CAJ | 학술논문

晚近，各国条约实践试图将公平与公正待遇条款限定在习惯国际法最低待遇标准范畴内，进而将其主要义务内容确定在不得拒绝司法等有限的义项内，以限制投资条约仲裁庭的宽泛解释。但是，RDC v．Guatemala案裁决表明，以美国为例的公平与公正待遇条款的条约改革实践并没有取得预期效果，仲裁庭仍然对于新一代公平<br>　　与公正待遇条款采取宽泛解释。对此，各国条约实践应该进一步明确限定习惯国际法的证明方式、公平与公正待遇标准的具体义务内容和最惠国待遇条款的适用范围，以促进公平与公正待遇标准仲裁实践的确定性和一致性。在政策选择上，不宜将公平与公正待遇的具体义务内容仅仅限定为不得拒绝司法，究竟应如何列举公平与公正待遇的具体义务内容仍需进一步的审慎考量。
만근，각국조약실천시도장공평여공정대우조관한정재습관국제법최저대우표준범주내，진이장기주요의무내용학정재불득거절사법등유한적의항내，이한제투자조약중재정적관범해석。단시，RDC v．Guatemala안재결표명，이미국위례적공평여공정대우조관적조약개혁실천병몰유취득예기효과，중재정잉연대우신일대공평<br>　　여공정대우조관채취관범해석。대차，각국조약실천응해진일보명학한정습관국제법적증명방식、공평여공정대우표준적구체의무내용화최혜국대우조관적괄용범위，이촉진공평여공정대우표준중재실천적학정성화일치성。재정책선택상，불의장공평여공정대우적구체의무내용부부한정위불득거절사법，구경응여하열거공평여공정대우적구체의무내용잉수진일보적심신고량。
States in recent investment treaty practices try to limit the Fair and Equitable Treatment ( FET) clause to the minimum standard of customary in-ternational law, restrict the scope of FET obligations to limited items such as no denial of justice, and to restrain tribunals'discretion in interpretation.However, as RDC v.Guatemala award shows, improvements of FET clause by the United States and many other States have not achieved the desired effect, and the tribu-nals are stil making expansive interpretations of improved FET clauses.There-fore, in order to promote certainty and consistency of arbitral practices of FET, States need to further definitely limit the methods of proving customary interna-tional law;limit the concrete FET obligation scope and the scope of MFN clause application.As for policy options, the FET should not be exclusively limited to no denial of justice.States should prudently consider how to make a balanced FET obligations list.