臺灣獨立與國際法庭關於科索夫獨立的意見書
作者：郭承天 （政治大學政治學系教授）
摘要：
2010年7月22日，國際法庭回覆了聯合國大會所提問關於科索夫獨立的意見，認為科索夫單方面的宣告獨立，並沒有違反國際法。相對於該意見書發佈之前所引起劇烈的政治和法律爭議，支持與反對科索夫獨立的雙方，在意見書發佈之後，都展現了相當的自制。本文主張，由於國際法庭在這個民族自決議題上，採取了一個創新的國際法原則，也就是「民主化補救分離原則」，因此可以對於過去幾世紀以來造成國際政治動亂的民族自決議題，有效的解決其政治與法律的爭議。若是應用在臺海兩岸關係上，國際法庭的這個意見書可能會同時限制臺灣獨立以及中國統一的意圖，而支持相互包容的折衷方案，例如類似歐盟的制度。
關鍵字
臺灣獨立、中國統一、國際法庭、民主化補救分離
ICJ Opinion on Kosovo Independence and Its Implications for Taiwan’s Self-Determination*
Author：Cheng-tian Kuo (Professor, Department of Political Science National Chengchi University)
Abstract：
On 22 July 2010, in response to a request by the United Nations General Assembly, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an opinion on the Kosovo case, stating that Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence is not in violation of international law. In contrast to the extravagant political and legal controversies concerning Kosovo’s independence before the ICJ opinion was issued, both supporters and opponents of Kosovo’s independence have revealed remarkable self-restraint in their reaction to the opinion. This paper argues that the ICJ’s actual application of an innovative principle of international law concerning national self-determination, the principle of “democratic remedial secession”, effectively resolves the political and legal problems surrounding national self-determination that have wrecked havoc to international political stability for centuries. If applied to China-Taiwan relations, the ICJ opinion would restrain both Taiwan independence and China-unification claims, while endorsing mutually accommodating alternatives, such as a quasi-European Union arrangement.
Keywords
Taiwan independence, China unification, International Court of Justice, democratic remedial secession