论欧盟航空排放交易规则下的管辖权冲突——从欧盟法院航空碳税案说起
On the Conflict of Jurisdiction Caused by Aviation Carbon Emission Trading System of EU—Analysis from the EU Case of Aviation Emission
-
摘要:欧盟将航空业纳入碳排放交易体系触发了各国就全航程排放的管辖冲突,成为国际碳减排规则的新问题.从欧盟法院航空碳税案裁决看,原因是各国就确立各航段空域排放管辖的标准认识不同,是国家减排行为边界国际法依据模糊和个别国家对气候谈判诱导试图的共同产物.据此,应明确领空内排放由主权国属地管辖,公海上空排放则根据气候变化公约确认是否突破航空器属人管辖而采普遍管辖或保护性管辖;对欧盟单边性意图,应集合贸易与减排国际法制度效力加以应对.Abstract:EU has enrolled aviation industry into the carbon emission trading system, which raised jurisdiction conflicts about the whole journey among different countries. This has become a new problem about the international regulation on carbon emission. Analyzing the EU Court’s verdict of carbon emission tax on airlines, each country has different understanding of carbon emission standards in each air-zone, which is the direct result of ambiguous definition for state’s boundary of emission and influences of certain countries exerted in unilateral climate change negotiations. Hence, there should be exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the carbon emission in the territorial sky. For High Sea, the jurisdiction should follow the Convention on Climate Change to identify if the aircraft has reached out of personal jurisdiction to universal jurisdiction or protective jurisdiction. For the unilateral objective of EU, it should be internationally responded with combination of trading and emission rules.
-
[1] 米歇尔·波特,埃卡德·雷宾德. 作为法律和政策问题的气候变化：国际气候变化制度及其在欧洲的实施[C]// 国际环境法与比较环境法评论(2008).上海：上海交通大学出版社,2008：132. [2] EU. Directive 2008/101 EC of the European parliament and of the council of 19 november 2008[J]. Official Journal of the European Union,2009(1)：8-17. [3] 国务院发展研究中心课题组. 全球温室气体减排：理论框架和解决方案[J]. 经济研究,2009(3)：4-13. [4] 王明远. 论碳排放权的准物权和发展权属性[J]. 2010(6)：92-99. [5] 杨泽伟. 碳排放权：一种新的发展权[J]. 浙江大学学报:人文社会科学版,2011(3)：40-49. [6] 周鲠生. 国际法大纲[M]. 北京：中国方正出版社,2004：47. [7] Sarah Davidson Ladly. Border carbon adjustments, WTO-law and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities[J].International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law & Economic, 2012,12 (1)：63-85. [8] 王晓丽. 共同但有区别的责任原则刍议[J]. 湖北社会科学,2008(1)：157-159. [9] 王慧. 美国气候安全法中的碳关税条款及其对我国的影响——兼论我国的诉讼对策[J]. 法商研究,2010(5)：21-30. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数:919
- HTML全文浏览量:1
- PDF下载量:782
- 被引次数:0
下载:
