|
WT/DS46/AB/R Brazil – Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, decision of 2 August 1999, para. 160.
包括三份决定： 1.专家小组报告，WT/DS58R, 15 May 1998; 2.上诉机构报告，WT/DS58/AB/R 12 October 1998; 3.上诉机构报告，WT/DS58/AB/RW, 22 October 2001. 三个案件分别被简称为 Shrimp I、Shrimp II 和 Shrimp III. 关于这些案件的研究，参见 A. von Bogdandy, ‘Law and Politics in the WTO’, in: Max Planck Yearbook of International Law, 2000, p. 613; J. Scott, ‘On Kith and Kine (and Crustaceans): Trade and Environment in the EU and WTO’, in: J.H.H. Weiler (ed), The EU, the WTO and the NAFTA. Towards A Common Law of International Trade, Oxford, 2000, p. 125 et seq.
Shrimp II, para. 127.
Shrimp II, para. 129; Shrimp III, para. 119. 另参见上诉机构报告，United States – Standard for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/AB/R, adopted 20 May 1996, para. 21-22.
Shrimp II, para. 167-168. 参见 T. Scovazzi (ed.), The Protection of the Environment in a context of regional economic integration. The Case of the European Community, the Mercosur and the NAFTA, Milan, Giuffrè, 2002.
Shrimp III, paras. 115, 122, commented by P. Trachtmann on the web site of Eur. J. of Int. L. .
Shrimp II, para. 180.
Shrimp II, para. 141; E. Cannizzaro, The Role of Proportionality in the Law of International Countermeasures, in: Eu .J. Int. Law (12), 2001, p. 889.
Shrimp III, para. 153.
Shrimp II, para. 181.
T. Daintith 对美国所具有的，已经得到强化的“支配地位”（hegemony）进行了评论，参见 ‘Exchange, response and competition: external perspectives on the United Kingdom constitution’, in: Public Law, 2000, p. 165. 关于私法工具的讨论，参见 P.N. Doremus, ‘The Externalization of Domestic Regulation: Intellectual Property Rights in a Global Era’, in: Indiana J. Of Global Legal Studies (3), 1996, no. 2, p. 1. 关于《联邦行政程序法》应当适应新情况作出调整的观点是由 A. C. Aman, jr.提出的，参见‘Proposals for Reforming the Administrative Procedure Act: Globalization, Democracy and the Furtherance of a Global Public Interest’, in: Ind. J. Global Legal Studies (6), 2001, p. 397.
参见 A. Stone Sweet, ‘The new GATT: Dispute Resolution and the Judicialization of the Trade Regime’, in: M. Volcansek (ed.), Law Above Nations: Supranational Courts and the Legalization of Politics, Gainesville, University of Florida Press, 1999, p. 118; Y. Iwasawa, ‘WTO Dispute Settlement as Judicial Supervision’, in: J. of Int. Ec. Law (5), 2002, no. 2, p. 287.
关于私人组织和非政府组织能否参与GATT/WTO争端解决程序的问题，曾经引起了广泛的争论。两起海豚案的专家小组报告（分别于1991和1994年作出，但未获得通过）和系列海龟案的裁决都对这一问题作出了肯定的回答。此后，欧盟也建立起了允许私人组织参与司法程序的法律机制。参见G. Shaffer, Defending Interests: Public-Private Parternship in WTO Litigation, Brookings Institution Press, 2003. ——译者注。
N.M. Blokker and H.G. Schermers (eds.), Proliferation of International Organizations, The Hague, Kluwer, 2001.
在经济全球化进程中，国家的观念逐渐被淡化。同时，私人组织可以突破地域限制，它们运作效率高，并有着丰富的专业知识和管理经验。这种全球化的经济环境促使公共职能越来越多地被委托给私人组织承担，从而形成了一种公/私融合式的“新政府治理”（new governance）模式。因此，私有化是政府治理方式向多样化发展的重要标志。这种“新政府治理”模式涵盖了各级政府为了履行职责而可以运用的一系列方法，例如合同式委托、资助、税收支出、代金券、直接贷款、政府企业以及特许经营等。参见Alfred C. Aman, Jr., ‘Globalization, Democracy, and the Need for a New Administrative Law’, in: UCLA Law Rev. (49), 2002, p. 1687. ——译者注。
|
