Ukryj
Pokaż wszystkie
Wyślij tekst przez e-mail Chiny a prawo międzynarodowe. Lawfare czy strategiczne wykorzystanie prawa międzynarodowego?
Streszczenie w języku polskim
Chińska Republika Ludowa (ChRL) bywa wielokrotnie oskarżana o stosowanie wyrafinowanej strategii lawfare, polegającej na strategicznym i nadużywającym wykorzystywaniu prawa międzynarodowego do realizacji własnych celów, w szczególności w związku ze sporami terytorialnymi na Morzu Południowochińskim. Celem artykułu jest zakwestionowanie tego rozpowszechnionego poglądu. W pierwszej kolejności przedstawiono koncepcję lawfare oraz wskazano na nieodłącznie związane z nią problemy natury analitycznej. Następnie scharakteryzowano historyczny stosunek Chin do prawa międzynarodowego oraz doktrynalne ujęcie zjawiska lawfare. W końcowej części poddano analizie spór morski pomiędzy ChRL a Filipinami, skierowany do rozstrzygnięcia przez Stały Trybunał Arbitrażowy, aby wykazać, że istnieje niewiele dowodów na to, że Chiny prowadziły metodyczną wojnę prawną, choć ChRL niewątpliwie podejmuje próby kształtowania norm publicznego prawa międzynarodowego we własnym interesie.
Słowa kluczowe
Pełny tekst:
PDF (English)Bibliografia
LITERATURE
Benvenisti E., Reclaiming Democracy: The Strategic Uses of Foreign and International Law by National Courts, “American Journal of International Law” 2008, vol. 102(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/30034538
Cai C., The Rise of China and International Law – Taking Chinese Exceptionalism Seriously, Oxford 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190073602.003.0001
Carlson J., Yeomans N., Whither Goeth the Law: Humanity or Barbarity, [in:] The Way Out: Radical Alternatives in Australia, eds. D. Crossley, M. Smith, Melbourne 1975.
Carr M., China and the Law of the Sea Convention, “Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs” 1983, vol. 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2159088
Comaroff J.L., Colonialism, Culture, and the Law: A Foreword, “Law & Social Inquiry” 2001, vol. 26(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2001.tb00180.x
Davies J.W., Inglis B.D., Divorce, the Royal Commission and Conflict of Laws, “The American Journal of Comparative Law” 1957, vol. 6(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/837517
Delisle J., From Accepting to Challenging the International Law of the Sea: China and the South China Sea Disputes, [in:] Legal Thoughts between the East and the West in the Multilevel Legal Order, eds. C. Lo, N.N. Li, T. Li, Singapore 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1995-1_16
Desierto D., China’s Maritime Law Enforcement Activities in the South China Sea, “International Law Studies” 2020, vol. 96.
Dunlap Jr C.J., Law and Military Interventions: Preserving Humanitarian Values in 21st Century Conflicts, Washington 2001.
Dunlap Jr. C.J., Lawfare 101 – A Primer, “Military Review” 2017, vol. 97.
Dupuy F., Dupuy P., Legal Analysis of China’s Historic Rights Claim in the South China Sea, “American Journal of International Law” 2013, vol. 107(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.1.0124
Eder T.S., China and International Adjudication: Caution, Identity Shifts, and the Ambition to Lead, Baden-Baden 2021.
Goldenziel J.I., Law as a Battlefield: The U.S., China, and the Global Escalation of Lawfare, “Cornell Law Review” 2021, vol. 106(5).
Goldsmith J., The Terror Presidency, Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration, New York 2009.
Guilfoyle D., The Rule of Law and Maritime Security: Understanding Lawfare in the South China Sea, “International Affairs” 2019, vol. 95(5). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz141
Hayton B., The South China Sea: The Struggle for Power in Asia, New Haven 2014.
Hondora T., Civil Society Organisations’ Role in the Development of International Law through Strategic Litigation in Challenging Times, “Australian International Law Journal” 2018, vol. 25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3262661
Jensen E.T., The ICJ’s “Uganda Wall”: A Barrier to the Principle of Distinction and an Entry Point for Lawfare, “Denver Journal of International Law and Policy” 2007, vol. 35(2).
Jochnick C., Normand R., The Legitimation of Violence: Critical History of the Laws of War, “Harvard International Law Journal” 1994, vol. 35.
Kaufman A., The “Century of Humiliation”, Then and Now: Chinese Perceptions of the International Order, “Pacific Focus” 2013, vol. 25(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1976-5118.2010.01039.x
Kennedy D., Of War and Law, Princeton 2006.
Kim S.S., Sovereignty in the Chinese Image of World Order, [in:] Essays in Honour of Wang Tieya, ed. R. McDonald, Dordrecht 1994.
Kittrie O.F., Law as a Weapon of War – Lawfare, Oxford 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190263577.003.0001
Kocs S.A., Explaining the Strategic Behavior of States: International Law as System Structure, “International Studies Quarterly” 1994, vol. 38(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2600864
Kraska J., Pedrozo R., International Maritime Security Law, Dordrecht 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004233577_002
Lam S.H., The Gentle Civilizer of the Far East: A Re-Examination of the Encounter between ‘China’ and ‘International Law’, “Journal of the History of International Law” 2024, vol. 26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718050-bja10096
Liang Q., Xiangsui W., Unrestricted Warfare, Beijing 1999.
Liang Q., Xiangsui W., Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America, New Delhi 2007.
Murphy B.K., Dangerous Ground: The Spratly Islands and International Law, “Ocean and Coastal Law Journal” 1995, vol. 1(2).
Odom J.G., The Value and Viability of the South China Sea Arbitration Ruling: The U.S. Perspective 2016–2020, “International Law Studies” 2021, vol. 97.
Pan J., Chinese Philosophy and International Law, “Asian Journal of International Law” 2011, vol. 1(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251310000354
Rabbani A., China’s Hegemony in the South China Sea, “World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues” 2009, vol. 23(9).
Rajagopal B., Counter-Hegemonic International Law: Rethinking Human Rights and Development as a Third World Strategy, “Third World Quarterly” 2006, vol. 27(5). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590600780078
Ramsden M., Strategic Litigation before the International Court of Justice: Evaluating Impact in the Campaign for Rohingya Rights, “European Journal of International Law” 2022, vol. 33(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chac025
Roberts A., Stephan P.B., Verdier P.-H., Versteeg M. (eds.), Comparative International Law, Oxford 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190697570.003.0001
Sacks B., The Political Geography of the South China Sea Disputes: A RAND Research Primer, Santa Monica 2022.
Sadat L., Geng J., On Legal Subterfuge and the So-Called “Lawfare” Debate, “Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law” 2010, vol. 43(1).
Shen J., China’s Sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands: A Historical Perspective, “Chinese Journal of International Law” 2002, vol. 1(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cjilaw.a000432
Stephens D., The Age of Lawfare, “International Law Studies” 2017, vol. 87.
Talmon S., The South China Sea Arbitration – Jurisdiction, Admissibility, Procedure, Leiden 2022.
The South China Sea Arbitration Awards: A Critical Study, “Chinese Journal of International Law” 2018, vol. 17(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmy012
Thornton H., John Selden’s Response to Grotius: The Argument for Closed Seas, “International Journal of Maritime History” 2006, vol. 18(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/084387140601800206
Tonnesson S., Why Are the Disputes in the South China Sea So Intractable? A Historical Approach, “Asian Journal of Social Science” 2002, vol. 30(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/156853102320945402
Wang D., China’s Unequal Treaties: Narrating National History, New York 2008.
Whomersley C., The Award on the Merits in the Case Brought by the Philippines against China Relating to the South China Sea: A Critique, “Chinese Journal of International Law” 2017, vol. 16(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmx023
Yee S., The South China Sea Arbitration (The Philippines v. China): Potential Jurisdictional Obstacles or Objections to Jurisdiction and Admissibility, “Chinese Journal of International Law” 2018, vol. 17(2).
Zaffaroni E.R., ¡Bienvenidos al lawfare!, Buenos Aires 2020.
Zhang K., Explaining China’s Large-Scale Land Reclamation in the South China Sea: Timing and Rationale, “Journal of Strategic Studies” 2023, vol. 46(6–7). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2022.2040486
Zhong H., White M., South China Sea: Its Importance for Shipping, Trade, Energy and Fisheries, “Asia-Pacific Journal of International Law and Policy” 2017, vol. 2(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-00201003
Zou K., China’s U-Shaped Line in the South China Sea Revisited, “Ocean Development & International Law” 2012, vol. 43(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2012.647483
MISCELLANEOUS
Press Release, Permanent Court of Arbitration Issuance on the Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China: Arbitral Tribunal Establishes Rules of Procedure and Initial Timetable, PCA 101203, 27.8.2013.
ONLINE SOURCES
Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Joint Statement on the 20th Anniversary of The Declaration on The Conduct of Parties in The South China Sea, 12.11.2022, https://asean.org/joint-statement-on-the-20th-anniversary-of-the-declaration-on-the-conduct-of-parties-in-the-south-china-sea (access: 10.7.2026).
Baughman J., “Unrestricted Warfare” Is Not China’s Master Plan, 25.4.2022, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/CASI/Articles/Article-Display/Article/3004313/unrestricted-warfare-is-not-chinas-master-plan (access: 6.7.2026).
Cheng D., Winning without Fighting: Chinese Legal Warfare, 21.5.2012, https://www.heritage.org/asia/report/winning-without-fighting-chinese-legal-warfare (access: 10.7.2026).
Deutsche Welle, South China Sea, Philippines Accuses China of Boarding Boats, 19.6.2024. https://www.dw.com/en/south-china-sea-philippines-china-coast-guard/a-69409869 (access: 6.7.2026).
Deutsche Welle, US, Philippines Kick off Combat Drills in South China Sea, 22.4.2024, https://www.dw.com/en/us-philippines-kick-off-combat-drills-in-south-china-sea/a-68885289 (access: 6.7.2026).
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying’s Regular Press Conference, 18.5.2016, http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/t1463251.shtml (access: 6.7.2026).
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Declarations Made by States Parties under Article 298. China: The Government of the People’s Republic of China Does Not Accept Any of the Procedures Provided for in Section 2 of Part XV of the Convention with Respect to All the Categories of Disputes Referred to in Paragraph 1 (a) (b) and (c) of Article 298 of the Convention, https://www.itlos.org/en/main/jurisdiction/declarations-of-states-parties/declarations-made-by-states-parties-under-article-298 (access: 6.7.2026).
JAG Corps, Maritime Claims Reference Manual, https://www.jag.navy.mil/national-security/mcrm (access:10.7.2026).
Ku J., Assessing the South China Sea Arbitral Award after One Year: Why China Won and the U.S. Is Losing, 12.7.2017, https://www.lawfareblog.com/assessing-south-china-sea-arbitral-award-after-one-year-why-china-won-and-us-losing (access: 10.7.2026).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Joint Statement between the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of the Philippines, 5.1.2023, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zy/gb/202405/t20240531_11367479.html (access: 10.7.2026).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Statement on the Award of 12 July 2016 of the Arbitral Tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration Established at the Request of the Republic of the Philippines, 12.7.2016, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/201607/t20160712_679470.html (access: 6.7.2026).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Statement on the Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of the South China Sea Arbitration by the Arbitral Tribunal Established at the Request of the Navy Ministry of National Defense of the People’s Republic of China, China’s Sansha City Establishes Xisha, Nansha Districts in Major Administrative Move, 18.4.2020, https://eng.mod.gov.cn/xb/News_213114/TopStories/4863772.html (access: 6.7.2026).
Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines, 7.12.2014, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/topics_665678/kjgzbdfyyq/P020200201565468720286.pdf (access: 6.7.2026).
Republic of the Philippines, 30.10.2015, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/gjhdq_665435/2675_665437/2762_663528/2763_663530/201510/t20151030_520923.html (access: 6.7.2026).
Rühlig T., How China Approaches International Law: Implications for Europe, European Institute for Asian Studies, May 2018, https://www.eias.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/EU_Asia_at_a_Glance_Ruhlig_2018_China_International_Law.pdf (access: 10.7.2026).
The National Defense Strategy of the United States of America, March 2005, https://tinyurl.com/yc4zatp6 (access: 10.7.2026).
UN Doc. CML/17/2009, 7.5.2009, https://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/mysvnm33_09/chn_2009re_mys_vnm_e.pdf (access: 10.7.2026).
Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin at the Press Conference on the White Paper Titled China Adheres to the Position of Settling through Negotiation the Relevant Disputes Between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea, 13.7.2016, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/nanhai/eng/wjbxw_1/t1381980.htm (access: 6.7.2026).
CASE LAW
In the Matter of the South China Sea Arbitration, Republic of the Philippines v People’s Republic of China, PCA Case no. 2013-19, Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 29 October 2015.
In the Matter of the South China Sea Arbitration, Republic of the Philippines v People’s Republic of China, PCA Case no. 2013-19, Award on Merits, 12 July 2016.
LEGAL ACTS
People’s Republic of China, Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone of 25 February 1992.
People’s Republic of China, Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf Act of 26 June 1998.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 10 December 1982, 1833 UNTS, no. 397.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2026.35.2.87-105
Data publikacji: 2026-08-07 12:31:20
Data złożenia artykułu: 2024-08-27 06:12:32
Statystyki
Wskaźniki
Odwołania zewnętrzne
- Brak odwołań zewnętrznych
Prawa autorskie (c) 2026 Tamás Hoffmann, Viktória Laura Herczegh
Powyższa praca jest udostępniana na lcencji Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.