从“稀土案”看《中国入世议定书》条款解释的新发展-法学法硕专业毕业论文.pdfVIP

摘 要 2012 年，美国、欧盟和日本向 WTO 提交了对中国施加在稀土、钨、钼上的 出口限制措施的控诉，主要针对中国212 个海关商品编码和30 多种措施，以及 包括出口税、出口配额、最低出口价格要求、出口许可证要求、附加要求和程序 等数量限制监管措施。这一指控与2009 年的原材料案如出一辙。继中国入世之 后，《中国入世议定书》的地位、性质以及其条款的解释引起了众多的争议。在 “原材料案”中，中国被控违反了议定书中规定的义务，专家组和上诉机构认定 中国不能援引《关税与贸易总协定》第20 条的一般例外条款进行抗辩，最终中 国败诉。然而在最新的稀土案中，中方提出了新的论点，一定程度上获得了专家 组的认可，为中国以后的WTO 诉讼打开了新局面。本文将结合近几年WTO 争端解 决的案例，对条约解释方法的新发展做一个梳理。在分析总结原材料案报告的基 础上，对稀土案中中国新的诉讼策略和思维、专家组意见进行归纳和分析，以期 对《中国入世议定书》条款的解释的发展进行更加深入和全面的解读。 关键词：稀土，《入世议定书》，条约解释，例外条款 Abstract On 13 March 2012, the United States requested consultations with China with respect to Chinas restrictions on the export of various forms of rare earths, tungsten and molybdenum. The request also refers to a number of Chinese published as well as unpublished measures that, operating separately or collectively, allegedly impose and administer export restrictions. These restrictions include export duties, export quotas, minimum export price requirements, export licensing requirements and additional requirements and procedures in connection with the administration of the quantitative restrictions. The accusation of which is of great resemblance to the raw material case originated in 2009. Recalling the raw material case, China was accused of violating the obligations specified in China’s Accession Protocol and denied by the panel and Appellate Body of justifying violations of the obligations contained in Paragraph 11.3. Right in the new rare earth case, China had put forward a comprehensive new defense, which had made a great breakthrough and won the appreciation of one dissenting panelist. This thesis is endeavoring to summarize the new interpretative method toward convention. An