首页|制裁抑或反制裁?——欧盟《反经济胁迫条例》的国际法分析及应对

制裁抑或反制裁?——欧盟《反经济胁迫条例》的国际法分析及应对

扫码查看
欧盟制定的《反经济胁迫条例》通过"经济胁迫"概念将第三国的合法经贸措施非法化,并试图通过反应机制与行动流程实现消极防御与竞争博弈的双重目标.该条例本质上是欧盟创设的一种兼具"制裁"与"反制裁"性质的新型法律工具,在国际投资和贸易条约以及相关习惯国际法上的合法性都存疑.鉴于该条例的实施可能会对中国企业造成负面影响进而触发我国的反制裁法律制度,我国应从提升企业应对能力、寻求司法救济、完善反制裁体系、参与构建国际规则及话语等四个维度统筹应对条例潜在的不利影响,积极维护我国的主权、安全和发展利益.
The EU's Anti-Coercion Instrument tends to designate legitimate trade and economic measures taken by third countries as illegal under the concept of"economic coercion."By establishing response mechanisms and operational processes,the Instrument aims to achieve both passive defense and competitive attack.Essentially,this instrument represents a novel legal tool created by the EU,combining elements of"sanction"and"counter-sanction,"whose legality remains questionable under international investment and trade treaties and relevant customary international law.Given the potential adverse impacts on Chinese enterprises that may trigger counter-sanction mechanisms,China should take a comprehensive approach to address the potential negative effects.Recommended measures include strengthening corporate resilience,seeking judicial relief,enhancing the counter-sanction framework,and actively engaging in the formation of international rules to protect China's developmental interests.

economic sanctioneconomic coercioncounter-sanctionforeign-related rule of law

包康赟

展开 >

清华大学法学院

经济胁迫 经济制裁 反制裁 涉外法治

2025

财经法学

财经法学

ISSN:
年,卷(期):2025.(1)