WTO"合理期限"仲裁举证问题探析

举证是“合理期限“仲裁过程中一个重要而复杂的环节,直接关系到仲裁结果的公正性和当事方对裁决结果的认可度.《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解》并未对“合理期限“仲裁的举证问题作出明确规定,在实践中此类仲裁举证责任经历了一个由当事方共同举证到后来由责任方承担首要举证义务的过程,但当事方认为有《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解》第21条第3款(c)项规定的“具体情形“存在时要提供相应的证据.在证明执行期限的合理性时,国内强行法具有表面证据效力,同类仲裁“判例“具有一定说服力但并不具有法律约束力.

On Proof during WTO "Reasonable Period of Time" Arbitration

The evidence rule is an important and complicated problem during "reasonable period of time" arbitration process as it not only affects directly the fairness of decision but also the approval degree of the members concerned toward the result.There are no specific provisions under Dispute Settlement Understanding of the burden of proof during"reasonable period of time"arbitration.In practice,the burden of proof has developed from common proof to the implementing member bearing the primary burden of proof.The party seeking to prove that there are"particular circumstances" under Dispute Settlement Understanding Article 21.3(c) has the burden of proof.The domestic mandatory law is the circumstantial evidence,and the similar arbitration "jurisprudence" has the certain persuasive power but not legally binding,when the implementing member seek to prove that the implementation period it proposes is logical and rigorous.