TBT协定中技术法规和标准“强制性”区分要素——以美国—金枪鱼案(Ⅱ)为例.pdfVIP

-142- 中国科技论坛 (2016 年9 月)第9 期 TBT 协定中技术法规和标准 强制性区分要素 一一-以美国一金枪鱼案( II )为例 李冬冬 (厦门大学法学院，福建厦门 36∞15) 摘 要:是否具有强制性是TBT 协定中技术法规和标准的关键区别。美国一全枪鱼案 (II) 中出现了 判定强制性的两种方法:形式主义解释路径和市场准入前提标准。本文认为，二者均以政府权力的 行使作为出发点，但在政府权力行使到何种程度时争端措施使其有了强制性这一问题上产生了分歧。前 者采取弹性标准，认为应当根据案情个案审查;后者采取刚性标准，认为只有当政府行为禁止不符合相 关要求的产品进入其国内市场时，该措施才具有强制性。相比之下，采取形式主义路径解择强制性， 区分技术法规和标准，更有利于打击监管保护主义，同时也不会必然侵蚀国家监管的自主权。 关键词:美国一全枪鱼案 (11) ;技术法规;技术标准;强制性 中图分类号: DF37 文献标识码:A Distinguishing Element of Mandatory Between Technical Regulation and Standard in the TBT Agreement on the Basis of US-Tuna (n) Li Dongdong (School of Law , Xiamen University , Xiamen 360015 , China) Abstract: 白le key distinction between technical regulation and standard in TBT Agreement is that the former is mandato巧， while the laUer is nol 咀lere 缸e two different methods ω 由e interpretation of mandatory in US-Tuna (Il): formalism approach and market accesss precondition standard. This paper shows that both of them take the exercise of govemment authority 笛 their starting point , how- ever ，由ey hold divergent views on the issue 由at when the disputed measure become mandatory becausè of the exercise of govemment authority. The formalism approach applies an elastic criterion to this issue which means 出at the DSB should consider all the facts on 由e basis of cωe by cωe; the market accesss precondition standard applies a rigid criteria , i. e. , only when the govemmental actions do not grant forei伊 products which do not meet the re甲lÌrements of the disputed meas山e the access to its domestic market