《發(fā)展中的海商法》書評

Muneeb Khan M. Jahanzeb Butt 張晏瑲

海洋資源的利用、海洋貿(mào)易和海洋漁業(yè)使海商法始終處于發(fā)展之中。人們認(rèn)識(shí)到，由于全球商品的海上運(yùn)輸方式和海洋資源的開采方式歷經(jīng)變革，21 世紀(jì)已然改變了“海商法”的涵義。并且，用于管理海洋和規(guī)范航運(yùn)的法律已融入現(xiàn)代實(shí)踐，海商法有可能以一種全新的方式來被定義。由穆科技（Proshanto K.Mukherji）、馬克西莫·梅希亞（Maximo Q. Mejia）和XU Jingjing 編著的《發(fā)展中的海商法》一書，1Maritime law in motion, Proshanto K. Mukherjee, Maximo Q. Mejia & XU Jingjing, eds.,Springer, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31749-2.以海商法的各個(gè)不同視角審視了現(xiàn)代海運(yùn)業(yè)，并對其當(dāng)代發(fā)展提供了更為細(xì)致入微的理解。全書共37 個(gè)章節(jié)，由來自22 個(gè)國家的45 位作者撰寫，梳理了海商法的代際發(fā)展，并對海事、航運(yùn)和面臨諸多挑戰(zhàn)的海洋治理等方面做了深入闡釋。

由于海運(yùn)業(yè)面臨新的挑戰(zhàn)，該書不僅從不同角度研究海商法，還采用了全新的結(jié)構(gòu)。它提出了一種勢在必行、刻不容緩的海商法研究新方法，尤其強(qiáng)調(diào)多學(xué)科方法——公法（國際海事法）和私法（海商法）結(jié)合的重要性。此外，該書主要從大陸法系和英美法系兩個(gè)角度進(jìn)行劃分，對不同地區(qū)的跨國訴訟和海事糾紛治理進(jìn)行了更為全面細(xì)致的分析。全書各章均采用多種純法學(xué)研究方法，深入研究了國際海事組織的國際海事公約目前所面臨的和即將面臨的挑戰(zhàn)。

值得一提的是，部分作者認(rèn)為《國際海上人命安全公約》《國際防止船舶造成污染公約》和《1978 年海員培訓(xùn)、發(fā)證和值班標(biāo)準(zhǔn)國際公約》在應(yīng)對自主航運(yùn)發(fā)展和氣候變化挑戰(zhàn)方面并未加以跟進(jìn)更新。此外，還有一些作者認(rèn)為《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》需要現(xiàn)代化的解釋，以便為沿海國制訂新的責(zé)任、義務(wù)和權(quán)利，并對自主船舶進(jìn)行屬地監(jiān)管和海洋污染控制。有作者建議，國際海事組織可考慮進(jìn)行架構(gòu)和職能改革，并采取可能的市場措施，以滿足氣候變化和自主航運(yùn)的需求。由于氣候變化和技術(shù)進(jìn)步（如人工智能），國際海事組織正面臨著當(dāng)代環(huán)境下的治理挑戰(zhàn)，范圍界定工作、2020 船舶“限硫令”和溫室氣體排放法規(guī)是探索新技術(shù)、控制船舶大氣污染源的大膽舉措。國際海事組織當(dāng)前的任務(wù)和結(jié)構(gòu)使其足以應(yīng)對這些挑戰(zhàn)，然而技術(shù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)的不確定性也對國際海事組織的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力具有消極影響。

根據(jù)國際海事組織監(jiān)管規(guī)定以及公法和私法，該書還分析了海上安全的國際法律框架。在反海盜行動(dòng)中，對非國家行為者（如合法的私營安保公司）的監(jiān)管需要在國際法律框架下采取新的手段。國家主權(quán)的傳統(tǒng)原則在這一監(jiān)管中得到了重申，即合法的非國家行為者應(yīng)在現(xiàn)有的國際法律框架下與國家行為者（海岸警衛(wèi)隊(duì)、海上安全機(jī)構(gòu)和海軍部隊(duì)）進(jìn)行合作。由于合法的非國家行為者的活動(dòng)水平取決于國家的自由裁量權(quán)，它將描述海上安全的規(guī)則和條例。從這一角度出發(fā)，本書對《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》所表述的分區(qū)和功能方法進(jìn)行了大量討論。有人指出，迄今為止，自由海的概念在海洋公域中是非常不受約束的，但現(xiàn)在已在很大程度上，實(shí)際上是積極地讓位于反映全球最新發(fā)展的限制性制度。

在未來幾年中，由于沿海國的權(quán)力已經(jīng)增加，《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》規(guī)定的海洋自由可能會(huì)受到更多限制。雖然沿海國擁有管理某些海洋用途和行使管轄權(quán)以對海洋污染負(fù)責(zé)的巨大權(quán)力，但其應(yīng)在權(quán)利行使和責(zé)任履行之間保持平衡，以保持海洋對全球產(chǎn)品（如海洋科學(xué)研究）的開放。在這方面，船旗國在國際法律框架下處理此類全球公有的重要事務(wù)，應(yīng)成為海商法不可或缺的組成部分。為此，我們得出結(jié)論，通過分析研究，了解和認(rèn)識(shí)《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》和《國際海事組織公約》規(guī)定的船旗國、沿海國和港口國制度，是應(yīng)對即將到來的和現(xiàn)有挑戰(zhàn)的重要材料。

意見和觀點(diǎn)的多樣性是本書的主要特點(diǎn)。作者擁有不同的海事背景（包括海員、海事律師和學(xué)術(shù)界、海岸警衛(wèi)隊(duì)官員和國際海事組織專家），他們的法律專業(yè)知識(shí)使他們能夠?yàn)楹Ｊ路ㄌ峁┬碌囊暯恰Ｓ捎谠摃鴤?cè)重于（公/私）國際法和海事法的結(jié)合，對實(shí)際問題的討論全面概述了海洋和航運(yùn)法律法規(guī)體系。此外，探討海商法面臨的新挑戰(zhàn)，還可以讓律師、學(xué)術(shù)界和海商專業(yè)人士在實(shí)際情況中實(shí)踐這些建議。本書對于有志于撰寫海商法、海洋法，或兩者兼而有之的博士生來說是一部重要的作品，因?yàn)樗钛a(bǔ)了航運(yùn)、海事和海洋治理領(lǐng)域法律和監(jiān)管方面的重大空白。

本書是對海商法發(fā)展和現(xiàn)狀感興趣的學(xué)生及專業(yè)人士的極佳參考書，但其結(jié)構(gòu)相當(dāng)復(fù)雜。并且，它還會(huì)使讀者對氣候變化和自主航運(yùn)問題的認(rèn)識(shí)感到困惑，因?yàn)樗J(rèn)為海商法的新發(fā)展應(yīng)在國際海事組織的框架下進(jìn)行。這一論點(diǎn)在海事領(lǐng)域引發(fā)了一場新的辯論，即如果國際海事組織有權(quán)對航運(yùn)進(jìn)行監(jiān)管，那么其他管理海洋的聯(lián)合國機(jī)構(gòu)在多大程度上是必不可少的。有關(guān)其他聯(lián)合國機(jī)構(gòu)的作用及其與國際海事組織合作的問題可以成為海商法領(lǐng)域研究和寫作的新嘗試。

英譯漢：黃宇欣

Maritime Law in Motion: Book Review

Muneeb Khan, M. Jahanzeb Butt, CHANG Yen-Chiang*

* Muneeb Khan, Dalian Maritime University, China; M. Jahanzeb Butt, Postdoctoral Research, School of Law, Shandong University, China; CHANG Yen-Chiang, Professor, Law School, Dalian Maritime University, China, Ph.D. in Law, E-mail: ycchang@dlmu.edu.cn.

?THE AUTHORS AND CHINA OCEANS LAW REVIEW

The utilisation of ocean resources and trade through sea and marine fisheries have kept maritime law always in motion. It is already acknowledged that the 21st century has changed the lexical of maritime law because the means of global merchandise carried by sea and the latest methods of extracting marine resources have been transformed. As it has been recognised that the laws regulating oceans and shipping have been integrated into modern practices, there is a potential for new means of defining maritime law. The bookMaritimeLawinMotion,1Maritime law in motion, Proshanto K. Mukherjee, Maximo Q. Mejia & XU Jingjing, eds.,Springer, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31749-2.edited by Proshanto K. Mukherji, Maximo Q. Mejia, and XU Jingjing, examines the modern maritime industry from every conceivable perspective of maritime law and delivers a much more nuanced understanding of its contemporary development.Collectively, the book has 37 Chapters (written by 45 authors from 22 States)connecting the inter-generational development of maritime law and has undertaken a prodigious effort to explain marine, shipping, and ocean governance faced with additional challenges.

Owing to new challenges in the maritime industry, this inaugural book adheres to a new structure while examining maritime law from various perspectives.It offers a massively imperative and instantly obligatory novel approach to maritime law, particularly in its emphasis on the significance of multidisciplinary approaches that combines public (international-maritime) and private (maritime)law. Furthermore, it is segmented principally from the perspective of civil and common law jurisdictions, which with a more comprehensive analysis about crossborder litigation and governance of maritime disputes in diverse regions. Several pure legal research methods have been adopted throughout all chapters, thoroughly examining the existing and upcoming challenges faced by the International Maritime Conventions of the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

In particular, it has been opinionated by several authors that theInternational ConventionfortheSafetyofLifeatSea(SOLAS), theInternationalConvention forthePreventionofPollutionfromShips(MARPOL), and theInternational ConventionontheStandardofTraining,Certification,andWatch-Keeping(STCW)are not updated following autonomous shipping development and climate change challenges. Furthermore, it has been argued that theUnitedNationsConventionon LawoftheSea(UNCLOS) requires modern interpretation in order to create new responsibilities, liabilities, and rights of the coastal States for territorial regulation of autonomous ships and control of marine pollution. It has also been advised that the IMO may consider a structural and functional change to meet the demands of climate change and autonomous shipping with respect to a possible marketbased measure. As IMO is facing governance challenges in a contemporary setting as a result of climate change and technological advancements (such as artificial intelligence), scoping exercises, Sulphur 2020 and GHG Emissions Regulations are bold steps towards navigating new technologies and controlling ship sources of air pollution. IMO’s current mandate and structure enable it to address these challenges; however, technological and economic uncertainties impact IMO leadership.

Under the IMO regulations and public/private law, the international legal framework for maritime security has also been analysed. In the conduct of antipiracy operations, regulation of nonstate actors (such as legitimate private security companies) requires new means under the international legal framework. The traditional principles of State sovereignty have been reiterated for such a regulation,that legitimate nonstate actors shall cooperate and collaborate with state actors(Coast Guards, Maritime Security Agencies, and Naval forces) under the existing international legal framework. As the level of activities of legitimate nonstate actors depends on the State’s discretion, it will describe the rules and regulations for maritime security. From such a point of view, there has been significant discussion on zonal and functional approaches expressed through UNCLOS. It has been stated that the hitherto concept of the free sea was very much unconstrained in the realm of the maritime commons that has yielded largely and indeed positively to a restricted regime reflective of the latest global developments.

In the upcoming years, the freedom of the seas under the UNCLOS could be more confined because the powers of the coastal States have been increased.While the coastal State’s powers to regulate certain usages of the sea and to assume jurisdiction to exercise responsibility for marine pollution is immense, there shall be a balance between rights and responsibilities to keep the seas open for global goods (such as marine scientific research). In this respect, the flag States embracing such vital matters of global commons shall be indispensable facets of maritime law following the international legal framework. To this end, it is concluded that understanding and appreciation of the flag, coastal, and port State regimes under UNCLOS and IMO Conventions through an analytical examination are material pertinent to the upcoming and existing challenges.

Diversity of opinions and viewpoints is the primary feature of this book. The authors from various maritime backgrounds (including seafarers, maritime lawyers and academia, coast guard officers, and IMO experts) with a combination of legal expertise enabled them to provide fresh perspectives on maritime law. As the book focus on the combination of (public/private) international and maritime law, the discussion on practical aspects provides a comprehensive overview of the ocean and shipping legal and regulatory system. Moreover, exploring the new challenges for maritime law allows lawyers, academia, and maritime professionals to practice the suggestions in actual circumstances. This book is a significant piece for Ph.D.students interested in writing on maritime law or law of the sea, or a combination of both because it explains substantial gaps in the legal and regulatory landscape in shipping, marine, and ocean governance.

Although this book is an excellent reference for students and professionals interested in maritime law development and the current situation, the structure is quite complex. It also confuses the readers about climate change and autonomous shipping issues, as it argues that new developments in maritime law are to be provided under the IMO framework. This argument opens a new debate in the maritime arena that if IMO has a regulatory mandate for shipping, then how far other UN Agencies governing oceans are essential. This issue concerning the role of other UN agencies and their cooperation with IMO could be a new venture of research and writing in the field of maritime law.