公平与公正待遇标准：国际投资法中的“帝王条款”？.doc

公平与公正待遇标准:国际投资法中的“帝王条款”? 摘要:在与公正待遇标准得到了最广泛的运用,并显现了极度扩张解释之势;同时,一些西方学者也将之与民商法中的诚实信用原则相提并论,实际上是尊奉该待遇标准为国际投资法中的“帝王条款”。但倘若如此,不仅将严重损害东道国管理外资的主权,而且,法理上也存在诸多疑点。公平与公正待遇标准对于国际投资条约的具体规定,并无“帝王条款”意义上的补缺、修正及解释之功能;同时,该标准应是“国家造法”,而非“法官造法”的产物,其与“帝王条款”的实质也不相符。我国应转而支持以国际习惯法的具体规则来诠解该项外资待遇的内容。关键词: 公平与公正待遇;国际投资条约;国际投资争端;国际仲裁 Abstract: “ Fair and Equitable Treatment ” is now widely used in arbitrations designed to solve international investment matters and tends to be interpreted more liberally. At the same time, some western pare the standard to the principle of Bona Fides in civil mercial laws, considering it indeed an“ empire clause ” in international investment law. If so, it would .greatly impair the sovereignty of the host country over foreign investment. In fact, fair and equitable treatment renders no supplementation, amendment or interpretation to international investment treaties as the “ empire clause ” does. Furthermore, fair and equitable treatment derives from “ state- making laws ” rather than “ judge-making laws, ” which is essentially different from the “ empire clause. ” While fair and equitable treatment is not recognized as an“ empirical clause, ” it is necessary for China to interpret it under specific international customary rules concerning foreign direct investment. Key Words:fair and equitable treatment; international investment treaties; international investment disputes; international arbitration 一、导论迄今为止,绝大多数与公正待遇标准,而且在晚近的国际仲裁实践中,该项外资待遇标准得到了最为广泛的运用,以致有的学者在论及《北美自由贸易协定》( NAFTA )中的公平与公正待遇时慨言: “不夸张地说,第 1105 条(公平与公正待遇)已经成为 NAFTA 第 11 章项下投资者——国家仲裁的最重要东西。每一个在审的请求均主张有违反第 1105 条的行为。同样地,每一个对 NAFTA 成员方做出的裁决至少有一部分放在讨论反对使用‘公平与公正待遇’的问题上。这些案件已经涉及了超过 20 亿美元的争议; 其结果将影响未来的资本投入和东道国的管理政策。”[ 1] 9在与公正待遇的规定,首先可分为不涉及与涉及国际法两大类条款。前者属不附加条件地规定该项外资待遇标准。例如,德国与柬埔寨间《双边投资条约》第 2 条第 1 款规定: “每一缔约方……应在任何情况下给予该外资公平与公正待遇。”第二类是涉及与公正待遇之条款,它又可细分为以下三种:[ 2] 187-189 其一是“不低于与公正待遇条款。例如,美国与捷克间《双边投资条约》第 2 条第 2款 a 项规定: “投资应在任何时候被给予公平与公正待遇,应享有充分的保护与安全,并在任何情形下得到的