学园天堂和希启太h:请翻一段英文

来源:百度文库 编辑:神马品牌网 时间:2024/04/30 05:19:30
5、建立与完善我国反倾销诉讼体制。
(1)、合格的诉讼主体。 一般而言,原告是指反倾销诉讼中 “利害关系方”。虽然我国《反倾销条例》也有“利害关系方”的概念,但是却没有对其做出明确界定。从现行《条例》第19条的规定来看,所谓“利害关系方”似乎仅限于反倾销调查对象——被控告倾销产品的出口商及其进口经营商以及相同或类似产品的国内产业,而并不包括其他各方。笔者认为:“利害关系方”的范围应当包括现行《条例》第11条之反倾销调查案的申请人所包含的“有关组织”,因为从利害关系角度考察,一个反倾销案件不仅事关该产品的出口商、进口商与国内同类产品产业的利益,而且也同我国各产业部门公会、工会以及消费者密切相关。而在当前我国国内产业与企业法律意识不强,市场本身尚缺规范的情形下,尽可能地拓宽“利害关系方”的范围则更加有利于尊重和维护各方利益,保护我国市场。同时,鉴于我国的行业组织的发展还不具备一定规模,为了更好的保护我国经济,我们还可以规定国家有关主管部门有权提起反倾销诉讼。
(2)、管辖法院。参照我国《行政诉讼法》第14条、17条以及相关司法解释,受理反倾销调查案件之诉的法院应当是被告所在地——外经贸部、国家经贸委机构所在的北京市中级人民法院。同样,有权对反倾销调查案进行二审的就理所当然地是北京市高级人民法院了。我国《反倾销条例》对反倾销调查案的管辖法院没有规定成为一大缺憾,按《行政诉讼法》的规定这种管辖也令人质疑。由于反倾销调查是技术性强、专业化要求高、程序复杂的工作,对其进行司法审查也是一项艰巨的任务,普通法院处理可能有时间和精力乃至能力上的困难;况且,地方中级人民法院和中央部委地位上、权威上的实际反差在当前的司法体制下,也难免影响国内外当事人对反倾销司法审查的独立性,公正性和准确性的信心;再者,所有对国务院部门所做出的具体行政行为提起诉讼都由北京的某一中级人民法院初审,北京市高级人民法院二审,那么,这两级法院将会面临着越来越沉重的负担,也难免会影响到司法效率。鉴此,有必要在反倾销立法中建立我国反倾销诉讼制度,包括管辖法院。参照各国经验暨我国实践,比较理想的法院管辖模式为:在最高人民法院下设专门法院——国际贸易法院,由该院受理反倾销调查案的初审;最高人民法院(设立国际贸易庭)负责二审即终审。这样设置的优点在于集中专业法官审理技术性强、影响性较大的反倾销案(实际上,国际贸易法庭不仅审理反倾销调查案,还可以审理涉外贸易的其他案件),更加体现效率与公正。
(3)、法院的受案范围。参考发达国家和发展中国家的有关立法实践和我国行政法和行政诉讼法的具体规定,笔者以为我国的反倾销诉讼的受案范围可以是以下几项:反倾销调查申请做出的不立案调查决定;对倾销和反倾销幅度做出的最终的决定;对损害和损害程度做出的最终的决定;对是否征收反倾销税做出的最后裁定等等有关的 具体行政行为。⑧同时,我国也应该参考欧洲国家的做法,不允许对我国的法律规定提起诉讼,这是对我国法律尊严和国家主权的维护。

5th, establishes and consummates our country instead to dump the lawsuit system.
(1), qualified lawsuit main body. Generally speaking, the plaintiff is refers instead dumps in the lawsuit "the formidable relational side". Although our country "Instead Dumps Rule" also has "the formidable relational side" the concept, but has not made actually to it is clear about the limits. The 19th stipulation looked from present "Rule" that, so-called "the formidable relational side" is as if only restricted in instead dumps the investigation object - to accuse dumps the product the exporter and its imports as well as is same or the similar product home industry, but not including other all quarters. The author thought that, "Formidable relational side" "the related organization" which presently the scope must include "Rule" 11th instead to dump the applicant which investigation document contains, because from the formidable relational angle inspection, instead dumps the case not only the critical time this product exporter, the importer and the domestic similar product industry benefit, moreover also with our country various industries department trade union, the trade union as well as the consumer closely is connected. But is not strong in the current our country's home industry and enterprise law consciousness, market itself still lacked the standard under the situation, opened up "the formidable relational side" as far as possible the scope then was more advantageous to the respect and the maintenance all quarters benefit, protected our country market. At the same time, in view of the fact that our country's profession organization's development does not have the certain scale, in order to better protects our country economy, we also may stipulate the country concerned department responsible for the work is authorized to raise the rebellion to dump the lawsuit.
(2), has jurisdiction over the court. Refers to our country "Administrative Procedural law" 14th, 17 as well as the related judicial interpretation, accepts instead dumps the court which the investigation case sues to have to be the Beijing intermediate people's court which defendant locus - Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation, the national Economic and Trade Committee organization is at. Similarly, was authorized to instead to dump the investigation document to carry on second trials naturally is the Beijing Higher People's Court. Our country "Instead Dumps Rule" to instead to dump the investigation document the jurisdiction court not to stipulate into a big disappointment, according to "Administrative Procedural law" stipulation this kind of jurisdiction also makes one question. Because instead dumps the investigation is the technical nature is strong, the specialization high requests, the procedure complex work, carries on the judicial examination to it also is an arduous duty, ordinary court processing possibly has in the time and the energy and even the ability difficulty; Moreover, place intermediate people's court and in on central ministries and commissions status, authority's actual contrast under current judicial system, also affects the domestic and foreign litigants to instead to dump the judicial examination unavoidably the independence, the fairness and the accurate confidence; Furthermore, possesses the concrete administrative action which makes to the State Council department to file the lawsuit all by Beijing's some intermediate people's court first trial, Beijing Higher People's Court second trials, then, these two levels of courts will be able to face the more and more serious burden, also will be able to affect unavoidably the judicial efficiency. Reflects this, it is necessary instead to dump in the legislation to found our country instead to dump the lawsuit system, including has jurisdiction over the court. The reference various countries experience and our country practice, compared with the ideal court jurisdiction pattern is: Supposes the special court - international trade court under the Supreme People's Court, accepts by this courtyard instead dumps the investigation document the first trial; The Supreme People's Court (establishment international trade courtyard) is responsible for second trials namely to trial in final. Like this establishes the merit lies in centralism specialized judge strongly to try the technical nature, big instead to dump the document (in fact, international trade court not only tries instead to dump investigation document, but also may try to touch on foreign affairs the trade other cases), even more manifests the efficiency and is fair.
(3), court document scope. Refers to the developed country and the developing nation related legislation practice with our country administrative law and the administrative procedural law specific stipulation, the author thought our country instead dumps the lawsuit the document scope to be possible to be following several items: Instead dumps the investigation application to make does not put on record the investigation decision; To dumps the final decision which makes with instead the dumping profit margin; To harms the final decision which makes with the harm degree; To whether levies instead dumps the tax to make finally rules and so on the related concrete administrative action. (8) At the same time, our country also should refer to the European country the procedure, does not allow to our country's legal rule to file the lawsuit, this is to our country legal sanctity and the national sovereignty maintenance.