禁止使用武力底下軍事活動與執法武力使用的區分: 以海洋執法單位在主權爭執之領土使用武力為例

Distinction between military activities and law enforcement activities: Use of force by maritime law enforcement in sovereignty disputed territory

盧廣豪(Quang-Hao Lu)

指導教授 ： 姜皇池

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2021年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202102306

摘要

禁止使用武力自從聯合國憲章成立以來已成為了各國所接受的新國際習慣法。由於大規模毀滅性武器的誕生，大國之間的戰爭逐漸減少，取而代之是小規模的衝突。國家無疑為了避免正面衝突而採取具有挑撥性較低的手段，其中即包括了採取執法單位來實施其目的或政策。在面對這個新興的議題，傳統禁止武力使用對於執法武力使用的二分法得到了挑戰。

在《圭亞那對蘇利南仲裁案》當中，蘇利南的執法單位並未對圭亞那的石油鑽機人員使用武力，僅有口頭上說如果不離開則後果自負等警告。仲裁庭認為蘇利南的執法行為已逾越了界線，並落入禁止使用武力的範圍之內。該判決雖未提及區分的理由與原因，然其仍為首次在國際法院當中對於該問題提出了先例，並且吾人相信並不會是最後出現的案例。面對這些問題，本論文嘗試針對這個新興問題提出區分要件，理由，以希望有助於這個議題未來的發展。

惟國際社會迅速發展，各國的手段不斷增加，其中領土爭端在國際法上是不容易解決的問題。而國家在領土爭端區域內，有的為了本身經濟利益而從事開發行為，有的為了有效統治而行使執法管轄權，而導致雙方發生衝突。在這種情況下，如果執法單位為了達到驅趕效果而使用武力，甚至導致一方人員傷亡，是執法過當還是落入了禁止使用武力的規範，值得深究。故在主權衝突的區域採取武力，無論是否為了執法，亦成為了本論文的重點，本論文會一併嘗試處理這個問題。

關鍵字

執法單位 ； 使用武力 ； 圭亞那蘇利南仲裁案 ； 領土爭端 ； 武力威脅 ； 執法管轄權 ； 海洋戰爭法

並列摘要

Upon gaining the status of customary international law, the principle of non-use of force has become the cornerstone of the contemporary international law. Combining with the introduction to Weapon of Mass Destruction, war has become less common, consecutively replaced by small scale armed incidence between major States. In place of the traditional method, States have shift to many less provocative measures, which are called the Gray Area by many international relations scholars. One of these measures are the reliance on law enforcement officials to enforcing claims on many fronts.

Traditionally, the use of force by law enforcement is straightforward excluded under the scope of the prohibition. However, with the growing stead of the conflicts, this so-called traditional dichotomy has become more blur than ever. In the Guyana/Suriname Award, the Tribunal explicitly pronounced what Suriname believed was merely law enforcement operation a threat of force that violates international law. This case is the first and will not be the last of determining this issue. Facing the growing challenge of this aspect, and the gap that international law currently has, this thesis endeavors to resolve the issue and tackle the challenge of distinguishing between these concepts.

Moreover, while it is common sense that the traditional role of law enforcement officials is to maintain public law and order, more States have used them to enforce maritime claims in sovereignty disputed territory. This growing threat is no doubt relevant to the distinguishment, and it is essential to determine what is the nature of such activity. The matter is nonetheless political sensitive, but as a part of the international law community, it is our responsibility to resolve and clarify what kind of issues that this challenge may possibly bring.

並列關鍵字

law enforcement ； territorial dispute ； sovereign dispute territory ； use of force ； enforcement jurisdiction ； law enforcement measures ； threat of force

參考文獻

` (1930). Convention Relating to the Regulation of Aerial Navigation, Journal of Air Law Commerce, 1, 94.

` (1967). The Convention on Conduct of Fishing Operations in the North Atlantic, International Law Materials, 6, 760-762.

Acer Yücel. (2003). The Aegean maritime disputes and international law. Ashgate.

Allen, C. (2006). Limits on the Use of Force in Maritime Operations in Support of WMD Counter-Proliferation Initiatives. International Law Studies, 81, 77–139.

Amnesty International. (2015). Use of force guidelines for implementation of the un basic principles on the use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials.