新闻网讯（通讯员 刘晶 梁芷涵 韦嘉）6月2日上午，中国日报网（China Daily）刊登我校文澜学者、法学院副院长江河教授文章：美国对中国的诉讼只不过是一场闹剧（US lawsuits against China nothing but a farce）。

中国日报网（China Daily）是中国最大的英文资讯门户，是国务院新闻办（中共中央外宣办）主管的中国日报旗下网站，为国家级重点新闻网站之一；它服务于国内外中高端读者群，是海外人士了解中国的首选网站，已经成为沟通中国与世界的网上桥梁。

文章以4月21日和5月12日美国共和党控制的密苏里州和密西西比州就新冠肺炎疫情对中国提起诉讼的两起案件以及美国谋求修订其《外国主权豁免法》的行为为背景展开，江河教授指出，这两起案件以及美国的修法行为，都是美国强权政治“司法化”的产物，公然违反了国家主权豁免原则，其滥诉行为缺乏法律上的合法性。同时，国内法和国际法在基本主体上的本质区别以及法域和管辖权在语义和法律上的关联性，也使其缺乏法理上的正当性，因而不过是一场闹剧。

江教授进一步表示，美国通过互联网实现其话语霸权、歪曲事实以污名化中国并推卸责任，其强权政治和司法霸权的行事逻辑暴露无遗。美国此举将削弱国际法的实效，破坏现行国际秩序，这将导致国际社会回归“自然状态”。其强权政治司法化的行为以及与中国的对立，不仅无益于国际公共卫生安全的维护，更有碍中国倡导的人类命运共同体理论及其“一带一路”倡议的实践。但是，这并不能阻止中国通过大国责任来维护国际和平与安全，相反，美国最终将自食其果。

附原文如下：

US lawsuits against China nothing but a farce

By Jiang He | China Daily | Updated: 2020-06-02 07:15

China Daily

On April 21, Republican-controlled Missouri became the first US state to file a lawsuit against China for spreading the novel coronavirus across the world. Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt laid the entire blame for the coronavirus pandemic and deaths and economic losses in Missouri on China, demanding compensation for them. On May 12, the US state of Mississippi filed a similar lawsuit.

In international law, all sovereign states, including China, are entitled to sovereign immunity. But US Senator Marsha Blackburn and Congressman Lance Gooden have put forward a bill in the US Congress to amend the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to exempt a foreign state that uses a biological weapon from the jurisdictional immunity clause. The bill, Stop China-Originated Viral Infectious Diseases Act of 2020, is directed against China.

The two cases and the two US lawmakers' attempt to change the US law have raised a jurisdictional issue related to sovereign immunity, pursuant to which China, as a sovereign state, cannot be sued in the US. They are the result of the US policy of judicialization of power politics, whose legality can be challenged based on the legal entity's active or passive jurisdiction both in national and international law.

As a universally accepted principle, sovereign immunity is based onpar in parem non habet imperium,Latin for equals have no sovereignty over each other, which according to ancient Roman law means no jurisdiction between equals and according to modern international law, no jurisdiction between sovereign states. Established by the general practice and opinio juris (an opinion in law) of the international community, the principle has been codified as a written norm in treaties, which the US states, by suing China in domestic courts, have flagrantly violated.

Due to Article 38 of China's Infectious Diseases Prevention Law, the Chinese government exercised public authority to tackle the coronavirus epidemic, rather than carrying out any commercial activity as claimed by 28 USC§1605(a)(2). The US law is inapplicable in such a case. Besides, under US law, domestic courts can stretch their jurisdiction to such cases only if both the tort and the damage have occurred in the US. But according to the lawsuits, the so-called tort happened in China, which makes the exception of 28 USC§1605 (a)(5) inapplicable.

Also, the scientific community has not traced the origin of the novel coronavirus. And China has taken stringent measures to prevent and control the outbreak, not concealed any facts related to it, and there is no legal causal relationship between China's epidemic prevention work and the US' losses. Therefore, even if the US modifies the existing law, it cannot hold China accountable for anything.

The jurisdiction of the US domestic courts can also be questioned in the light of modern constitutional rationale and subjectivity of natural law of justice. The typology of major legal systems of human society is defined by their natural subjectivity, and reflected in the nature of their national laws and international law－with the European Union's laws being sui generis (only one of its kind).

Internally, natural persons or citizens in a modern democracy are equal in the eyes of domestic law. Consequently, the procedural rights or the judicial powers of the subjects are legalized synchronically by a constitution or diachronically by the natural rights of a natural person.

So the right to sue or the power to administer justice to any subject in another jurisdiction runs counter to the rule of national law. The primary subject of international law is the nation-state instead of a natural person. The principle of sovereign equality of state sovereignty is the pillar of international law, according to which nation-states are independent and equal. And the principle of sovereign immunity is recognized and accepted by the international community as a legally binding norm.

Within the country, the US is free to enact a law and use it to file a case against anybody, but externally, it would be violating international law by filing a lawsuit against another state. As such, owing to their lack of legality in law and legitimacy in jurisprudence, the US lawsuits against China are nothing but a farce.

International law and international relations are closely interconnected. So the US' exceptionalism and sacred mission, aimed at legalizing its power politics in the international community, are a violation of both international law and international relations.

The US lawsuits expose the US' use of power politics and judicial hegemony. Although the US will not succeed in its evil designs, its attempts to stigmatize China and tarnish China's image reveals its true colors. The lawsuits are also an attempt to divert American public attention from the US administration's failure to control the COVID-19 pandemic in the country and, instead, blame China for the health crisis.

Yet the US can highlight the facts related to the lawsuits through its global hegemonic discourse because it controls the only primary root server of the global network. US-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers enjoys the lion's share of soft power in the virtual world.

First, the US move will weaken the effectiveness of international law, and undermine the world order, which could lead to regression of the international community to the state of nature.

Second, the world and humankind as a whole are facing a grave health crisis and fighting against the pandemic, which calls for international cooperation. But instead of cooperating with the rest of the world in the global fight against the pandemic, the US is more interested in triggering confrontation with China to fulfill its hegemonic goals.

And third, the US' move will sow discord between China and other states in the anti-epidemic fight, and create obstacles for China to help build a community with a shared future for mankind and promote the Belt and Road Initiative.

But instead of preventing China from fulfilling its responsibility as a major country, the US will end up shooting itself in the foot.

附中国日报网原文刊载链接：https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202006/02/WS5ed58c1ba310a8b24115a060.html