|
|
|
篇目详细内容 |
|
【篇名】 |
International legal issues on china’s recourse for cultural relics pillaged overseas: dilemma and way out ― take the litigation on the auction of rat head and rabbit head bronze statues for example |
|
【刊名】 |
Frontiers of Law in China |
|
【刊名缩写】 |
Front. Law China |
|
【ISSN】 |
1673-3428 |
|
【EISSN】 |
1673-3541 |
|
【DOI】 |
10.3868/s050-001-012-0022-3 |
|
【出版社】 |
Higher Education Press and Thomson Reuters |
|
【出版年】 |
2012 |
|
【卷期】 |
7
卷3期 |
|
【页码】 |
454-473
页,共
20
页 |
|
【作者】 |
Guoqiang Luo;
|
|
【关键词】 |
|
【摘要】 |
|
Facing the dilemma on the recourse for Chinese cultural relics pillaged overseas, China shall get a clear understanding of the international legal situation, strengthen international communication and promote international compromise. Based on this foundation, China shall take rational, beneficial, and moderate legal actions to uphold and protect national rights. The recourse on the ground of international custom has been deemed as a failure by the view of the majority; the recourse in a foreign court will almost certainly encounter numerous obstacles in law that are very difficult to deal with, and the recourse in a national court will not only achieve the expected goals but also raise considerable disadvantages. If China hopes to retrieve the pillaged cultural relics by means of international treaty, it is necessary for China to conclude special agreements with relative states. The latter shall exercise best efforts to recover the cultural relics and return them to China at the expense of Chinese tax payers. On the other hand, there are two choices available if China hopes to settle the problem through general principles of law: One is to make an agreement with relative states, and the other is to authorize certain international tribunals to adjudicate the case according to the general principles of law. If the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) is chosen, then the relative states can authorize the court to decide the case according to the principle of ex aequo et bono; however, the best way is to conclude an international arbitration agreement and renounce the application of certain general principles of law which might hinder the dispute resolutions. The other choice is to make unilateral legal activities with each other according to relative general principles of law, on condition that certain tacit agreement or understanding had been achieved between relative states. However, whether the above international legal methods can be used for the settlement of the problem, it depends on sufficient negotiation and mutual compromise between China and other relative states; the relative national authorities shall pay more attention to such aspects instead on unilateral declarations or sanctions. |
|
