Access to Justice in International Economic Law. On the Procedural Status of Private Litigants

该研究是关于国际公法和欧洲法中非国家行为者地位的论述的一部分。它填补了法律理论和学说研究的空白，因为自然人和法律的人在国际一级的程序自主权的地位和范围尚未得到深入处理，国际经济法是一个特别适合对国际个人索赔人的法律的权力进行比较和历史分析的研究领域：除了欧盟，非洲和美洲的区域经济一体化体系进行了分析，这是迄今为止基本上未探讨。研究报告的分析部分涉及个人在区域经济一体化体系中诉诸司法的机会，以及个人索赔人在国际海洋法体系和国际投资法中的地位，为在全世界经济背景下赋予自然人和法律的人程序性权力提供了基本见解。由于它们有权启动国际司法程序，因此在很大程度上具备了国家传统上保留给它们自己的职能。尽管国际条约的设计各不相同，但在对私人诉讼当事人的地位的司法解释中可以找到很大程度的一致性：在判例法中，自然人和法律的人被赋予关键的程序作用。特别是，个人的诉讼权利得到了扩大，赋予了私人诉讼当事人控制国家合法性的权力。扩大国际地位的功能等同于一组法院在国家法院实现私人诉讼当事人的程序自主权。各国对私人当事方地位的不同类型的司法延伸作出了高度反应。然而，根本的国家挫折，所谓的“政治反弹”，对国际法院制定的个人原告的程序关键功能并没有实现。本研究指出，在传统的国家同意概念之外，“私人诉讼当事人”的“全面的“程序”能力的“法律原则“可以得到正当化的途径：它从明确的国际经济法角度扩大了“规范个人主义”的伦理概念，同时考虑到“个人”的现代国际法律的地位，特别是在程序方面，可以很好地涉及自然人以及法律的人，即人。

The study is part of the discourse on the status of non-state actors in Public International and European Law. It closes a gap in legal-theoretical and doctrinal research, as the status and scope of a procedural autonomy of natural and legal persons on an international level has not yet been dealt with in depth.International Economic Law is a particularly suitable area of research for a comparative, historical analysis of the legal power of international individual claimants: Besides the EU, African and American systems of regional economic integration are analysed, which are hitherto largely unexplored. The analysis section of the study, dealing with individual access to justice in systems of regional economic integration, with the standing of individual claimants in the international law of the sea system as well as in international investment law, provides fundamental insights into the procedural empowerment of natural and legal persons in economic contexts worldwide.A key finding of the study is that private litigants, by virtue of their empowerment to initiate international judicial proceedings, are equipped to a very heterogeneous extent with functions that states traditionally had reserved for themselves. Notwithstanding the heterogeneity of international treaty designs, a large degree of coherence can be found in the judicial interpretation of the standing of private litigants: in the case-law, natural and legal persons are assigned a key procedural role. In particular, individual rights of action are expanded, granting private litigants the power to control state legality. The functional equivalent of extending the international standing is that one group of courts effectuates the procedural autonomy of private litigants before national courts. States react highly responsive to the different types of judicial extension of the standing of private parties. However, fundamental state setbacks, so-called "political backlashes", against the procedural key function of individual plaintiffs as developed by international courts did not materialize.-The-study-points-out-ways-in-which'a-legal-principle“of'the-"comprehensive"procedural'capacityof‘ private litigants" can be justified beyond the traditional concept of state consent: It broadens the ethical concept of “normative individualism” from a decidedly international economic law perspective taking into account that the modem international legal position of “the individual”, especially in a procedural context, may well relate to natural as well as legal persons, i.e. human.