997]2CMLR24.
    ②Article301, Treaty establishing the European Community.“Where it is provided, in a common position or in a jointaction adopted according to the provisions of the Treaty on European Union relating to the common foreign andsecurity policy, for an action by the Community to interrupt or to reduce, in part or completely, economic relationswith one or more third countries, the Council shall take the necessary urgent measures. The Council shall act by aqualified majority on a proposal from the Commission.”
    ③甘开鹏、陆宁：《欧盟对外经济制裁政策评析》，载《经济问题探索》2009年第10期，第98页。
    ④See Mr. Vredeling, Written Question No.5/73, Official Journal, C57,23March1973, p.27; Answer of theCommission, Official Journal, C57,4June1973, p.28.
    ①Report by the Foreign Ministers of the Member States on the Problems of Political Unification, Part one, para.7.“The first fact is that, in line with the spirit of the Preambles to the Treaties of Paris and Rome, tangible form shouldbe given to the will for a political union which has always been a force for the progress of the EuropeanCommunities.”
    ②Report by Mr. Leo Tindemans, Prime Minister of Belgium to the European Council, Bulletin of the EuropeanCommunities Supplement1/76.
    ③甘开鹏、陆宁：《欧盟对外经济制裁政策评析》，载《经济问题探索》2009年第10期，第99页。
    ④Common Foreign and Security Policy, available athttp://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/amsterdam_treaty/a19000_en.htm, visited on14February2012.
    ①Council of the European Union, Basic Principles on the Use of Restrictive Measures (Sanctions),10198/1/04Rev.1,Brussels,7June2004.
    ②Council of the European Union, Guidelines on Implementation and Evaluation of Restrictive Measures (Sanctions)in the Framework of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy,15114/05, Brussels,2December2005.
    ③Council of the European Union, Basic Principles on the Use of Restrictive Measures (Sanctions),10198/1/04Rev.1,Brussels,7June2004.
    ④Council of the European Union, Basic Principles on the Use of Restrictive Measures (Sanctions),10198/1/04Rev.1,Brussels,7June2004.
    ①具体请参见欧盟秘书处背景文件，The High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/The EuropeanExternal Action Service, November2009, available athttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/111301.pdf, visited on16February2012.
    ②Mehrdad Payandeh and Heiko Sauer, European Union: UN Sanctions and EU Fundamental Rights, InternationalJournal of Constitutional Law, vol.7(2009), pp.306,308,310-315.
    ③Piet Eeckhout, X. L. Xenopoulos ed., External Relations of the EU and the Member States: Competence, MixedAgreements, International Responsibility and Effects of International Law, Nicosia,2006, at287.
    ④Article301, European Community Treaty.
    ⑤Article60, European Community Treaty.
    ①马贺：《欧盟区域刑事合作进程中的制度缺陷与对策——从<马斯特里赫特条约>到<里斯本条约>》，载《犯罪研究》2010年第5期。
    ②Case C-176/03, Commission v Council,[2005] ECR I-7879, paragraph38, and Case C-440/05Commission vCouncil [2007] ECR I-0000, paragraph52
    ③Case C-170/96, Commission v Council,[1998] ECR I-2763, paragraph16; Case C-176/03, Commission v Council,paragraph39; and Case C-440/05, Commission v Council, paragraph53.
    ④http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/cfsp/sanctions/index.htm, visited on16February2012.
    ⑤Paola Mariani, The Implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions Imposing Economic Sanctions in the EU/ECLegal System: Interpillar Issues and Judicial Review, Bocconi Legal Studies Research Paper No.1354568, BocconiUniversity-Institute of Comparative Law (IDC), March6,2009.
    ①Article24, Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany.“The Federation may by a law transfer sovereignpowers to international organizations.”
    ②Theodor Maunz, Günter Dürig, Grundgesetz: Kommentar (Basic Law: Commentary), Vol.6, C.H. Beck,1994.
    ③BGH1StR700/94-Case of21April1995(LG Mannheim), BGHSt41,127; Strafbarkeit der Bef rderung vonPrivatpersonen im Busverkehr von Deutschland nach Serbien Montenegro w hrend des UN-Embargos (Offense toTransport by Private Bus from Germany to Serbia in Montenegro during the UN Embargo), Entscheidungen desBundesgerichtshofes in Strafsachen (Decisions of the Federal Court in Criminal Matters, BGHSt), Vol.41, p.127.See also, Judgment of28September,1995, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift1996, p.602.
    ①Sec.2(1),Art undAusma von Beschr nkungen und Handlungspflichten, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“Soweit indiesem Gesetz Beschr nkungen zugelassen sind, kann durch Rechtsverordnung vorgeschrieben werden, dassRechtsgesch fte und Handlungen allgemein oder unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen:1. einer Genehmigungbedürfen oder;2. verboten sind.”
    ②Sec.5, Erfüllung zwischenstaatlicher Vereinbarungen, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“Zur Erfüllung zwischenstaatlicherVereinbarungen, denen die gesetzgebenden K rperschaften in der Form eines Bundesgesetzes zugestimmt haben,k nnen Rechtsgesch fte und Handlungen im Au enwirtschaftsverkehr beschr nkt und bestehende Beschr nkungenaufgehoben werden.”
    ③Sec.7, Schutz der Sicherheit und der ausw rtigen Interessen, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“(1) Rechtsgesch fte undHandlungen im Au enwirtschaftsverkehr k nnen beschr nkt werden, um:1. die wesentlichen Sicherheitsinteressender Bundesrepublik Deutschland zu gew hrleisten;2. eine St rung des friedlichen Zusammenlebens der V lker zuverhüten;3. zu verhüten, dass die ausw rtigen Beziehungen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland erheblich gest rtwarden, oder;4. die ffentliche Ordnung oder Sicherheit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Sinne von Artikel46und58Absatz1des EG-Vertrags zu gew hrleisten.”
    ④Sec.2(2), Art und Ausma von Beschr nkungen und Handlungspflichten, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.
    ⑤See, e.g., Section69c, Regulation Implementing the Foreign Trade and Payments Act (Foreign Trade and PaymentsRegulation–AWV) of18December1986, last amended by the90thRegulation Amending the Foreign Trade andPayments Regulation of18August2010.
    ①例如关于津巴布韦制裁的相关规定。See Restrictions based on the Common Position2004/161/CFSP of9February2004imposing restrictive measures on Zimbabwe, Section69h, Regulation Implementing the ForeignTrade and Payments Act (Foreign Trade and Payments Regulation–AWV) of18December1986, last amended bythe90thRegulation Amending the Foreign Trade and Payments Regulation of18August2010.
    ②Order of2June1992in the case of Yugoslavia, Federal Gazette,4June,1992, p.4493. See also, Question9, Noteverbale dated16April2003from the Permanent Mission of Germany to the United Nations addressed to theChairman of the Committee, Report of Germany required pursuant to paragraphs6and12of resolution1455(2003),S/AC.37/2003/(1455)/10,17April2003.
    ③Gesetz über die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Internationalen Strafgerichtshof für das ehemalige Jugoslawien(Jugoslawien-Strafgerichtshof-Gesetz), Bundesgesetzblatt, Part1, No.18, Z5702,13April,1995, p.485. available athttp://www.bgbl.de/Xaver/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_BGBl, visited on8January2012. See also, Gesetzüber die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Internationalen Strafgerichtshof für Ruanda (Ruanda-Strafgerichtshof-Gesetz),Bundesgesetzblatt, Part1, No.25,8May,1998, p.843. available athttp://www.bgbl.de/Xaver/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_BGBl, visited on8January2012.
    ④Gesetz zur Bek mpfung des internationalen Terrorismus (Terrorismusbek mpfungsgesetz), Bundesgesetzblatt, Part1,No.3,11January,2002, p.361. available at http://www.bgbl.de/Xaver/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_BGBl,visited on8January2012.
    ①Order of2June1992in the case of Yugoslavia, Federal Gazette,4June,1992, p.4493.
    ②安理会第757（1992）号决议，S/RES/757(1992)，1992年5月30日。
    ①See Federal Gazette,13June,1992, p.4706.
    ②Executive Order of7August1990, Federal Gazette,8August,1990, p.4013.
    ③Regulation of9August1990, Federal Gazette,11August1990, p.4065.
    ④按照安理会该决议的规定，“……确保其国民或在其境内的任何人不会向此种人员或向海地军方,包括警察在内,或为其利益,直接或间接提供此种或任何其他的资金和财政资源”，但德国行政命令却并未将国内制裁扩展至上述人员，而仍仅限于海地政府。
    ⑤Sec.7(3), Schutz der Sicherheit und der ausw rtigen Interessen, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“(3) Zu den in Absatz1genannten Zwecken k nnen auch Rechtsgesch fte und Handlungen Deutscher in fremden Wirtschaftsgebietenbeschr nkt werden, die sich auf Waren und sonstige Gegenst nde nach Absatz2Nummer1einschlie lich ihrerEntwicklung und Herstellung beziehen, wenn der Deutsche:(1) Inhaber eines Personaldokumentes derBundesrepublik Deutschland ist oder;(2) verpflichtet w re, einen Personalausweis zu besitzen, falls er eineWohnung im Geltungsbereich dieses Gesetzes h tte.”
    ①Sec.45b, übermittlung personenbezogener Daten aus Strafverfahren, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.
    ②Executive Order of26April1993, Federal Gazette,28April,1993.
    ③Decision of26March1987, Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts (Decisions of the FederalConstitutional Court, BVerfGE), vol.74, p.358.
    ①Judgments of12April1995, Neuen Zeitschrift für Strafrecht, p.551; BGH1StR700/94-Case of21April1995(LGMannheim), BGHSt41,127; Strafbarkeit der Bef rderung von Privatpersonen im Busverkehr von Deutschland nachSerbien Montenegro w hrend des UN-Embargos (Offense to Transport by Private Bus from Germany to Serbia inMontenegro during the UN Embargo), Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Strafsachen (Decisions of theFederal Court in Criminal Matters, BGHSt), Vol.41, p.127; Judgment of28September,1995, Neue JuristischeWochenschrift1996, p.602; Judgment of14July1998, Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofs, para.34.
    ②Federal Court of Justice, Judgment of28September1995, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift1996, p.602.
    ③Judgment of11September1995, Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofs,1StR242/95.
    ④Supreme Court of the State of Bavaria, Judgment of10November1997, Die ffentliche Verwaltung1998, p.296.
    ①State Court of Stuttgart, Judgment of1October1996, Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht,1997, p.288.
    ②Court of Appeals of Oldenburg, Judgment of6June1994, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift,1994, p.2908.
    ③Court of Appeals of Stuttgart, Judgment of17October1995, Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht,1997, p.288.
    ④See e.g., Federal Court of Justice, Judgment of27January1994, Juristenzeitung,1994, p.725.
    ⑤Hans-Konrad Ress, The Trade Embargo: International Relations, European Integration and Foreign Trade LawFramework, and Compensation Practices, Springer,2000, p.272.
    ⑥Federal Court of Justice, Judgment of28September1995, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift,1996, p.603.
    ①Sec.34(4), Straftaten, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“(4) Mit Freiheitsstrafe von sechs Monaten bis zu fünf Jahren wirdbestraft, wer:1. einer Rechtsverordnung nach§2Absatz1in Verbindung mit§5oder§7Absatz1oder3Satz1zuwiderhandelt, die der Durchführung: a) einer vom Sicherheitsrat der Vereinten Nationen nach Kapitel VII derCharta der Vereinten Nationen,…”
    ②Federal Court of Justice, Judgment of21April1995, Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Strafsachen,Vol.41, p.134.
    ③Federal Court of Justice, Judgment of21April1995, Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Strafsachen,Vol.41, p.134.
    ④Judgment of9October1998, Entscheidungssammlung des Verwaltungsgerichtshofs (Decisions of the AdministrativeCourt), Vol.49, p.60.
    ①不过也有学者认为，依据联合国制裁措施而对德国国民财产的剥夺，可能会引发与宪法保护个人财产规定的冲突，而在这一方面目前在德国法院也没有可以援引的判例；即使能够依据安理会决议和相关的国内执行立法能够对公民财产进行冻结或扣押，是否应当进行补偿的问题也会带来潜在的宪法性冲突。此外，在联合国反恐问题上，根据1373（2001）号决议，德国重新对国内反恐怖安全法进行了修正，大大扩展了德国情报和国家安全部门的权力，因此而带来对宪法保障的公民基本权利的侵害，这一影响则至为深远。See Hans-KonradRess, The Trade Embargo: International Relations, European Integration and Foreign Trade Law Framework, andCompensation Practices, Springer,2000, p.327.
    ②See Case T-315/01, Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Council and Commission, Court of First Instance,21September2005,ECR II-3649; Case T-315/01, Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council and Commission, Court ofFirst Instance,21September2005, ECR II-3533, para.226.
    ③Council Regulation (EC) No.881/2002of27May2002, imposing certain specific restrictive measures directedagainst certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, andrepealing Council Regulation (EC) No467/2001prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan,strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Talibanof Afghanistan, Official Journal of the European Communities, L139/10,29May2002.
    ①Case T-306/01, Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council, and Case T-315/01Kadi v. Council andCommission, Judgments of21September2005, para.132-133.
    ②Case T-306/01, Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council, and Case T-315/01Kadi v. Council andCommission, Judgments of21September2005, para.326.
    ③Case T-306/01, Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council, and Case T-315/01Kadi v. Council andCommission, Judgments of21September2005, para.316.
    ④参见顾婷：《安理会反恐“聪明制裁”之困境及其出路》，载《法学》2011年第10期，第124页。
    ⑤See Case No.1A45/2007, Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department ofEconomic Affairs, Administrative Appeal Judgment, Switzerland, Federal Tribunal,14November2007, para.7.
    ⑥See Agrim Behrami and Bekir Behrami v. France, Ruzhdi Saramati v. France, Norway and Germany, EuropeanCourt of Human Rights,2May2007, joined App. Nos.71412/01&78166/01, paras.148-149.
    ⑦See R (on the application of Al-Jedda) v. the Secretary of State of Defense, Court of Appeal,[2007] UKHL58,EWCA Civ.327,29March2006, para.74.
    ⑧See Nabil Sayadi and Patricia Vinck v. Belgian State, Tribunal de premiere instance de Buxelles4thCh.,2February2005, Cited in Third Report of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team Appointed Pursuant to Res.1526(2004) Concerning Al-Qaida and the Taliban and Associated Individuals and Entities, UN Doc. S/2005/572,pp.48-49.
    ①Dubsky v. Ireland and Others, IE2005, ILDC485, para.91.
    ②Antonios Tzanakopoulos, Judicial Dialogue in Multilevel Governance: The Impact of the Solange Argument, inUnity or Fragmentation of International Law: The Role of International and National Tribunals, Fauchald, OleKristian＆Nollkaemper, Andre eds., Hart, Oxford2010, p.13.
    ③Case No. PTA13,14,15,17&19/2007, A, K, M, Q&G v. H.M. Treasury, The High Court of Justice, Queen'sBench Division Administrative Court,[2008] EWHC869(Admin),24April2008.
    ④瑞士在执行1267决议时，国内曾规定了一个暂缓执行制裁措施的期间，在此期间内列入制裁名单的当事人可获得陈述和答辩的机会。但是，1267委员会对瑞士的做法表示了批评：“委员会希望澄清的是这些措施与成员国在《联合国宪章》第七章下的义务不符。因此，委员会敦促成员国保证在委员会将个人或实体列入名单后立即冻结其财产。”“1267体制”下义务的严格性由此可见一斑。参见顾婷：《安理会反恐“聪明制裁”之困境及其出路》，载《法学》2011年第10期，第124页。See also, Letter Sent by the President of the SanctionsCommittee Under Resolution1267to the President of the Security Council of1December2005, UN Doc.S/2005/760.
    ⑤Remarks of Kimberly Prost, Ombudsperson,1267Al Qaida/Taliban Sanctions Committee Delivered to the InformalMeeting of Legal Advisors,25October2010, http://www.un.org/en/sc/ombudsperson/pdfs/2010.10.25-E.pdf, visitedon16February2012.
    ①陈海明：《卡迪案及其对国际法意义的分析》，载《太平洋学报》2010年第1期，第22页。
    ①张乃根：《论条约批准的宪法程序修改》，载《政治与法律》2004年第1期。
    ①例如，根据《维也纳外交关系公约》和《维也纳领事关系公约》，我国制定了《中华人民共和国外交特权与豁免条例》，并且相应在《刑法》第8条中规定，“享有外交特权与豁免的外国人的刑事责任问题，通过外交途径解决”；在《海关法》第34条中规定，“享有外交特权与豁免的外国机构或人员的公务用品或者自用物品进出境，依照《中华人民共和国外交特权与豁免条例》的规定办理”。按照《改善战地武装部队伤者病者日内瓦公约》要求缔约国采取必要措施，禁止例如滥用红十字标志或名称的规定，我国《商标法》禁止使用与“红十字”、“红新月”的标志、名称相同或近似的文字、图形作商标。
    ①罗国强：《论国际条约的国内适用问题》，载《兰州学刊》2010年第6期，第124页。
    ②如我国于1995年制定了《民用航空法》，其中有关民用航空器权利的规定就与1948年《国际承认航空器权利公约》的内容完全一致；再如我国于2001、2009年相继修改了《专利法》《商标法》和《著作权法》，从而使国内法的内容与我国参加的国际条约（《世界贸易组织协定》以及中国入世承诺）的规定实现一致。
    ③罗国强：《论国际条约的国内适用问题》，载《兰州学刊》2010年第6期，第125页。
    ④Qingjiang Kong, Enforcement of WTO agreement in China: Illusion or Reality, Journal of World Trade, Vol.35(2001), No.6, at p.1181.
    ①参见《外交部关于执行联合国安理会第1343号决议的通知》，2001年5月10日；外发〔2001〕18号《外交部关于执行联合国安理会第1373号决议的通知》，2001年9月30日；外发〔2002〕25号《外交部关于联合国安理会制裁阿富汗委员会将“东突厥斯坦伊斯兰运动”列入受制裁实体名单的通知》，2002年9月17日；外国函〔2008〕200号《外交部关于执行联合国安理会第1803号决议的通知》，2008年1月1日。
    ②例如，外交部文件：《关于执行联合国安理会第1980号决议的通知》，外发〔2011〕10号，2011年5月25日。
    ③外交部文件：《外交部关于执行安理会第1267和1333号决议对有关个人和实体实施金融制裁的通知》，外发〔2001〕20号，2001年10月17日。
    ④需要注意的是，2010年联合国网站改版，该网页已经无法访问；事实上即使能够访问，该网址也是不尽准确的，尽管联合国新闻发布站点确实能够查阅到关于名单可能的更新，但由于联合国新闻站是综合性发布的，普通浏览的情况下根本无法定位与制裁名单相关的消息。不过，关于这一问题，外交部已经在随后的通知函件中作出了修正，参见外交部文件：《关于更新联合国安理会1267委员会制裁名单的通知》，外发〔2010〕
    12号，2010年3月19日。《1267（1999）号和1989（2011）号决议所设委员会拟订并维持的基地组织及其有关联的个人、集团、企业和实体的名单》http://www.un.org/chinese/sc/committees/1267/consolist.shtml,访问日期2012年2月18日。
    ⑤外交部文件：《外交部关于联合国安理会制裁阿富汗委员会将“东突厥斯坦伊斯兰运动”列入受制裁实体名单的通知》，外发〔2002〕25号，2002年9月17日。
    ①参见中国银监会办公厅文件：《中国银监会办公厅关于转发外交部执行联合国安理会第1973号决议的通知》，银监办发〔2011〕109号，2011年4月12日。
    ②中国银监会办公厅文件：《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行账户管理有效执行联合国相关制裁决议的通知》，银监办发〔2010〕12号，2010年1月11日。
    ③中国银监会办公厅文件：《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行账户管理有效执行联合国相关制裁决议的通知》，银监办发〔2010〕12号，2010年1月11日。
    ①中国银监会文件：《中国银监会关于印发<银行业金融机构国别风险管理指引>的通知》，银监发〔2010〕45号，2010年6月8日。
    ②中国人民银行：《中国人民银行执行外交部<关于执行安理会有关决议通知>的通知》，银发〔2010〕165号，2010年6月11日。
    ①该执行通知所称“控制客户的自然人”和“交易的实际受益人”包括但不限于以下两类人员：一是公司实际控制人；二是未被客户披露，但实际控制着金融交易过程或最终享有相关经济利益的人员（被代理人除外）。
    ①行政函件的效力和地位问题将在下文详述。
    ①例如我国《对外贸易法》第17条规定：“国家对与裂变、聚变物质或者衍生此类物质的物质有关的货物、技术进出口，以及与武器、弹药或者其他军用物资有关的进出口，可以采取任何必要的措施，维护国家安全。”另见商务部：《两用物项和技术进出口许可证管理办法》，2009年5月13日。
    ②联合国安理会第1298（2000）号决议，S/RES/1298(2000)，2000年5月18日。
    ③海关总署文件：《海关总署转发外交部<关于执行联合国安理会第1298号决议的通知>的通知》，2000年7月4日。
    ④海关总署文件：《关于转发<关于执行联合国安理会第918号决议的通知>的通知》，1994年6月2日。
    ①夏军：《论行政规范性文件及其效力》，载《湖北行政学院学报》2003年第5期，第38页。
    ②黄风：《联合国安理会金融制裁措施的国内法实施程序》，载《法学》2006年第4期，第63页。
    ①中华人民共和国外交部主要职责，http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/chn/pds/wjb/zyzz/,访问日期2012年2月20日。
    ②这一点从实践中对外交部通知函的转发单位也可以得到验证。根据笔者收集到的公开资料，在目前国务院组成部门中，仅有交通运输部以及中国人民银行进行过转发和规则制定，国务院直属机构中只有海关总署、国务院直属事业单位中只有证监会和银监会进行过转发和执行措施制定。
    ①具体而言，包括中国人民银行上海总部；各分行、营业管理部；各省会（首府）城市中心支行、副省级城市中心支行；国家开发银行、各政策性银行、国有商业银行、股份制商业银行以及中国邮政储蓄银行。
    ②这9份报告分别是：《中国执行联合国安全理事会第1718（2006）号决议报告》，S/AC.49/2006/21，2008年1月30日；《中国执行联合国安理会第1874（2009）号决议报告》，S/AC.49/2009/23，2009年8月4日；《中国执行安全理事会第1857（2008）号决议的报告》，S/AC.43/2009/9，2009年4月15日；《中国执行安理会第1896号决议的报告》，S/AC.43/2010/6，2010年7月6日；《中国执行安理会第1970（2011）号决议报告》，S/AC.52/2011/27，2011年7月7日；《中国执行安理会第1737号决议报告》，S/AC.50/2007/22，2007年3月5日；《中国执行安理会第1747号决议报告》，S/AC.50/2007/99，2007年6月5日；《中国执行安理会第1803号决议情况报告》，S/AC.50/2008/18，2008年5月13日；《中国执行安理会第1929号决议报告》，S/AC.50/2010/32，2010年8月28日。
    ①香港法例第537章，《联合国制裁条例》第3条，宪报编号：1997年第125号，1997年7月18日。
    ②参见香港律政司，双语法例资料系统，http://translate.legislation.gov.hk/gb/www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_ind.nsf/WebView?OpenAgent&vwpg=CurAllChinDoc*534*100*534.1#534.1,访问日期2012年2月20日。
    ③参见《2011年联合国制裁（利比亚）规例》第4条，宪报编号L.N.114（2011），2011年6月30日。
    ④参见《2011年联合国制裁（利比亚）规例》第7条，宪报编号L.N.114（2011），2011年6月30日。
    ⑤See Cheng Yan Ki Bonnie, Implementing Security Council Resolutions in Hong Kong: An Examination of the UnitedNations Sanctions Ordinance, Chinese Journal of International Law (2008), Vol.7, No.1, p.67.
    ①参见《2011年联合国制裁（利比亚）规例》第7条，宪报编号L.N.114（2011），2011年6月30日。
    ①See Cheng Yan Ki Bonnie, Implementing Security Council Resolutions in Hong Kong: An Examination of the UnitedNations Sanctions Ordinance, Chinese Journal of International Law (2008), Vol.7, No.1, p.67.
    ②立法会：《研究在香港实施联合国安全理事会就制裁事宜所作决议的小组委员会》，档号：CB(1)2251/04-05(01)，2005年8月。
    ③立法会：《研究在香港实施联合国安全理事会就制裁事宜所作决议的小组委员会》，档号：CB(1)2251/04-05(01)，2005年8月。
    ④立法会：《商务及经济发展局局长就香港实施联合国安全理事会议决的制裁事宜的现行安排休会待续议案的发言全文》，参见http://sc.edb.gov.hk/gb/www.cedb.gov.hk/chi/speech/2010/pr08072010.htm,访问日期2012年2月20日。
    ⑤如果在安理会的制裁决议中明确规定了制裁措施的生效时间的情况下，例如安理会第1591（2005）号决议中规定旅行限制以及资金冻结的“措施在本决议通过满30日后生效”，三个月的时间相对而言则较为滞后。参见安理会第1591（2005）号决议，S/RES/1591（2005），2005年3月29日。不过，在执行该项决议的过程中，香港特区政府收到外交部通知函件时即超过30天的期限，行政长官依据《制裁条例》制定规例耗费了两个月的时间。如前文国别研究所述，从目前世界各国的实践来看，三个月的时间差已经属于较为高效的范
    ①唐颖侠：《国际法与国内法的关系及国际条约在中国国内法中的适用》，载《社会科学战线》2003年第1期，第179页。
    ②参见唐颖侠：《国际法与国内法的关系及国际条约在中国国内法中的适用》，载《社会科学战线》2003年第1期，第179页。
    ③张卫彬：《论国际习惯法在我国入宪》，载《时代法学》2009年第1期。
    ④参见，例如：罗国强：《论国际条约的国内适用问题》，载《兰州学刊》2010年第6期；杨泽伟：《论国际法在我国国内法上的效力》，载《河北法学》1996年第5期；杨炼：《国际法与国内法关系之宪政模式比较》，载《重庆邮电学院学报（社会科学版）》，2003年第4期；唐颖侠：《国际法与国内法的关系及国际条约在中国国内法中的适用》，载《社会科学战线》2003年第1期；刘焱：《国际条约的适用与我国宪法规范》，载，《人大研究》2003年第12期。
    ①肖冰：《论我国条约适用法律制度的构建》，载《国际经济法论丛》第5卷。
    ②杨炼：《国际法与国内法关系之宪政模式比较》，载《重庆邮电学院学报（社会科学版）》，2003年第4期，第49页。
    ③肖冰：《论我国条约适用法律制度的构建》，载《国际经济法论丛》第5卷。
    ①肖冰：《论我国条约适用法律制度的构建》，载《国际经济法论丛》第5卷。
    ②高晓力：《国际条约在涉外民商事审判中的适用》，载《人民法院报》2007年2月13日。
    ①See Cheng Yan Ki Bonnie, Implementing Security Council Resolutions in Hong Kong: An Examination of the UnitedNations Sanctions Ordinance, Chinese Journal of International Law (2008), Vol.7, No.1, p.90
    ①立法会：《商务及经济发展局局长就香港实施联合国安全理事会议决的制裁事宜的现行安排休会待续议案的发言全文》，参见http://sc.edb.gov.hk/gb/www.cedb.gov.hk/chi/speech/2010/pr08072010.htm,访问日期2012年2月20日。
    ①Sec.2(2), Art und Ausma von Beschr nkungen und Handlungspflichten, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.
    ②中央机构编制委员会办公室文件：《外交部的职责》。
    ③参见国务院办公厅：《国务院办公厅关于印发外交部职能配置、内设机构和人员编制方案的通知》，国办发〔1994〕2号，1994年1月4日。
    ①Section5, Trading with the Enemy Act,50U.S.C. App., Act Oct.6,1917, Ch.106,40Stat.411.
    ②Presidential Proclamation No.2039of6March1933,48Stat.1689; No.2040of9March1933,48Stat.1691.
    ③The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Title II of Pub.L.95-223,91Stat.1626, October28,1977.
    ④Sec.2(1), Art und Ausma von Beschr nkungen und Handlungspflichten, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“Soweit indiesem Gesetz Beschr nkungen zugelassen sind, kann durch Rechtsverordnung vorgeschrieben werden, dassRechtsgesch fte und Handlungen allgemein oder unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen:1. einer Genehmigungbedürfen oder;2. verboten sind.”
    ⑤Sec.5, Erfüllung zwischenstaatlicher Vereinbarungen, Au enwirtschaftsgesetz.“Zur Erfüllung zwischenstaatlicherVereinbarungen, denen die gesetzgebenden K rperschaften in der Form eines Bundesgesetzes zugestimmt haben,k nnen Rechtsgesch fte und Handlungen im Au enwirtschaftsverkehr beschr nkt und bestehende Beschr nkungenaufgehoben werden.”
    ⑥See, e.g., Charter of the United Nations (Sanctions-Eritrea) Regulations2010, F2011C00256, SLI2010No.32Regulations as amended, taking into account amendments up to Charter of the United Nations LegislationAmendment Regulations2011(No.1), Administered by: Foreign Affairs and Trade, Prepared18May2011by OLDP.Article9(4):“Section15.1of the Criminal Code applies to an offence under section27of the Act that relates to acontravention of this regulation.”
    ①Martin Scheinin, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamentalfreedoms while countering terrorism, UN.Doc. A/61/267,16August2006.
    ②例如，在1993年安理会针对前南斯拉夫联盟制裁的第820号决议规定，“提醒各国亟须严格执行根据《宪章》第七章规定的措施，并呼吁各国控告违反第713（1991）、757（1992）、787（1992）号决议和本决议规定的措施的个人和实体，并处以适当的刑罚”。另见安理会第841（1993）号决议，第864（1993）号决议，第1295（1999）号决议，第1267（1999）号决议以及第1333（2000）号决议。按照布莱克法律词典对“penalty”的解释，指，“对违法者所施加的惩罚，通常以徒刑或罚金的形式，主要指刑事犯罪。”因此，尽管制裁决议往往缺乏足够的定义，但是从安理会上述制裁决议的文意上而言，应当意图针对制裁目标要求各成员国施加刑事处罚。See Black's Law Dictionary,8thed.2004, p.3588.
    ③See Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Collective Responses to Illegal Acts in International Law: United Nations Action in theQuestion of South Rhodesia, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,1990, p.557.
    ①UN Doc. S/RES/418(1977), November4,1977.
    ②UN Doc. S/PV.2046(1977), November4,1977.
    ③David Cortright and George A. Lopez, The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UN Strategies in the1990s, p.1.
    ①United Nations Security Council Resolution757,30May1992.
    ②S/AC27/1992/CRP7/Rev.3, para.8.
    ③Laurie Rosensweig, United Nations Sanctions: Creating a More Effective Tool for the Enforcement of InternationalLaw, Austrian Journal of Public International Law, vol.48, pp.161-195(1995).
    ①R. Renwick, ECONOMIC SANCTIONS, Cambridge, MA,1981, at45.
    1. United Nations Charter
    2. European Community Treaty
    3. OAU Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism
    4. ASEAN Declaration on Joint Action to Counter Terrorism
    1. UN Doc. S/11178/REV.1(OR), Sixth Report of the Security Council CommitteeEstablished in Pursuance of Resolution253(1968) Concerning the Question ofSouthern Rhodesia,9January1974;
    2. UN Doc. A/50/60, Supplement to an Agenda for Peace: position paper of theSecretary-General on the occasion of the50thanniversary of the United Nations,January25,1995;
    3. UN Doc. A/53/1, Kofi Annan, Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Workof the Organization, August27,1998;
    4. UN Doc. A/54/280, Regional Hearings in the Preparation for the MillenniumAssembly of the United Nations: Hearing Held for the Region of the Economic andSocial Commission for Western Asia at Beirut on23and24may1999, January20,2000;
    5. UN Doc. A/56/10, Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of itsFifty-third Session, August,2001;
    6. UN Doc. A/60/825, Report of the Secretary-General, Uniting Against Terrorism:Recommendations for a Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy,27April2006.
    1. Council Regulation (EEC) No990/93of26April1993concerning trade between theEuropean Economic Community and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia andMontenegro)
    2. Council Regulation (EC) No2580/2001of27December2001on SpecificRestrictive Measures Directed against Certain Persons and Entities with A View toCombating Terrorism
    3. Council Regulation (EC) No.881/2002of27May2002, Imposing Certain SpecificRestrictive Measures Directed against Certain Persons and Entities Associated withUsama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida Network and the Taliban, and Repealing CouncilRegulation (EC) No467/2001Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods and Servicesto Afghanistan, Strengthening the Flight Ban and Extending the Freeze of Funds andOther Financial Resources in Respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan.
    1. Argentine: Constitution of the Argentine Nation
    2. Austria: Bundes-Verfassungsgesetz, B-VG
    3. Columbia: Constitution of Columbia
    4. Costa Rica: Constitution of Costa Rica
    5. Cyprus: Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus
    6. Czech Republic: Constitution of the Czech Republic, amended by Act No.395/2001Coll.
    7. El Salvador: Constitution of the Republic of El Salvador
    8. Germany: Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany
    9. Honduras: Constitution of Honduras
    10. Italy: Constitution of the Italian Republic
    11. Jordan: The Constitution of The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
    12. Korea: The Constitution of the Republic of Korea
    13. Netherland: The Constitution of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
    14. Poland: The Constitution of the Republic of Poland of2nd April,1997
    15. Spain: Spain Constitution sanctioned by His Majesty the King on August27,1992
    16.《中华人民共和国宪法》
    17.《日本国憲法》
    1)《中华人民共和国对外贸易法》
    2)《中华人民共和国缔结条约程序法》
    1)1994年6月2日海关总署《关于转发<关于执行联合国安理会第918号决议的通知>的通知》
    2)2000年7月4日《海关总署转发外交部<关于执行联合国安理会第1298号决议的通知>的通知》
    3)2001年5月10日《外交部关于执行联合国安理会第1343号决议的通知》
    4)2001年9月30日《外交部关于执行联合国安理会第1373号决议的通知》，
    5)2001年10月17日《外交部关于执行安理会第1267和1333号决议对有关个人和实体实施金融制裁的通知》
    6)2002年9月17日《外交部关于联合国安理会制裁阿富汗委员会将“东突厥斯坦伊斯兰运动”列入受制裁实体名单的通知》
    7)2008年1月1日《外交部关于执行联合国安理会第1803号决议的通知》
    8)2010年1月11日《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行账户管理有效执行联合国相关制裁决议的通知》
    9)2010年6月8日《中国银监会关于印发<银行业金融机构国别风险管理指引>的通知》
    10)2010年6月11日中国证监会广东监管局《关于执行联合国安理会相关决议的通知》
    11)2010年6月11日《中国人民银行执行外交部<关于执行安理会有关决议通知>的通知》
    12)2011年4月12日《中国银监会办公厅关于转发外交部执行联合国安理会第1973号决议的通知》
    13)2011年5月25日《关于执行联合国安理会第1980号决议的通知》
    14)2011年7月4日中国证监会办公厅《关于转发外交部<关于执行联合国安理会第1980号决议的通知>的通知》
    15)2012年1月13日交通运输部国际合作司《关于执行联合国安理会第2016号决议的通知》
    1)1997年7月18日香港法例第537章，《联合国制裁条例》，宪报编号：1997年第125号
    2)2007年5月18日香港立法会内务委员会会议文件：《研究在香港实施联合国安全理事会就制裁事宜所作决议的小组委员会报告所提出主要事项的摘要》，立法会CB(1)1586/06-07号文件，档号：CB1/HS/1/04
    3)2005年8月立法会：《研究在香港实施联合国安全理事会就制裁事宜所作决议的小组委员会》，档号：CB(1)2251/04-05(01)
    1) United Nations Participation Act
    2) Trading With the Enemy Act of1917
    3) International Emergency Economic Powers Act
    4) Export Administration Act
    5) Foreign Assets Control Regulation
    6) Arms Export Control Act
    1) Executive Order11322, Relating to trade and other transactions involving SouthernRhodesia, January5,1967
    2) Executive Order11419, Relating to trade and other transactions involving SouthernRhodesia, July30,1968
    3) Executive Order12170, November15,1979
    4) Executive Order13129, Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with theTaliban, July7,1999
    5) Executive Order13224, Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions WithPersons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism, September25,2001.
    1) Trading with the Enemy Act,1939
    2) Immigration and Asylum Act1999
    1) Act on the Implementation of Certain Obligations of Finland as a Member of theUnited Nations, No659/1967, Issued at Helsinki on29December1967
    2) Act on the Enforcement of Certain Obligations of Finland as a Member of the UnitedNations and of the European Union, title amended by Act No705/1997
    Law on the Implementation of Decisions of the United Nations Security Council,1995
    Lag om vissa internationella sanktioner (Act on Certain International Sanctions),1999
    Bundesgesetz über die Durchsetzung von internationalen Sanktionen (Embargogesetz,EmbG),22M rz2002
    1) Au enwirtschaftsgesetz
    2) Regulation Implementing the Foreign Trade and Payments Act (Foreign Trade andPayments Regulation–AWV) of18December1986
    3) Regulation of9August1990
    1) Executive Order of7August1990
    2) Executive Order of26April1993
    1)《外国為替及び外国貿易法》
    2)《出入国管理及び難民認定法》
    1) Ley12838/1946, Aprobando ratificación a la Carta de las Naciones Unidas
    2) Ley19846/1972, Aprueba una resolución adoptada por el Consejo de Seguridad delas Naciones Unidas relacionada con el libre comercio con la República de Rhodesiadel Sur
    3) Ley24080, Tratados Y Convenciones Internacionales, Establécese la publicación enel Boletín Oficial de actos y hechos referidos a tratados o convencionesinternacionales en los que la Nación Argentina sea parte
    1) Decreto Nacional1.560/90, Ocupacion del Estado de Kuwait por la Republica deIrak (Occupation of the State of Kuwait by the Republic of Iraq), Buenos Aires,August13,1990
    2) Decreto Nacional2.067/90, Aprobacion de la Resolucion del Consejo de Seguridadpor la Cual se Amplian las Sanciones Contra la Republica de Irak (Approval of theResolution of the Security Council which will Increase the Sanctions against theRepublic of Iraq), Buenos Aires,2October1990
    3) Decreto Nacional2.798/93, Aprobacion de la Resolucion787del Consejo deSeguridad de las Naciones Unidas Sobre la Guerra de Bosnia (Approval ofResolution787of the Security Council of the United Nations on the Bosnian War),Buenos Aires, December30,1993
    4) Decreto Nacional784/94, Restricciones Acordadas por el Consejo de SeguridadInternacional de las Naciones Unidas a la Republica de Haiti (Restrictions Agreedby the Security Council of the United Nations to the Republic of Haiti), BuenosAires, May18,1994
    5) Decreto Nacional582/96, Seguridad Internacional. Aprobacion de una Resoluciondel Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas (Adoption of a resolution of theSecurity Council of the United Nations), Buenos Aires, May31,1996
    6) Decreto Nacional71/99, Seguridad Internacional (International Security), BuenosAires, February5,1999
    1. The S.S. Lotus Case (France v. Turkey), P.C.I.J.,1927
    2. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United Kingdom, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. UnitedStates of America, Case Concerning Questions of Interpretation and Application ofthe1971Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie
    3. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, I.C.J. Reports1986
    4. Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro, ICJ Reports1993
    5. Prosecutor v. Tadi, Appeal on Jurisdiction, Case IT-94-I-AR72,2October1995
    6. Case C-177/95, Ebony Maritime SA and Loten Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Prefetto dellaProvincia di Brindisi and Others,27February1997, ECR I-1114
    7. Agrim Behrami and Bekir Behrami v. France, Ruzhdi Saramati v. France, Norwayand Germany, European Court of Human Rights,2May2007
    8. Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of theEuropean Union and Commission of the European Communities
    9. Ahmed Ali Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council of theEuropean Union and Commission of the European Communities
    10. R. v. HM Treasury and Bank of England, ex parte Centro-Com Srl.,[1997]1CMLR555
    11. Ebony Maritime SA v. Prefetto Della Provincia di Brindisi,[1997]2CMLR24
    12. Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Council and Commission, Court of First Instance,21September2005, ECR II-3649
    13. Yusuf and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council and Commission, Courtof First Instance,21September2005, ECR II-3533.
    14. Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department ofEconomic Affairs, Administrative Appeal Judgment, Switzerland, Federal Tribunal,14November2007
    1) Whitney et al. v. Robertson, Collector, United States Supreme Court
    2) Diggs v. Dent, Decision of the District Court for the District of Columbia
    3) Charles Coles Diggs et al., Appellants, v. George P. Shultz, Secretary of Treasury, etal., United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
    4) United States of America v. David S. McKeeve, No.96-2273, United States Court ofAppeals, First Circuit
    5) Reid v. Covert, United States Supreme Court
    1) Kuwait Airways Corporation v. Iraqi Airways Company and Others,[2002] UKHL19,16May2002
    2) Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom&Ors., Court of Appeal-Queen's Bench Division, December17,2002
    3) R (on the application of Al-Jedda) v. the Secretary of State of Defense, Court ofAppeal,[2007] UKHL58, EWCA Civ.327,29March2006
    4) A, K, M, Q&G v. H.M. Treasury, The High Court of Justice, Queen's BenchDivision Administrative Court,[2008] EWHC869(Admin),24April2008
    5) Her Majesty’s Treasury (Respondent) v. Mohammed Jabar Ahmed and others (FC)(Appellants), Her Majesty’s Treasury (Respondent) v. Mohammed al-Ghabra (FC)(Appellant), R (on the application of Hani El Sayed Sabaei Youssef)(Respondent) v.Her Majesty’s Treasury (Appellant)(No.2),[2010] UKSC5,4February2010
    Nabil Sayadi and Patricia Vinck v. Belgian State, Tribunal de premiere instance deBuxelles4thCh.,2February2005
    Abdelrazik v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs),[2010]1FCR267
    Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret AS v. Minister for Transport, Energy andCommunications and others, Irish High Court
    1) Miguel A. Ekmekdjian, c. Gerardo Sofovich, Buenos Aires, julio7de1992
    2) Fibraca Constructora S.C.A. c. Comisión Técnica Mixta Salto Grande, CorteSuprema de Justicia de la Nación,7July,1993
    3) Unilever NV c. Instituto Nacional de la Propiedad Industrial
    1.[奥]阿·菲德罗斯等著，李浩培译：《国际法》，商务印书馆1981年版；
    2.[英]劳特派特修订：《奥本海国际法》，王铁崖、陈体强译，商务印书馆1981年版；
    3.[荷]亨利·范·马尔赛文、格尔·范·德·唐：《成文宪法的比较研究》，华夏出版社1987年版；
    4.[美]菲利斯·本尼斯著，陈遥遥、张筱春译，《发号施令：美国是如何控制联合国的》，新华出版社1999年版；
    5.[德]沃尔夫冈·格拉夫·魏智通主编，吴越等译：《国际法》，法律出版社2002年版。
    1.慕亚平、周建海、吴费：《当代国际法论》，北京：法律出版社1998年版；
    2.莫纪宏：《现代宪法的逻辑基础》，北京：法律出版社2001年版；
    3.贺其治：《国家责任法及案例浅析》，法律出版社2003年版；
    4.李寿平：《现代国际法律责任制度》，武汉大学出版社2003年版；
    5.刘达人、袁国钦：《国际法发达史》，中国方正出版社2007年版。
    1.梁西主编：《国际组织法（总论）》（修订第五版），武汉大学出版社2001年版；
    2.余民才主编：《国际法专论》，中信出版社2003年版；
    3.李广民、欧斌主编：《国际法》，清华大学出版社2006年版。
    1)温树斌：《国际法强制执行问题研究》，武汉大学2009年博士学位论文，；
    2)刘衡：《国际法之治：从国际法治到全球治理》，武汉大学2011年博士学位论文。
    1)宋云城：《条约在日本国内法体系中之地位的研究－以日本国宪法及国际人权条约为核心》，淡江大学日本研究所2005年硕士学位论文
    2)孙鹤：《联合国实施国际法机制雏论》，华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文
    3)岳同珍：《当代国际法治研究》，山东大学2011年硕士学位论文
    1.陈海明：《卡迪案及其对国际法意义的分析》，载《太平洋学报》2010年第1期；
    2.陈卫东：《论条约在美国国内适用中的“后法优先规则”》，载《甘肃政法学院学报》2009年第1期；
    3.杜涛：《美国单边域外经济制裁的国际法效力问题探讨》，载《湖南社会科学》2010年第2期；
    4.甘开鹏、陆宁：《欧盟对外经济制裁政策评析》，载《经济问题探索》2009年第10期；
    5.顾婷：《安理会反恐“聪明制裁”之困境及其出路》，载《法学》2011年第10期；
    6.胡剑萍、阮建平：《美国域外经济制裁及其冲突探析》，载《世界经济与政治》2006年第5期；
    7.黄风：《联合国安理会金融制裁措施的国内法实施程序》，载《法学》2006年第4期；
    8.黄瑶：《国际人权法与国内法的关系》，载《外国法译评》1999年第3期；
    9.黄瑶：《习惯国际法与美国国内法的冲突问题》，载《中山大学学报（社会科学版）》1997年11月增刊；
    10.简基松：《联合国经济制裁的“人道主义例外”法律机制初探》，载《法学评论》2004年第3期；
    11.简基松：《联合国制裁之定性问题研究》，载《法律科学》2005年第6期；
    12.罗国强：《论国际条约的国内适用问题》，载《兰州学刊》2010年第6期；
    13.马贺：《欧盟区域刑事合作进程中的制度缺陷与对策——从<马斯特里赫特条约>到<里斯本条约>》，载《犯罪研究》2010年第5期；
    14.唐颖侠：《国际法与国内法的关系及国际条约在中国国内法中的适用》，载《社会科学战线》2003年第1期；
    15.肖冰：《论我国条约适用法律制度的构建》，载《国际经济法论丛》第5卷；
    16.辛崇阳：《国际条约在日本国内法体系中的地位——兼对“砂川事件”的透视》，载《海南大学学报人文社会科学版》2000年第3期；
    17.杨炼：《国际法与国内法关系之宪政模式比较》，载《重庆邮电学院学报（社会科学版）》，2003年第4期；
    18.易波、李玉洁：《美国对外经济制裁研究》，载《特区经济》2008年第9期；
    19.余敏友：《论世贸组织争端解决机制的强制执法措施》，载《暨南学报》2008年第1期；
    20.张乃根：《论条约批准的宪法程序修改》，载《政治与法律》2004年第1期；
    21.张卫彬：《论国际习惯法在我国入宪》，载《时代法学》2009年第1期；
    22.赵冠峰：《略论国际制裁的困境与对策——对“伊拉克悖论”的思考》，载《同济大学学报（社会科学版）》2008年第2期；
    1. Baehr, P. R. and Gordenker, Leon. The United Nations: Reality and Ideal, PalgraveMacmillan,2005.
    2. Brierly, James L. The Law of Nations: An Introduction to the International Law ofPeace, Clarendon Press,1949.
    3. Brown-John, C. Lloyd. Multilateral Sanctions in International Law, Praeger,1975.
    4. Cortright, David and Lopez, George A. The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UNStrategies in the1990s, Lynne Rienner Publishers,2000.
    5. De Wet, Erika. The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council,Oxford University Press,2004.
    6. Doxey, M. Economic Sanctions and International Enforcement, Oxford UniversityPress,1971.
    7. Doxey, Margaret P. International Sanctions in Contemporary Perspective, MacMillanPress,1987.
    8. Gowlland-Debbas, Vera. Collective Responses to Illegal Acts in International Law:United Nations Action in the Question of Southern Rhodesia, Martinus NijhoffPublishers,1990.
    9. Higgins, Rosalyn. The Development of International Law Through the PoliticalOrgans of the United Nations, Oxford University Press,1963.
    10. Highley, A. E. The First Sanctions Experiment (A Study of League Procedures),Geneva research centre,1938.
    11. Kelsen, Hans. The Law of the United Nations, Frederick A. Praeger, Inc.,1950.
    12. Kelsen, Hans. The law of the United Nations: A Critical Analysis of Its FundamentalProblems (with Supplement), The Lawbook Exchange Ltd.,2000.
    13. Lowe, Vaughan. International Law, Oxford University Press,2007.
    14. Malanczuk, Peter. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law, Routledge,1997.
    15. Manusama, Kenneth. The United Nations Security Council in the Post-Cold War Era:Applying the Principle of Legality, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2006.
    16. Shaw, Malcolm N. International Law, Cambridge University Press,2005.
    17. White, N. D. Keeping the Peace: the United Nations and the Maintenance ofInternational Peace and Security, Manchester University Press,1997.
    18. Barberis, J. The Formation of the International Law, de R. Depalma,1994.
    19. Martinez, M. Martin. National Sovereignty and International Organizations, KluwerLaw International,1996.
    20. Lowenfeld, Andreas F., Newman, Lawrence W. and Walker, John M. RevolutionaryDays: The Iran Hostage Crisis and the Hague Claims Tribunal: A Look Back, JurisPublishing,1998.
    21. Lowenfeld, Andreas F. Trade Controls for Political Ends, Matthew Bender Publisher,1983.
    22. Ress, Hans-Konrad. The Trade Embargo: International Relations, EuropeanIntegration and Foreign Trade Law Framework, and Compensation Practices,Springer,2000.
    23. Maunz, Theodor and Dürig, Günter. Grundgesetz: Kommentar (Basic Law:Commentary), C.H. Beck,1994.
    24. Hartley, Trevor C. The Foundations of European Community Law, OxfordUniversity Press,2007.
    1. Bethlehem, D. L. ed., The Kuwait Crisis: Sanctions and Their EconomicConsequences,1991.
    2. Delbrück, Jost ed., The Future of International Law Enforcement: New Scenarios-New Law? Proceedings of an International Symposium of the Kiel Institute ofInternational Law,1993.
    3. Eeckhout, Piet and Xenopoulos, X. L. eds., External Relations of the EU and theMember States: Competence, Mixed Agreements, International Responsibility andEffects of International Law,2006.
    4. Goodrich, Leland M., Hambro, Edvard and Simons, Anne Patricia eds., Charter ofthe United Nations: Commentary and Document,1970.
    5. Gowlland-Debbas, Vera and Tehindrazanarivelo, Djacoba Liva eds., NationalImplementation of United Nations Sanctions: A Comparative Study,2004.
    6. Paxman, John and Boggs, George eds., United Nations: A Reassessment-Sanctions,Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Assistance,1973.
    7. Weiss, Thomas G., Cortright, David, Lopez, George A. and Minear, Larry eds.,Political Gain and Civilian Pain: Humanitarian Impacts of Economic Sanctions,1997.
    1. K lin, Walter. Implementing Treaties in Domestic Law: from “Pacta Sunt Servanda”to “Anything Goes”, in Gowlland-Debbas, Vera ed., Multilateral Treaty-Making,2000.
    2. Nossal, Kim Richard. Economic Sanctions in the League of Nations and the UnitedNations, in Leyton-Brown, David ed., The Utility of International EconomicSanctions,1986.
    3. Randelzhofer, Albrecht. Article2(4), in Simma, Bruno ed., The Charter of the UnitedNations: A Commentary,1995.
    4. Schrijver, N. J. The Use of Economic Sanctions by the UN Security Council: AnInternational Law Perspective, in Post, Harry H. G. ed., International EconomicLaw and Armed Conflict,1994.
    5. Tzanakopoulos, Antonios. Judicial Dialogue in Multilevel Governance: The Impactof the Solange Argument, in Fauchald, Ole Kristian and Nollkaemper, Andre eds.,Unity or Fragmentation of International Law: The Role of International andNational Tribunals,2010.
    1. Barrett, Scott. Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements, OxfordEconomic Papers, vol.46,1994:878-894.
    2. Benvenisti, Eyal. Judicial Misgivings Regarding the Application of InternationalLaw: an Analysis of Attitudes of National Courts, European Journal of InternationalLaw, vol.4,1993.
    3. Birnie, Patricia. The Development of International Environmental Law, BritishJournal of International Studies, vol.3,1977:169-190.
    4. Blewitt, Graham T., Crawford, James R. and Meron, Theodor. The Necessity forEnforcement of International Humanitarian Law, Proceedings of the AnnualMeeting (American Society of International Law), vol.89,1995:298-304.
    5. Bonnie, Cheng Yan Ki. Implementing Security Council Resolutions in Hong Kong:An Examination of the United Nations Sanctions Ordinance, Chinese Journal ofInternational Law, vol.7,2008.
    6. Brudner, Alan. The Domestic Enforcement of International Covenants on HumanRights: A Theoretical Framework, The University of Toronto Law Journal, vol.35,1985:219-254.
    7. Bühler, Micha. Choice of Swiss Law No Escape Route To Avoid Application ofInternational Sanctions, Walder Wyss&Partners Attorneys at Law, vol.29,2001.
    8. Burci, G. L. The Indirect Effect of United Nations Sanctions on Third States: TheRole of Article50of the UN Charter, African Yearbook of International Law, vol.12,1995.
    9. Burgenthal, Thomas. Self-Executing and Non-Self-Executing Treaties in Nationaland International Law, Recueil des Cours. Academie de Droit International de laHaye, vol.235,1992.
    10. Carver, Jeremy and Hulsmann, Jenine. The Role of Article50of the UN Charter inthe Search for International Peace and Security, The International and ComparativeLaw Quarterly, vol.49,2000.
    11. Charnovitz, Steve. Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions, American Journal ofInternational Law, vol.95,2001.
    12. Christenson, Gordon A. Review: The Jurisprudence of Sanctions in InternationalLaw, Human Rights Quarterly, vol.31,2009:1086-1134.
    13. Curran, Patrick D. Universalism, Relativism, and Private Enforcement of CustomaryInternational Law, Chicago Journal of International Law, vol.5,2004:311.
    14. D., D. S. Enforcement of International Human Rights in the Federal Courts afterFilartiga v. Pena-Irala, Virginia Law Review, vol.67,1981:1379-1393.
    15. Davidson, Nicholas. U.S. Secondary Sanctions: The U.K. and EU Response, StetsonLaw Review, vol.27,1997.
    16. Deflem, Mathieu. Global Rule of Law or Global Rule of Law Enforcement?International Police Cooperation and Counterterrorism, Annals of the AmericanAcademy of Political and Social Science, vol.603,2006:240-251.
    17. Dempsey, Paul Stephen. Compliance and Enforcement in International Law:Achieving Global Uniformity in Aviation Safety, North Carolina Journal ofInternational Law and Commercial Regulation, vol.30,2004:2.
    18. Dickerson, Claire Moore. Future of International Law and Development: Flyingunder the Radar, North Carolina Journal of International Law&CommercialRegulation, vol.35,2010.
    19. Doktori, Daniel. Minding the Gap: International Law and Regional Enforcement inSierra Leone, Florida Jounal of International Law, vol.20,2008:329.
    20. Fischer, Dana D. and Watson, J. S. The Limited Utility of International Law in theProtection of Human Rights, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Societyof International Law), vol.74,1980:1-6.
    21. Fischer, Dana D. and Watson, J. S. The Limited Utility of International Law in theProtection of Human Rights, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Societyof International Law), vol.74,1980:1-6.
    22. Fitzmaurice, G. G. The Foundations of the Authority of International Law and theProblem of Enforcement, The Modern Law Review, vol.19,1956:1-13.
    23. Fitzmaurice, Gerald. The General Principles of International Law Considered fromthe Standpoint of the Rule of Law, Recueil des Cours, vol.92,1957.
    24. Gowlland-Debbas, Vera. Security Council Enforcement Action and Issues of StateResponsibility, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol.43,1994.
    25. Gubbay, Anthony R. The Protection and Enforcement of Fundamental Human Rights:The Zimbabwean Experience, Human Rights Quarterly, vol.19,1997:227-254.
    26. Guillaume, Gilbert. The Introduction and Implementation in the Legal State of theResolutions of the Security Council of the United Nations Adopted under ChapterVII of the Charter, International Journal of Comparative Law, vol.50,1998.
    27. Hassan, Farooq. The Doctrine of Incorporation: New Vistas for the Enforcement ofInternational Human Rights? Human Rights Quarterly, vol.5,1983:68-86.
    28. Hilal, Leila and Pangalangan, Raul C. Rethinking the Enforcement of Human Rights,Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), vol.93,1999:243-245.
    29. Hilpold, Peter. The Duty to Protect and the Reform of the United Nations-A NewStep in the Development of International Law, Max Planck Yearbook of UnitedNations Law, vol.10,2008.
    30. Hixson, Kathleen. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Under the Third Restatement ofForeign Relations Law of the United States, Fordham International Law Journal, vol.12,1988.
    31. Hudsion, Manley O. The Report of the Assembly of the League of Nations on theSino-JapanDispute, American Journal of International Law, vol.27,1933.
    32. International Law. Trusts. Reparation Treaty Moneys as a Trust Fund. Enforcementagainst Sovereign, Columbia Law Review, vol.33,1933:163-165.
    33. Jr. Reiss, Albert J. Review: Compliance without Coercion, Michigan Law Review,vol.83,1985:813-819.
    34. Kong, Qingjiang. Enforcement of WTO agreement in China: Illusion or Reality,Journal of World Trade, vol.35,2001.
    35. Lillich, Richard B. The Role of Domestic Courts in Enforcing International HumanRights Law, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of InternationalLaw), vol.74,1980:20-25.
    36. Lillich, Richard B. The Role of Domestic Courts in Enforcing International HumanRights Law, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of InternationalLaw), vol.74,1980:20-25.
    37. Llopis, Ana Peyró. Coolective Security and the International Enforcement ofInternational Law: French and American Perspectives, Maine Law Review, vol.58,2006:544.
    38. Lowe, A. Vaughan. US Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: The Helms-Burton andD’Amato Acts, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol.46,1997.
    39. Manchak, Benjamin. Comprehensive Economic Sanctions, the Right to Development,and Constitutionally Impermissible Violations of International Law, Boston CollegeThird World Law Journal, vol.30,2010.
    40. Martenczuk, Bernd. The Security Council, the International Court and JudicialReview: What Lessons from Lockerbie? European Journal of International Law, vol.10,1999.
    41. Mayerfeld, Jamie. Who Shall Be Judge?: The United States, the InternationalCriminal Court, and the Global Enforcement of Human Rights, Human RightsQuarterly, vol.25,2003:93-129.
    42. Milde, Michael. Enforcement of Aviation Safety Standard-Problems of SafetyOversight, German Journal of Air and Space Law, vol.45,1996:3.
    43. Moore, John Norton. Enhancing Compliance With International Law: A NeglectedRemedy, Virginia Journal of International Law, vol.39,1999:881.
    44. Payandeh, Mehrdad and Sauer, Heiko. European Union: UN Sanctions and EUFundamental Rights, International Journal of Constitutional Law, vol.7,2009.
    45. Petrovi, Milan. The "Acts of Government" and the Legal Notion of Politics, FactaUniversitatis Series: Law and Politics, vol.9,2011.
    46. Portela, Clara. National Implementation of United Nations Sanctions: TowardsFragmentation, International Journal, vol.65,2009.
    47. Reith, Charles. International Authority and the Enforcement of Law, Transactions ofthe Grotius Society, vol.38,1952:109-124.
    48. Rostow, Eugene V. Until What? Enforcement Action or Collective Self-Defense? TheAmerican Journal of International Law, vol.85,1991:506-516.
    49. Scharf, Michael P. and Dorosin, Joshua L. Interpreting UN Sanctions: the Rulingsand Role of the Yugoslavia Sanctions Committee, Brooklyn Journal of InternationalLaw, vol.19,1993.
    50. Schweitzer, Thomas A. the United Nations as a Source of Domestic Law: CanSecurity Council Resolutions be Enforced in American Courts, Yale Studies inWorld Public Order, vol.4,1997.
    51. Shelton, Dinah. International Enforcement of Human Rights: Effectiveness andAlternatives, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of InternationalLaw), vol.74,1980:6-16.
    52. Tzanakopoulos, Antonios. From Interpretation to Defiance, Abdelrazik v. Canadaand United Nations Sanctions in Domestic Courts, Journal of International CriminalJustice, vol.8,2010.
    53. Van Alstine, Michael. The Universal Declaration and Developments in theEnforcement of International Human Rights in Domestic Law, Maryland Journal ofInternational Law, vol.24,2009:63.
    54. Van Schaack, Beth. International Law in the United States Legal System:Observance, Application, and Enforcement, Santa Clare Law Review, vol.45,2005:807.
    55. Vinuales, Jorge E. The Contribution of the International Court of Justice to theDevelopment of International Environmental Law: A Contemporary Assessment,Fordham International Law Journal, vol.32,2008.
    56. Wang, Guiguo. International Development Law in the Globalized World, JamesCook University Law Review, vol.13,2008.
    57. Warner, David P. Challeges to International Law Enforcement Cooperation for theUnited States in the Middle East and North Africa: Extradition and Its Alternatives,Villanova Law Review, vol.50,2005:479.
    58. Weiss, Edith Brown, Stewart, Richard, Murase, Shinya, Bodansky, Daniel, Glennon,Michael J., Tinker, Catherine and Kiss, Alexandre. New Developments inInternational Environmental Law, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (AmericanSociety of International Law), vol.85,1991:401-427.
    59. Weissbrodt, David. Human Rights Implementation and Fact-finding by InternationalOrganizations, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society ofInternational Law), vol.74,1980:17-20.
    60. Wood, Stepan. The New Global Environmental Standards, Proceedings of the AnnualMeeting (American Society of International Law), vol.93,1999:220-221.
    61. Wright, Quincy. Enforcement of International Law, American Society ofInternational Law Proceedings, vol.38,1944:77.
    62. Zyberi, Gentian. The Development and Interpretation of International Human Rightsand Humanitarian Law Rules and Principles through the Case-Law of theInternational Court of Justice, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, vol.25,2007.
    1. Iain Cameron, Targeted Sanctions and Legal Safeguards, Report to the SwedishForeign Office on Legal Safeguards and Targeted Sanctions, October2002
    2. Peter Wallensteen, Carina Staibano and Mikael Eriksson, Making Targeted SanctionsEffective: Guidelines for the Implementation of UN Policy Options, Results from theStockholm Process on the Implementation of Targeted Sanctions, UppsalaUniversity Department of Peace and Conflict Research,2003
    3. Targeted Financial Sanctions—Harmonizing National Legislation and RegulatoryPractices, Prepared by the Targeted Financial Sanctions Research Project at theWatson Institute for International Studies, Brown University
    Paul Conlon, Historical Note on the Issue of Oil Belonging to the Kuwait petroleumCompany in Aden, Collected Papers of Paul Conlon, Director of UN SecurityCouncil Sanctions Committee, University of Iowa Special Collections.