本文關鍵詞：芻論國際法淵源之位階序列，由筆耕文化傳播整理發布。

芻論國際法淵源之位階序列 On the origin of international law order sequence

作者：吳玥瑤 作者本人請參看權利申明

導師姓名：姜世波

學位授予單位：山東大學

授予學位：碩士

學位年度：2014

專業：民商法學

關鍵詞：

摘要:

國際法淵源是國際法學的一個根本概念,然則其寄義若何界定,諸淵源之間能否存在位階,何種位階等成績,在實際界仍未構成定論。究其本源,在于學者保持的法哲學立場分歧。天然法哲學、實證法哲學和社會法哲學三個法哲學派別對國際法淵源不雅和標準位階不雅提出了分歧的主意。但是現代國際情勢和國際關系成長須要一個平面化、多位階、開放性的國際法淵源系統,以賡續順應全球化成長帶來的新情形、新成績。縱不雅三個派別的主意,社會法哲學提出的多元主義司法實際正好吻合了現今需求。社會法哲學所提出的司法多元實際中,一階標準和二階標準并不是簡略并存,還存在位階序列。在現代國際情勢下,既要保持司法多元,以應對紛紛的全球化成績；又要對多元的司法淵源肯定位階序列,來處理龐雜的國際理論。社會法哲學的多元主義司法實際無疑給國際法淵源系統構建指清楚明了偏向。國際法淵源系統其實不是原封不動的,其組成和位階跟著國際配合體的汗青演化而靜態成長。只要靜態地掌握國際法諸淵源的位置變遷和演化進程,能力周全、精準地斷定現今情勢下國際法系統的位階序列。國際配合體發生早期,最原始的司法淵源即為習氣,調劑其時的國際關系,具有主要意義。但是因為社會主義國度提出的主意和國際舞臺上第三世界國度的年夜量涌現。較之習氣法壯盛時代,今朝國際配合體成員的數目遠遠要多很多。習氣的位置逐步降低：已存的習氣國際律例則被新興理論打破；新興范疇用習氣國際法調劑的判例也愈來愈少。中世紀之前,合同的數目極端少,而且僅限于恢復戰爭和規定疆界等政治性事項。在古代,淵源于合同的國際法在數目上曾經年夜年夜跨越了源于習氣的國際律例范。現代年夜多由雙邊合同和多邊合同來調劑列國之間的司法關系,并不是全體由國際習氣法調控了。而且,結合國成立以來,國際組織之間、國際組織與國度之間,在各個范疇均締結了年夜量的合同。普通司法準繩作為合同、習氣的空白的彌補和幫助淵源,被1921年《常設國際法院規約》歸入,其實用頻率極其鮮少,歷久地處于冬眠狀況。但這不影響其自力作為國際法淵源系統中的一員位置。只需新的國際法范疇中存在著顯著的破綻,此種普通規矩和所蘊涵的淵源就會從新煥發活氣。在20世紀60年月經由寬大成長中國度和社會主義國度的盡力,把經由過程傳統的司法淵源構成的某些根本規矩進步一個條理,調劑國度間關系的某些標準被付與了高于根本合同與習氣構成的廣泛規矩的位階。至此強行律例范發生,并參加了國際法淵源系統,并且取得了最高的位階。晚近國際法成長過程中又涌現了一種更加惹人注視的景象,即國際軟法年夜肆鼓起。國際軟法既宣示了現今國際社會的配合理念和目的,又推進著國際立法,為處理國際關系范疇的成績供給可行計劃。但是其不法律束縛力的特點卻使其不能不在國際法淵源系統中讓位于強行法、合同、習氣和普通司法準繩。多元化、平面化的國際法淵源系統就建成了,依照諸淵源的束縛力強弱規定位階,勝利答復了諸淵源抵觸難調的迷惑,這也給國際司法機構在裁判案件時肯定諸淵源的實用序列供給明白的參考。國際法淵源系統的第一名階是強行律例范,具有弗成損抑的強迫性；第二位階是并存的三種淵源,即合同、習氣和普通司法準繩。第二位階的前提或許說2、三位階的劃分界限即自力的司法實用性和對國際法主體的司法束縛力但又缺少弗成損抑性。有且唯一此三種淵源知足如斯刻薄的前提。三種淵源之間又是自力自足、對等的,雖然說普通司法準繩是合同、習氣的彌補,但在缺少合同和習氣劃定可征引時,普通司法準繩施展著完整同等于合同和習氣的感化,可自力地為法官判決供給本質性根據。第三位階等于狹義的國際軟法,涵蓋了國際組織決定、法院判決和威望公法學家學說等各類還沒有司法束縛力,卻具有必定司法后果的文獻。現代國際法淵源系統正如桑托斯主意的司法地圖,是平面的,條理清楚的司法圖景,應用分歧年夜小的比例尺繪制而成。

Abstract:

The origin of international law is a fundamental concept in international law, but its meaning is defined, there is a conclusion that there is still a question whether there is a rank among the sources, which is a kind of order. Investigate its origin, lie in the philosophy standpoint that the scholar maintains a difference. Natural law philosophy, empirical law philosophy and social philosophy of the three law schools of the international law of the origin of the standard and the standard of the idea of a different. But modern international situation and international relations growth need a plane, a number of order, open the sources of international law system, to continuously conform to the global growth of new situations and new problems. Throughout the three factions of the judicial idea, put forward the social philosophy of law pluralism coincided the current actual demand. In the judicial practice, the first order and the two order standard are not simple, but there are also the rank order. In the modern international situation, it is not only to maintain the judicial pluralism, in order to deal with the globalization of the world, but also to the multiple of the judicial origin of the order sequence, to deal with complex international theory. The social philosophy of law pluralism will undoubtedly give actual sources of international law system to clear bias. Sources of international law system in fact is not intact, its composition and order follow the ligand and the history of evolution and static growth. As long as it is in the position of the origin of the international law, the ability to determine the order of the international law system in the present situation. In the early stage of international cooperation, the most original judicial source is used to adjust the time of international relations. But because of the idea of the socialist state and the world's third world stage. Compared with the customary law of the times, the number of members of the international community is much more than a lot of. The position of the habit gradually reduced: the international law has been kept in the emerging theory is broken; the emerging field of international law and the use of international law to adjust the case is also less and less. The Middle Ages before, the number of contracts and limited to less extreme, recovery of war and other political matters prescribed boundaries. In ancient times, the international law of the contract, which had greatly crossed the international law of the habit. The modern world, a large number of bilateral contracts and multilateral contracts to adjust the judicial relationship between the countries, and not all by the international law of the regulation. Moreover, since the founding of the United Nations, international organizations, international organizations and countries, in all areas have concluded a large amount of contract. General principles of justice as a blank contract, habits make up and help the origin. By 1921 the Permanent Court of international justice statute placed in, in fact, frequency extremely rarely, lasting in hibernation. But this does not affect its independence as a member of the international law system in the position. There are significant flaws in the new category of international law, such common rules and the implication of origin will from the new coruscate vigor. In the 20th century 60 years of menstruation by large developing countries and socialist countries tried, constructed via the judicial origin of the traditional process of some fundamental rules progress a structured, adjust certain standards for inter country relationship is entrusted to the above contract and habit of structure widely rules of rank. So far, the law of mandatory rules and regulations, and participated in the international law system, and achieved the highest level. The emergence of the trend of international law in the growth process of a more compelling picture, namely the international soft law's four muster. International soft law is declared the modern international society with the idea and goal, and promote the international legislation and to deal with the category of international relations results supply a feasible plan. However, the characteristics of its non legal binding force can not be made in the international law system, so that it can be located in the law, contract, customs and common judicial principles. Diversification, the international law of the plane of the system is built, according to the binding force of the source of the strength of the provisions of the order, the victory of the source of the conflict is difficult to adjust the confusion, which also to the international judicial organs in the case of the reference to the practical sequence of the source of the reference. The first order of the international law origin system is to force the law, which has the compulsion of the loss of the second. The rank is the coexistence of the three sources, namely the contract, the bad habits and the common judicial criterion. The premise of the second order is that the division of the three, the 2 order is the judicial practice and the judicial restraint of the main body of international law. There is only one of the three sources of contentment so mean. Is between the three sources of independent self-sufficient, peer to peer, although the general principles of justice is contract and the habit of make up, but in the lack of contract and habits designated quoted, the general principles of justice display completely same contract and habits of action, independent judges for to nature according to. The third rank order is equal to the international soft law, which covers the international organization, the court decision and the public law scholars. Modern international law system, as Santos...

目錄:

  本文關鍵詞：芻論國際法淵源之位階序列，由筆耕文化傳播整理發布。