Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/135895
|
| Title: | 論原住民權利於國際投資仲裁制度之地位及調和方法
A Study on the Status of Indigenous Rights and Methods of Adjustment under International Investment Arbitration |
| Authors: | 吳晨瑜
Wu, Chen-Yu |
| Contributors: | 楊培侃
Yang, Pei-Kan
吳晨瑜
Wu, Chen-Yu |
| Keywords: | 國際投資法
國際投資仲裁
原住民權
國際人權法
International Investment Law
International Investment Arbitration
Indigenous Peoples Rights
International Human Rights Law |
| Date: | 2021 |
| Issue Date: | 2021-07-01 15:57:11 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 鑒於資本的跨國界流通熱絡，輔以國際人權意識的高漲，國際間伴隨而來的經濟、社會與文化價值之衝突漸趨明顯。尤其在全球資本主義浪潮下，跨國企業對全球經濟的影響力不斷擴大，而跨國投資行為所偏好之自然資源多位處原住民居住地，使得外人投資計畫往往影響甚至侵害原住民之固有土地、文化或生活環境，導致原住民於《國際勞工組織第169號公約》與《聯合國原住民權利宣言》下之文化完整性、土地和資源等權利遭受破壞。從而涉及原住民權之國際投資爭端，每每引發投資人投資權益之保障與原住民權利之維護兩者間的衝突與調和問題。因此，本文旨在探討國際投資仲裁架構下，原住民權利是否以及如何在投資仲裁案件審理中受到保障，以及現行國際投資仲裁制度如何進一步將原住民權利之保障納入投資爭端解決之考量。檢視具體個案所涉及投資協定內的徵收條款、公平與公正待遇原則或完整保障與安全原則等爭議，探討原住民權利在國際投資法下的現況與問題。
歸結過往案例，本文認為原住民權之主張對於投資仲裁判斷結果之影響有限，因投資仲裁爭議之裁決主要仍取決於系爭投資協定下相關投資保障條款的解釋與適用。仲裁庭確曾以欠缺管轄權為由駁回原住民權之主張，亦曾拒絕援引相關的國際人權法規作為適用法，且為爭取原住民權所發起之抗議亦會招致違反完整保障與安全原則義務的控訴。另一方面，仲裁庭對法庭之友的認定有所侷限，且其並無採納法庭之友意見的義務，故在法庭之友未能發揮其效用的前提下，倘若原住民未兼具投資人之身分，則除非地主國願意以原住民權作為抗辯，否則原住民之權利不易在投資仲裁程序中被納入考量。盡管如此，從相關案件之仲裁判斷中看來，本文發現仲裁庭仍積極回應原住民權保障之相關論述，相較過往已有所突破，可以看出仲裁庭對於人權議題之探究仍抱持開放的態度，值得肯認。深究投資仲裁案件不易調和人權議題之原因，乃國際人權法與國際投資法之本質不同，且國際投資協定也欠缺可供仲裁庭適用的人權保障條款。因此，若要調和人權與投資人的權利，得從解釋論的層面將人權法納入仲裁判斷之考量、從制度面改善仲裁機制與引進人權影響評估協議或藉由修法解決人權保障不足的疑慮。
With the rising awareness of international human rights and the increase of cross-border capital flows, the tensions grows rapidly in the international community due to the potential conflicts between economic, social and cultural values. Under the trend of global capitalism, the multinational enterprises play a more influential role in shaping the contour of economy worldwide. Due to the fact that many natural resources are located in the indigenous peoples’ residential areas, the rampant development of foreign direct investment projects is more likely to increase potential conflicts with indigenous’ ancestral land, cultural integrity, rights of land and resources recognized under the “International Labor Organization Convention No. 169” and the “UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”. This paper aims to examine the investment disputes involved with the rights of indigenous people, and finds that most disputes despite the indigenous rights being concerned, mainly addressed substantive claims regarding the protection of investor’s rights such as whether the specific cause of action constitutes expropriation under the investment agreement and whether it violates the principle of fair and equitable treatment or the principle of full protection and security.
After analyzing precedent international investment arbitration cases, it holds that the indigenous rights have only limited role to play in the investment arbitrations and have little influence on the outcome of arbitration award. Instead, the outcome depends on the substantive claims based on the rules under the investment agreement and how these rules are interpreted and applied in solving the dispute. Indeed, the arbitration tribunal declined to hear the human rights claims on the ground of the lack of jurisdiction, and to refer to international human rights law as an applicable law under the investment dispute. Last but not the least, the protest to fight for indigenous right may also triggers the claim of violating the obligation of full protection security. On the other hand, owing that the arbitral tribunal has no obligation to adopt the opinions submitted by the amicus curiae, it is difficult for the indigenous people to defend their rights through amicus curiae unless they also possess the identity of investor or the host state is willing to claim the rights of the indigenous people as a defense. Nevertheless, judging from the award of such cases, this paper discovered that the arbitral tribunals still made many efforts to respond arguments associated with the indigenous rights in its findings. Thus, this is a sign of a positive development in the practice of investment tribunals, indicating their willingness to address the human right issues in the investor-state dispute proceedings.
In respect to the difficulties of reconciling human rights issues in investment arbitration cases, it is believed that the essence of international human rights law is different from that of international investment law. Apart from the improvement of arbitration system, there is also a lack of solid human rights protection found in the international investment agreements. To reconcile human rights with investors` rights, human rights laws must be taken into consideration via treaty interpretation, or modify the arbitration system, adopt human rights impact assessment agreement and amend the treaties that may fundamentally solve the problem of insufficient human rights protection. |
| Reference: | 中文參考資料
官大偉，「原住民」到「原住民族」——從臺北市政府原住民事務委員會更名為臺北市政府原住民族事務委員會談起，原住民族教育情報誌，43期，頁72，73（2012年）。
英文參考資料
書籍
García González Luis, The Role of Human Rights in International Investment Law, in THE FUTURE OF ICSID AND THE PLACE OF INVESTMENT TREATIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 29 (N Jansen Calamita eds., 2013).
Ioana Knoll‐Tudor, The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard and Human Rights Norms, in HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND ARBITRATION 357-358 (P‐Dupuy eds., 2009).
Kulick Andreas, Human Rights and Investment—Friends or Foes?, in GLOBAL PUBLIC INTEREST IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW 304 (Andreas Kulick ed., 2012).
MUCHLINSKI P. ET AL., THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW 16 (2008).
PETERSON ERIC LUKE, HUMAN RIGHTS AND BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES: MAPPING THE ROLE OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW WITHIN INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION 37 (2009).
Pulitano Elvira, Indigenous Rights and International Law: An Introduction, in INDIGENOUS RIGHTS IN THE AGE OF THE UN DECLARATION 25 (Elvira Pulitano ed., 2012).
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT, TAKING OF PROPERTY 26-31 (2000).
Vadi Valentina, The Protection of Indigenous Cultural Heritage in International Investment Law and Arbitration, in THE INHERENT RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 208 (Antonietta Di Blase and Valentina Vadi eds., 2020).
Waincymer J. , Balancing Property Rights and Human Rights in Expropriation, in HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT ARBITRATION 309 (P‐M Dupuy eds., 2009).
Watson I. and S. Venne, Talking Up Indigenous Peoples’ Original Intent in a Space Dominated by State Interventions, in INDIGENOUS RIGHTS IN THE AGE OF THE UN DECLARATION 87, 96, 106 (E. Pulitano ed., 2012).
Weiler TJ Grierson and IA Laird, Standards of Treatment, in THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW 272-290 (P Muchlinski, eds., 2008).
ZACHARY DOUGLAS, JOOST PAUWELYN, AND JORGE E. VIÑUALES, THE FOUNDATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW: BRIDGING THEORY INTO PRACTICE 156 (2014).
仲裁案件
Azurix Corp. v. Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/12, Award (July 14, 2006), icsidfiles.worldbank.org/icsid/ICSIDBLOBS/OnlineAwards/C5/DC507_En.pdf.
Azurix Corp. v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/12, Award (July 14, 2006), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0061.pdf.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21, Award (Nov. 30, 2017), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw9381.pdf.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21, Partial Dissenting Opinion of Professor Philippe Sands, ¶ 10 (Nov. 30, 2017), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw10107.pdf.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21, Procedural Order No 2, ¶ 64 (Apr. 19, 2015), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw4332.pdf.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21, Procedural Order No. 5 (July 21, 2016), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw7447.pdf.
Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21, Non-disputing Party Written Submission of DHUMA and Dr. Carlos Lopez, at 2, 3 (June 9, 2016), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw7517.pdf.
Bernhard von Pezold and Others v. Republic of Zimbabwe, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/15, Award, ¶ 453-454 (July 28, 2015), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw7095_0.pdf.
Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd. v. United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22, Award, (July 24, 2008), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0095.pdf.
Burlington Resources, Inc. v. Republic of Ecuador, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/5, Decision on Jurisdiction, ¶¶ 26, 53 (June 2, 2010), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0106.pdf.
Cayuga Indians (Great Britain) v. United States, 6 REV. INT’L ARBITRAL AWARDS 173, 176 (1926) (providing that “Indian tribe is not a legal unit of international law.”).
Compañiá de Aguas del Aconquija S.A. and Vivendi Universal S.A. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/3, Award (Nov. 21, 2000), icsidfiles.worldbank.org/icsid/ICSIDBLOBS/OnlineAwards/C159/DC548_En.pdf.
Compañia del Desarrollo de Santa Elena S.A. v. Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No. ARB/96/1, Award (Feb. 17, 2000), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw6340.pdf.
Grand River Enter. Six Nations, Ltd. v. United States of America, Counter-Memorial, at 160 (Dec. 22, 2008), https://jusmundi.com/en/document/pdf/other/en-grand-river-enterprises-six-nations-ltd-et-al-v-united-states-of-america-respondents-counter-memorial-on-the-merits-monday-22nd-december-2008.
Grand River Enter. Six Nations, Ltd. v. United States of America, Particularized Statement of Claim, ¶¶ 62-69 (June 30, 2005), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw8883_0.pdf.
Grand River Enter. Six Nations, Ltd. v. United States of America, Statement of Claimants` Claims Arising from Allocable Share Amendments, at 1 (Nov. 6, 2006), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw8903.pdf.
John R. Andre v. Government of Canada, Notice of Intent, ¶¶ 35, 51 (Mar. 19, 2010), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw6335.pdf.
Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua, Inter-Am. Ct. Hum. Rts. (Ser. C) Case No. 79, ¶ 103(k) (Judgment of Aug. 31, 2001), available at http://www.corteidh.or.cr/seriecing/serie_c_79_ing.doc.
Metalclad Corporation v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1, Award, ¶¶ 103, 111 (Aug. 30, 2000), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0510.pdf.
Occidental Exploration and Production Co v Ecudaor (Occidental), LCIA Case No UN2467, Award,¶ 177. (July 1, 2004), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0571.pdf.
Philip Morris Brand Sàrl (Switzerland), Philip Morris Products S.A. (Switzerland) and Abal Hermanos S.A. (Uruguay) v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7, Award (July 8, 2016), icsidfiles.worldbank.org/icsid/ICSIDBLOBS/OnlineAwards/C1000/DC9012_En.pdf.
Piero Foresti, Laura de Carli & Others v. The Republic of South Africa, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/07/01, Award (Aug. 4, 2010), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0337.pdf.
S.D. Myers, Inc. v. Government of Canada, Partial Award, ¶ 162 (Nov. 13, 2000), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0747.pdf.
Saluka Investments B.V. v. The Czech Republic, UNCITRAL, Partial Award, ¶ 255 (Mar. 17, 2006), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0740.pdf.
Siemens A.G. v. Republic of Argentina, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Award, ¶ 346 (Jan. 17, 2007), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0790.pdf.
South American Silver Limited v. Bolivia, PCA Case No. 2013-15, Award (Nov. 22, 2018) available at https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw10361.pdf.
Southern Pacific Properties (Middle East) Limited v. Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/84/3, Award (May 20, 1992), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw6314_0.pdf.
Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, S.A.and Vivendi Universal, S.A. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/19, Award (Apr. 9, 2015), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw4365.pdf.
The Rompetrol Group N.V. v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/3, Award, ¶ 170 (May 6, 2013), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw1408.pdf.
Toto Costruzioni Generali S.p.A. v. The Republic of Lebanon, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/12, Decision on Jurisdiction, ¶154 (Sept. 21, 2009), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0869.pdf.
United Parcel Service of America Inc. v. Government of Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/02/1, Award on the Merits (May 24, 2007), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0885.pdf.
Urbaser S.A. and Consorcio de Aguas Bilbao Bizkaia, Bilbao Biskaia Ur Partzuergoa v. The Argentina Republic, Award, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/26, Award, ¶ 34 (Dec. 8, 2016), https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw8136_1.pdf.
研究報告
CORDES KAITLIN Y. ET AL., LEGAL FRAMEWORKS & FOREIGN INVESTMENT: A PRIMER ON GOVERNMENTS’ OBLIGATIONS 9 (2019), https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=sustainable_investment_staffpubs.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, EUROPEAN COMMISSION SERVICES’ POSITION PAPER ON THE SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE NEGOTIATIONS ON AN INVESTMENT PROTECTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE REPUBLIC OF THE UNION OF MYANMAR 5 (2017).
GAUKRODGER DAVID AND KATHRYN GORDON, OECD, INVESTOR STATE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: A SCOPING PAPER FOR THE INVESTMENT POLICY COMMUNITY 64 (2012).
GILBERT JÉRÉMIE, LAND GRABBING, INVESTMENTS & INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS TO LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES: CASE STUDIES AND LEGAL ANALYSIS 40 (2017), https://iwgia.org/images/publications/new-publications/land-grabbing-indigenous-peoples-rights.compressed.pdf.
GORDON KATHRYN, JOACHIM POHL AND MARIE BOUCHARD, OECD, INVESTMENT TREATY LAW, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS CONDUCT: A FACT FINDING SURVEY 3, 5 (2014).
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT, GETTING IT RIGHT: A STEP BY STEP GUIDE TO ASSESS THE IMPACT OF FOREIGN INVESTMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS 2 (2008).
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, EXHAUSTION OF LOCAL REMEDIES IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW 5 (2017), https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/best-practices-exhaustion-local-remedies-law-investment-en.pdf.
MANN HOWARD, INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT AGREEMENTS, BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS: KEY ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES 9 (2008), https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/iia_business_human_rights.pdf.
MARC JACOB, INEF, INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT AGREEMENTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS 26 (2010).
OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHT, HUMAN RIGHTS: A BASIC HANDBOOK FOR UN STAFF 5 (2001) https://ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/HRhandbooken.pdf.
OMWOYO BRIAN ASA, A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE REGIME FOR PROTECTION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW 9 (2014), available at https://reurl.cc/kV8YXn.
PETERSON LUKE ERIC AND KEVIN R. GRAY, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS IN BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES AND IN INVESTMENT TREATY ARBITRATION 30 (2003), https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/investment_int_human_rights_bits.pdf.
PETERSON LUKE ERIC, RESEARCH NOTE: EMERGING BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY ARBITRATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (2003), https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/trade_bits_disputes.pdf?q=sites/default/files/publications/trade_bits_disputes.pdf.
UNCTAD, WORLD INVESTMENT REPORT 2020 Xii (2020), available at https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/wir2020_overview_en.pdf.
聯合國文件
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, UN Doc. CEDAW/C/COL/CO/6, ¶ 29.
Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Doc.
CEDAW/C/PHI/CO/6, ¶ 26 (Aug. 25, 2006).
Committee on the Rights of the Child, UN Doc.
CRC/C/15/Add.232, ¶ 48 (June 30, 2004).
Economic and Social Council, UN Doc E/C.12/GC/24, ¶ 13 (Aug. 10, 2017).
G.A. Res. A/RES/61/295, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, arts. 3, 4, 6, 14, 16 (Sept. 13, 2007).
G.A. Res. A/RES/64/223, ¶ 14 (Mar. 25, 2010).
Human Rights Council, UN Doc. A/HRC/19/59/Add.5 (Dec. 19, 2011).
Report of the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention on Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Study of the Problem of Discrimination against Indigenous Populations, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7/1986 (1986).
U.N. Secretary-General, Report of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on the Impact of International Investment and Free Trade on the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ¶ 20, U.N. Doc. A/70/301 (Aug. 7, 2015).
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Selected Developments in IIA Arbitration and Human Rights, at 12, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/webdiaeia20097_en.pdf.
條約
Convention (No. 169) Concerning Indigenous and Tribal People in Independent Countries, art. 1, 27 June 1989, 1650 U.N.T.S. 383 (entered into force 5 September 1991).
Economic Partnership Agreement between the CARIFORUM States, of The One Part, and the European Community and its Member States, of The Other Part, 2008 O.J. (L 289) 1938, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:22008A1030(01)&from=EN.
ICSID Convention, Regulations and Rules, art. 37.2, Apr. 10, 2006, 575 UNTS 159, https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/documents/ICSID%20Convention%20English.pdf.
U.S. Model BIT (2004), arts. 12, 13, available at http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_066871.pdf.
UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993, at 3, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36c0.html.
UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, at 171, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3aa0.html.
期刊
Aponte Lillian Miranda, The Role of International Law in Intrastate Natural Resource Allocation: Sovereignty, Human Rights, and Peoples-based Development, 45(3) VJTL 785, 828 (2012).
Bodea Cristina and Ye Fangjin, Investor Rights Versus Human Rights: Do Bilateral Investment Treaties Tilt the Scale?, 50(3) BR. J. POLIT. SCI. 955, 957 (2018).
Carpenter Kristen A. & Angela R. Riley, Indigenous Peoples and the Jurisgenerative Moment in Human Rights, 102(1) CALIF. L. REV. 173, 177 (2014).
Christie G. C., What Constitutes a Taking of Property Under International Law? 38 B.Y.I.L. 307, 307-338 (1962).
Foster George K., Investors, States, and Stakeholders: Power Asymmetries in International Investment and the Stabilizing Potential of Investment Treaties, 17(2) LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 361, 361–362 (2013).
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ Rights over Their Ancestral Lands and Natural Resources: Norms and Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Human Rights System, 35 AM. INDIAN L. REV. 263, 463 (2011).
Kastrup José Paulo, The Internationalization of Indigenous Rights from the Environmental and Human Rights Perspective, 32(1) TEX. INT`L L. J. 97, 98 (1997).
Kleinfeld Joshua, The Double Life of International Law: Indigenous Peoples and Extractive Industries, 129(6) HARV. L. REV. 1755, 1756 (2016).
Lenzerini Federico, Sovereignty Revisited: International Law and Parallel Sovereignty of Indigenous Peoples, 42(1) TEX. INT`L L. J. 155, 165 (2007).
Mazel Odette, The Evolution of Rights: Indigenous Peoples and International Law, 13(1) AUSTL. INDIGENOUS L. REV 140,142 (2009).
McLachlan C., The Principle of Systemic Integration and Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention, 54(2) INT COMP LAW Q 279, 286 (2005).
McRae D., International Economic Law and Public International Law: The Past and the Future 17(3) J. INT’L. ECON. L. 627, 635 (2014).
Nowak Manfred, The Need for a World Court of Human Rights, 7(1) HUM. RTS. L. REV. 251, 252-254 (2007).
Peinhardt Clint et. al., Delegating Differences: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bargaining Over Dispute Resolution Provisions, 54(1) INT. STUD. Q. 1, 1-26 (2010).
Simma Bruno, Foreign Investment Arbitration: A Place for Human Rights?, 60(3) CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 573, 576. (2011).
Smelcer John D., Using International Law More Effectively to Secure and Advance Indigenous Peoples’ Rights: Towards Enforcement in U.S. and Australian Domestic Courts, 15 PAC. RIM L. & POL`Y J. 301, 306 (2006).
Sornarajah, M. , The Clash of Globalizations and the International Law of Foreign Investment: The Simon Reisman Lecture in International Trade Policy, 10(2) CAN. FOREIGN POLICY J. 1, 2-10 (2003).
The Double Life of International Law: Indigenous Peoples and Extractive Industries, 129(6) HARV. L. REV. 1755 (2016).
Thompson Alexander et. al., When Do States Renegotiate Investment Agreements?, 13(1) REV. INT. ORGAN. 25, 25-48 (2018).
Ursula Kriebaum, Regulatory Takings: Balancing the Interests of the Investor and the State, 8(5) THE JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT AND TRADE 717, 717-744 (2007).
Vadi Valentina, Heritage, Power, and Destiny: The Protection of Indigenous Heritage in International Investment Law and Arbitration, 50(4) GEO. WASH. L. REV. 101, 143 (2018).
YEARBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 307, 307-338 (1962).
PDF文件
Leo, Benjamin, Where are the BITs? How U.S. Bilateral Investment Treaties with Africa Can Promote Development 3 (Aug. 2010), https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/1424333_file_Leo_BITs_FINAL.pdf.
網站
About ECCHR, ECCHR, https://www.ecchr.eu/en/about-us/ (last visited June 14, 2021).
About Indigenous Peoples and Human Rights, UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IPeoples/Pages/AboutIndigenousPeoples.aspx (last visited June 14, 2021).
Ex Post Evaluations, EUROPEAN COMMISSION, https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/policy-making/analysis/policy-evaluation/ex-post-evaluations/ (last updated June 14, 2021).
Guidelines on the Analysis of Human Rights Impacts in Impact Assessments for Trade-related Policy Initiatives, EUROPEAN COMMISSION, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/july/tradoc_153591.pdf.
How to Incorporate Human Rights Obligations in Bilateral Investment Treaties?, IISD (Mar. 22, 2013), https://www.iisd.org/itn/en/2013/03/22/how-to-incorporate-human-rights-obligations-in-bilateral-investment-treaties/.
Human Rights Day 10 December 2010: Statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER, Human Rights Day 10 December 2010: Statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay (ohchr.org) (last visited June 14, 2021).
Human Rights, UNITED NATIONS, https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/human-rights (last visited June 14, 2021).
Investment Policy Hub: Taiwan Province of China, UNCTAD, https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/countries/205/taiwan-province-of-china (last visited June 14, 2021).
John R. Andre v. Government of Canada, ITALAW, https://www.italaw.com/cases/3377 (last visited June 14, 2021).
Non-Disputing Party Submission - ICSID Convention Arbitration, ICSID, https://icsid.worldbank.org/services/arbitration/convention/process/ndp (last visited June 14, 2021).
Provost Claire and Matt Kennard, UK Investment Treaty with Colombia Threatens Fragile Peace Process, THE GUARDIAN (July 9, 2014), https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/jul/09/uk-investment-treaty-colombia-human-rights.
Shah Anup, Rights of Indigenous People, GLOBAL ISSUES (Oct. 16, 2010), https://www.globalissues.org/article/693/rights-of-indigenous-people#IndigenousPeoplesStruggleAroundTheWorld.
Sustainability Impact Assessments, EUROPEAN COMMISSION, https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/policy-making/analysis/policy-evaluation/sustainability-impact-assessments/ (last updated June 14, 2021).
Top Ten Business and Human Rights, INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS, https://www.ihrb.org/library/top-10/top-ten-issues-in-2012 (last visited June 14, 2021).
Who We Are: The World’s Largest Corporate Sustainability Initiative, UNITED NATIONS GLOBAL COMPACT, https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc (last visited June 14, 2021).
World Bank Operational Directive 4.20 Paragraph, MINORITY RIGHTS GROUP INTERNATIONAL, https://minorityrights.org/law-and-legal-cases/world-bank-operational-directive-4-20-paragraph-2/ (last visited June 14, 2021). |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
國際經營與貿易學系
107351044 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107351044 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202100521 |
| Appears in Collections: | [國際經營與貿易學系 ] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 104401.pdf | 3522Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 17 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
