摘要
近年来,国家安全泛化正在严重侵蚀国际法治。国际经济法律实践表明,一国可以安全为由采取经济限制措施,但必须依法“自谦”,并履行适当举证义务。禁止泛化国家安全概念的实质是在“尊重主权”和“依法规制”之间寻求动态平衡。国际经济组织的“主业”不是规制成员的国家安全活动,但如果成员借安全名义实施与条约不符的措施,国际经济组织应当介入、依法管辖并作出裁判。基于国际金融、国际贸易、国际投资相关领域的法律实践考察,应从3个方面改革国家安全的国际法律规范。首先,承认国家安全概念具有动态性和地域性特点,国际经济组织原则上尊重成员的安全判断。其次,成员基于安全理由采取限制措施,应符合善意原则,即证明其安全理由和限制措施之间具有初步的、合理的关联,确保在尊重成员安全关切的同时,防止其滥用限制措施。最后,把一些明显泛化的安全理由列入负面清单,以反向方式排除援引。
The issue of national security becomes a central topic overshadowing international economic cooperation,as it has been sabotaging the international rule of law.A shared understanding of national security exceptions,which exempt a state from certain treaty obligations,is practiced almost uniformly across the three legal pillars of international economy-international finance,trade,and investment,and may be summed up thus:national security is primarily national prerogatives,but a security-related,restrictive measure susceptible to treaty violation must be exercised in good faith,and supported with substantial evidence;a mere allegation of security reasons does not suffice the requirements of international economic laws.International legal endeavors in security exceptions appear unbound,yet they always seek a dynamic balance between respect for national sovereignty and appropriate supranational regulation in response to changing circumstances.International economic organizations generally do not hesitate to exercise jurisdiction if their treaty provisions,including both purposive and specific ones,are violated by members that invoke national security exceptions.Such practice is exemplified in the laws of International Monetary Fund(IMF),World Trade Organization(WTO),and various investment treaties.The IMF has two historic cases involving national security disputes;they are the United States'initiation of sanctions and embargoes during the Korean war,and the compulsory withdrawal of Czechoslovakia from the IMF in 1954.The WTO had a landmark national-security case in 2019,i.e.,Ukraine suing Russia over Russian measures concerning traffic in transit,and a few more such cases ensued.In the area of international investment,national security concerns are embodied either in investment treaties or customary international law.In the high-profile ICSID case Huawei v.Sweden,Sweden would invoke national security under customary international law to justify banning Huawei's 5G technology.Any reforms in regulation of national security in international economic law should not shy away from the following three aspects.First,given the sovereign and local nature,the judgment of security should be deferred to the member invoking it.Second,the member invoking security reasons for its treaty-violating measures should bear an appropriate level of obligation of proof;and the principle of good faith should be a better standard than a stringent test of necessity for the successful invocation of security exceptions.Third,a few reasons that manifestly fall out of the scope of national security should be prohibited from invocation,and should be identified in the form of Negative List;among them are the action of kicking away the ladder in industrial and market competition,protection of infant industry,anti-drug trafficking,and climate change.
出处
《国际法研究》
2025年第3期54-65,共12页
Chinese Review of International Law
关键词
国家安全
国家安全泛化
投资仲裁
IMF
WTO
National Security
Generalization of National Security
Investment Arbitration
IMF
WTO
