返回总库    

中图法分类

国际法治视野内国际非政府组织问责机制研究

作者: 刘海江
出版日期:2015-01-01
浏览次数:11次
简介: 国际非政府组织在全球发展迅猛,其通过参与和促进国际良法与全球善治的形成,积极地加入到国际法治的进程中来。作为国际法治的参与者和促进者,国际非政府组织发挥出的积极作用已经在全世界范围内引起广泛关注。但是事物的发展总有两面性,国际非政府组织在参与国际法治的进程中也显现出众多不和谐的因素,其中尤为值得关注的是国际非政府组织在国际法治的进程中显现出问责危机,大量的实例表明这一危机已经在一定程度上阻碍了国际非政府组织发挥参与和促进的作用,所以有必要对国际非政府组织在国际法治中的问责进行考量。国际法治是国际社会接受良好的法律达到善治的一种状态。虽然国际法治是法治向国际社会的延伸,但是国际法治区别于国内法治,有其独特的内涵。结合国际法治所依附的国际大环境和国际法的不成体系等特点,赋予了目前所探讨的国际法治为多元化法治与国际法之治、其内在要求表现为国际良法与全球善治等独特的内涵。其中国际法治的多元化最主要的表现是参与主体的多元化,除了国家和政府间国际组织之外,有大量的事实证明国际非政府组织凭借其自身的独特优势已经参与到国际法治的进程中,国际非政府组织在实现国际法治所要求的国际良法与全球善治的过程中发挥了重要作用。有大量的事实证明国际非政府组织在国际法治中担当着参与者和促进者的角色。所以,国际法治的多元化特点要求国际非政府组织的问责也要呈现出与以往不同的特点,主要表现为问责对象、问责主体、问责内容、问责方式、问责目的与问责过程等具备多元化的独特内涵。数量众多的国际条约和政府间国际组织都或多或少、或直接或间接地通过各种形式在国际法中赋予了国际非政府组织以应该由国际法主体所享有的权利,没有无义务的权利,既然因为权利而行使了权利,那就有义务接受责任。所以在国际法治视野内对国际非政府组织的问责进行探讨的理论框架为“基于权利而问责”:权利与责任是相对的,国际非政府组织既然享有国际法所赋予的权利,就要承担责任,在国际法治的进程中就要对利益相关者交代自己的所作所为,并要接受利益相关者的评估,根据结果接受相应的惩罚和奖励。国际非政府组织问责危机的起因主要包括国际非政府组织的迅速增长、吸引资金的大量增加、在国际良法与全球善治的实现过程中发挥越来越重要的作用和其存在的合法性危机等。而正是这些原因的存在导致国际非政府组织与国际法治的互相借重与需要愈来愈强,所以在这种背景下在国际法治视野内探讨国际非政府组织的问责危机是十分有必要的。由于目前国际法治主要是指国际法之治,是适用于国际法主体之间的法治,但鉴于国际非政府组织国际法主体地位的缺失,所以在国际法治视野内探讨国际非政府组织的问责还存在着一定的障碍。虽然国际非政府组织在发展的过程中,在面对获取国际法律地位的历史机遇的时候都做出了努力,但是囿于各种条件的限制,所取得的进展还不是很令人满意。目前,按照国际非政府组织问责的主体进行分类,在国际法治视野内主要包括三类国际非政府组织问责机制,这些机制在发挥积极作用的同时,也存在一些不可避免的缺陷。首先,国家通过国内立法和少数欧洲国家通过缔结国际条约的方式对在本国领域范围内进行活动的国际非政府组织的问责提出要求,但是由于各国立法和观念不同,这种方式良莠不齐,并且只影响在一定范围内的国际非政府组织;其次,政府间国际组织与国际非政府组织之间的关系主要表现为合作和管制,在两者建立的咨商与参与的合作关系中,政府间国际组织通过设置义务对国际非政府组织的问责发挥了一定的积极作用,但是囿于两者法律地位的不平等性,这种问责机制的建立肯定是不正式和不全面的;最后,国际非政府组织通过缔结和加入各种行为准则和道德准则的方式对自身的问责设置了种种要求,但是这种方式存在着自愿性特点,大多数行为准则都存在着实施机制缺失等先天不足的缺陷。所以,这些对国际非政府组织问责机制并没有完全发挥出所期望的作用。鉴于在国际法治视野内国际非政府组织问责的独特内涵,再加上不同的利益相关者对不同的国际非政府组织提出不同的问责要求,所以在短时期内立即构建出完全有效的国际非政府组织问责机制的可能性是非常小的。结合国际法治独特的内涵要求与国际非政府组织自身的特点可以发现,目前构建国际非政府组织问责机制的最好途径就是在充分利用现有几种问责机制的基础上,向以国际条约建构国际非政府组织问责机制的方式过渡。大量事实证明,从应然的角度出发,国际非政府组织已经具备了作为国际法主体的资格,所以也就具备了以国际条约建构国际非政府组织问责机制的可行性。在坚持以人为本、可持续发展与和谐共存理念的基础上,适用法治原则、透明原则与平衡原则缔结国际条约,通过回答国际非政府组织对什么问责、向谁问责与怎样问责三个问题对国际非政府组织问责机制的构建做出较为详细的规定,并且该类条约应把建立核准机制、实施机制与加入相关行为准则的先行机制作为重中之重,只有这样这类条约才不会流于形式。虽然这种方式的实施也将面临着时间与成本的考验,但是从长远的角度来看,这种方式将是一种符合发展规律的较为有效的方式。关键词:国际法治;国际非政府组织;问责;利益相关者;行为准则ABSTRACTInternational Non-Governmental Organizations(INGOs),widespread around the world,have positively participated in the process of international rule of law by improving the formation of international good laws and good governance.As the participant and promoter of international rule of law,INGOs have played an active role in their procedure and gained widespread attention worldwide.However,everything has two sides,there has existed a good deal of disharmony between INGOs and the procedure of international rule of law.Particularly,the accountability crisis that INGOs have encountered in this procedure has hindered their participation in it,therefore,it is necessary for INGOs to examine their accountability in international rule of law.International rule of law is one condition that the international community has accepted a good governance by law.Although it's an extension of domestic rule of law to international community,it's quite different from the domestic one.Considering the international environment depended upon by international rule of law and fragmentation of international law,the international rule of law has its peculiar connotations such as diversified legislation,international legislation,and its intrinsic requirement of international good law and good governance.Among these elements,the diversification of international rule of law manifests itself in participants.Apart from domestic and international governmental organizations,INGOs have been reported to have participated in the procedure ofinternational rule of law by right of its own peculiar superiority.In addition, INGOs have played a key role in the procedure of international good law and global good governance required by the international rule of law.INGOs demonstrate their roles of participants and promoters in the procedure of international rule of law from numerous facts.Hence,the diversification of the international rule of law requires features of the accountability of INGOs different from the past,which mainly include objects,subjects,contents, mothods,purposes and procedures of the accountability.Numerous international treaties and international governmental organizations more or less endow INGOs with the rights enjoyed by the subjects of international law in both direct and indirect ways.There is no right without obligation.Moreover, if INGOs have rights to exercise their power,they are in duty bound to accept their obligations.Therefore,this paper attempts to explore the accountability of INGOs in the theoretic framework of“the accountability on the basis of rights”from the perspective of the international rule of law.The essence of this basis is the relativity between rights and duties,which means that since INGOs enjoy rights endowed by international law,they should undertake relevant obligations.INGOs should account for what they do to stakeholders and accept evaluation by them,so as to accept rewards or punishment according to evaluation results.The accountability crisis of INGOs stems from the rapid growth of INGOs,the increase of their financial investment;increasing significance in implementing international good law and global good governance and legality crisis.However,it is those factors that lead to the increasing interaction between INGOs and the international rule of law,therefore,it is necessary to discuss the accountability crisis of INGOs from the perspective of international rule of law.The international rule of law mainly refers to rule by international law applied among the subjects of international law.However,it is quite difficult to exhaustively reveal all the problems in the accountability crisis of INGOs from the perspective of international law,due to the deficiency of INGOs’ status as subjects in international law.Despite of all kinds of efforts made by INGOs to gain status of international law in their developmental process,the present progress is still unsatisfied because of various restrictions.The mechanism of accountability of INGOs can be divided into three subclasses from the perspective of accountability subjects,all of which have both positive and negative sides.Firstly,every country should claim requirements to INGOs acting domestically through domestic legislation,moreover,a few coun tries in Europe can conclude international treaties to realize it.However,owing to the distinction of law and values among different countries,this method has very limited influence in INGOs.Secondly,the relationship between IGOs and INGOs manifests coorperation and regulation,in which IGOs have played a positive role in the accountability of INGOs by establishing the latter's obligations.However,given the inequal international legal status between IGOs and INGOs,surely this kind of accountability mechanism is not formal and comprehensive.Lastly,INGOs have itself restrained in establishing their own accountability by concluding and entering all kinds of codes of conduct and ethics which have inherent inadequacy in their implement mechanism because of voluntary nature.In view of the peculiar connotation of INGOs’ accountability from the perspective of international rule of law and different requirements made by numerous stakeholders,theirs is little possibility for INGOs establishing a most effective mechanism of accountability.Combining connotational requirements of international rule of law and their own characteristics,the author has found that the best way is taking good advantage of several current mechanisms of accountability to transit towards the ones constructed by treaty.Massive facts have demonstrated that INGOs have gained the qualification of the subject of international law so that constructing the accountability mechanism of INGOs by entering into treaty is feasible.On the basis of people-oriented,sustainable development and harmonious coexistence principles,INGOs should obey rule of law as well as transparency and balance principles to conclude treaty,and formulate detailed rules for the construction of INGOs’ accountability mechanisms by answering the content,object and procedure of INGOs’ accountability.What is more important,is focusing on approval,implementation mechanism and prior mechanism of participating in pertinent codes of conduct,or this kind of treaty would become formalistic.Although this method may face the challenge of time and cost,it will be quite an effective model which complies with the law of development in the long run.Key words:international rule of law;INGOs;accountability;stake⁃holders;code of conduct

非政府组织制度性参与国际法律体系研究

作者: 李洪峰
出版日期:2014-08-01
浏览次数:12次
简介: 随着当代全球化的发展,非政府组织已经成为国际法律体系的重要参与者。然而,国际法律体系中现有规范非政府组织参与的相关制度安排已经表现出一定的滞后和不足,影响了非政府组织参与国际法实践功能的发挥。基于这种判断,本书以制度规范主义为视角,详细梳理和评估了非政府组织参与国际立法、国际法监督执行和国际司法诉讼进程中的相关法律制度安排和实践效果,主要包括参与的法律基础、参与的主要形式、参与资格认证的实体规则和程序规则等方面, 旨在发现当前制度规范中存在的问题与不足,并对非政府组织制度性参与国际法律体系的发展和完善提出了具体建议。

社会发展与现代田园主义:发达国家社会发展得失谈

作者: 蒋立峰
出版日期:2013-10-01
浏览次数:10次
简介: 本书以科学理论为指导,以忧患意识、危机意识为出发点,从美国金融危机和地球环境危机对研究社会发展和政策选择带来的启示谈起,选择有代表性的五个西方国家英国、美国、法国、日本、瑞典为剖析对象,从人口、城市化、阶级分化、环境保护、社会稳定和国民素质教育等方面对五国的各自发展特色分别展开论述,从而归纳总结其在社会发展和政策选择方面的经验教训,进而对相关基本理论及发展模式问题进行新的思考,提出了“现代田园主义”这一理论框架及实现现代田园主义的各项原则,并以此为理论指导,对我国今后社会发展中的人口增长问题、经济发展问题、环境保护问题、社会保障问题(包括住房、教育、医疗、养老等方面)及思想教育问题等都提出了相应的可操作性建议,以供政策制定部门参考借鉴,同时为关心社会发展与政策选择问题的广大读者提供一个新的思路。
关键词: 发达国家  社会发展  社会政策  研究  

社会发展研究(第一期)

作者: 李汉林
出版日期:2012-01-01
浏览次数:9次
简介: 主办单位:中国社会科学院社会发展战略研究院主编:李汉林编辑委员会:Duncan Gallie(英国)Peter Hedstrom(瑞典)Gudmund Hernes(挪威)Alberto Martinelli(意大利)Niklas Simon(德国)Lowell Turner(美国)李汉林 李路路李国强 韩朝华渠敬东 夏传玲沈红 折晓叶编辑:杨清媚地址:北京市西城区三里河东路5号中商大厦8层邮政编码:100045电子邮件:isd@cass.org.cn网址:http://www.nisd.cass.cn/发展是人类进步的主题,但为发展而发展,坚持“唯发展”的发展观,则会成为发展的绊脚石,无法使发展广泛地惠及人民群众,无法使发展沿着持续协调的路径进步,使发展与稳定这一建设有中国特色的社会主义的两大目标无法得到统一。党的十七大提出,科学发展观第一要义是发展,核心是以人为本,基本要求是全面协调可持续性,根本方法是统筹兼顾,指明了我们进一步推动中国经济改革与发展的思路和战略,明确了科学发展观是经济社会发展的根本指导思想。邓小平同志曾指出:“发展是硬道理”。“发展什么”、“怎样发展”,“为什么发
关键词: 社会学  社会发展  

版权所有:中国社会科学出版社 地址:北京西城区鼓楼西大街甲158号 邮编:100720

京ICP备05032912号-4