一. 駁開羅宣言與波次坦宣言無效說
鑒於有不少法律外行人近來大量發表諸如 " 台灣主權未定論 "之品質頗差文章, 本人為正視聽 , 特別以國際法研究學人之身分撰寫本篇文章期待無知人士不要再以訛傳訛的胡亂解釋條約, 笑掉我們內行人大牙
台灣本身是否主權尚未定論? 無知人士的答案肯定為是 , 因為它們所持的論點不外是舊金山和約中未對台灣主權歸屬有所討論 , 因而很沒知識的即推斷台灣仍然維持其無主地位 .
論述中國合法取得台灣主權應從兩方面著手 , 其一為和約 , 其二為先佔, 本文將先從和約論述起:
台澎由馬關條約割讓日本後,在二戰的一九四三年的開羅會議, 中美英發表了 "開羅宣言"如下:(原文)
-----------------------------------
"The several military missions have agreed upon future military operations against Japan. "The three great allies expressed their resolve to bring unrelenting pressure against their brutal enemies by sea, land, and air. This pressure is already rising.
"The three great allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan. They covet no gain for themselves and have no thought of territorial expansion. "It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pasific which are she seized or occupies since the biginning of the first world war in 1914 , and that all the territories that Japan has stolen from the Chinese,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
such as Manchuria, Formosa, and Pescadores, shall be restored to the
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Republic of China.
-----------------------------------
最後三行主張日本必需將偷自(stolen from)中國的土地如滿州台澎歸還( restored) 中華民國( the Republic of China) 開羅宣言的重要性不是因為三國元首的聲明,而是它後來被國際法律文件引用,並不須要簽字,因解釋條約有一相當重要之原則 - 引入原則,而引用它的國際條約中 ,各當事國均簽了字 (視宣言為原則)!
根據維也納條約法公約 ( Vienna Covention on the Law of Treaties )第三十一條第二項規定 ：
就解釋條約而言 , 上下文除指 " 連同並言及附件在內之約文 " 外.....
我們可以很清楚的看到公約本項對於引入原則的明文強調 , 而把開羅宣言視為降書中的一部份,是故本宣言當然有國際法上的效力而對日本發生拘束力.最重要者,是開羅宣言之所以備忘錄形式紀錄 , 其主要原因乃在戰時國際法不同於平時國際法,敵對間之交戰國很顯然無法於當時共同簽字,故由他國暫行擬定條文而交由戰敗國日本批准後生效.
至於日本降書是如是說, 原文如下: (節錄和中華民國相關者)
-----------------------------------
INSTRUMENT OF SURRENDER
We, acting by command of and in behalf of the Emperor of Japan, the Japanese Government and the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters, hereby accept the provisions set forth in the declaration issued by the heads of the Governments of the United States, China, and Great Britain on 26 July 1945 at Potsdam, and subsequently adhered to by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,which four powers are hereafter referred to as the Allied Powers.
我們,受日本帝國.日本政府.日本軍部之命,接受所有由美國.中國.和英國政府制定的波茲坦宣言,及其後和蘇維埃政府發布之宣言...
We hereby proclaim the unconditional surrender to the Allied Powers of the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters and of all Japanese armed forces and all armed forces under the Japanese controlwherever situated.
We hereby undertake for the Emperor, the Japanese Government and their successors to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam~~~~~~~~~~~Declaration in good faith, and to issue whatever orders and
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (註一)take whatever actions may be required by the Supreme Commander for the Allied Poers or by any other designated representative of the Allied Powers for the purpose of giving effect to that Declaration.
我們天皇和日本政府及其後繼者必將實施波茲坦宣言......
MAMORU SHIGMITSU
By Command and in behalf of the Emperor
of Japan and the Japanese Government
天皇及政府代表 重光葵
YOSHIJIRO UMEZU
By Command and in behalf of the Japanese
Imperial General Headquarters
日本軍部代表 梅津美治郎
-----------------------------------
這是一份正式的國際文件,各國及日本都同意波茲坦宣言,也等於承認了開羅宣言做為原則,很多人都以為宣言沒簽字一定無效,重點是: 它們一旦納入了正式合約之中,就是被做為法律原則實行,除非相關國家重訂新約否定前約,否則這就是新的現狀! 當然或許有人會說降書是由戰區司令作代表而簽署 , 效力明顯不及由兩國國會及元首同意通過的國際條約 . 但是請別忘記 , 降書目的乃在結束戰時狀態平時國際法之重新適用乃在降書簽訂之後 , 故依據戰時國際法原則 , 在非常時期下之條約簽署不同於平時國際法中條約之簽署 , 戰區作戰司令乃代表該國對外之最高代表 , 是故其所簽署之條約自然對該國有完全之拘束力.
另外,本文中所標記出來的數點地方,正是一九四五年六月二十六日,中美英三國共同發表的波茲坦宣言(Potsdam Proclamation)部分內容,其前言和原文節錄如下(和台澎相關者):
-----------------------------------
1. We, the President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain,representing the hundreds of millions of our
countrymen, have conferred and agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end the war.
我們,美國總統,中華民國國民政府主席,大英首相同意日本應被給予機會停止戰爭
8. The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out, andJapanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu,Hokkaido, Kyushu,Shikoku, and such minor islands as we determine.
開羅宣言的條件一定要實現,日本的領土限定在我們決定的範圍內
-----------------------------------
開羅宣言的效力在此顯現 : 其被波茲坦宣言包括了進去,而後來波茲坦宣言被日本的降書做為原則,也就是說各國和日本皆同意這波茲坦宣言和開羅宣言的原則! 國際法外行彭明敏之所以會得出開羅宣言與波次坦宣言不具法律效力的言論, 乃是因為他不懂國際法中的引入原則 (前已提及引入原則之法理) 所以會誤認兩宣言的效力. 另外 ,另一大法律外行沈建德則緊咬所謂的 " 開羅宣言僅為一紙新聞稿 "; 根據他所引述的美方檔案資料(該員在文章中根本就沒有表明是哪裡來的資料, 不過就當作他真的有查過這份資料好了, 該文請見
http://www.wufi.org.tw/cairocom.htm ), 其一再強調宣言的無共識性, 但根據我方史料 ( 中華民國重要史料初篇 -對日抗戰時期第三篇 - 戰時外交 , 秦孝儀編 , 台北中央文物供應社出版)中之會議摘要記載, 英方代表原本主張 " 台澎地位當然由日本放棄 "但在我國代表力爭下終於維持 " 台澎歸還中國 " 之字樣 . 沈氏之言, 不攻自破.
此外,請注意降書中註一之部分日本所言 " 以誠信原則實現波茲坦宣言..... " 云云. 何謂誠信原則? 稱誠信原則者,乃以善意及有效並合理之方式解釋並實現波茲坦宣言,並努力謀求當事人真意之實現 .
我們再來看看此處所論之波茲坦宣言關於台灣部分的內容:
-----------------------
that is, at the beginning of World War I. Manchuria, Formosa,
~~~~~~~~~
and other territories taken from China by Japan were to be restored
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
to China. The three powers were "determined that in due course Korea
~~~~~~~~
shall become free and independent."
.....日本自中國所奪取之台灣等領土需歸還中國...... (標記部分)
-----------------------
日本既然於降書中明示遵守波次坦宣言中之條款,而開羅宣言又因引入原則而成為波次坦宣言之一部份,依據條約善意而有效解釋之結果,當然可認日本真意為歸還台灣主權.
