(2) Commentary on the phenomenon and theoretical propositions of weakening national economic sovereignty. After the introduction of the theory advocating the weakening of sovereignty, it became a hot topic for a while. In the lack of thinking, it confused many issues related to the theory of modern international law.

.

Here, the author will only comment on a few of the most critical and influential common issues to set the record straight: 1. International economic organizations do not constitute an erosion of national economic sovereignty (Note 27).

With the deepening of the organization of international society, the scope of adjustment of international economic law is gradually expanding, and the economic scope of national jurisdiction is also relatively narrowing. International economic legal rules have shown a development trend from relatively dispersed to more centralized.

However, as the basic unit of the international economic and legal order - the sovereign state - will never lose its dominant position.

Sovereign states are the prerequisite for the emergence of international economic law and international economic organizations. International economic law and international economic organizations cannot exist without a state, and it is impossible for only a single country or multiple independent countries to have international economic law and international economic organizations.

.

International economic organizations are mainly economic organizations between countries, and their rights originate from the transfer of national economic sovereignty rights.

International economic organizations are the result of sovereign states' self-limitation and restraint on economic sovereignty and cannot become an authority over states.

International economic organizations are also subjects of international economic law. They are adjusted and constrained by international economic law. They have equal status with sovereign states in certain aspects in foreign economic exchanges and even have the function of coordinating state relations in the economic field.

Therefore, international economic organizations have not been elevated to a position above the economic sovereignty of sovereign states. The emergence of a large number of international economic organizations such as the WTO, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund and the expansion of the functions of international economic organizations have not changed the economic sovereignty of states.

status.

It is undeniable that in reality, there are indeed situations where some international economic organizations interfere in situations that are originally within the jurisdiction of national economic sovereignty. However, this is a manifestation of the contradiction between the old and new international economic orders in the process of economic globalization, and it is also what the developing countries should do.

issue that deserves adequate attention.

2. The operations of multinational companies and the global market strategy do not really form a substantial restriction on national economic sovereignty.

Because multinational corporations have still not been able to change their legal status as legal persons subject to national jurisdiction, the global operations of multinational corporations cannot change the situation in which countries fully exercise their sovereignty.

Just as the establishment of the cross-border computer Internet and information highways has only shortened the distance between people in space, the international community has not become a "global village" without borders, as some people advocate. Transnational

The company has used advanced information technology to change the traditional production, sales and business management models, posing challenges to the current international economic and legal system adapted to traditional commercial transaction activities and relevant domestic economic laws and regulations of various countries. However, its behavior

It does not exceed the jurisdiction of the country's economic sovereignty. By exercising its economic sovereignty, the country can still formulate and regulate a series of behaviors of multinational companies using modern high-tech means such as e-commerce, electronic money and online payment to circumvent the tax collection and administration of sovereign countries, and solve this problem.

various legal issues caused.

3. "Economic globalization" is not "denationalization" or "legal integration."

From the perspective of international economic development, globalization has its imperfections in its development process. It is undeniable that globalization is the mainstream of international economic development.

The development of economic globalization will inevitably have a comprehensive, extensive and profound impact on politics, culture, law, and ideology, but we cannot conclude from this that the "denationalization" of the international society and the "integration of the international legal system"

conclusion.

In essence, the formulation of legal globalization refers to the "World Law", "Super-national Law" and "Transnational Law" that emerged after the Second World War.

A replica of , only the external performance has changed.

In the past, world law emphasized politics, while legal globalization emphasized economics; in the past, world law emphasized changing the nature of international law, while legal globalization emphasized being separated from international law; in the past, world law emphasized controlling countries, while legal globalization emphasized being free from international law.

Control by any country; previous world law emphasized the power of world government, while legal globalization emphasized the functions of private government; but they are essentially the same, and both propose that their laws are supranational and independent of the country.

In the legislative process, they all advocate that private subjects can become the subjects of legal relations, and they all downplay national economic sovereignty and use the principle of sovereignty as the main target of attack (Note 28).

If international legal integration is possible, it can only be a law that purely represents the will of a very small number of countries. At this time, international economic law will lose its unique legal attribute of "international"; the international community will no longer be able to

It’s called the “international community”.

Therefore, in a fundamental sense, the formulation of legal globalization is unscientific. Economic globalization is by no means the globalization of interests, but merely the globalization of markets and business models. Economic globalization can never lead to non-state actors in the international community.

change.

4. To weaken the economic sovereignty of other countries is the real purpose of the "transfer theory", "erosion theory", "ambiguity theory" and "abandonment theory".