請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/87970
標題: | 對疾病發源國的國際咎責——以 COVID-19 為例 State Accountability for Pandemic: A Case Study of COVID-19 |
作者: | 向恩 En Hsiang |
指導教授: | 姜皇池 Huang-Chih Chiang |
關鍵字: | 國際公法,國際衛生法,疾病發源國責任,疾病咎責法律基礎,國際咎責管道,COVID-19, international law,international health law,the international obligations for pandemic-originated state,the legal responsibility for pandemic-originated state,the accountability forums under international law,COVID-19, |
出版年 : | 2023 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | COVID-19 於 2019 年年底爆發,自 2020 年起,「如何向疾病發源國咎責」 成為國際間備受討論的議題。事實上,綜觀國家間齊心抗疫之經驗,COVID-19 並非各國首次面對嚴重傳染性疾病,「對疾病發源國違反國際義務之咎責問題」 亦非初次浮上檯面。然即便過去此議題曾被提出,後卻因疾病的趨緩或消逝而 討論不再。是故,「疾病發源國之國際義務和咎責方式」長期受到忽略,直至近 年因 COVID-19 為世界帶來前所未有的不便,此議題方再度受到重視。
由於疾病發源國為防疫的重要角色,若國際上對其咎責機制不完善,難免遭遇未來疾病發源國重蹈覆轍,違背國際義務而錯失抑制疾病擴散機會之風險。為分析目前國際上對疾病發源國之咎責可能性,本論文首先檢視現行國際法下 疾病發源國之義務,後討論對其咎責之可能法律基礎與管道,同時比較採行各管道可能面臨的優劣勢,最後再針對本次 COVID-19 疫情,探討對疾病發源國 之咎責可能性,並分析國家於咎責過程中將面臨的困難。 本文的結論包括以下:一、在防疫一事上,「事前監督」和「事後咎責」不應偏廢,然由目前 WHO 修法方向以觀,仍僅強化監督機制,而忽略事後檢討、矯正之重要性;二、「對疾病發源國咎責」之議題熱度須繼續維持,方有利於未來的改革與實踐;三、現行國際上對疾病發源國之咎責機制不全,本文提出修改建議;四、由於過去未曾有向疾病發源國咎責之例,故國家利用現有管道為任何嘗試,皆極具參考價值。 After the outbreak of COVID-19, the discussion about “state accountability for pandemic” has become popular since 2020. In fact, this issue has been raised for several times when the pandemics happened among countries. However, with the pandemics under control, the related discussions faded away. As a result, the question “when the state where pandemic originated (pandemic-originated state) breaching its international obligations, what are the ways to hold it accountable?” remains unsolved. But if the effective accountability system for pandemics does not exist, pandemic- originated state will not have enough motivation to comply with its obligations. In other words, states are all still under the risk of future pandemic raging arising from the pandemic-originated state breaking the rules. To explore this issue, this thesis firstly lists the international obligations that pandemic-originated state has under current international law. Second, it turns to analyze when states are going to hold pandemic- originated state accountable for breaching its obligations, what are the possible legal bases and forums for them to choose from. Third, it makes comparisons among different forums and points out the problems in the current mechanisms. Last, it goes back to COVID-19 and examines whether states can use the ways mentioned above to make China take on the responsibility for this global pandemic. In this thesis, four conclusions are drawn: First, to build a sound pandemic prevention system for the world, the supervision and the accountability systems should both be created. Second, the discussions and debates for this topic should be continued. It will help the innovations for the related regulations. Third, the current accountability systems for pandemic are still not effective enough, so the thesis submits its own proposal. Last, since there have been no previous cases for holding pandemic- originated state responsible, any new try can be invaluable. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/87970 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202301152 |
全文授權: | 同意授權(全球公開) |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf | 2.9 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。