摘要
审裁员身份冲突带来的针对其独立性与公正性的怀疑加剧了ISDS机制的合法性危机,身份冲突规制作为解决合法性危机的突破口被广泛讨论,联合国国际贸易法委员会等机构的规则文本对身份冲突提出了以仲裁型改良路径与司法型改革路径为代表的不同规制路径。从规则文本与仲裁实践出发,审裁员身份冲突表现形式的构成要素具有组成多元性与作用复合性的特征。通过比较司法型机制和仲裁型机制的特征,ISDS机制中审裁员身份冲突在实际可行性、群体多样性、意思自治三方面具有私法特殊性,同时在回应合法性、程序效率低下与问责性缺失质疑三方面又具有公法特殊性。ISDS机制中审裁员身份冲突规制的路径选择应当考虑ISDS机制兼具公法与私法价值的“跷跷板”特征,从两者价值平衡的角度出发选择合理的规制路径。以比例原则、透明度原则与可持续发展原则为指引,审裁员身份冲突的规制宜同时考虑仲裁型与司法型规制路径兼具的灵活型规制方案。中国可以针对两类规制路径的规则完善提出相应预案。
The legitimacy crisis of investor-state dispute settlement has been exacerbated by doubts about the independence and impartiality of adjudicators due to their multiple roles.The regulation of multiple roles issue has been widely discussed by countries and arbitration institutions as a breakthrough in response to the legitimacy crisis.UNCITRAL and other institutions’texts put forward different regulatory paths for the multiple roles issue.From the perspective of existing regulatory texts and arbitration practices,the constituent elements of multiple roles are characterized by being pluralistic in composition and compound in function.Compared with the judicial-type mechanism and the arbitration-type mechanism,the multiple roles issue in investment arbitration is special in private law in terms of three aspects:feasibility,diversity,and party autonomy;and is special in public law in terms of responding to the doubts of legitimacy,improving procedural efficiency and perfecting accountability.Therefore,the choice of the path to regulate the multiple roles issue in investor-state dispute settlement should take into account the comparative characteristics of the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism,which combines the values of public law and private law,and then choose a reasonable regulatory path from the perspective of balancing the values of the two.Guided by the principles of proportionality,transparency and sustainable development,regulations on multiple roles of adjudicators should consider both the arbitration improvement path and the judicial reform path as a flexible regulation option.China can propose a corresponding plan for the improvement of the two paths.
出处
《商事仲裁与调解》
2024年第2期27-46,共20页
Commercial Arbitration & Mediation
基金
陕西省社会科学《陕西省企业在非洲地区经营合作现状及风险防范对策研究(2023HWT05)》的阶段性成果
关键词
ISDS机制
身份冲突
价值平衡
investor-state dispute settlement mechanism
multiple roles
values trade-off
作者简介
陈虹睿,法学博士,西安交通大学法学院副教授;宋静怡,西安交通大学法学院硕士研究生
