《國家責任條款草案》編纂過程中“受害國”含義演變問題研究

The Evolution of the Meaning of Injured State during the Coding Process of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts

“受害國”是確立國家責任“存在的理由”。在國家責任條款編纂過程中，“受害國”的含義及其條款在結構上經歷了從“國際責任的內容、形式與程度”到“國家國際不法行為的法律後果”，再到“一國國際責任的履行”這樣一個變化過程；在形式上，不同方案的提出分別經歷了“化繁為簡”和“化簡為繁”、從單一方案到多個方案並存的過程；在內容上，幾位特別報告員均聚焦於違反初級規則的性質及後果。“受害國”含義條款編纂的最大進展，在於認識到不同類型的“受害國”均有權實施制裁和採取反措施。最終通過的案文在“損害”上堅持了寬泛標準，並將其與實質性後果和工具性後果合併考慮，賦予了不同類型的國家以不同的權利範圍，但在手段上，“受害國”與“受害國以外的國家”並無實質性區別。

The definition for“injured state”is the raison d’être for coding the topic of state responsibility. During the coding process of this topic, the meaning of“injured state”and its provisions have undergone a change from“the content, form and degree of international responsibility”to“legal consequences of internationally wrongful acts of States”, and then to“the implementation of the international responsibility of a State”. For its form, the different proposals have gone through the process of“complexity to simplicity”and“simplicity to complexity”respectively, from a single option to multiple options. In terms of its content, all the three Special Rapporteurs have focused on the nature and consequences of violations of primary rules. The greatest progress in the codification of the concept of ''injured State'' is acknowledging that different types of injured States have the right to impose sanctions and take countermeasures. The final adopted draft articles adhere to a broad standard of“injury”and considers it together with substantive and instrumental consequences, endows different types of states with different scope of rights. However, in terms of means, there is no substantial difference between“an injured State”and“a State other than an injured State”