ICSID仲裁上诉机制的构建研究
摘要
成立四十余年的ICSID,在东道国与外国投资者争端解决领域取得了重大成就。但伴随着ICSID仲裁不断的运作,其自身的局限性日益突显,其中,裁决的不一致和仲裁裁决监督机制的严重不足,极大影响了ICSID在专业、公平及廉正方面享有的声誉。而ICSID仲裁上诉机制不仅可以解决ICSID现有的两大问题,还能够进一步实现ICSID仲裁机制的公正性,满足仲裁当事方和仲裁机制本身对实体公正的现实需求。
美国不遗余力地推广“美式”双边投资仲裁上诉机制构成对ICSID仲裁机制威胁的同时,也是对构建ICSID仲裁上诉机制极大的促进。ICSID仲裁上诉机制将采用与ICSID仲裁撤销制度并存的模式,其具体设置会合理借鉴WTO上诉机制的经验。尽管设立仲裁上诉程序会对ICSID机制自身和国际投资仲裁机制带来一定的冲击,但从其对国际投资仲裁机制和ICSID仲裁机制的积极影响考虑,仲裁上诉机制的建立是非常有必要的。对于已是ICSID成员国的中国,在尚无任何ICSID仲裁实践经验、未来又兼具东道国和投资者双重身份的情况下,应当参照先前对ICSID一般仲裁管辖的态度和做法,在积极、全面、深入地研究该仲裁上诉机制的基础上,结合中国的国情,慎重对待ICSID仲裁上诉机制。
本文将在前两部分阐述构建ICSID仲裁上诉机制的背景和必要性,然后对该上诉机制构建的具体问题进行评析,并讨论和预测建立该机制可能带来的积极和消极影响,从而给出中国应对ICSID仲裁上诉机制的具体策略。
During the past more than forty years, ICSID has made significant achievements in the field of investor-state disputes settlement. However, in the continuous operation of ICSID arbitration, its limitations become more and more obvious. Inconsistent arbitral awards and serious shortage of arbitration awards review system are among other things the most important ones which greatly affected ICSID’s figure of professional, fairness and integrity. ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism can not only solve the two aforementioned problems, but also enhance the fairness of ICSID arbitration, thus reply for the arbitration parties’aspiration to substantial fairness.
Recently, the American government proposes strongly the reform of review mechanism under the investment arbitration through establishing an arbitral appellate regimes under BITs that it has signed. That movement may present a threat to the ICSID arbitration, however, it could also significantly stimulate the construction of ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism. The envisaged appellate mechanism will not replace but coexist with ICSID arbitration award annulment measure. Its establishment draws inspirations from the experience of WTO appellate mechanism. Although the appellate mechanism may have some negative impact to ICSID arbitration and international investment arbitration system, it has some important merits that cannot be underestimated. That is the reason why establishing ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism is necessary. As a Contracting Party of the ICSID Convention, China has not yet involved in the ICSID arbitration, on the other hand, China is no longer a simple foreign investment hosting state, but will also be investors’mother state. Under such a context, it is useful to examine China’s previous and actual practices on the general jurisdiction of ICSID arbitration, and to lead a comprehensive study on the appellate mechanism, in order to prudently determine China’s position towards the ongoing construction of ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism by taking consideration China’s particular situation.
This paper firstly researches on the background and the necessity of constructing ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism, then analyzes in detail the relevant problems that exist in establishing such an appellate mechanism, gives comments on the positive and negative impacts of such an appellate mechanism, and finally gives the author’s proposals on China’s strategy in dealing with the ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism.
美国不遗余力地推广“美式”双边投资仲裁上诉机制构成对ICSID仲裁机制威胁的同时,也是对构建ICSID仲裁上诉机制极大的促进。ICSID仲裁上诉机制将采用与ICSID仲裁撤销制度并存的模式,其具体设置会合理借鉴WTO上诉机制的经验。尽管设立仲裁上诉程序会对ICSID机制自身和国际投资仲裁机制带来一定的冲击,但从其对国际投资仲裁机制和ICSID仲裁机制的积极影响考虑,仲裁上诉机制的建立是非常有必要的。对于已是ICSID成员国的中国,在尚无任何ICSID仲裁实践经验、未来又兼具东道国和投资者双重身份的情况下,应当参照先前对ICSID一般仲裁管辖的态度和做法,在积极、全面、深入地研究该仲裁上诉机制的基础上,结合中国的国情,慎重对待ICSID仲裁上诉机制。
本文将在前两部分阐述构建ICSID仲裁上诉机制的背景和必要性,然后对该上诉机制构建的具体问题进行评析,并讨论和预测建立该机制可能带来的积极和消极影响,从而给出中国应对ICSID仲裁上诉机制的具体策略。
During the past more than forty years, ICSID has made significant achievements in the field of investor-state disputes settlement. However, in the continuous operation of ICSID arbitration, its limitations become more and more obvious. Inconsistent arbitral awards and serious shortage of arbitration awards review system are among other things the most important ones which greatly affected ICSID’s figure of professional, fairness and integrity. ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism can not only solve the two aforementioned problems, but also enhance the fairness of ICSID arbitration, thus reply for the arbitration parties’aspiration to substantial fairness.
Recently, the American government proposes strongly the reform of review mechanism under the investment arbitration through establishing an arbitral appellate regimes under BITs that it has signed. That movement may present a threat to the ICSID arbitration, however, it could also significantly stimulate the construction of ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism. The envisaged appellate mechanism will not replace but coexist with ICSID arbitration award annulment measure. Its establishment draws inspirations from the experience of WTO appellate mechanism. Although the appellate mechanism may have some negative impact to ICSID arbitration and international investment arbitration system, it has some important merits that cannot be underestimated. That is the reason why establishing ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism is necessary. As a Contracting Party of the ICSID Convention, China has not yet involved in the ICSID arbitration, on the other hand, China is no longer a simple foreign investment hosting state, but will also be investors’mother state. Under such a context, it is useful to examine China’s previous and actual practices on the general jurisdiction of ICSID arbitration, and to lead a comprehensive study on the appellate mechanism, in order to prudently determine China’s position towards the ongoing construction of ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism by taking consideration China’s particular situation.
This paper firstly researches on the background and the necessity of constructing ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism, then analyzes in detail the relevant problems that exist in establishing such an appellate mechanism, gives comments on the positive and negative impacts of such an appellate mechanism, and finally gives the author’s proposals on China’s strategy in dealing with the ICSID arbitration appellate mechanism.
引文
1 ICSID Secretariat Discussion Paper: Possible Improvements of the Framework for Arbitration. 2004: 16. http://www. worldbank.org/icsid/highlights/improvear b.pdf
2衣淑玲.国际投资上诉机制探析.甘肃社会科学.2007(6):113 111～112
3张泽忠.试探投资者—东道国争端解决中的上诉机制.国际经贸探索.2008 (3):39～40 43
4 David A. Gantz. An Appellate Mechanism for Review of Arbitral Decisions in Investor-State Disputes: Prospects and Challenges. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 2006:39 59
5陈安.国际投资争端仲裁——“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究.复旦大学出版社, 2001:8～21 231 21～22
6魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度研究.厦门大学出版社, 2007:224～252 158～159 169 221 231 232 249～252
7陈荣.论国际投资争端中的仲裁.西南政法大学硕士学位论文.2007:15～24
8马迅.《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章争议解决机制研究.武汉大学硕士学位论文.2005:34～35
9 Jessica S. Wiltse. An Invest-State Dispute Mechanism in the Free Trade areas of the Americas: Lessons from NAFTA Chapter Eleven51Buffalo L.Rev,2003:1191
10 Chris Tollefson. Games Without Frontiers: Investor Claims and Citizen Submissions Under the NAFTA Regime. The Yale Journal of International Law. 2002(27):164 187～188
11 Ray C. Jones. NAFTA Chapter11 Investor-to-State Dispute Resolution: A Shield to Be Embraced or a sword to be Feared? BYUL. Rev,2002:549 550
12 Lucien J. Dhooge. The Revenge of the Trail smelter: Enviornmmtal Regulation as Expropriation of Pursuant to the North American Free Trade Agreement, Am.Bus.L.J.2001(38):553
13沈慧弊.国家和私人间投资争端解决机制的冲突和协调——兼比较WTO与ICSID争端解决机制的冲突和协调.当代法学.2003(11):104～107
14詹晓宁.投资者与国家争端解决的最新发展.国际经济合作.2007(9):9～13
15余劲松,詹晓宁.论投资者与东道国间争端解决机制及其影响.中国法学. 2005(5):175～184
16杨文滔.外国投资者与东道国间强制性仲裁研究.湖南师范大学硕士学位论文.2007:21～28 66～83
17蔡从燕.外国投资者利用国际投资仲裁机制新发展反思——国际法实施机制与南北矛盾的双重视角.法学家.2007(3):102～109
18陈安.国际经济法学.第二版.法律出版社,2007:464 464 465
19陈安.国际投资争端仲裁.复旦大学出版社,2001:12
20刘笋.WTO法律规则体系对国际投资法的影响.中国法制出版社,2001:285~ 289
21 ICSID Annual Report. 2007:3 3
22 Daivino, Rober'to. Opening Remarks by Roberto Danino. Paris: ECD Head quarters, Room I, 2005:12.
23 Antonio.R.Parra. Provisions on the Settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, vo1.12, 1997:352
24 C. Schreuer. Traveling the BIT Route: of Waiting Periods, Umbrella clauses and Forks in the Road. J. World Inv. 2004:231～256
25 ICSID. Award of 6 August 2003, Award of 29 January 2004, http://www. worldbank.org/icsid/cases/SGS-decision.pdf.
26 Susan Frank. The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions. Fordham Law Review, 2005, (73):1558
27 Susan D. Franck. The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, Fordham Law Review. vol.73. 2005:1545~1546
28 David D. Caron. Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process: Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal. ICSID Review- Foreign Investment Law Journal vol. 7, No. 1, 1992:27.
29石慧.以条约为基础的投资者与国家间仲裁机制的评判.西南政法大学博士学位论文. 2007:147 153～155
30 Philippe Gruslin v. Malaysia. ICSID Case No. ARB/99/3.
31 Christopher R. Drahozal. Of Rabbits And Rhinoceri: A Survey Of Empirical Research On International Commercial Arbitration, Journal of International Arbitration. Vol. 20, No. 1, 2003:28.
32 William H. Knull III, Noah D. Rubins. Betting the Farm on International Arbitration: Is It Time to Offer an Appeal Option?, The American Review Of International Arbitration, Vol. 11, 2000: 532.
33 Charles N. Brower, Charles H. Brower II, Jeremy K. Sharpe. The Coming Crisis in the Global Adjudication System, Arbitration International,Vol.19, 2003:435.
34施米托夫.国际商事仲裁的普遍性与区域性.国际贸易法文选(赵秀文选译).中国大百科全书出版社,1993: 634
35 CPR. CPR Arbitration Appeal Procedure(1999), http://www. cpradr. rg/arb_appeal_ procedure.htm; JAMS, JAMS Optional Appeal Procedures(2003), http://www. Jamsadr. com/home. Asp
36 Cecilia M. Di Cio. Dealing With Mistakes Contained in Arbitral Awards. The American Review of International Arbitration. Vol. 12. 2001: 15.
37 Noah D. Rubin. Investment Arbitration in Brazil. The Journal World Investment. Vol. 4, No. 6. 2003:8
38 William W. Park, private adjudication and the public interest: the expanding scope of international arbitration, Brooklyn journal of international law, vol.12, 1986: 629～940
39 Charles H. Brower. Investor-State Disputes under NAFTA: A Tale of Fear and Equilibrium, Pepperding Law Review, vol. 29, 2001:52
40 Jeffery Atik. Repenser NAFTA Chapter 11: A Catalogue of Legitimacy Critiques. Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law. Vol. 3, 2003: 3
41徐静.评析国际投资仲裁合法性危机.产业与科技论坛. 2007 (6):10
42 Update on MAI Negotiations. http: //www. flora. org/flora/archive/maiinfo/update 01. htm
43魏艳茹.美国晚近有关投资仲裁监督机制的态度的转变及其对ICSID仲裁监督制度的影响.国际经济法学刊12(4). 2005:213 220
44 Abbott Frederick. The Political Economy of NAFTA Chapter Eleven: Equality before the Law and the Boundaries of North American Integration. Hastings International and Comparative Law Journal. 2000:303 308
45 William S. Dodge. Case Report: Waste Management, Inc. v. Mexico. American Journal of International Law. 2001:191~192;
46 William S. Dodge. International Decision: Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico. American Journal of International Law. 2001:910 918
47 Guillermo Aguilar Alvarez, William W. Park. The New Face of Investment Arbitration: NAFTA Chapter11. Yale Journal of International Law. 2003:385
48徐泉,陈功.美国外贸法中“快车道”模式探析.国际经济法学刊.12 (3). 2005: 80
49 Biparrtisan Trade promotion Authority Act of 2002, 19 USCS 3802(b) (3) S. Rep. No. 107~139, at 13(2d Sess. 2002).
50 Biparrtisan Trade promotion Authority Act of 2002,S. Rep. No. 107-139, at 13(2d Sess. 2002)
51 George Yeo. Letter from George Yeo on the Possibility of a Bilateral Appeallate Mechanism, Minister for Trade and Industry of Singapore, to Robbert Zoellick, U.S. Trade Representative (May 6, 2003), http://www.ustr.gov/new/fta/singapore/f inal/15app.pdf
52 United States—Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, h. r. rep. No. 108～224, pt. I, at 3(2003)
53 http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/40852.pdf
54 ICSID. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States: Documents Concerning the Origin and Formulation of the Convention,Vol.2,1968:905~910, 940, 994~996, 1000~1003
55 David A. Gantz. An Appellate Mechanism for Review of Arbitral Decisions in Investor-State Disputes: Prospects and Challenges. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 2006:39 59
56 WTO《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解》第17条第3款。
57张庆麟,彭忠波.晚近多边投资规则谈判的新动向.国际经济法学刊.2005(3): 123.
58 Howard Mann, Aaron Cosbey, Luke Peterson, Konrad von Moltke. Comments on ICSID Discussion Paper(关于ICSID讨论稿的评论). http://www.iisd. org/pdf/2004/investment_icsid_response.pdf
59 Filip De Ly, Who Wins and Who Losses in Investment Arbitration? Are Investors and Host States on a Level Playing Field?—The Lauder/Czech Republic Legacy, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, Vol. 6 No. 1, 2005:62~63
60 South Centre. Development on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries, http://www. southcentre. org/tadp_webpage/research_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpa pe r_feb05.doc, July1, 2005.
61 Developments on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries [EB/OL]. http: //www. S -outhcentre. org/tadp_webpage/research_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpape -r_feb05. doc, para.57~60
62 Thomas W. Walde. Energy Charter Treaty-based Investment Arbitration: Controversial Issues, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, Vol. 5 No. 3, 2004:113~121
63 Christian J. Tams. An Appealing Option? The Debate on An ICSID Appellate Structure. http: //www.wirtschaftsrecht.unihalle.de/Heft57.pdfpara. 18～20
64魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度价值定位研究.国际经济法学刊.北京大学出版社12 (4),2005:367
65 Proposed Amendments of ICSID Rules: Process Related And Substantive Issues on ICSID Reform For Developing Countries. http: //www. Southcentre. rg/tadp_webp- age/research_papers/Investment_Project/Icsid_Discpaper_Aug05.Doc,Para.19-20
66 Jack J. Coe. Domestic court control of investment awards necessary evil or Achilles heel with in NAFTA and the proposed FTAA? Journal of international arbitration. 2002,19(3):187
67赵秀文.21世纪中国国际仲裁法律制度现代化与国际化的发展方向.河南省政法管理干部学院学报. 2001(3):32
68陈安.中外双边投资协定中的四大“安全阀”不宜贸然拆除——美、加型BITs谈判范本关键性“争端解决”条款剖析.国际经济法学刊. 2006(13):5 35
69陈安.区分两类国家,实行差别互惠:再论ICSID体制赋予中国的四大“安全阀”不宜贸然全面拆除.国际经济法学刊. 2007,14(3):23
70 John Savage, Elodie Dulac. The Asia Pacific Arbitration Review 2007, http:// www. globalarbitrationreview.com/handbooks/2/sections/4/chapters/19/china-bits
71 World Investment Report 2006(2006年中国外商投资报告). http://www.fdi.gov.c- n/ pub/FDI/wzyj/yjbg/zgwstzbg/2006china investmentreport/t20061219_68013.htm
2衣淑玲.国际投资上诉机制探析.甘肃社会科学.2007(6):113 111～112
3张泽忠.试探投资者—东道国争端解决中的上诉机制.国际经贸探索.2008 (3):39～40 43
4 David A. Gantz. An Appellate Mechanism for Review of Arbitral Decisions in Investor-State Disputes: Prospects and Challenges. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 2006:39 59
5陈安.国际投资争端仲裁——“解决投资争端国际中心”机制研究.复旦大学出版社, 2001:8～21 231 21～22
6魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度研究.厦门大学出版社, 2007:224～252 158～159 169 221 231 232 249～252
7陈荣.论国际投资争端中的仲裁.西南政法大学硕士学位论文.2007:15～24
8马迅.《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章争议解决机制研究.武汉大学硕士学位论文.2005:34～35
9 Jessica S. Wiltse. An Invest-State Dispute Mechanism in the Free Trade areas of the Americas: Lessons from NAFTA Chapter Eleven51Buffalo L.Rev,2003:1191
10 Chris Tollefson. Games Without Frontiers: Investor Claims and Citizen Submissions Under the NAFTA Regime. The Yale Journal of International Law. 2002(27):164 187～188
11 Ray C. Jones. NAFTA Chapter11 Investor-to-State Dispute Resolution: A Shield to Be Embraced or a sword to be Feared? BYUL. Rev,2002:549 550
12 Lucien J. Dhooge. The Revenge of the Trail smelter: Enviornmmtal Regulation as Expropriation of Pursuant to the North American Free Trade Agreement, Am.Bus.L.J.2001(38):553
13沈慧弊.国家和私人间投资争端解决机制的冲突和协调——兼比较WTO与ICSID争端解决机制的冲突和协调.当代法学.2003(11):104～107
14詹晓宁.投资者与国家争端解决的最新发展.国际经济合作.2007(9):9～13
15余劲松,詹晓宁.论投资者与东道国间争端解决机制及其影响.中国法学. 2005(5):175～184
16杨文滔.外国投资者与东道国间强制性仲裁研究.湖南师范大学硕士学位论文.2007:21～28 66～83
17蔡从燕.外国投资者利用国际投资仲裁机制新发展反思——国际法实施机制与南北矛盾的双重视角.法学家.2007(3):102～109
18陈安.国际经济法学.第二版.法律出版社,2007:464 464 465
19陈安.国际投资争端仲裁.复旦大学出版社,2001:12
20刘笋.WTO法律规则体系对国际投资法的影响.中国法制出版社,2001:285~ 289
21 ICSID Annual Report. 2007:3 3
22 Daivino, Rober'to. Opening Remarks by Roberto Danino. Paris: ECD Head quarters, Room I, 2005:12.
23 Antonio.R.Parra. Provisions on the Settlement of Investment Disputes in Modern Investment Laws, Bilateral Investment Treaties and Multilateral Instruments on Investment ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, vo1.12, 1997:352
24 C. Schreuer. Traveling the BIT Route: of Waiting Periods, Umbrella clauses and Forks in the Road. J. World Inv. 2004:231～256
25 ICSID. Award of 6 August 2003, Award of 29 January 2004, http://www. worldbank.org/icsid/cases/SGS-decision.pdf.
26 Susan Frank. The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law through Inconsistent Decisions. Fordham Law Review, 2005, (73):1558
27 Susan D. Franck. The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, Fordham Law Review. vol.73. 2005:1545~1546
28 David D. Caron. Reputation and Reality in the ICSID Annulment Process: Understanding the Distinction between Annulment and Appeal. ICSID Review- Foreign Investment Law Journal vol. 7, No. 1, 1992:27.
29石慧.以条约为基础的投资者与国家间仲裁机制的评判.西南政法大学博士学位论文. 2007:147 153～155
30 Philippe Gruslin v. Malaysia. ICSID Case No. ARB/99/3.
31 Christopher R. Drahozal. Of Rabbits And Rhinoceri: A Survey Of Empirical Research On International Commercial Arbitration, Journal of International Arbitration. Vol. 20, No. 1, 2003:28.
32 William H. Knull III, Noah D. Rubins. Betting the Farm on International Arbitration: Is It Time to Offer an Appeal Option?, The American Review Of International Arbitration, Vol. 11, 2000: 532.
33 Charles N. Brower, Charles H. Brower II, Jeremy K. Sharpe. The Coming Crisis in the Global Adjudication System, Arbitration International,Vol.19, 2003:435.
34施米托夫.国际商事仲裁的普遍性与区域性.国际贸易法文选(赵秀文选译).中国大百科全书出版社,1993: 634
35 CPR. CPR Arbitration Appeal Procedure(1999), http://www. cpradr. rg/arb_appeal_ procedure.htm; JAMS, JAMS Optional Appeal Procedures(2003), http://www. Jamsadr. com/home. Asp
36 Cecilia M. Di Cio. Dealing With Mistakes Contained in Arbitral Awards. The American Review of International Arbitration. Vol. 12. 2001: 15.
37 Noah D. Rubin. Investment Arbitration in Brazil. The Journal World Investment. Vol. 4, No. 6. 2003:8
38 William W. Park, private adjudication and the public interest: the expanding scope of international arbitration, Brooklyn journal of international law, vol.12, 1986: 629～940
39 Charles H. Brower. Investor-State Disputes under NAFTA: A Tale of Fear and Equilibrium, Pepperding Law Review, vol. 29, 2001:52
40 Jeffery Atik. Repenser NAFTA Chapter 11: A Catalogue of Legitimacy Critiques. Asper Review of International Business and Trade Law. Vol. 3, 2003: 3
41徐静.评析国际投资仲裁合法性危机.产业与科技论坛. 2007 (6):10
42 Update on MAI Negotiations. http: //www. flora. org/flora/archive/maiinfo/update 01. htm
43魏艳茹.美国晚近有关投资仲裁监督机制的态度的转变及其对ICSID仲裁监督制度的影响.国际经济法学刊12(4). 2005:213 220
44 Abbott Frederick. The Political Economy of NAFTA Chapter Eleven: Equality before the Law and the Boundaries of North American Integration. Hastings International and Comparative Law Journal. 2000:303 308
45 William S. Dodge. Case Report: Waste Management, Inc. v. Mexico. American Journal of International Law. 2001:191~192;
46 William S. Dodge. International Decision: Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico. American Journal of International Law. 2001:910 918
47 Guillermo Aguilar Alvarez, William W. Park. The New Face of Investment Arbitration: NAFTA Chapter11. Yale Journal of International Law. 2003:385
48徐泉,陈功.美国外贸法中“快车道”模式探析.国际经济法学刊.12 (3). 2005: 80
49 Biparrtisan Trade promotion Authority Act of 2002, 19 USCS 3802(b) (3) S. Rep. No. 107~139, at 13(2d Sess. 2002).
50 Biparrtisan Trade promotion Authority Act of 2002,S. Rep. No. 107-139, at 13(2d Sess. 2002)
51 George Yeo. Letter from George Yeo on the Possibility of a Bilateral Appeallate Mechanism, Minister for Trade and Industry of Singapore, to Robbert Zoellick, U.S. Trade Representative (May 6, 2003), http://www.ustr.gov/new/fta/singapore/f inal/15app.pdf
52 United States—Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, h. r. rep. No. 108～224, pt. I, at 3(2003)
53 http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/40852.pdf
54 ICSID. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States: Documents Concerning the Origin and Formulation of the Convention,Vol.2,1968:905~910, 940, 994~996, 1000~1003
55 David A. Gantz. An Appellate Mechanism for Review of Arbitral Decisions in Investor-State Disputes: Prospects and Challenges. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 2006:39 59
56 WTO《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解》第17条第3款。
57张庆麟,彭忠波.晚近多边投资规则谈判的新动向.国际经济法学刊.2005(3): 123.
58 Howard Mann, Aaron Cosbey, Luke Peterson, Konrad von Moltke. Comments on ICSID Discussion Paper(关于ICSID讨论稿的评论). http://www.iisd. org/pdf/2004/investment_icsid_response.pdf
59 Filip De Ly, Who Wins and Who Losses in Investment Arbitration? Are Investors and Host States on a Level Playing Field?—The Lauder/Czech Republic Legacy, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, Vol. 6 No. 1, 2005:62~63
60 South Centre. Development on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries, http://www. southcentre. org/tadp_webpage/research_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpa pe r_feb05.doc, July1, 2005.
61 Developments on Discussions for the Improvement of the Framework for ICSID Arbitration and the Participation of Developing Countries [EB/OL]. http: //www. S -outhcentre. org/tadp_webpage/research_papers/investment_project/icsid_discpape -r_feb05. doc, para.57~60
62 Thomas W. Walde. Energy Charter Treaty-based Investment Arbitration: Controversial Issues, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, Vol. 5 No. 3, 2004:113~121
63 Christian J. Tams. An Appealing Option? The Debate on An ICSID Appellate Structure. http: //www.wirtschaftsrecht.unihalle.de/Heft57.pdfpara. 18～20
64魏艳茹.ICSID仲裁撤销制度价值定位研究.国际经济法学刊.北京大学出版社12 (4),2005:367
65 Proposed Amendments of ICSID Rules: Process Related And Substantive Issues on ICSID Reform For Developing Countries. http: //www. Southcentre. rg/tadp_webp- age/research_papers/Investment_Project/Icsid_Discpaper_Aug05.Doc,Para.19-20
66 Jack J. Coe. Domestic court control of investment awards necessary evil or Achilles heel with in NAFTA and the proposed FTAA? Journal of international arbitration. 2002,19(3):187
67赵秀文.21世纪中国国际仲裁法律制度现代化与国际化的发展方向.河南省政法管理干部学院学报. 2001(3):32
68陈安.中外双边投资协定中的四大“安全阀”不宜贸然拆除——美、加型BITs谈判范本关键性“争端解决”条款剖析.国际经济法学刊. 2006(13):5 35
69陈安.区分两类国家,实行差别互惠:再论ICSID体制赋予中国的四大“安全阀”不宜贸然全面拆除.国际经济法学刊. 2007,14(3):23
70 John Savage, Elodie Dulac. The Asia Pacific Arbitration Review 2007, http:// www. globalarbitrationreview.com/handbooks/2/sections/4/chapters/19/china-bits
71 World Investment Report 2006(2006年中国外商投资报告). http://www.fdi.gov.c- n/ pub/FDI/wzyj/yjbg/zgwstzbg/2006china investmentreport/t20061219_68013.htm