哲学社会科学版
陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)
法学研究
基于区块链的纠纷解决机制研究
杨 锦 帆
(西北政法大学 法治学院, 陕西 西安 710063)
杨锦帆,男,湖南邵阳人,西北政法大学法治学院副教授,美国康奈尔大学访问学者。
摘要:
鉴于在区块链应用中产生的新型纠纷对传统救济途径提出的严峻挑战,国际上出现了将区块链技术应用于纠纷解决的商业化救济措施,即基于区块链的纠纷解决机制。该机制具有解纷系统的“去中心化”、解纷依据的“代码化”和解纷方案执行的“自动化”等优势。现有的解纷机制可分为基础设施型、民主投票型、专家裁决型和专项服务型共4种类型。它们在给当事人带来解纷便利的同时,也可能因技术先占形成“商业化长臂管辖”,给发展中国家带来司法安全的隐患。该机制对于我国的主要启示在于,我们对于区块链技术在解纷与司法应用方面的理解和视野都有待拓展,加快推进我国基于区块链的救济途径的建设和布局是应对“商业化长臂管辖”的必然选择。
关键词:
区块链纠纷; 基于区块链的纠纷解决机制; 商业化长臂管辖; 司法安全隐患; 区块链+司法
收稿日期:
2021-03-15
中图分类号:
D913.99
文献标识码:
A
文章编号:
1672-4283(2021)04-0163-14
基金项目:
西北政法大学法治学院校级专项项目“后疫情时期‘区块链+法律’的疫苗管理机制”(2020YQ03)
Doi:
Research on the Blockchainbased Dispute Resolution Mechanism
YANG Jinfan
(School of Rule of Law, Northwest University of Political Science and Law, Xi’an 710063, Shaanxi)
Abstract:
In view of the new disputes generated in the application of blockchain posing severe challenges to the traditional remedy approaches, the international application of blockchain technology in the dispute resolution of commercial relief measures, namely blockchainbased dispute resolution mechanism. This mechanism has the advantages of decentralization of the dispute resolution system, the codification of the dispute resolution norms, and the automatic execution of the dispute resolution solution. The existing mechanisms can be roughly divided into four styles, such as infrastructure, democratic voting, similar to national courts and special services. While they bring convenience to the parties to solve disputes, they may also form “commercialized longarm jurisdiction” due to technological preoccupation, and bring hidden dangers of judicial security to the laterdeveloping countries. In this regard, China’s “blockchain+justice” should deeply develop the combination of block chain technology, and carry out a comprehensive layout of the collaborative development of the judicial and commercial dispute resolution mechanism, in order to deal with the challenge of commercial longarm jurisdiction and defend the judicial sovereignty of developing countries.
KeyWords:
blockchain dispute; blockchainbased dispute resolution mechanism; commercial longarm jurisdiction; judicial security risk; blockchain+justice