5.量化下列要素，制定知识产权执法考核评价指标体系
第一，有法可依，立法完善；第二，执法体制健全，机构设置合理；第三，执法机关、执法人员专业水平高；第四，公众保护知识产权意识强；第五，国际交流与合作制度化、有成效；第六，知识产权管理与利用、保护与执法等各环节协调流畅，平衡有效；第七，决策程序公开透明、公正，救济有效而且多元化；第八，行政管理机关在知识产权执法考核评价中的主导作用。
6.坚持科学发展观，体现法治原则
法治原则普遍认为包含4项基本要素：第一，政府及其官员和机关必须对法律负责；第二，法律不仅要明确公布、稳定公平，而且要保护基本权利（包括个人与财产的安全）；第三，法律程序（包括立法、执法、司法与强制实施）必须易于接近、公平有效；第四，必须由充足而有适当资源支持并能反映社会构成成分的称职、独立和道德高尚的执法官员、律师和法官来维护法律、伸张正义。
我国的知识产权执法体系，不仅应该体现科学发展观，而且应该有助于从完善立法、严格执法、公正司法、自觉守法等方面扎实推进我国知识产权法治建设。通过科学考核知识产权立法，进一步提高知识产权立法质量，尽快形成更加完备的中国特色社会主义知识产权法律体系；通过客观评价知识产权法律的实施，有助于维护人民合法权益和社会公平正义，维护社会主义法制的统一、尊严、权威；通过对知识产权执法活动的有效监督，有利于确保权力正确行使，真正做到有权必有责、用权受监督、违法要追究；通过正确评价知识产权法治宣传教育，有助于进一步提高全社会的知识产权法律意识和法治观念，早日形成自觉学法守法用法的社会氛围。
知识产权执法是当今世界关注的重大问题，十分复杂，不仅涉及现实利益争夺，而且涉及知识经济能否给人类社会创造一个公平而可持续发展的新时代，更关系到我国“和谐社会”和“和谐世界”战略构想能否变成现实。因此，我国需要认真对待知识产权执法，更深入持久地开展研究，将知识产权保护与执法进行到底！
【作者简介】
余敏友，汉大学国际法研究所副所长、教授、博士生导师，武汉大学WTO学院院长，中国世界贸易组织研究会常务理事，中国法学会世界贸易组织法研究会副会长，中国国际法学会常务理事。廖丽武，武汉大学国际法研究所博士研究生，禇童，武汉大学国际法硕士。
【注释】 China - Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights - Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States - Note by the Secretariat, WT/DS362/8, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds362_e.htm.
China-Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, WT/DS362/R, Report of the Panel, circulated on 26 January 2009.
T.E Volper, TRIPS Enforcement in China: A Case for Judicial Transparency, in Brooklyn Journal Of International Law, Vol. 33, 2007, No. 1, pp336-340
Konstantina K. Athanasakou：China IPR Enforcement: Hard As Steel or Soft as Tofu? Bringing the Question To The WTO Under TRIPS, in Georgetown Journal of International Law, Vol. 39, 2007, p236
美国诉丹麦影响知识产权执法案（DS83）、美国诉瑞典影响知识产权执法案（DS86）、美国诉欧共体电
影和电视节目的知识产权执法案（DS124）和美国诉希腊电影和电视节目的知识产权执法案（DS125）。
Konstantina K. Athanasakou：China IPR Enforcement: Hard As Steel or Soft as Tofu? Bringing the Question To The WTO Under TRIPS, in Georgetown Journal of International Law, Vol. 39, 2007, pp237-240
Ibid, p240
T.E Volper, TRIPS Enforcement in China: A Case for Judicial Transparency, in Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Vol. 33, 2007, No. 1, p.332
United States Wins WTO Dispute over Deficiencies in China’s Intellectual Property Rights Laws, http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Document_Library/Press_Releases/2009/January/asset_upload_file105_15317.pdf
See US claims victory in WTO complaint on China piracy，http://uk.reuters.com/article/mediaNews/idUKN2651177820090126；China vows to help WTO on piracy, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7853016.stm.
Michael Geist: Why the U.S. Lost Its WTO IP Complaint against China badly, http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3645/125/.
Stan Abrams：U.S.-China WTO IP Dispute IV - final thoughts，http://www.chinahearsay.com/us-china-wto-ip-dispute-iv-final-thoughts/.
Tina Wang：WTO’s China Piracy Ruling: All Bark and No Bite, http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/27/china-wto-piracy-markets-equity-0127_markets2.html.
Xuan Li , SECURE: A Critical Analysis and Call for Action, South Bulletin. Reflections and
Foresights, 16 May 2008, Issue 15, http://www.southcentre.org.
Carlos M. Correa: The Push for Stronger Enforcement Rules: Implications for Developing Countries, in The Global Debate on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights and Developing Countries, pp41-43, http://ictsd.net/i/publications/42762/.
S. Liebowitz and R. Watt , How to best ensure remuneration for creators in the market for music? Copyright and its alternatives, in M. McAleer and L. Oxley , Economic and legal issues in intellectual property, Blackwell, 2007, pp. 31-63.
Carlos M. Correa: The Push for Stronger Enforcement Rules: Implications for Developing Countries, in The Global Debate on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights and Developing Countries, p59, http://ictsd.net/i/publications/42762/.
Carsten Fink, Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights: an Economic Perspective, in The Global Debate on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights and Developing Countries, p1, http://ictsd.net/i/publications/42762/.
T.E Volper, TRIPS Enforcement in China: A Case for Judicial Transparency, in Brooklyn Journal Of International Law, Vol. 33, 2007, No. 1, pp336-340
