WTO政府採購協定適用範圍之研究-以爭端解決案件為探討核心

Abstract

各國政府機關每年對外採購之交易金額約占各國國內生產總額10％至15％，因此政府採購市場對整體經濟的影響性甚大，各國傳統上對此均採行保護政策，然隨著國際貿易日漸頻繁，傳統的歧視性措施於是漸受國際關注，政府採購也不再只是一國內部的事務，對外乃全球化市場中另一個兵家必爭之地。 在ＧＡＴＴ/ＷＴＯ架構下政府採購不適用最惠國待遇與國民待遇原則，因此一締約國對來自於其他不同締約國之同類產品，在進口後採購時可以給予不同的待遇；締約國對於進口到其國內的其他締約國產品，於政府採購時也可以給予不同於本國產品之差別待遇；為避免各國政府利用政府採購造成貿易障礙，在一九七九年東京回合談判中，終於達成第一個政府採購協定，中央機關所辦理之貨品採購開始以複邊形式受到規範，而目前乃是適用於烏拉圭回合談判中於一九九六年一月一日正式生效之政府採購協定，並已有28個締約國，而我國於二○○二年一月一日正式成為ＷＴＯ會員，依據我國入會文件理應於二○○三年一月之前簽署政府採購協定，惟目前仍因政治力因素迄未簽署，然自一九九五年度至二○○三年度，我國就政府採購協定所承諾適用機關的採購規模逐漸擴大，於二○○○年度已達六千億元新台幣以上，而門檻金額以上之採購案金額就高達三千餘億元，二○○三年門檻金額以上之採購案金額更高達四千七百六十二億餘元；當然倘我國簽署協定後，其他協定締約國也必須對我開放總額每年約新台幣六兆八千億元以上之政府採購市場，因此，基於上開龐大商機考量，各締約國無不利用各種管道對我國開放政府採購市場腳步持續表達關切。 而我國簽署協定後必須開放哪些政府採購市場極有釐清的必要，惟由於政府採購協定採框架式談判，未對何謂「政府採購」作明確的定義，因此某機關是否為承諾之「政府機關」？其「行為」在何種情形下應適用政府採購協定？與其發生爭議時之判斷標準為何？均有解釋空間，也有賴對整個ＷＴＯ協定與政府採購協定間相互關係的瞭解，這對政府採購機關與民間企業均是很大挑戰，從而即有深入研究之必要。本文首先於第二章藉由各國對簽署協定考量的角度，初步介紹各國在政府採購市場下實施保護之相關措施，並進行ＷＴＯ國際經貿體制下政府採購協定演進之探討；第三章則探討協定之主要規範、適用之原理原則與爭端解決程序；第四章則藉由前開研究，以在ＧＡＴＴ/ＷＴＯ架構下有關政府採購所生之爭端解決案件探討協定適用之「採購行為」與「採購機關」，並研析爭端解決小組就「採購行為」「採購機關」所提出之幾項判斷標準；第五章則繼續討論協定第一條所謂之「任何有關」「法律、規章、程序或實務」之適用，並介紹協定適用之採購客體、金額與除外事項等；第六章，就我國目前對外面臨政府採購協定締約國質疑我國違反ＷＴＯ協定，對內面臨國內廠商質疑採購機關辦理採購程式圖利外國廠商之窘境，藉由上開研究先釐整出不適用協定之範圍，供政府機構作為決定是否開放市場或採取保護措施之參考，以期能兼顧我國政府與廠商之利益，並提出我國承諾清單於簽署後可能產生之問題，另外也藉由研究所得，提出我國政府採購法制之修法建議，以供政府施政參考。

For many World Trade Organization (WTO) members, government procurement (GP) is generally ten to fifteen percent of a country's gross domestic product (GDP). Because the significant impact on a nation’s economy, the early procurement laws were protective of its domestic industry. However, as international trade being more frequently, considerable international attention is drawn on these discriminatory measures. Accordingly, a nation’s GP becomes not only a domestic issue but a global one. Under the construct of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), GP was explicitly excluded from the key national treatment obligation and the Most-Favored-Nation Treatment. To prevent the protective policies of GP from being trade barriers, the first GP Agreement (GPA), signed in 1979 at the Tokyo Round of Trade Negotiations, entered into force in 1981. The GPA provides a strong framework for ensuring that the procurement practices of signatory nations are open and competitive, and respect the WTO core principles of national treatment without discrimination. Recently, the internal market of our GP has continuously been increasing. Notably, the procurement above a certain threshold amount exceeded NT$300 billions in 2000 and reached NT$470 billions in 2003. Taiwan signed the WTO’s agreement in 2002 and has been requested to accede to the GPA in 2003 as a condition of Taiwan’s GATT/WTO accession. Due to political reasons, we have not signed the agreement. Once the agreement is signed, the GPA members will open their market of GP over NT$ 6,800 billions to us. Considering this huge business opportunity, the GPA members have been expressing their concerns via various channels on the pace that we open the market. Since this is the very first time for us to open our GP market to other countries, the definition of GP in the agreement is crucial to successful applications of the GPA. Yet, there still exist questions on how to define government bodies/organizations, to classify applicable transactions to the GPA, as well as to settle disputes happened in applying the GPA. Hence, there is a need to further study these questions and thus this thesis has been directed to investigate the trust of these questions. In the organization of this thesis, Chapter 1 presents the topic and purpose of the study and defines specific notions. The impact of current multilateral rules and the general role and history of the WTO are reviewed in detail in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 describes the application of GPA disciplines to local government entities and the dispute settlement system under the GPA. Chapter 4 provides a study on relevant dispute settlement cases and articles under the GPA to develop a standard of what constitutes a “purchase” and “procuring entity”. In Chapter 5, we investigate the meaning of “any law”, “regulation, procedure or practice regarding any procurement,” valuation of contract, and exceptions to the agreement. Chapter 6 discusses the lists in our schedule in Annexes 1 to 5 of Appendix I of the Government Procurement Law issued in 1998, and predicts the problems which may arise if the GPA is signed. Finally, through thorough examinations on the regulations and applicability of the GPA, we expect this study will provide guidelines for our government to make beneficial policies to itself as well as to our domestic industry. Concluding remarks and future research work can be found in Chapter 7.