1944.05.04 菲利普中尉文書—1/5 Taimocracy翻譯

 1944.05.04 菲利普中尉文書—1/5　Taimocracy翻譯

【縛雞之見】英文請拷到 Google / DeepL 找中文翻譯
炳炎前輩給的影像檔，相當珍貴。個人卻感覺：真討厭！又要派工作了，這可不輕鬆。

 

1944.05.04 菲力浦中尉文書

Naval School of Military Government and Administration--p. 1

 

Seminar Paper  研討資料

 

Naval School of Military Government and Administration

美國海軍軍事統治行政
New York, New York
4 May 1944

MEMORANDUM  備忘錄

From:         Lieut. Darius V. Phillips, U.S.N.R.  菲力浦中尉

To:             The Staff, International Administration 175 H  國際行政幕僚

Subject:     Sovereignty, declared or promised changes,

during military occupation.  軍事佔領期間主權的宣示或承諾改變

References:      (a) Laws and Customs of War on Land, Hague

Convention No. IV of 18 October 1907  1907海陸戰公約

(b) International Law, Chiefly as Interpreted and

Applied by the U.S., C.H. Hyde.  專功美國詮釋與適用的國際法

(c) Legal Problems in the Far Eastern Conflict,  遠東衝突法律問題

Q. Wright, H. Lauterpacht, E. M. Bore hard,

P. Morrison.

(d) The International Economic Law of Belligerent

Occupation, L. H. Feilchenfeld.  交戰佔領國際經濟法

(c) Ethopia conf. lecture by Lt. Col. Blackly.  衣索比亞會議課程

(1) Administrative policy in Cyrenaica, British

secret, May 1942  Cyrenaica的行政政策

(g) The Law of Military Occupation, J.T. Brierly.   佔領法

1.               Subject report considers, for Ethiopia, Cyrenaica and Territory X. in the light of international law changes in sovereignty, declared or promised, during military occupation.  有關衣索比亞、Cyrenaica和Ｘ領土在軍事佔領期間，根據國際法宣佈或承諾主權變化的主題報告。

2.               Since international law rests partly on the consent of states and partly on generally approved practice, a declaration of sovereignty of a territory by any one nation even though that nation has established a "de facto" government over the territory, cannot in itself make that sovereignty legal.  Such a declaration is a political act announcing that the government recognises a certain sovereignty, but does not make that sovereignty legal in the eyes of the world unless it meets the test of conformity with generally approved practice or of specific or implied consent of the family of nations by consensus of civilized states.  A promised change in sovereignty merely involves a moral obligation by such a nation to effectuate the change when, if and as possible.  In other words, at the end of the war in the settlement to be provided by the peace treaty, and to the degree made possible under the conditions then existing, and subject to the consent of other states and the rules of international law.  由於國際法部分依賴於國家的同意，部分依賴於普遍認可的實踐，因此任何一個國家即使已經在該領土上建立了「事實上的」政府，宣佈對該領土擁有主權，其行為本身並不能使那個主權合法。這樣的聲明是一種政治行為，宣佈政府承認某種主權，但不會使該主權在世界眼中合法化，除非它符合普遍認可的做法，或經過國際社會中文明國家的共識以具體或默示同意的檢驗。承諾的主權改變僅僅涉及這樣一個國家的道德義務，即在可能的情況下實現改變。換句話說，在戰爭結束時的解決辦法由和平條約規定，並在當時存在的條件下達到可能的程度，並須得到其他國家的同意和國際法規則。

 

Naval School of Military Government and Administration--p. 2

3.               For the purpose of this analysis there is postulated the view that international law does not consist of universal and permanent concepts of rights, principles or justice.  Rather, to par a phrase Borchard, international law rests partly on the consent of the states and partly on generally approved practice.  It is objective law after it has by time and experience acquired general recognition and application by tribunals.  Its sources are usage, giving rise to custom, or positive agreements or treaties.  為分析之目的，國際法不被視為包含普遍和永久的權利、原則或正義概念。相反的，用 Borchard 的話說，國際法部份取決於國家的同意，部份取決於普遍認可的實踐。 它經過時間和經驗得到法庭的普遍承認和適用後，成為客觀的法律。 它的來源是適用，習慣源，或確定的協議或條約。

4.               The theory of sovereignty holding that law is the will of the state comes into opposition with international law in the sense that no rules of international relations have the force of law except by the consent of the state.  In most cases involving the great powers international law cannot be effectuated, except by military force of the sovereigns which would be used by such states to further national policy and not international policy as such.  Particularly is international law weak in granting legal sanction to treaties imposed by force and to gains derived by nations through the assertion of force.  Rules which thus rest on consent and agreement have a doubtful quality as law.  To be effective, methods of enforcement are necessary, which between nations generally must mean willingness to fight.  However, these rules are objective and, having been recognized as rules by international tribunals or majority practise, become a binding body of rules applied by and to states in their international intercourse, although constantly subject to modification in the interests of progress.  國際法與認為法律是國家意志的展現的主權理論背道而馳，因為國際關係規則中非經國家同意不具有法律效力。大多數涉及大國的情況下，除非透過主權國家的軍事力量來推動國家政策而不是國際政策，否則無法實施國際法。尤其是在對要以武力強加的條約，和國家以主張武力獲得的利益，國際法給予法律認可方面是很無力的。因此，這種建立在同意和協議之上的規則，很難和法律一樣。為了有效起見，執法的方式是必要的，這通常意味著國家之間必須有奮戰的意願。然而，這些規則是客觀的，並且已被法院或多數實踐承認為規則，成為國家在其國際交往中適用和適用於國家的具有約束力的規則體系，儘管為了進步仍會不斷進行修改。

5.               Therefore it is reasonable to adapt the old law to modern conditions arising since World War I.  Since that war, through acceptance of the League of Nations Covenant, the fact of Paris, the Argentine Anti-War Treaty or the Inter-American Treaty on Right and Duties of States, practically

Naval School of Military Government and Administration--p. 3

every state in the world has accepted obligations not to resort to war or not to use armed force for the solution of international controversies, and not to recognize territorial changes resulting from external violence against any party to the treaty.  These treaties thus may be held to have given a legal interest to all parties in cases of violent seizure of the territory of one of their number by another.  Consequently, a change in sovereignty can occur only by validation of the illegalility of such a seizure by acquiescence of the states, parties to such treaties. According to international law, this may happen legally:  因此，根據第一次世界大戰以來出現的現代條件調整舊法律是合理的。自那場戰爭以來，通過接受〈國際聯盟公約〉、〈巴黎和約〉、〈阿根廷反戰條約〉或〈美洲國家間權利與義務公約〉，實際上，世界上所有國家都接受了：不訴諸戰爭，或不使用武力解決國際爭端的義務，不承認對條約任何一方的外部暴力造成的領土變化。因此，這些條約可能被認為在其一方的領土被另一方暴力佔領的情況下賦予了各方合法利益。因此，主權的變化只有在國家、此類條約的締約國默許這種扣押的非法性情況下才能發生。於是，根據國際法，這可能在法律上發生：

(1) Formally by the states, individually or collectively, assenting to the new situation,  國家個別或集體正式同意此一新形勢，

(2) By "prescription" by the states acquiescing in the new situation without protest and under the continuous and undisturbed dominion of the occupant for a period of time sufficient to justify the assumption that the position has become part of the established international order.  以「建議」，即國家在未受抗議的情況下默許新的情況，並在足夠長的時間內，接受佔領者的持續和不受幹擾的統治，從而有理由認為該地位已成為既定國際秩序的一部分。

6.               A second important principle which in the world of today might be given some weight as international law is Wilson's principle of "the self-determination of nations".  Hyde discusses this possibility as follows:  第二個在當今世界可能被視為國際法的重要原則，是威爾遜的「民族自決」原則。Hyde討論了這種可能性如下：