TBT協定下「國際標準」之適當解釋與運用--兼論與菸草控制框架公約規範體系之可能連結

出於各種目的，多數國家、乃至於國際組織均有針對產品之形體大小、內含物種類與容量、甚至其製造過程可能對參與者或自然環境造成之影響等，規範、制定特定規格要求。例如限制產品長寬大小之規格，以便利通關輸入；限制農產品所含之殘餘農藥劑量，以確保食用人健康等。然而各國若恣意對於其境內流通之產品為不同規格要求，恐對國際間之貨品貿易活動造成不必要之障礙。是以，為使貿易更加自由化，WTO會員國遂於《TBT協定》制定調和條款，要求會員國應以已存在或即將存在之相關國際標準作為其等技術規章、標準或符合性評估程序之基礎，以期盡可能調和、縮小不必要之貿易法規障礙。《TBT協定》中之調和條款雖然要求會員國應以相關的國際標準作為其技術性措施之基礎，條文中卻未就其所指「國際標準」為定義，導致條文適用上多有不確定之處。因此，本文將研析條文相關文字意涵、歷史文件、WTO相關機關決議、及DSB於個案中所曾表示之相關意見，探究WTO現行就本協定之「國際標準」作如何之解釋、或設置如何之檢驗認定條件。其次，考量到WTO相關機構本身並不具有制定適用於產品規格之標準內容的專業能力，及明確、具體化TBT「國際標準」對於WTO會員之重要性，本文將嘗試針對DSB現行就認定TBT「國際標準」所建立之檢驗清單為調整建議，以期得以提升該檢驗清單於爭端個案中適用之妥適性。最後，鑒於《菸草控制框架公約》近年來於國際投資法及國際貿易法領域均受到高度重視及討論，本文遂嘗試論證該公約本文、議定書及指導準則中相關標準內容是否存在構成TBT「國際標準」之可能性及該認定所可能導致之影響，並舉澳洲菸品素面包裝案為模擬實例。

關鍵字

TBT協定；國際標準；調和；貿易促進；多元價值；菸草控制框架公約；爭端解決

並列摘要

Out of various purposes, most Countries and international organizations have required or seggusted certain products to be made under certain specifications or dimentions, or with certain amount of ingredients, or even to be made under certain circumstances that may limit the adverse effect on the producers or natural environment. For example, there are requirements for products’ specifications or dimentions in order to facilitate Countries’ customs import procedures, or requirements for maximum residue limits in agriculture products in order to protect human health. However, too much different kinds of requirements or seggustions mentioned above might cause unnecessary confusion and legal barriers to cross-border transactions of products. Thus, in order to reduce unneccesary legal obstacles to international trade, Aritcles 2.4-2.6, 4, 5.4-5.5, and Annex 3 of TBT agreement require WTO Members to use related international standards, if they exist or their completion is imminent, as a basis for their technical regulations, standards or conformity assessment procedures. Even though related articles of TBT agreement reguire Members to use related international standards as a basis for their technical regulations, standards or conformity assessment procedures, the agreement does not provide the interpretation of “international standards”. This cause many uncertainties while Members applying those harmonization articles mentioned above. To investigate that how WTO agencies or DSB determine a standard as having international nature, I study and analyse related article wordings, historical documents, decisions or suggestions made by WTO agencies’s, and DSB decisions driving from individual dispute cases. In addition, considering that WTO agencies or DSB have no professional ability to decide the standards’ contents of products, and awaring of the importance to clarify the meaning of “international standards” under TBT agreement, I attempt to provide some amendment suggestions to DSB’s current interpretation of “international standards” in order to enhance the adequacy of the interpretation. At last, whereas FCTC has caused serious legal problems in the field of international trade law and investment law, and have been frequently discussed, I attempt to analyse the possibility of demonstrating certain regulations or guidance of FCTC and its protocols and guidelines as the “international standards” under TBT agreement, and the possible effects thereof. Under the last chapter, I also take Australia – Tobacco Plain Packaging dispute as a model case simulating the application of harmonization articles under TBT agreement.

並列關鍵字

TBT agreement ； international standards ； harmonization ； trade facilitation ； multiple values ； dispute settlement

參考文獻

牛惠之（2007），〈WTO技術性貿易障礙(TBT)協定就安全貿易之適用與限制—環保標示、GMO標示之評析〉，《政大法學評論》，95期。

陳在方（2005），《世界貿易組織爭端解決機制下舉責任之研究》，國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文。

BERNASCONI-OSTERWALDER, NATHALIE et al. (2006), ENVIRONMENT AND TRADE — A GUIDE TO WTO JURISPRUDENCE.

BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 4th ed. (1968).

GRUSZCZYNSKI, LUKASZ (2010), REGULATING HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS UNDER WTO LAW — A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SPS AGREEMENT.

國際替代計量

TBT協定下「國際標準」之適當解釋與運用--兼論與菸草控制框架公約規範體系之可能連結

全文下載

主題瀏覽