2016年翻译资格考试中英文翻译素材五

英语翻译资格考试网 鲤鱼小编 更新时间:2016-09-21

  The so-called award made by the South China Sea arbitral tribunal attracted wide attention. Media coverage here in the UK generally shared the same logic: this ruling represents the international law and China's non-acceptance of this ruling is in violation of international law. But is this true?

  南海仲裁案仲裁庭近日出台了所谓裁决结果,引发广泛关注。英国媒体的报道林林总总,但大体意思不外乎一句话:仲裁庭的裁决代表了国际法,中国不接受仲裁就是不遵守国际法。事实果真如此吗?
 
  It is common sense that a legitimate arbitration needs to meet certain conditions. First, the tribunal shall have jurisdiction over the subject matter. Second, the arbitrators shall be impartial and authoritative. Third, the procedure must be reasonable. Fourth, the ruling on the substantive issues should help resolve disputes.
 
  Does the South China Sea arbitration meet any of these conditions? The answer is no.
 
  常识告诉我们,一场合法的仲裁至少要满足几个条件:一是在仲裁事项上确有管辖权;二是仲裁员本身要公正、权威;三是整个仲裁程序要合乎常理;四是对实体问题的裁决要达到化解矛盾的效果。南海仲裁满足这些条件吗?答案显然是否定的。
 
  First and foremost, the tribunal does not have jurisdiction. The subject matter of the arbitration initiated by the Philippines, and the real intention behind it, is in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation. Issues of territorial sovereignty are clearly beyond the scope of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and issues of maritime delimitation have been excluded by the declaration that China made years ago in accordance with UNCLOS. The arbitral tribunal in fact expanded its power into areas outside of its jurisdiction.
 
  先看管辖权。菲律宾单方面提起仲裁的有关事项,背后的本质和真正目的都指向领土主权和海洋划界问题,领土主权问题《联合国海洋法公约》根本管不着,海洋划界问题也早已被中国根据《公约》规定而作的声明所排除。仲裁庭实际上是在自己无权管辖的领域扩权、滥权。
 
  Second, the composition of the tribunal – an ad hoc body having nothing to do with the International Court of Justice – is questionable. None of the five arbitrators is from Asia or has much knowledge of Asian history and culture. Most inconceivable in the arbitration process was that two arbitrators totally abandoned the opinions that they used to hold. This only increases doubts about the impartiality, representativeness and the authoritativeness of the tribunal.
 
  再看仲裁庭的构成。仲裁庭并非国际法院,只是一个临时组建的机构。五名仲裁员中没有一位来自亚洲,不了解东亚文化和历史。更令人匪夷所思的是,有两位仲裁员还在仲裁过程中完全背弃了原来坚持的观点。这样一个仲裁庭有多少公正性、代表性和权威性,不能不让人怀疑。
 
  Third, the procedure of the arbitration went against normal practice. According to the dispute settlement system of the Convention, bilateral channels between state parties comes before arbitration. However, disregarding prior bilateral agreements between China and the Philippines to resolve the disputes through negotiations and consultations, the tribunal forced ahead with the arbitration proceedings. Such procedure is utterly unreasonable and it contravenes the general practice of international arbitration under the Convention.
 
  再看仲裁程序。在《公约》设计的争端解决机制中,缔约国通过双边渠道解决争议应予以优先适用,但仲裁庭却反其道而行之,在中菲早已选择通过谈判协商解决争端的情况下,仍优先选择强制仲裁,强行审理。这种做法不合常理,违反《公约》的一般实践。

相关推荐:

2015上半年山东莱芜市翻译专业资格(水平)考试报考简章汇总

云南关于做好2015年度上半年翻译专业资格(水平)考试考务工作的通知

专题汇总