国际法的遵守与实施:航空安全迈向全球统一

Paul Stephen Dempsey, Leiyin Wang
{"title":"国际法的遵守与实施:航空安全迈向全球统一","authors":"Paul Stephen Dempsey, Leiyin Wang","doi":"10.55574/gnzy3829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"无人遵守且无法实施的法律与诗歌无异——虽悦耳动听,但对我们生活的现实世界鲜有影响。现有的研究并未完全把国际规范和遵守国际法律义务统一起来;甚至需要达成广泛共识来实现国际协作的领域,也没有完全达成一致。受各国固有主权、参差不齐的经济发展水平、以及种类繁多的政治优先事项影响,遵守国际义务并不是一件容易的事。本文将考察有关国际航空安全的法律法规,同时也会论及在遵守国际义务中单边及多边所做出的努力。国际商业航空提供了有价值的研究案例,让国际社会在守法的前提下,得以共同探寻互利的可能性。国际习惯法、国际组织颁布的类法律准则,以及国内法规与程序法,增进了我们对复杂国际企业的理解,比如,商业航空公司是如何在国际舞台发挥其影响力的。1944年,国际社会急待通过统一的立法来保障航空安全。这需要一个管理国际航空的组织,其不仅享有制定国际航空安全规则的准立法权,同时也有权强制让成员国通过国内法来执行这些规则。然而,除了主要成员国和国际组织所做的努力,这一目标推进得十分缓慢。因此,把航空安全作为一个典型课题,不仅可以研究国家遵守国际义务的意愿和能力,还可探索激励或强制履行国际义务的方式。这一研究之所以重要,还有一个更加现实的原因,即安全(safety)和保安(security)密切相关。对二者进行规定,除了可以避免人身损害和财产损失,最重要的是可以防止人们失去生命。不过,二者也存在区别。安全的规定用来预防意外伤害,而保安的规定则用来预防故意伤害。正如普通法中过错责任(fault-based negligence)和故意侵权(intentional torts)的区别:后者比前者的过错更大,且会面临更加严格的惩罚。2001年9月11日的悲剧后,保安成为国际航空界最为关心的目标。可实际上,乘客死于航空安全的概率比死于空中恐怖袭击的概率高出10倍。因此,研究航空安全在实践中的重要性,其意义远大于充满感情色彩的航空保安研究。在商业航空中,安全的优先级一定是最高的。统计数据表明,国际航空的安全性近年来显著提升。究其原因,一方面归功于日益进步的技术,另一方面也得益于不断完善的法律。本文关注的是后一个问题。 Law without compliance and enforcement is like poetry – it is pleasing to the ear, but has little to do with the practical world in which we live. The study of efforts to achieve uniformity in international norms and compliance with international legal obligations reveals mixed success, even in areas where there is widespread consensus for the need to have international harmony. Given the inherent sovereignty of states, the heterogeneous levels of economic ability, and the diversity of political priorities, securing compliance with international obligations is rarely an effortless task. This article addresses legal norms governing international aviation safety, as well as both unilateral and multilateral efforts to achieve state compliance with those international legal obligations. Commercial international aviation provides a useful case study of how the world community seeks to achieve mutual self-interest by securing global harmony in law. The interplay between conventional international law, quasi-legal standards promulgated by international organizations, and national laws, regulations, and procedures offers insights as to how complex international enterprises, such as commercial aviation, play on the world stage. In 1944, the world community acknowledged the need to achieve safety in international aviation through uniformity in law by establishing an organization to govern international aviation, conferring upon it quasi-legislative power to prescribe standards governing international aviation safety, and obliging member states to implement these standards through their domestic laws. Despite the efforts of major aviation nations and international organizations, those goals are only sluggishly being achieved. Thus, aviation safety can serve as a case study to inquire into the ability and willingness, on the one hand, or inability and unwillingness, on the other, of states to conform to their international obligations and the means by which they can be encouraged, or coerced, to comply. This inquiry is important for another less theoretical and more practical reason. Safety and security are two sides of the same coin. The regulation of both is designed to avoid injuries to persons and property, and the deprivation of man’s most valuable attribute – life. Yet the two are quite different, as well. Safety regulation focuses on preventing accidental harm. Security regulation focuses on preventing intentional harm. Like the common law difference between fault-based negligence and intentional torts, the latter involves more culpability than the former, and is deterred by more serious penalties. Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, security has become a paramount concern in international aviation community. Yet a passenger is ten times more likely to lose his life in an aviation safety-related accident than in an aviation terrorist event. Hence, the study of aviation safety is of far more practical importance than the more emotionally driven study of aviation security. Safety must be among the highest priorities in commercial aviation. All statistical evidence indicates that international aviation has become decidedly safer in recent decades. Though much of that positive result can be attributed to improvements in technology, much can also be attributed to improvements in the law. It is the latter subject that is the focus of this article.","PeriodicalId":512508,"journal":{"name":"China Law Journal","volume":"8 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"国际法的遵守与实施:航空安全迈向全球统一\",\"authors\":\"Paul Stephen Dempsey, Leiyin Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.55574/gnzy3829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"无人遵守且无法实施的法律与诗歌无异——虽悦耳动听,但对我们生活的现实世界鲜有影响。现有的研究并未完全把国际规范和遵守国际法律义务统一起来;甚至需要达成广泛共识来实现国际协作的领域,也没有完全达成一致。受各国固有主权、参差不齐的经济发展水平、以及种类繁多的政治优先事项影响,遵守国际义务并不是一件容易的事。本文将考察有关国际航空安全的法律法规,同时也会论及在遵守国际义务中单边及多边所做出的努力。国际商业航空提供了有价值的研究案例,让国际社会在守法的前提下,得以共同探寻互利的可能性。国际习惯法、国际组织颁布的类法律准则,以及国内法规与程序法,增进了我们对复杂国际企业的理解,比如,商业航空公司是如何在国际舞台发挥其影响力的。1944年,国际社会急待通过统一的立法来保障航空安全。这需要一个管理国际航空的组织,其不仅享有制定国际航空安全规则的准立法权,同时也有权强制让成员国通过国内法来执行这些规则。然而,除了主要成员国和国际组织所做的努力,这一目标推进得十分缓慢。因此,把航空安全作为一个典型课题,不仅可以研究国家遵守国际义务的意愿和能力,还可探索激励或强制履行国际义务的方式。这一研究之所以重要,还有一个更加现实的原因,即安全(safety)和保安(security)密切相关。对二者进行规定,除了可以避免人身损害和财产损失,最重要的是可以防止人们失去生命。不过,二者也存在区别。安全的规定用来预防意外伤害,而保安的规定则用来预防故意伤害。正如普通法中过错责任(fault-based negligence)和故意侵权(intentional torts)的区别:后者比前者的过错更大,且会面临更加严格的惩罚。2001年9月11日的悲剧后,保安成为国际航空界最为关心的目标。可实际上,乘客死于航空安全的概率比死于空中恐怖袭击的概率高出10倍。因此,研究航空安全在实践中的重要性,其意义远大于充满感情色彩的航空保安研究。在商业航空中,安全的优先级一定是最高的。统计数据表明,国际航空的安全性近年来显著提升。究其原因,一方面归功于日益进步的技术,另一方面也得益于不断完善的法律。本文关注的是后一个问题。 Law without compliance and enforcement is like poetry – it is pleasing to the ear, but has little to do with the practical world in which we live. The study of efforts to achieve uniformity in international norms and compliance with international legal obligations reveals mixed success, even in areas where there is widespread consensus for the need to have international harmony. Given the inherent sovereignty of states, the heterogeneous levels of economic ability, and the diversity of political priorities, securing compliance with international obligations is rarely an effortless task. This article addresses legal norms governing international aviation safety, as well as both unilateral and multilateral efforts to achieve state compliance with those international legal obligations. Commercial international aviation provides a useful case study of how the world community seeks to achieve mutual self-interest by securing global harmony in law. The interplay between conventional international law, quasi-legal standards promulgated by international organizations, and national laws, regulations, and procedures offers insights as to how complex international enterprises, such as commercial aviation, play on the world stage. In 1944, the world community acknowledged the need to achieve safety in international aviation through uniformity in law by establishing an organization to govern international aviation, conferring upon it quasi-legislative power to prescribe standards governing international aviation safety, and obliging member states to implement these standards through their domestic laws. Despite the efforts of major aviation nations and international organizations, those goals are only sluggishly being achieved. Thus, aviation safety can serve as a case study to inquire into the ability and willingness, on the one hand, or inability and unwillingness, on the other, of states to conform to their international obligations and the means by which they can be encouraged, or coerced, to comply. This inquiry is important for another less theoretical and more practical reason. Safety and security are two sides of the same coin. The regulation of both is designed to avoid injuries to persons and property, and the deprivation of man’s most valuable attribute – life. Yet the two are quite different, as well. Safety regulation focuses on preventing accidental harm. Security regulation focuses on preventing intentional harm. Like the common law difference between fault-based negligence and intentional torts, the latter involves more culpability than the former, and is deterred by more serious penalties. Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, security has become a paramount concern in international aviation community. Yet a passenger is ten times more likely to lose his life in an aviation safety-related accident than in an aviation terrorist event. Hence, the study of aviation safety is of far more practical importance than the more emotionally driven study of aviation security. Safety must be among the highest priorities in commercial aviation. All statistical evidence indicates that international aviation has become decidedly safer in recent decades. Though much of that positive result can be attributed to improvements in technology, much can also be attributed to improvements in the law. It is the latter subject that is the focus of this article.\",\"PeriodicalId\":512508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"China Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"8 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"China Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55574/gnzy3829\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"China Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55574/gnzy3829","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

无人遵守且无法实施的法律与诗歌无异--虽悦耳动听,但对我们生活的现实世界鲜有影响。现有的研究并未完全把国际规范和遵守国际法律义务统一起来;甚至需要达成广泛共识来实现国际协作的领域,也没有完全达成一致。受各国固有主权、参差不齐的经济发展水平、以及种类繁多的政治优先事项影响,遵守国际义务并不是一件容易的事。本文将考察有关国际航空安全的法律法规,同时也会论及在遵守国际义务中单边及多边所做出的努力。国际商业航空提供了有价值的研究案例,让国际社会在守法的前提下,得以共同探寻互利的可能性。国际习惯法、国际组织颁布的类法律准则,以及国内法规与程序法,增进了我们对复杂国际企业的理解,比如,商业航空公司是如何在国际舞台发挥其影响力的。1944年,国际社会急待通过统一的立法来保障航空安全。这需要一个管理国际航空的组织,其不仅享有制定国际航空安全规则的准立法权,同时也有权强制让成员国通过国内法来执行这些规则。然而,除了主要成员国和国际组基于过失)和故意侵权(intentional本文关注的是后一个问题。究其原因,一方面归功于日益进步的技术,另一方面也得益于不断完善的法律、但与我们所生活的现实世界关系不大。对实现国际准则统一和遵守国际法律义务的努力进行的研究表明,即使是在就需要国际和谐达成广泛共识的领域,所取得的成功也是喜忧参半。鉴于各国固有的主权、不同的经济能力水平以及政治优先事项的多样性,确保遵守国际义务很少是一件轻而易举的事。本文探讨了国际航空安全的法律规范,以及各国为履行这些国际法律义务而做出的单边和多边努力。国际商业航空提供了一个有用的案例研究,说明国际社会如何通过确保全球法律和谐来实现共同的自身利益。传统国际法、国际组织颁布的准法律标准以及国家法律、法规和程序之间的相互作用,为商业航空等复杂的国际企业如何在世界舞台上发挥作用提供了启示。1944 年,国际社会认识到有必要通过统一法律来实现国际航空安全,为此成立了一个管理国际航空的组织,赋予该组织准立法权,规定国际航空安全标准,并责成成员国通过国内法实施这些标准。尽管主要航空国家和国际组织都做出了努力,但这些目标的实现进展缓慢。因此,航空安全可以作为一个案例研究,探究国家履行国际义务的能力和意愿,或国家履行国际义务的能力和意愿,以及鼓励或强迫国家履行义务的手段。这一问题之所以重要,还有另一个理论性不强、实践性更强的原因。安全与保障是一枚硬币的两面。对二者的管理都是为了避免对人身和财产造成伤害,避免剥夺人类最宝贵的属性--生命。然而,两者也有很大不同。安全监管侧重于防止意外伤害。安全监管侧重于防止蓄意伤害。就像普通法中基于过失的疏忽和故意侵权之间的区别一样,后者比前者涉及更多的罪责,并受到更严重的惩罚。自 2001 年 9 月 11 日的悲惨事件以来,安全已成为国际航空界最为关注的问题。然而,与航空恐怖事件相比,乘客在与航空安全相关的事故中丧生的可能性要高出十倍。因此,对航空安全的研究远比对航空保安的研究更有实际意义。安全必须是商业航空的重中之重。所有统计证据都表明,近几十年来,国际航空明显变得更加安全。虽然这一积极成果的大部分可归功于技术的改进,但也有很大一部分可归功于法律的改进。本文的重点正是后者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国际法的遵守与实施:航空安全迈向全球统一
无人遵守且无法实施的法律与诗歌无异——虽悦耳动听,但对我们生活的现实世界鲜有影响。现有的研究并未完全把国际规范和遵守国际法律义务统一起来;甚至需要达成广泛共识来实现国际协作的领域,也没有完全达成一致。受各国固有主权、参差不齐的经济发展水平、以及种类繁多的政治优先事项影响,遵守国际义务并不是一件容易的事。本文将考察有关国际航空安全的法律法规,同时也会论及在遵守国际义务中单边及多边所做出的努力。国际商业航空提供了有价值的研究案例,让国际社会在守法的前提下,得以共同探寻互利的可能性。国际习惯法、国际组织颁布的类法律准则,以及国内法规与程序法,增进了我们对复杂国际企业的理解,比如,商业航空公司是如何在国际舞台发挥其影响力的。1944年,国际社会急待通过统一的立法来保障航空安全。这需要一个管理国际航空的组织,其不仅享有制定国际航空安全规则的准立法权,同时也有权强制让成员国通过国内法来执行这些规则。然而,除了主要成员国和国际组织所做的努力,这一目标推进得十分缓慢。因此,把航空安全作为一个典型课题,不仅可以研究国家遵守国际义务的意愿和能力,还可探索激励或强制履行国际义务的方式。这一研究之所以重要,还有一个更加现实的原因,即安全(safety)和保安(security)密切相关。对二者进行规定,除了可以避免人身损害和财产损失,最重要的是可以防止人们失去生命。不过,二者也存在区别。安全的规定用来预防意外伤害,而保安的规定则用来预防故意伤害。正如普通法中过错责任(fault-based negligence)和故意侵权(intentional torts)的区别:后者比前者的过错更大,且会面临更加严格的惩罚。2001年9月11日的悲剧后,保安成为国际航空界最为关心的目标。可实际上,乘客死于航空安全的概率比死于空中恐怖袭击的概率高出10倍。因此,研究航空安全在实践中的重要性,其意义远大于充满感情色彩的航空保安研究。在商业航空中,安全的优先级一定是最高的。统计数据表明,国际航空的安全性近年来显著提升。究其原因,一方面归功于日益进步的技术,另一方面也得益于不断完善的法律。本文关注的是后一个问题。 Law without compliance and enforcement is like poetry – it is pleasing to the ear, but has little to do with the practical world in which we live. The study of efforts to achieve uniformity in international norms and compliance with international legal obligations reveals mixed success, even in areas where there is widespread consensus for the need to have international harmony. Given the inherent sovereignty of states, the heterogeneous levels of economic ability, and the diversity of political priorities, securing compliance with international obligations is rarely an effortless task. This article addresses legal norms governing international aviation safety, as well as both unilateral and multilateral efforts to achieve state compliance with those international legal obligations. Commercial international aviation provides a useful case study of how the world community seeks to achieve mutual self-interest by securing global harmony in law. The interplay between conventional international law, quasi-legal standards promulgated by international organizations, and national laws, regulations, and procedures offers insights as to how complex international enterprises, such as commercial aviation, play on the world stage. In 1944, the world community acknowledged the need to achieve safety in international aviation through uniformity in law by establishing an organization to govern international aviation, conferring upon it quasi-legislative power to prescribe standards governing international aviation safety, and obliging member states to implement these standards through their domestic laws. Despite the efforts of major aviation nations and international organizations, those goals are only sluggishly being achieved. Thus, aviation safety can serve as a case study to inquire into the ability and willingness, on the one hand, or inability and unwillingness, on the other, of states to conform to their international obligations and the means by which they can be encouraged, or coerced, to comply. This inquiry is important for another less theoretical and more practical reason. Safety and security are two sides of the same coin. The regulation of both is designed to avoid injuries to persons and property, and the deprivation of man’s most valuable attribute – life. Yet the two are quite different, as well. Safety regulation focuses on preventing accidental harm. Security regulation focuses on preventing intentional harm. Like the common law difference between fault-based negligence and intentional torts, the latter involves more culpability than the former, and is deterred by more serious penalties. Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, security has become a paramount concern in international aviation community. Yet a passenger is ten times more likely to lose his life in an aviation safety-related accident than in an aviation terrorist event. Hence, the study of aviation safety is of far more practical importance than the more emotionally driven study of aviation security. Safety must be among the highest priorities in commercial aviation. All statistical evidence indicates that international aviation has become decidedly safer in recent decades. Though much of that positive result can be attributed to improvements in technology, much can also be attributed to improvements in the law. It is the latter subject that is the focus of this article.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
元宇宙背景下个人生物信息的法理辨析及保护路径 国际法院对国际人权法的阐释与发展 论运用医疗人工智能的说明义务 元宇宙背景下个人生物信息的法理辨析及保护路径 基于Lawler-Porter综合激励模型的竞争合规制度建构探析
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1