scholarly journals Why Developing Countries are at Disadvantage Position in WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-63
Author(s):  
Muhammad Waqas
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Trade Dispute ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Specialized Institutions ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The Dispute Settlement Board of WTO aims to solve the disputes of WTO members regarding international trade. Dispute settlement process involves the parties and third parties to a case, and it operates through the DSB panels, the Appellate Body, the WTO Secretariat, arbitrators, independent experts and several specialized institutions. Although the dispute settlement mechanism provides opportunities to the developing countries to seek remedies if they are aggrieved by any other country, yet there are certain challenges for the developing countries to participate effectively in DSM. The study finds out the challenges that caused the role of developing countries less significant in the WTO dispute settlement process. Moreover, several recommendations have also been made for making the role of developing countries more effective.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ijssm.v1i2.10103 Int. J. Soc. Sci. Manage. Vol-1, issue-2: 60-63

Exploring Aggressive Legalism: Is Now A Good Time to Promote This Approach in Greater Asia?

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Lu
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Good Time ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Status ◽  
Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Asian Developing Countries

AbstractAggressive legalism, a trade policy-making strategy targeted at actively utilizing WTO rules to defend trade interests, has greatly benefited major Eastern Asian countries in past years. This paper examines whether this strategy should be promoted around greater Asia in this era. First, this paper updates the status of adoption of aggressive legalism in East Asian countries including Japan, Korea and China. Second, it looks into the current and possible future utilization of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism by selected countries which are frequent “targets” of trade remedy measures, namely India, Thailand and Indonesia. Finally, it discusses the participation of Asian developing countries in the WTO. Relying upon case studies and statistical analysis, the author finds that Asian countries’ rising image in international trade signals a trend of adopting aggressive legalism in Great Asia. This trend will undoubtedly promote the energetic development of international trade globally. However, room for more progressive participation in the WTO still exists, especially in developing countries.

Precedent in the WTO: Retrospective Reflections for a Prospective Dispute Settlement Mechanism

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-277
Author(s):  
Mariana Clara de Andrade
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Wto Appellate Body ◽  
Legitimacy Crisis ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

Abstract Several factors triggered the legitimacy crisis which paralysed the WTO Appellate Body in December 2019. This article focuses on one of them: the criticism expressed by the United States that the ‘Appellate Body claims its reports are entitled to be treated as precedent’. This work describes the origins of the problem and examines the issue of the precedential value of adopted reports within the WTO dispute settlement. It argues that the problem cannot be addressed through textual attempts to better define the value of precedent, as some have suggested, but can be alleviated through the practice of adjudicators. Moreover, it argues that the criticisms regarding the precedential value of past reports is due to the inherent hierarchy ensuing from the existence of an appeals organ. Therefore, the demise of the Appellate Body may weaken the precedential value of past adopted reports.

scholarly journals THE NECESSITY OF CAPACITY BUILDING FOR INDONESIA'S EFFECTIVE UTILIZATION OF WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MECHANISM: IMPLEMENTATION OF GATT ARTICLE XX FOR TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT ISSUES

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Windu Kisworo
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Effective Utilization ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Fear Of Retaliation ◽  
Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Special Provision

AbstrakThe World Trade Organization Agreement, aimed to also protect theenvironment, provides a special provision on environment under article xx.Any dispute arose between parties in respect to the article should be settledtrough the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism. Although environmentalprotection should be sought in trade, it is often problematic for developingcountries. They generally lack an adequate domestic environmentallegislation and its enforcement because they place greater priority oneconomic development. Indeed, there have been a number of cases foughtbetween developing countries and developed countries on this very issuewithin the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism. In addition, there areseveral conditions that might prevent them of using the mechanism effectivelywhich includes: lack of understanding of WTO law and its jurisprudences,lack of institutional capacity, and the fear of retaliation from developedcountries when bringing the claim against developed countries to DisputeSettlement Mechanism. Indonesia, as one of developing countries also facesthe above three problems. This paper will discuss what Indonesia need toprepare so that they can use the Dispute Settlement Mechanism effectively toresolve any dispute (if any) with other country, particularly in respect to theviolation of the article XX under the WTO Agreement

The WTO Appellate Body and the TRIPS Agreement

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Gervais
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Domestic Court ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Appellate Body ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

This contribution reviews the role of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Appellate Body—a part of its dispute-settlement mechanism—in interpreting the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). It discusses, first, the way in which the Appellate Body functions when compared to a common law jurisdiction or a general or specialized domestic court. The contribution then turns to the three disputes concerning the TRIPS Agreement that have reached the Appellate Body since 1995, and the five cases filed against Australia challenging plain packaging measures targeting tobacco products. The primary purpose of the contribution is not to discuss those cases individually in detail but rather to offer a perspective on how the Appellate Body might play a greater role in building the interface between the rules and standards contained in the TRIPS Agreement, and those contained in international law outside the WTO.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document