試析投資者－國家爭端解決機制當代改革的歐盟模式──以歐盟TTIP建議案中常設投資法院機制為例

An Analysis of EU's Model for Current Reformation of Investor -State Dispute Settlement Mechanism -Taking for Example the Investment Court Systen in EU's TTIP Proposal

為了解決投資仲裁正當性危機，歐盟利用歐美《TTIP協定》談判的機會提出了歐盟模式的改革方案即建立投資法院機制。該機制不僅提高了程式透明度、加大了第三方和非爭端締約方參與程式的力度、選任了一批更具獨立性的法官，而且首次採納了一套系統的上訴機制，還對歐盟法問題進行了妥善安排。儘管投資法院機制對投資仲裁機制作出了種種完善,但它本身性質上屬於司法還是仲裁依然未定，它所作裁決能否得到有效執行取決於它未來能否實現多邊化。更為重要的是，進行深入分析後，它的存在可能依然與歐盟法律秩序的要求不符，這些未解和缺陷均可能成為這一歐盟模式為更多國家所接受的阻礙。

To resolve the legitimacy crisis of investment arbitration, the EU, taking advantage of the TTIP Agreement negotiation, has proposed its own model of reform, which is the establishment of Investment Court System (ICS). The ICS has not only improved procedural transparency, provided more chances for non-disputing parties and third parties'involvement, formed a group of independent judges, but also adopted for the first time a systematic appellate mechanism; besides, this mechanism has also made proper arrangement for EU law issues. Though perfections have been made, it is still indefinite whether it is a judicial or arbitral mechanism, and the enforcement of its award depended on multilateralization of the mechanism. What's more, there is a possibility that it is inconsistent with EU legal order after deep analysis, all these defects will become obstacles for more countries to accept this EU model.