摘要
从国际法制和相关案例来看,嗣后惯例的效力和构成要素是模糊的。嗣后惯例并非正式的、文本性协定,其解释性价值完全依赖于一致性的行为、所有当事方间达成的协定和作为单一的自主解释之合成解释。嗣后惯例必须是确立了当事方间的协定,当事方在条约履行中明确地实施了本质上相同或一致的行为。嗣后惯例的效力是一个颇有争议的问题,尤其是部分缔约方的惯行对原条约和其他缔约方的效力问题。相互矛盾的嗣后惯例会有不同的效力,这取决于所涉的多边条约机制。该惯例的形成有赖于国家在适用条约时有机会采取某些行动,并不要求每个当事方都必须单独地实施足以被接受为惯例的行为,只需要所有当事方接受,甚至是默示地接受。嗣后惯例与嗣后协定间存在联系与差异。
From the point of international legal system and relevant cases, the effectiveness and components of subsequent practice are fuzzy. According to the definition, it is not a formal, textual agreement. Its explanatory value depends entirely on the consistent behavior, an agreement between all parties concerned, and resultant interpretation as a single independent interpretation. Subsequent practice must establish the agreement between the parties concerned and in the performance of the treaty parties explicitly implement essentially the same or consistent behavior. Its effectiveness is a controversial problem, especially on the part of effectiveness of subsequent practice of the contracting parties to the treaty and other parties. Contradictory subsequent practice will have different effects, depending on the mechanism of multilateral treaties involved. The formation of the practice depends on the country＇ s chance to take some action in the process of applying a treaty. It is not required that each party individually implements behavior e concerned need to accept it, even in an implied way. There practice and subsequent agreement. nough to be accepted as practice, and all ＇parties is some relation and difference between subsequent practice and subsequent agreement.
出处
《西南政法大学学报》
2014年第2期56-66,共11页
Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law
作者简介
冯寿波（1965-）,男,江苏东海人,南京信息工程大学副教授,法学博士。
