司法权威不立，法治焉存

姜明安

　 读10月27日《北京青年报》第19版《法院岂可非议人大法规》一文，感觉到我国国民对维护和确立法院、法官权威的重大意义尚认识不足，尚没有把法院、法官的权威和建立法治国家密切联系起来。据该文介绍，甘肃省酒泉地区中级人民法院在审理一件二审行政案件中，认为被诉具体行政行为适用的该省某地方性法规与国家法律相抵触，判决撤销一审判决和被诉具体行政行为。对此，甘肃省人大主任会议认为上述判决“严重侵犯了宪法和地方组织法赋予地方人大及常委会的立法权，超越审判权限，没有正确领会法律、法规实质，违法判决，直接损害了地方性法规的严肃性，影响了社会主义法制的统一”，“是一起全国罕见的审判机关在审判中的严重违法司法事件”，责成甘肃省高级人民法院提审并撤销上述判决，在全省法院系统中公开批评酒泉中院和追究有关负责人及责任人的违法责任。

　 这里我们不准备探讨法院的判决是否正确。我们要探讨的是：作为一个法治国家，是否应该在法院之上另设一个特别“法院”，来评判法院的判决是否正确、合法；法院之外的国家机关是否可对法院如何审理案件和做出判决下达指示或命令；法官依法定程序做出判决后，如果其他国家机关认为该判决不正确和违法，以至上级法院通过二审程序或再审程序撤销或改变该判决，是否要继而追究审理该案件和做出相应判决的法官的法律责任。从许多法制比较健全的国家的情况来看，上述问题的答案都是否定的。法院的判决只有在当事人不服和向上级法院依法提出上诉的情况下，才能由上级法院依司法程序对其正确性、合法性做出评价；任何法院以外的其他国家机关不能对法院如何审理案件和做出判决施加影响，更不要说下达指示或命令；法官除了对受贿等犯罪行为承担刑事法律责任外，对其审理和判决行为不承担任何法律责任。

　 试想，法院的判决如果接受其他国家机关的评判，其它国家机关可对法院如何审案、判案下达指示、命令，法官在判案时还要考虑如何下判才能免除自己日后承担法律责任，法院的独立审判权还如何保障？法院、法官在国家、社会生活中的权威还何以维持、存在？没有法院的独立审判，没有法院、法官在国家、社会生活中和国民心目中的权威，这个国家还能叫法治国家么？

　

　 法院的判决不接受其他国家机关的评判、监督，法院办冤、假、错案怎么办？法院、法官不是神，他们办案当然难免出错，但是，公开、公正、公平的司法程序是人类设计的保证冤、假、错案最少发生可能的制度，这种制度虽然不能绝对避免错误发生，但那是人类不得不付出的代价。如果我们试图在这种制度之外去寻求另一种纠错机制，那我们只能是饮鸩止渴，再回到过去的人治时代去。

　 现在许多法官腐败，司法不公，他们做出的违法、错误判决不接受其他国家机关评判和监督，怎么纠正？现在我们国家确实存在某些法官腐败和司法不公的现象，但这些现象是怎么引起，怎么发生的呢？是因为我们的审判太独立，我们的法院、法官权威太过造成的还是因为我们的司法体制（如地方保护主义等）和我们的法官制度（如法官选拔、任用制度，法官待遇等）存在的弊端所致？显然是后者。如果我们不是从司法体制和法官制度上进行改革，消除产生司法腐败的根源，提高法官队伍的素质（吸收和吸引第一流的人才进入法官队伍），而是在司法体制之外寻求某种个案纠错、补漏的机制，可能是错案越纠越多，漏洞越补越大。

　 让我们再回到前述案件，该案涉及法治的另一个重大原则问题：法院在审理案件中，发现地方性法规、行政法规、规章与法律相抵触，是否可直接适用法律而不适用与法律相抵触的法规、规章？根据法治原则，这不仅是可以的，而且是应该和必须这样做的。如果不这样做，国家法制的统一如何保障？最高国家权力机关的最高权力如何保障？我国宪法第五条和立法法第七十八、七十九条都明确确立了宪法、法律优于法规、规章的效力和法律规范的位阶制度，法院适用法律当然必须遵循这一制度。例如，我国土地管理法对违法占用耕地进行各种建筑的行为规定的法律责任是拆除违法建筑，恢复土地原状。如相应建筑符合土地利用规划，可没收相应建筑和并处罚款。但一些地方性法规规定的法律责任却是可单处罚款。人民法院在办理土地行政案件时，如不直接适用法律而适用行政机关在处罚时适用的地方性法规，土地管理法保护耕地的立法目的怎么实现？

　 这样做是否可行？法院对法律理解错误怎么办？法官当然可能错误理解法律，但法官错误理解法律的可能性要比其他人小得多，因为法官理解法律是在双方当事人及其律师参与的公开、公正、公平的司法程序下进行的，并且要受到二审程序和审判监督程序的制约。在这种制度下虽然仍然可能发生错误，但这是我们不得不面对的风险。在大多数法治国家，法院不仅可以不适用与法律相抵触的法规、规章，而且可以直接撤销它们。

　 有人可能会说，外国法官素质相对较高，可以赋予他们这种权力，在我们现在这种法官素质条件下，能这样做吗？目前我国法官的素质的确不尽如人意，但法官素质是可以改善的，通过法官选拔、任用、培训和待遇制度的改革，法官队伍的整体素质完全可以在不太长的时间内大为提高。如果我们因法官队伍现在的素质尚有一定问题而不赋予法官理解和选择适用法律规范的权力，对所有法律规范冲突问题都提交全国人大及其常委会解决，我们的司法可能会处于半停滞状态。最重要的是，目前我国全国人大及其常委会既没有设立专门的宪法法院或宪法委员会，也没有制定一套专门解决法律规范冲突的程序，如果我们将所有法规、规章与法律抵触的问题（包括明显冲突的问题）都提交全国人大，如何保障这些问题的及时、正确解决，如何保障整个国家法制的正常运转？

　 在一个法治国家，法院（包括普通法院、行政法院、宪法法院）应享有解决一切法律争议（包括法律规范冲突争议）的终局权力，法律的权威应通过法院、法官及其判决的权威实现。任何在司法制度、司法程序之外建立的对法院判决的“纠错”机制和对法官办理“错案”的责任追究机制的设想和设计都是缺乏远见的治标之策，从长远看，它不仅不能解决问题，而且将后患无穷。


WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

------An Analysis of the DSU in Positivism



by
Chengwei, Liu




Foreword
This book is a systematically selected compilation of Reports issued by various panels and the standing Appellate Body, then adopted by the DSB under the WTO jurisdiction by the end of May 2002, in category of subjects such as causes of action, initiation of panel proceedings, function of panels, rules of evidence and special rules governing anti-dumping disputes, etc., which are in most cases ruled as “preliminary issues” or “procedural objections”. However, this book is not intended to be exhaustive. It deals only with issues in dispute settlement proceedings under the WTO jurisprudence that the author considers the more important, where such rules are mainly concerned as Art. XXIII of the GATT 1994; Arts. 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 21.5, 23, 26 of the DSU; Arts. 17.4, 17.5, 17.6 of the AD Agreement and Arts. 31, 32 of the Vienna Convention and so on.
Moreover, this book is intended to be descriptive and positive rather than prescriptive and theoretical. Most of the author’s analysis benefits much from the precise and logically organized reports by panels and the Appellate Body, administered by the DSB under the WTO jurisdiction. It must be made clear that these reports do not constitute binding “subsequent practice” referred to in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, nor do they operate as stare decisis, panels and the Appellate Body are therefore not bound by past reports. Nevertheless, it does be the case demonstrated by the DSB practice that, relevant reasoning in a particular case has been cited or followed frequently by another panel or confirmed by the Appellate Body in subsequent cases.
As ruled by the Appellate Body in Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (DS44), “[a]dopted panel reports are an important part of the GATT acquis. They are often considered by subsequent panels. They create legitimate expectations among WTO Members, and, therefore, should be taken into account where they are relevant to any dispute”. Furthermore, a panel could nevertheless find useful guidance in the reasoning of an unadopted panel report when it considers relevant. More importantly, as stated in the letter with which the Appellate Body conveyed in the February of 1996 its Working Procedures for Appellate Review to the DSB for information, “… it is also important to ensure consistency and coherence in our decision-making, which is to the advantage of every WTO Member and the overall multilateral trading system we all share”.
There is no doubt that, in line with the pragmatic evolution of the GATT dispute settlement system, the progressive clarification of a number of issues that are not precisely regulated in the DSU and the further development of the WTO dispute settlement procedures, will gradually evolve after having been tested and progressively clarified and improved in concrete dispute settlement cases.
Considering all of this, the author complete this book with serious-minded exploring examination and great diligence, bearing in mind that it is therefore practical and of great significance for WTO Members to be informed of the valuable rulings in those reports issued by panels and the Appellate Body in particular cases.

List of Abbreviations

ATC Agreement on Textile and Clothing
BISD Basic Instruments and Selected Documents (published by GATT)
DSU Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes
DSB Dispute Settlement Body
EC The European Communities
GATS General Agreement on Trade in Services
GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
IMF International Monetary Fund
PGE Permanent Group of Experts (in the SCM Agreement)
SCM Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
SG Agreement on Safeguards
SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
TBT Technical Barriers to Trade
TMB Textiles Monitoring Body
TRIMS Trade-related Investment Measures
TRIPS Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
TSB Textiles Surveillance Body
WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
Table of Contents

Chapter I Trend towards “Judicialization”:
A Rule-oriented Dispute Settlement System
Chapter II Causes of Action before the DSB:
Art. XXIII of the GATT 1994
Section One Right to Pursue a Proceeding under the WTO
I The Concept of Nullification or Impairment
II The Standing Issue before the DSB