政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/118295
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 109951/140887 (78%)
Visitors : 46272774      Online Users : 1318
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118295


    Title: 論默認在國際領土爭端中之角色
    The Role of Acquiescence in International Territorial Disputes
    Authors: 鄒楷
    Tsou, Kai
    Contributors: 陳純一
    Chen, Chun-I
    鄒楷
    Tsou, Kai
    Keywords: 默認
    領土取得與喪失
    三段階層規律
    主權轉移
    默示承認
    釣魚臺爭端
    Aquiecsence
    Acquisition and loss of territory
    Tripartite hierarchical decision rule
    Transfer of sovereignty
    Implied recognition
    Diaoyutai islands
    Date: 2017
    Issue Date: 2018-07-03 17:35:47 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 在20世紀以來大多數的國際領土爭端判決中，國際法庭經常以默認作為決定領土歸屬之理由。本文為探詢默認在領土爭端中的角色，具體而言目標有三：第一，探討默認之樣態；第二，檢視默認與各個領土取得方式（理論）的關係，並嘗試驗證傳統的領土取得理論在案例中實際應用的情形；第三，歸納默認在領土爭端中之應用規律。
    經研究案例，本文發現默認是國家面對「需要積極回應的情勢」，以正式程度較低的舉措表示同意。默認可應用於詮釋各類權利根據（即條約、保持占有主義、先占）以及轉移主權，但在轉移主權之情形，默認需明確、可證明，方可能轉移主權，換言之，對逆權侵佔保持沉默不構成默認，時效應不存在。
    本文認為在國際法庭實踐中，有三種方式可證明默認存在以決定權利根據歸屬，分別是：(1)比較主權伸張的相對強弱；(2)獨立證據證明爭端方知情或同意；(3)國家對特定之國際或國內情勢疏於回應。
    In most of international territorial disputes since 20th century, international tribunals constantly refer to acquiescence as rationale of judicial rule. This thesis is designated to examine the role of acquiescence in international territorial disputes. Specifically, the object is three-fold: First, exploring the extension and definition of acquiescence; Second, to examine the relationship between acquiescence and "the modes of acquisition", and utility of these modes in tribunal practices. Third, to summarize the rules of acquiescence in territorial disputes.
    By examining cases, we find acquiescence is consent in the form of informal state conduct, while the state face a circumstance which calls for a positive reaction. Acquiescence is also an interpretative tool of territorial titles (i.e. treaty, uti possidetis and occupation) and transfer of sovereignty, and it should be manifested "clearly and without any doubt" in the latter situation. In other words, remaining silent in the face of adverse possession does not constitute acquiescence, it also implied that the so called "prescription" in strict sense does not exist in any judicial decision of international territorial disputes.
    Lastly, according to my studies on cases of territorial disputes, there are three types of method (or analysis) could lead to acquiescence, they are: (1) to appraise the relative strength of the sovereign stretch relating to disputing territory; (2) to issue evidence directly proving knowledge or consent; (3) to prove the circumstance (internal or external) called for reaction.
    Reference: 參考文獻

    中文

    專書

    丘宏達著，陳純一修訂，2012。《現代國際法》，修訂三版。台北：三民。
    陳瑞麟，2014。《科學哲學：理論與歷史》。台北：群學。

    期刊論文

    王冠雄，「南海爭端之國際法觀點分析」，〈展望與探索〉，第8期，2011年8月，頁13-20。
    范建得，田永彬，2012，〈我國對釣魚台列嶼領土主權論據之評析〉，《東海大學法學研究》，36期，頁1-75。
    張衛彬，2011，〈論國際法院的三重性分級判案規則〉，《世界經濟與政治》，第5期，頁77-93。
    張衛彬，2015，〈國際法院解釋領土條約的路徑，方法及其拓展〉，《法學研究》，第2期，192-208。
    曾皓，2010，〈論領土法的新發展--以國際司法判例為視角〉，《湘潭大學學報》，第34期，頁44-48。
    李玉玲，2013，〈國際法下釣魚島主權爭端的評估〉，《中國海洋法學評論: 中英文版》年，頁1-72。
    黃居正，「時際法原則與後殖民國家領土秩序：以東南亞國家領土爭議事件為中心」，國立臺灣大學法學論叢 ，2011年，第40卷第2期，843-876 頁。
    趙國材，〈從國際法觀點分析我國南海歷史性水域之法律地位〉，《問題與研究》。32卷8 期。頁13-15。

    學位論文

    劉千綺，《兩岸有關南海爭議島嶼主權主張之作為 -以國際法中有效統治原則之探討為核心》，國立清華大學科技法律研究所碩士論文，2012年。

    官方文件

    中華民國政府，「中華民國南海政策說帖」，2016年3月21日，<http://multilingual.mofa.gov.tw/web/web_UTF-8/South/%E4%B8%AD%E8%8F%AF%E6%B0%91%E5%9C%8B%E5%8D%97%E6%B5%B7%E6%94%BF%E7%AD%96%E8%AA%AA%E5%B8%96.pdf>。

    外文

    專書

    Abou-El-Wafa, Ahmed. (2010) Les Différends Internationaux Concernant Les Frontières Terrestres Dans La Jurisprudence De La Cour Internationale de Justice, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
    Black, Henry C. (1979) Black`s Law Dictionary. 5e éd. St. Paul: West Publishing.
    Blum, Yehuda. (1965), Historic Titles in International Law, La Haye, M. Nijhoff,
    Dörr, O., & Schmalenbach, K. (Eds.). (2011). Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: a commentary. Springer Science & Business Media.
    Dupuy, P. M., & Kerbrat, Y. (2014). Droit International Public. &quot;Comportement unilatéral de l`Etat revendiquant et acquiescement`` Dalloz: Paris.
    Fauchille, Paul. (1925) Traité de Droit international public, 8th ed. tome Ier, 2e partie-Paix. Paris: Rousseau.
    Fitzmaurice, Gerald. (1986) The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice, Cambridge: Grotius Publ.
    Guggenheim, Paul. (1953) Traité de droit international public. Genève: Georg.
    Hackworth, Green. (1940) Digest of international Law. Washington D.C.: Department of State.
    Heffter, August W. (1887) Das europäisehes Vökerrecht der Gegenwart. 7e éd. Berlin: Schroeder. Le droit international de l`Europe. 4e éd. française par F. Heinrich Geffcken, trad. par Jules Bergson, Paris-Berlin: Cotillon-Müllier.
    Jennings, R.Y. 1963. The Acquisition of Territory in International Law. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
    Jennings, Robert & Watts. (1992) Arthur. Oppenheim`s International Law, 9e éd. vol. I-Peace, Harlow: Longman.
    Kelsen, Hans & Rober, Tucker(eds.) (1966) Principles of International Law, 2e édition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
    Kohen, M. G. (1997). Possession contestée et souveraineté territoriale. Company édition: Graduate Institute Geneva/PUF.
    La Fontaine, H. (1902) Pasicrisie Internationale: Histoire documentaire des arbitrages internationaux. Berne: Stampili.
    Lauterpacht, Hersch. (1927) Private Law Sources and Analogies of International Law, (with Special Reference to International Arbitration). Londres: Longmans.
    Morgenthau, Hans J. (1978). Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, Fifth Edition. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
    Pinto, Roger (1956) La Prescription en Droit International. Leyde : Sijthoff.
    Rousseau, Charles. (1977) Droit International Public. Paris: Sirey.
    Sharma, S.P. (1997) Territorial Acquisition, Disputes and International Law. The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
    Shaw, Malcolm. (2008) International Law, 6th Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Talmon, Stefan. (2001) Recognition of Governments in International Law: With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rodríguez, Sánchez et Luis Ignacio. (1997) `&quot;L`uti Possidetis et Les Effectivités Dans Les Contentieux Territoriaux et Frontaliers ` Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law.
    Venturini, G. C. (1964). &quot;La portée et les effets juridiques des attitudes et des actes unilatéraux des états (Volume 112)&quot;, in: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law.
    Verykios, P. A. (1934) La prescription en droit international public, Paris, Pedone.
    Waters, Tony & Waters, Dagmar (translate and edite). (2015) Max Weber in Weber`s Rationalism and Modern Society. New York: Palgrave Books.

    專書論文

    Harbor, Edvard. (1957) &quot;The Ihlen Declaration Revisited,&quot; in D.S. Constantopoulos, C. Th. Eustathiades and C.N. Fragistas eds., Fundamental Problems of International Law. Festschrift für Jean Spiropoulos. Bonn: Schimmelbusch.
    Gautier, Philippe2007) &quot;Les accords informels et la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités entre États&quot;, in N. Angelet, ed., Droit du pouvoir, pouvoir du droit: mélanges offerts à Jean Salmon. Paris: Bruylant.
    Kohen, Marceloㄡ(2013) &quot;Keeping Subsequent Agreements and Practice in Their Right Limits&quot;, in G. Nolte (ed.), Treaties and Subsequent Practice, Oxford University Press: Oxford.
    Russell, Bertrand. (1952) &quot;Is There a God?&quot; The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Vol. 11: Last Philosophical Testament, 1943-68. Routledge. pp. 543-48.

    期刊論文

    Abi-Saab., Georges. (1990) `La pérennité des frontières en droit international`, Relations Internationales, Paris-Genève, n° 64, pp. 341-349.
    Abou-el-Wafa., Ahmed. (1986).`Arbitration and Adjudication of International Land Boundary Disputes`, Revue égyptienne de droit international.
    Antunes, N. S. M. (2000) `Estoppel, Acquiescence and Recognition in Territorial and Boundary Dispute Settlement` Boundary and territory briefing Vol. 2, No. 8, IBRU, pp.1-42.
    Antunes, N. S. M. (2006) `Acquiescence` Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, September 2006, pp. 1-8.
    Barale, Jean. (1965) &quot;L`acquiescement dans la jurisprudence internationale&quot; Annuaire français de droit international, volume 11. pp. 389-427.
    Barberas Julio A. (1967) &quot;La prescription adquisitiva y la costumbre en el derecho internacional&quot;, Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques, vol. 45, p. 233-243.
    Chan, Phil C. W. (2004) &quot;Acquiescence/Estoppel in International Boundaries: Temple of Preah Vihear Revisited&quot; Chinese Journal of International Law, Fall, Vol.3(2), pp. 421-439.
    Das, Hans. (1997) &quot;L`estoppel et L`acquiescement : Assimilations Pragmatiques et Divergences Conceptuelles,&quot; Revue Belge de Droit International, pp. 607-634.
    Distefano., Giovanni. (1994) &quot;La pratique subséquente des États parties à un traité&quot; Annuaire français de droit international, volume 40. pp. 41-71.
    Dupuy, Florian & Dupuy, Pierre-Marie. (2013) `A Legal Analysis of China`s Historic Rights Claim in the South China Sea`, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 107, No. 1, pp. 124-141.
    Fitzmaurice, Gerald. (1954) `The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice, 1951-54: General Principles and Sources of Law`, The British Year Book of International Law 1953, 30: 1-70.
    Goldie, L.F.E. (1968). `The Critical Date,` The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp. 1251-1284.
    Hamakawa, Yoko. (2007) `Issues on the Title of the Senkaku Islands: Analysis of the Viewpoints of Japan and China`, Issue Brief, National Diet Library No. 565, pp. 1-14.
    International Law Commission. (1998). `First report on unilateral acts of States` 49th session, A/CN.4/486
    International Law Commission. (1999). `Second report on unilateral acts of States` 50th session, A/CN.4/500
    International Law Commission. (2000). `Third report on unilateral acts of States` 51st session, A/CN.4/505
    International Law Commission. (2001). `Fourth report on unilateral acts of States` 53rd session, A/CN.4/519
    International Law Commission. (2002). `Fifth report on unilateral acts of States` 54th session, A/CN.4/525
    International Law Commission. (2003). `Sixth report on unilateral acts of States` 55th session, A/CN.4/534
    International Law Commission. (2004). `Seventh report on unilateral acts of States` 56th session, A/CN.4/542
    International Law Commission. (2005). `Eighth Report on unilateral acts of States` 57th session, A/CN, 4, 557.
    International Law Commission. (2006). `Ninth report on unilateral acts of States` 58th session, A/CN.4/569
    International Law Commission. (2013). First Report on Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice in Relation to the Interpretation of Treaties. 65th session, A/CN.4/660
    International Law Commission. (2014). Second Report on Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice in Relation to the Interpretation of Treaties. 66th session, A/CN.4/671
    International Law Commission. (2015). Third Report on Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice in Relation to the Interpretation of Treaties. 67th session, A/CN.4/683
    International Law Commission. (2016). Fourth Report on Subsequent Agreements and Subsequent Practice in Relation to the Interpretation of Treaties. 68th session, A/CN.4/694
    Jessup, Philip C. (1928) `The Palmas Island Arbitration` The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 22, No. 4 (Oct., 1928), pp. 735-752.
    Johnson, D. H. N. (1950). `Acquisitive prescription in international law` The British Year Book of International Law 1950, 27, 332-354.
    Johnson D. H. N. (1954) `The Minquiers and Ecrehos Case` The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 189-216.
    Johnson, D. H. N. (1955). `Consolidation as a Root of Title in International Law` The Cambridge Law Journal 13 (2): 215-225.
    Lauterpacht, Hersh. (1944) `Recognition of States in International Law`, The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 53, No. 3 (Jun., 1944), p. 385-458.
    Lesaffer, Randall. (2005) `Argument from Roman Law in Current International Law: Occupation and Acquisitive Prescription`, European Journal of International Law, Vol.16(1), pp. 25-58
    Kohen, Marcelo. (2004) &quot;La relation titres/effectivités dans le contentieux territorial à la lumière de la jurisprudence récente&quot; Revue Générale de Droit International Public, tome 108, p. 561-595.
    Kohen, M. (2013). Original Title in the Light of the ICJ Judgment on Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge. Journal of the History of International Law/Revue d`histoire du droit international, 15(2), 151-171.
    MacGibbon, I.C. (1956) `The Scope of Acquiescence in International Law`, The British Year Book of International Law 1954, 31: 143-186.
    MacGibbon, I.C. (1948) &quot;Customary International Law and Acquiescence&quot;, British International law Yearbook, Volume 25, pp. 115-145.
    Morgenthau, J., Hans. (1948). `The Problem of Sovereignty Reconsidered` Columbia Law Review, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 341-365.
    Munkman A. (1972-3) &quot;Adjudication and Adjustment - International Judicial Decision and the Settlement of Territorial and Boundary Disputes&quot;, British International Law Yearbook, pp. 1-116.
    Ozaki., Shigeyoshi. (2013) &quot;The Senkaku Islands and Japan`s Territorial Rights,&quot; Review of Island Studies(Tosho Kenkyu), Vol. 1, pp. 1-16.
    Jean Salmon. (1999) `Les accords non formalisés ou solo consensu` Annuaire français de droit international, volume 45, pp. 1-28.
    Secretariat United Nations, The,. 1962. &quot;Juridical Regime of Historic waters including historic bays - Study prepared by the Secretariat,&quot; Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission, vol. II, A/CN.4/143, pp. 1-27.
    Shaw, Malcolm N. (2007). &quot;Title, Control, and Closure? The Experience of the Eritrea- Ethiopia Boundary Commission&quot; International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 56, pp. 755- 796.
    Schwarzenberger, Georg. (1957) &quot;Title to Territory: Response to a Challenge.&quot; American Journal International Law. 51: 308-324.
    Sumner, B. T. (2004). `Territorial Disputes at the International Court of Justice.` Duke Law Journal, 53(6), 1779-1812.
    Waldock, Meredith. (1948) &quot;Disputed Sovereignty in the Falkland Islands Dependencies.&quot; British International Law Yearbook, 25, pp. 311-353.

    國際組織官方文件

    International Law Commission. 1966. Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties (A/CONF.39/11).
    International Law Commission. 2006. Guiding Principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations. International Law Commission.
    The Secretariat United Nations. 1962. &quot;Juridical Regime of Historic waters including historic bays - Study prepared by the Secretariat,&quot; Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission. vol. II, A/CN.4/143.
    WTO. 2005. Appellate Body Report, EC - Chicken Cuts. (WT/DS269/AB/R, WT/DS286/AB/R, 12)


    國家官方文件

    United States, 1953/12/25. On the Geographical Boundary of the Ryukyu Islands. USCAP No. 27.
    Deitscher Bundestag, 1990/6/21. Wahlperiode, Drucksache. 11/7465,
    Malaysia, 1999/11/1. Memorial of Malaysia. CR 2002/3
    Republic of Singapore, 2005/11/25. Reply of theRepublic of Singapore. CR 2007/21,

    國際司法決定

    Interpretation of Article 3, Paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Lausanne (Frontier between Turkey and Iraq) (Advisory Opinion) PCIJ Series B No 12.
    Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands, USA), Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 4 April 1928, Volume II, pp. 858-859.
    Affaire de l`île de Clipperton (Mexique contre France), Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 28 janvier 1931 Volume II, pp. 1105-1111.
    The Legal Status of Eastern Greenland, Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) Judgement of 5 April 1933 (PCIJ Series A/B No. 53), World Court Reports (WCR), Volume III (1932-1935), A Collection of Judgements, Orders and Opinions of the Permanent Court of International Justice, Manley O. Hudson (ed.), Washington, 1938: 148-231.
    The Minquiers and Ecrehos case (France/United Kingdom), Judgment of November 17th, 1953: ICJ Reports 1953: 47-73.
    Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway), ICJ Judgement of 18 December 1951, ICJ Reports 1951: 116-206.
    Case concerning Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land (Belgium/ The Netherlands) ICJ Judgement of 20 June,1959: I.C.J. Reports 1959, p. 209.
    Case Concerning the Arbitral Award Made by the King of Spain on 23 December 1906 (Honduras v. Nicaragua), ICJ Judgement of 18 November 1960, ICJ Reports 1960: 192-239.
    Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), ICJ Judgement of 15 June 1962, ICJ Reports 1962: 6-146.
    Case Concerning the Indo-Pakistan Western Boundary (India vs Pakistan), Arbitral Award of 19 February 1968, International Law Reports (ILR), Volume 50.
    Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1975: 12-74
    Dispute between Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel (Argentina/Chile) Reports Of International Arbitral Awards, 18 February 1977, VOLUME XXI pp.53-264
    Case Concerning the Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada v. United States of America), ICJ Judgement of 12 October 1984, ICJ Reports 1984: 246-390.
    Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali) ICJ Judgement of 22 December1986, ICJ Reports: 554-651.
    Case Concerning the Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador v. Honduras; Nicaragua intervening), ICJ Judgement of 11 September 1992, ICJ Reports 1992: 351-761.
    Case Concerning the Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen (Denmark v. Norway), ICJ Judgement of 14 June 1993, ICJ Reports 1993: 38-314.
    Case Concerning the Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Chad), ICJ Judgement of 3 February 1994, ICJ Reports 1994: 6-103.
    Case Concerning Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Botswana/Namibia) ICJ Judgement of 13 December 1999, ICJ Reports 1994: 1045-1109.
    Case Concerning Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan (Indonesia/Malaysia) ICJ Judgement of 17 December 2002, ICJ Reports 2002: 625-686.
    Case Concerning Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea Intervening) ICJ Judgement of 10 October 2002, ICJ Reports 2002: 303-458.
    Decision regarding Delimitation of the Border between Eritrea and Ethiopia (Eritrea v. Ethiopia) Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 13 April 2002 -22 March 2003, Volume XXV; 83-229
    Case Concerning Frontier Dispute (Benin/Niger) ICJ Judgement of 12 July 2005, ICJ Reports 2005: 90-151
    Case Concerning Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v Honduras) ICJ Judgement of 8 October 2007, ICJ Reports 2002: 659-764.
    Case Concerning Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore) ICJ Judgement of 23 May 2008, ICJ Reports 2008: 12-197.
    Case Concerning Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Niger), ICJ Judgement of 16 April 2013, ICJ Reports 2013: 44-93
    The South China Sea Arbitration Award of 12 July 2016 (Philippines v. China), Permanent Court of Arbitration, PCA Case No 2013-19.

    條約

    United Nations, 1946/4/18. Statute of the International Court of Justice, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3deb4b9c0.html
    United Nations, 1969/5/23. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, p. 331, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3a10.html
    UN General Assembly, 1996/11/6. Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties. available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b38518.html [accessed 15 May 2017]

    網路資料

    Benvenisti, Eyal. (2009) `Belligerent Occupation`, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law.
    Dörr, Oliver. (2006) `Declaration` Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law.
    Gioia, Andrea. (2013) `Historic Titles`, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law,,
    Kohen, M. G., & Hebie, M. (2011). &quot;Acquisition of Territory&quot;, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law.
    Talmon, Stefan. (2008) `Recognition of States and Governments in International Law,` Azerbaijan in the World.ADA Biweekly Newsletter, Vol. 1, No. 19., available at http://ada-edu-az.outsourceinformationsystems.com/files/beweekly/27/ADA%20Biweekly_Vol.%201_No.%2019.pdf
    Woodward, James. (2014) &quot;Scientific Explanation&quot;, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/scientific-explanation/>.
    Baker, Alan. (2013) &quot;Simplicity&quot;, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/simplicity/>.
    Hayton, Bill. (2016)，〈島與礁 從國際法看南海主權爭議：《南海》選摘（2）〉風傳媒，<http://www.storm.mg/article/142025>。
    雲程，〈古書釣魚？還是談國際法吧〉，自由評論網，2016年2月15日<http://talk.ltn.com.tw/article/paper/961782>。
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    外交學系
    1032530042
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1032530042
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/THE.NCCU.DIP.001.2018.F09
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Diplomacy] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    004201.pdf3831KbAdobe PDF2537View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback