摘要
现代国际法下的同意原则伴随着第三方解决国际争端的兴起而确立,被公认为国际裁判管辖权的基础。常设国际法院的实践表明,同意原则不仅适用于诉讼管辖权,也适用于咨询管辖权。然而,在联合国时代的国际法院实践中,由于咨询案件的特殊性质以及法院对自身职能的独特定位,已经使同意原则很难单独构成影响法院发表咨询意见的决定性理由。法院在咨询程序中考虑可受理性问题时,并未赋予“法院作为联合国主要司法机关的职责”与“法院司法职能的适当性”这两个因素以同等地位,而是明显将前者置于优先位置。鉴于国际法院在联合国系统中的特殊地位,法院的实践对于促进联合国机构依法行使职权具有积极意义。与此同时,也必须注意到法院的实践可能具有外溢效果。其他国际司法机构不宜简单效仿,不应忽略同意原则在咨询程序中的重要地位。
The principle of consent has long been serving as the basis of jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals.The practice of the PCIJ clearly demonstrates that this principle applies not only to contentious cases,but also to advisory proceedings.As the successor of the Permanent Court,the ICJ has made it clear that the consent of interested states is not relevant for the establishment of the advisory jurisdiction of the Court,but for the discretion of the propriety of giving an opinion.However,the International Court has not declined any advisory questions requested by the organs of the United Nations on the basis of lacking interested states'consent,despite the fact that specific disagreements over territorial sovereignty and other controversial issues may be involved in some advisory proceedings.The Court always emphasizes its role as the principal judicial organ of the UN and the significance of participation in the activities of the UN,and thus de facto denies the possibility of application of the principle of consent to advisory proceedings which is involved in pending disputes between states.This position has been contrary to the judicial propriety of the Court and may ultimately be a detriment to its judicial authority in the global system.
作者
叶强
Ye Qiang(Beijing Branch,National Institute for South China Sea Studies,Beijing 100020,China)
出处
《中国海洋大学学报（社会科学版）》
2020年第2期124-134,共11页
Journal of Ocean University of China(Social Sciences)
基金
国家社科基金重大研究专项“人类命运共同体理念融入国际海洋法体系研究”(18VHQ002)
关键词
国际法院
常设国际法院
咨询管辖权
国际争端
同意原则
International Court of Justice(ICJ)
Permanent Court of International Justice(PCIJ)
advisory jurisdiction
international dispute
principle of consent
