[2009.11.26] ECO 法庭上見 See you in court

Quattrocentist

Europe

Kosovo and Serbia
科索沃和塞爾維亞

See you in court
法庭上見
Nov 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition
An international court case creates tremors(震動) in the Balkans and beyond
國際法院案件引發地震，波及巴爾幹及遠方



KOSOVO is a tiny place. But on December 1st, when hearings begin at the United Nations’ International Court of Justice on the legality of its 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia, people from Catalonia to Tibet will be paying it close attention. Serbia persuaded the UN general assembly(議會) just over a year ago to ask the court to intervene(干涉). Its ruling may have ramifications(分枝) around the world.
科索沃是個小地方。但是當聽說12月1日國際法院會判決科索沃2008年宣告從塞爾維亞獨立具有合法性時，從加太羅尼西亞到西藏的人民將會密切關注。僅僅在一年以前，塞爾維亞說服聯大要求國際法院介入。法院的裁決將會對全世界產生影響。

Unlike the six former republics that became states after Yugoslavia collapsed in the 1990s, Kosovo was a province of Serbia. But some 90% of its 2m-odd people are ethnic(種族(上)的) Albanians. In Yugoslav times it had many of the attributes of a republic, with an assembly and government. After NATO’s war in 1999, it became a UN ward(保護).
與此前的六個在南斯拉夫九十年代倒臺後成立的共和國不同，科索沃是塞爾維亞的一個省。但是其兩百來萬居民中90％是阿爾巴尼亞人。在南斯拉夫時代，其近似於共和國體制，具有議會與政府。在1999年北約戰爭後，它變成了聯合國的監護區。

Serbia’s lawyers argue that Kosovo’s assembly had no right to declare independence and the UN should have nullified(廢除) its act. The Kosovars reply that this is a constitutional question, not an issue of international law, so the court has no business opining(表示意見) on it. They also insist that Kosovo had a right to self-determination, just as much as the ex-Yugoslav republics.
塞爾維亞的律師指出，科索沃的議會無權宣告獨立，聯合國應當廢除其決議。科索沃反駁認為，這是一個憲法問題，而非國際法問題，因此國際法院無權對其進行判決。他們還堅持認為科索沃具有自決權，就如同前南斯拉夫共和國一樣。

In all likelihood, the opinion of the court (which is not binding) will be vague, because there are many differing views over self-determination. Most Western countries (but not, eg, Spain) accept that Kosovo’s Albanians had that right. Some 63 states have recognised Kosovo’s independence. But Russia says Serbia’s right to territorial integrity(完整) has been violated. Admittedly(一般公認地), Russia’s position was weakened when it recognised the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in August 2008—but the West’s refusal(拒絕) to recognise either Georgian territory also seems to conflict with a recognition of Kosovo.
在多數情況下，法院的判決（並無強制性）是含糊的，因為其中包含了許多對於自決權的不同觀點。大部分西方國家（但不是所有，例如西班牙）接受科索沃的阿爾巴尼亞人有自決權。大約63個國家承認科索沃的獨立。但是俄羅斯認為塞爾維亞有權維護領土完整不受侵犯。無可否認的是，俄羅斯於2008年8月承認阿布哈茲和南奧塞梯獨立後，其立場弱化了－但是西方拒絕承認格魯吉亞的任何領土主權似乎也與承認科索沃獨立相互矛盾。

The irony is that, even if the court were to find against the Kosovars, Serbia would be quite unable to absorb 2m hostile(懷敵意的) Albanians. Some senior Serbs concede(承認) privately that the real aim of going to court is to be rid of Kosovo, not to get it back. They want to manoeuvre(巧妙地操縱) the Kosovars into a position where they feel forced to return to the negotiating table—at which point Serbia might propose an exchange of Serb-inhabited(居住於) north Kosovo for the Albanian-inhabited Presevo valley in Serbia.
具有諷刺意味的，即使法院判決科索沃獨立為非法，塞爾維亞也無法同化二百萬敵對的阿爾巴尼亞人。一些塞爾維亞高層人士私下裏勉強承認，提起訴訟的真實目的是擺脫科索沃，而非保留。他們希望給科索沃人施加壓力，使其重返談判桌—塞爾維亞人目的在於以塞爾維亞人聚居的北科索沃地區，來交換塞爾維亞境內阿爾巴尼亞人聚居的Presevo峽谷。

In the unlikely event that the court finds that the Kosovars did indeed have an unqualified(不夠資格的) right to declare their independence, notes Marc Weller, an international lawyer at Cambridge University who supports their argument, the court “would have set a huge precedent(判例).” But for that very reason, the judges are unlikely to define exactly what the law is.
萬一法院判決科索沃人確實無權宣佈獨立，支持法院觀點的劍橋大學國際律師Marc Weller指出，法院“將開創一項史無前例的判例”。但是正是由於這個原因，法官不可能準確界定適用的准據法。

The question before the court asks only if it was legal for Kosovo to declare independence. Even if it was not, it may keep its independence. Yet, although Kosovo’s government affects a nonchalant(漠不關心的) view of the proceedings, others are worried. Shyqyri Haxha, boss of PTK, Kosovo’s post and telecoms operator, which wants to privatise(使私有(民營)化) its profitable(有利的) mobile arm(部門), says that, unless the court finds clearly for Kosovo, it “will have implications(牽連) for foreign investment”. He fears it might “deter(使斷念) big players from coming.”
只有在首先確認科索沃宣佈獨立的合法性後，國際法院才可以進行審理。如果不是這樣，至少應當首先維持科索沃的獨立性。雖然科索沃政府對此持冷漠態度，但有的人卻很擔心。Shyqyri Haxha，科索沃郵政和電信運用商PTK的老闆，正在設法將盈利的移動通訊業務私有化，他認為除非法院對科索沃作出清晰的判決，否則它“將影響外國投資”。他擔心法院的判決可能“阻礙大型投資者進入”。

Kosovo is not the only Balkan issue before the court. In another case Croatia is accusing Serbia of genocide during the 1990s war. Macedonia has a case against Greece. Montenegro and Croatia may ask the court to examine an old border dispute(爭執). At least it beats killing each other.
科索沃對於法院不僅僅是巴爾幹地區的爭議。在另一個案件中，克羅地亞指控塞爾維亞在90年代的戰爭中實施種族屠殺。馬其頓有一項針對希臘的訴案。黑山和克羅地亞請求法院調查一項由來已久的邊界糾紛。至少法院制能夠止相互殺戮。





[ 本帖最後由 qwers00033269 於 2009-12-3 14:35 編輯 ]

d9405401

謝謝大大的分享
真的是值得收藏
英文真的太重要了