隨著全球對跨境有害化學物質風險之重視，多邊環境協定（MEAs）所採行之貿易限制措施，常與世界貿易組織（WTO）之自由貿易與非歧視原則產生體制交織與規範衝突，而本研究以《水俁公約》為核心研究對象。該公約作為全球首部聚焦於汞生命週期管理的法律框架，其制度設計兼具污染源頭管制與產品流通管理之雙軌特徵，對國際經貿秩序帶來顯著之張力，具有重新檢視貿易與環境法制平衡之學術與實務意義。本研究進一步聚焦於《水俁公約》下非締約方之特殊處境，探討《水俁公約》第 3 條關於非締約方貿易在 GATT 第 XX 條以及前言（chapeau）下之法律評價。
本研究採取文獻分析、比較分析及案例研析法。首先，系統性整理《水俁公約》下包含附件清單管理、分階段淘汰、事先知情同意及最佳可行技術與最佳環境實務等實體與程序義務。其次，本研究梳理國際法學界就WTO法制與其他國際規範之潛在衝突的調和所提出的「國際法整體性觀觀點」、「WTO-only 規則觀點」與「協調解釋模式」之學說辯證，並結合 WTO 環境例外案例法（如美國—蝦案、巴西—輪胎案、歐洲—海豹案）之演進，剖析杜哈回合談判第 31(i) 段關於MEAs下之特定貿易義務（STOs）與WTO規範之關係的談判中的界定基準與主要會員立場，藉此確認多邊合作脈絡之環境措施在 WTO 審查中制度正當性基礎。
為進行實體法之合規性檢驗，本文建構一組由《水俁公約》締約方（A 國、C 國）與非締約方（B 國）所組成之模擬爭端個案，分析 A 國針對非締約方所採之汞貿易限制措施，是否可能構成 GATT 義務之初步違反，並進一步檢視其於 GATT 第 XX 條下之正當化空間。尤其於前言審查部分，若於具體個案中，B 國已具備與締約方相近之風險控制能力，而 A 國仍採取僵硬且缺乏彈性之締約身分區分，不容許非締約方透過效果上實質等同之措施證明其環境治理能力，則該措施即可能構成前言所禁止之任意或不合理歧視
最後，本研究認為，當非締約方雖因外部因素未正式締結《水俁公約》，然其內國法制已全面實質轉化公約標準，使保護水準符合 WTO 案例法上所確立之「比較有效性（Comparable Effectiveness）」標準時，本研究進一步將此審查標準轉化為前置性的「實質效果等同」評估模式。透過此模式，本研究提出作為中間路徑之「有限調和」主張，建議進口國之執行邏輯應由形式上之「締約身分區分」轉向實質上之「客觀風險治理」；亦即，實質遵約之非締約方在面對國際邊境環境規制時，應有權援引 WTO 程序正當性原則，要求進口國於國內法中建立客觀透明之比較有效性審查機制，以落實貿易與環境之相互支持性，進而防免隱性經貿歧視，並有效捍衛實質經貿利益與產業競爭力。

With growing global attention on the risks of cross-border hazardous chemical substances, trade-restrictive measures adopted under Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) frequently give rise to regime interplay and normative conflicts with the principles of free trade and non-discrimination encapsulated within the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework. This study centers on the Minamata Convention on Mercury.
As the first global legal framework dedicated to the life-cycle management of mercury, its institutional design features a dual track comprising source pollution control and product distribution management, thereby creating a pronounced tension with the international economic and trade order, and carrying significant academic and practical implications for re-examining the equilibrium between trade and environmental legal systems. This research further focuses on the specific predicament of non-parties under the Minamata Convention, exploring the compatibility of trade measures under Article III of the Convention with GATT Article XX and its chapeau.
This study employs literature analysis, comparative analysis, and case study methodologies. First, it systematically characterizes the substantive and procedural obligations under the Minamata Convention, including annex-based inventory management, phased-out timelines, prior informed consent (PIC), and Best Available Techniques (BAT) / Best Environmental Practices (BEP). Second, this study reviews the doctrinal debates advanced by international law scholars regarding the reconciliation of potential conflicts between the WTO legal system and other international norms, namely the “integrative international law perspective,” the “WTO-only rule perspective,” and the “harmonious interpretation model.”
Concurrently, by integrating the evolution of WTO environmental exception jurisprudence (such as US – Shrimp, Brazil – Retreaded Tyres, and EC – Seal Products), this paper dissects the defining benchmarks and major members' positions within the Doha Round negotiations under Paragraph 31(i) concerning the relationship between Specific Trade Obligations (STOs) set out in MEAs and WTO rules, thereby confirming the institutional legitimacy of environmental measures within multilateral cooperation contexts under WTO scrutiny.
To conduct a substantive compliance analysis, this paper constructs a hypothetical dispute involving a Minamata Convention party (Country A), a non-party (Country B), and another party (Country C). It analyzes whether the mercury trade restrictions imposed by Country A against the non-party constitute a prima facie violation of GATT obligations, and further examines the scope for justification under GATT Article XX. Particularly within the scrutiny under the chapeau, if Country B has achieved a risk-control capacity comparable to that of contracting parties in a concrete case, yet Country A maintains a rigid and inflexible distinction based solely on signatory status, refusing to permit the non-party to demonstrate its environmental governance capabilities through measures with substantially equivalent effects, such measures would likely constitute “arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination” prohibited by the chapeau.
Finally, this study posits that when a non-party, despite not formally acceding to the Minamata Convention due to external factors, has comprehensively and substantially transposed the Convention standards into its domestic legal system, rendering its level of protection compliant with the “comparable effectiveness” standard established in WTO jurisprudence, this study further transforms this judicial review standard into a pre-emptive “substantially equivalent effects” assessment model.
Through this model, this research proposes a “limited harmonization” approach as a middle ground, suggesting that the enforcement logic of importing countries should shift from formal “political status segregation” to substantive “objective risk governance.” That is, a substantially compliant non-party, when facing international border environmental regulations, should be entitled to invoke WTO principles of procedural justice to demand that importing countries establish objective and transparent comparable effectiveness review mechanisms within their domestic laws. This approach aims to operationalize the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment, prevent disguised economic and trade discrimination, and effectively safeguard substantive economic interests as well as industrial competitiveness.

中文文獻
專書
羅昌發，《國際貿易法：世界貿易組織多邊貿易體制與法律實務》，三民書局，2020年。
施文真，《WTO、氣候變遷與能源》，元照出版公司，2013年。
施文真，《綠化WTO：貿易、環境與臺灣》，元照出版公司，2008年。
葉俊榮，《全球環境議題－台灣觀點》，巨流圖書，1999年。

期刊論文
蘇義淵，〈關於汞的水俁公約簡介〉，《台灣法學雜誌》，第277期，頁115–128（2015年）。
張南薰，〈從WTO之「歐體海豹產品案」看TBT協定第2.1條及第2.2條與GATT 1994第XX之關係〉，《貿易政策論叢》，第24期，頁53–102（2015年）。
薛景文，〈論保存天然資源之出口數量限制措施：政策考量與正當性抗辯〉，《科技法學評論》，第11卷第1期（2014年）。
施文真，〈由相關國際環境公約檢視我國環境影響評估法制中之民眾參與制度〉，《月旦法學雜誌》，第104期，頁45–68（2004年）。
洪思竹，〈WTO體系與國際環境法之互動（Ⅰ）：WTO下SPS協定與生物安全議定書之關係〉，《臺灣海洋法學報》，第7卷第1期（2008年）。
許耀明，〈從 WTO 生技產品案爭端解決小組報告看 GMO 國際貿易中國際貿易法與國際環境法之衝突與解決可能〉，《科技法學評論》，第4卷第1期，頁225–266（2007年）。
施文真，〈台灣於環境保護 vs. 自由貿易之國際辯論中的定位〉，《臺大法學論叢》，第31卷第1期，頁45–74（2002年）。
牛惠之，〈國際環境公約與 GATT/WTO 之潛在衝突：論相關於環境之貿易措施與獎勵性措施之運用與爭議〉，《臺大法學論叢》，第28卷第4期，1999年7月，頁193–245。

國家法規
廢棄物清理法，環境部，民國112年5月24日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=O0050001。
資源循環推動法，環境部，民國112年5月24日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=O0050070。
商品檢驗法，經濟部，民國112年5月17日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=J0030002。
中華民國氣候變遷因應法，環境部，民國112年2月15日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=O0020098。
毒性及關注化學物質標示與安全資料表管理辦法，環境部，民國111年11月4日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=O0060037。
貿易法，經濟部，民國110年12月15日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=J0090001。
關稅法，財政部，民國110年12月17日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=G0340001。
毒性及關注化學物質管理法，環境部，民國108年1月16日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=O0060012。
環境基本法，環境部，民國91年12月11日，https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=O0000010。

英文文獻
書籍
P. Sands & J. Peel, Principles of International Environmental Law (4th ed. 2018).
Tsuguyoshi Suzuki & Reiko Kanzaki, Minamata Disease: Its History and Medical Approach (2010).
Daniel Bodansky, Jutta Brunnée & Ellen Hey eds., The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2007).
Joost Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law (2003).
Scott Barrett, Environment and Statecraft (2003).
Timothy S. George, Minamata: Pollution and the Struggle for Democracy in Postwar Japan (Harvard Univ. Press 2001).
Edith Brown Weiss & Harold K. Jacobson eds., Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords (MIT Press 1998).

期刊論文
Kateryna Holzer, Balancing Trade and Environment: Insights from WTO Disputes over Sustainability Requirements for Biofuels, 18 J. World Energy L. & Bus. (2025).
Wen-Tien Tsai et al., Environmental Policy and Legal Framework for Controlling Mercury Emissions from Stationary Sources: A Case Study in Taiwan, 25 J. Material Cycles & Waste Mgmt. 2716 (2023).
Henrik Selin & Noelle Eckley Selin, From Stockholm to Minamata and Beyond: Governing Mercury Pollution for a More Sustainable Future, 5 One Earth 1109 (2022).
J. McLagan et al., Linking Science and Policy to Support the Implementation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, 12 Environ. Sci. Eur. 34 (2017).
David C. Evers et al., Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Minamata Convention on Mercury: Principles and Recommendations for Next Steps, 569-570 Sci. Total Environ. 888 (2016).
Robert L. Howse, The World Trade Organization 20 Years On: Global Governance by Judiciary, 1 Eur. J. Int'l L. 9 (2016).
Kazuki Hozumi, Corporate Accountability and Public Redress: The Evolution of Chisso Corporation's Liability in the Minamata Case, 18 Asia Pac. J. Envtl. L. 112 (2015).
Henrik Selin, Global Environmental Law and Treaty-Making on Hazardous Substances: The Minamata Convention and Mercury Abatement, 14 Glob. Envtl. Pol. 1 (2014).
M. H. H. Eriksen & F. X. Pérez, The Minamata Convention: A Comprehensive Response to a Global Problem, 23(2) RECEIL (2014).
Steve Charnovitz, Trade and the Environment in the WTO, 10 J. Int'l Econ. L. 299 (2007).
Sanford E. Gaines, The WTO's Reading of GATT Article XX Chapeau: A Disguised Restriction on Environmental Measures, 22 Wis. Int'l L.J. 443 (2004).
Steve Charnovitz, The Law of Environmental "PPMs" in the WTO: Debunking the Myth of Illegality, 27 Yale J. Int'l L. 59 (2002).
Gabrielle Marceau, Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions: The Relationship Between the WTO Agreement and MEAs and Other Treaties, 35 J. World Trade 1081 (2001).
Eric Neumayer, Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements and WTO Rules: Potential for Conflict, Scope for Reconciliation, 55 Aussenwirtschaft 95 (2000).
Gregory C. Unruh, Understanding Carbon Lock-In, 28 Energy Pol'y 817 (2000).
Steve Charnovitz, The WTO and the Environment, 8 Eur. J. Int'l L. 33 (1997).
Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, International Trade Law and International Environmental Law: Prevention and Settlement of International Environmental Disputes in GATT, WTO and NAFTA, 27 J. World Trade 43 (1993).

國際規範
Minamata Convention on Mercury, Oct. 10, 2013, T.I.A.S. No. 14-816.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, 1867 U.N.T.S. 187.
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, May 22, 2001, 2256 U.N.T.S. 119.
Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, Sept. 10, 1998, 2244 U.N.T.S. 337.
Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Heavy Metals, June 24, 1998, 2237 U.N.T.S. 4.
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331.

政府及國際組織文件
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Global Mercury Assessment 2018 (2019).
UNEP, Guidance on Best Available Techniques and Best Environmental Practices Explained in Article 8 of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, UNEP/MC/COP.1/7 (Sept. 2017).
UNEP, Report of the Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Minamata Convention on Mercury, U.N. Doc. UNEP(DTIE)/Hg/CONF/4 (Oct. 14, 2013).
Ministry of the Environment, Japan, Lessons from Minamata Disease and Mercury Management in Japan (2013).
UNEP Governing Council, Decision 25/5 (2009).
Ministry of the Environment, Japan, Minamata Disease: The History and Measures (2002).

一般機構文件
World Trade Organization, Committee on Trade and Environment, Information Session on Multilateral Environmental Agreements, Note by the Secretariat, WTO Doc. WT/CTE/W/254 (Mar. 12, 2024).
World Trade Organization, Committee on Trade and Environment, Matrix on Trade Measures Pursuant to Selected Multilateral Environmental Agreements, WTO Doc. WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.9 (Nov. 14, 2017).
World Health Organization, Mercury and Health, Fact Sheet (Mar. 31, 2017), https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mercury-and-health.
World Trade Organization, Committee on Trade and Environment Special Session, Existing WTO Rules and Specific Trade Obligations (STOs) Set Out in Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), WTO Doc. TN/TE/S/1/Rev.2 (Feb. 20, 2007).
Alice Palmer & Richard Tarasofsky, The Doha Round and Beyond: Towards a Lasting Relationship Between the WTO and the International Environmental Regime (Chatham House 2007).
International Law Commission, Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/L.682 (Apr. 13, 2006) (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi).
World Trade Organization, Committee on Trade and Environment, Report of the Meeting Held on 23–24 February 2006, WTO Doc. TN/TE/R/15 (Mar. 15, 2006).
U.N. Conference on Trade & Development, Trade and Environment Review 2003, U.N. Doc. UNCTAD/DITC/TED/2003/4 (2004).
World Trade Organization, The Relationship Between the Provisions of the Multilateral Trading System and Trade Measures Pursuant to Multilateral Environmental Agreements, in Trade and Environment at the WTO 35–43 (2004).
World Trade Organization, Compilation of Submissions under Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration—Revision—Note by the Secretariat, WTO Doc. TN/TE/S/3/Rev.1 (Apr. 24, 2003).
Guidelines for Arrangements on Relations with Non-Governmental Organizations, WTO General Council, WT/L/162 (July 23, 1996).

網路資料
U.S. Env’t Prot. Agency, Basic Information about Mercury (2025), https://www.epa.gov/mercury/basic-information-about-mercury.
Minamata Convention on Mercury, Overview, https://www.mercuryconvention.org.
National Institute for Minamata Disease, Current State of Mercury Pollution in Minamata Bay (Akito Matsuyama), https://nimd.env.go.jp/.
World Trade Organization, The Doha Mandate on Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envir_neg_mea_e.htm.
Ministry of the Environment, Japan, Minamata Disease, https://www.env.go.jp/en/chemi/hs/minamata2002/.