摘要
由于《TBT协定》中缺少类似《GATT1994》第20条的一般例外规定,因此上诉机构对该协定第2条第1款国民待遇原则"不低于待遇"要求的判定适用了合法监管区分例外标准,以维护成员方的监管自主权。根据该标准,如果技术法规对进口产品造成的不利影响完全源于合法监管区分,那么该法规就不构成对"不低于待遇"要求的违反。然而,合法监管区分例外标准能否真正保障成员方的监管自主权值得怀疑,因为该标准不但本身存在模糊和矛盾之处,其与《GATT1994》第3条第4款和第20条的适用法理也不尽相同,从而会导致成员方就同一事项在不同条款下享有不同监管自主空间。我国宜在今后TBT案件的参与策略和技术法规的制定两方面着手应对合法监管区分例外标准。
Due to the absence of general exceptions similar to Article XX of GATT 1994,the Appellate Body adopted the legitimate regulatory distinction exception test to determine the＂no less favourable＂requirement under Article 2. 1 of TBT Agreement（ National Treatment Principle） to preserve Members＇ regulatory autonomy. According to this test,if the detrimental impact caused by the technical regulation to the imported products stems exclusively from legitimate regulatory distinction,the technical regulation shall not be determined to violate the＂no less favourable＂requirement. However,it is doubtful that this test can truly maintain Members＇ regulatory autonomy,given its ambiguity and contradiction as well as Members＇ different regulatory spaces on the same subject resulting from different legal interpretations under Article 2. 1 of TBT Agreement and Article III： 4 of GATT1994. In order to cope with legitimate regulatory distinction exception test,China should make preparations for the participation strategy in future TBT disputes and the enactment of technical regulations.
出处
《法学论坛》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第2期151-160,共10页
Legal Forum
