摘要
治外法权随不平等条约的缔结而来,治外法权是条约体系中的重要支柱,也是中国近代史上无法绕开的一环。然而,"治外法权"一词本身的意涵就是模糊不清且常与"领事裁判权"混用的:就治外法权概念而言,有属地主义与属人主义的双重用法;与领事裁判权相较,则更有诸多混淆矛盾之处。回顾历史,由治外法权的语义困顿可以看出,当时对治外法权的认识尚难言透彻。以语言学和逻辑学的语词前提为基础,本文聚焦于"同光中兴"时期(1864~1894年),提出清廷的"治外法权工具观"论点,分析其利弊,并得出结论:同光中兴时的清廷对治外法权制度止于批判而无解决的意愿和能力,从导致痛失撤废治外法权之良机。
Extraterritoriality,as an important pillar in the treaty system,is established by a series of unequal treaties,which is a prominent conception in Chinese modern history as well.However,not to mention the the institution of extraterritoriality,the conception itself is ambiguous and can be easily confused with the word consular jurisdiction:the meaning of extraterritoriality has dual use of the principle of territoriality and nationality;compared with the implication of consular jurisdiction,it has more confusing and conflicting points.Dated back to that age,from the perspective of semantic predicament,it can be assumed that people of that time did not understand the conception of extraterritoriality thoroughly.On the basis of the precondition of linguistic and logic,this essay concentrates on the age of latter stage of Qing Dynasty(1864-1894),trying to put forward a point of view that the government takes the extraterritoriality as a tool by the evidences from history.As a result,the social soil and historical internal cause can be explored in this process:Qing government does much less to abolish extraterritoriality so that we lose a valuable opportunity between 1864 and 1894.
出处
《人大法律评论》
2019年第2期292-311,共20页
Renmin University Law Review
关键词
治外法权
领事裁判权
治外法权工具观
同光中兴
Extraterritoriality
Consular jurisdiction
Extraterritoriality as a tool
Tongzhi Restoration
