GATT & WTO - DSB
-
Upload
navneetsahota05 -
Category
Documents
-
view
250 -
download
0
Transcript of GATT & WTO - DSB
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
1/39
GATT-WTO Dispute Settlement
Mechanism
Structure of the WTO Agreement
Annex 1
1A: GATT1B: GATS
1C: TRIPs
Annex 2
Dispute
SettlementUnderstanding
Annex 3
Trade Policy
ReviewMechanism
Annex 4
Plurilateral
Agreements
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
2/39
GATT 1947:
Nearly 50 years of dispute settlement under theGATT 1947.
Still no specific procedure or provision for
settlement of disputes. No provision for establishment of Tribunals for
settling questions of law or interpretation.
But even then;
GATT 1947 resolved many disputes througharound Nineteen Clauses which obligated thecontracting parties to consult in specific instances.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
3/39
What is a Dispute ?What is a Dispute ?
Disputes in the WTO are essentially about broken promises. WTO members have agreedthat if they believe fellow-members are violatingtrade rules, they will use the multilateral system
of settling disputes instead of taking actionunilaterally. That means abiding by the agreedprocedures, and respecting judgments.
A dispute arises when one country adopts a tradepolicy measure or takes some action that one ormore fellow-WTO members considers to be
breaking the WTO agreements, or to be a failure
to live up to obligations.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
4/39
Objectives
Article 3.2 of the DSU
Security and predictability in international trade ;
Preserving Members rights and obligations ;
Peaceful settlement of disputes.
Clarifying the existing provisions.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
5/39
Outcome ?
Article 3.7 of the DSU
Positive solution to a dispute;
Preferred outcome: Mutually acceptable solution
Withdrawal of measures inconsistent with the
covered agreements
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
6/39
...and if no mutually agreed solution
reached ? Panel proceedings
(Appellate Body review)
Inconsistent measures...
1. Withdrawal
2. Compensation / Suspension of concessions
Measure
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
7/39
Article XXII and XXIII deal with provisions
regarding dispute settlement in GATT.
Art. XXII made consultations, a basis for
GATTs dispute settlement procedure.
Art. XXIII says, the complainant must show that
either;
1. Benefits accruing to him under GATT are beingnullified or impaired; or
2. Attainment of any objectives of GATT is beingimpeded; and that;
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
8/39
such nullification or impairment is a result of
either:
1. breach of obligations by respondent;
2. application of any conflicting measure byrespondent;
3. existence of any other situation.
Over the years, some semblance of formality was
added to the dispute settlement process in 1979when Tokyo Round adopted an Understanding
on Notification, Consultation, Dispute Settlement
and Surveillance.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
9/39
Complainants
EC, 81
Canada, 33India, 18
Mexico, 21
Argentina, 15Korea, 14
Others
(developed), 34
US, 93
Brazil, 24
Others
(developing), 90
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
10/39
Main actors in the WTO
Dispute Settlement System
Art.2 DSU establishes Dispute Settlement Body(DSB)
Administers the WTO Dispute Settlement System
Establishes panels
Adopts panel and Appellate Body reports
Maintains surveillance of implementation
Non-implementation? Authorizes retaliatory measures
The panel 3 5 panelists, ad hoc body
The Appellate Body Standing body of 7 members, 4-yearterm
Assist panels and theAppellate BodyWTO and AB Secretariat
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
11/39
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
12/39
Recourse to WTO dispute settlement:
Who?Only WTO Members (153 as of November 2009)
NOT NGOs, individuals (although may lobbygovernments indirect access)
Appellate Body: No DSU provision requiring legal interest
Members have a broad discretion whether or not tobring a case
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
13/39
Recourse to WTO dispute settlement:
Regarding what?
Appendix 1 to the DSU
Disputes under the following agreements must be resolvedpursuant to the DSU:
WTO Agreement
Multilateral Trade Agreements (GATT 1994 + 12 other
agreements on trade in goods)GATS
TRIPS
DSU
(Plurilateral Trade Agreements)
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
14/39
Kinds of Jurisdiction:
Compulsory jurisdiction
Members obliged to bring disputes under the Covered
Agreements to WTO dispute settlement
Accession: Consent to accept jurisdiction
Exclusive jurisdiction
No other fora
No unilateral action
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
15/39
Main Stages:
Consultat ons60 days
Panel review6 9 months
AB review60 90 days
Adoptionof report by the DSB
Implementation
Good offices,conciliation and
mediationpossible at any
moment
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
16/39
...Consultations
Article 4 of the DSU
Diplomatic method of settling the dispute
Confidential No intervention by the Secretariat
Without prejudice to the rights of any Member in further legal
proceedings
As of April 2010:
406requests for consultations! !
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
17/39
Third parties joining consultations
Article 4.11 of the DSU
Request filed underArticle XXII of the GATT
Substantial trade interest
Notification to the consulting Parties and the DSB
Within 10 days of the circulation of the original request
(WT/DSXXX/1)
Respondent decides:
Substantial interest? No review, but the Member can
separately request consultations
DSB informed about the decision to accept
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
18/39
GATT(1994), WTO & Dispute Settlement
Principle: the settlement of disputes shall be rule orientedandnot power oriented.
Art. 2 of DSU: establishment ofDSB.
DSU = 27 Articles + 4 Appendices
DSU is often referred to as the jewel in the crown of WTO.
DSU confers compulsory jurisdiction to DSB, hencetransforming GATT 1947s soft law status to GATT 1994s
stringent law mechanism.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
19/39
Functions of DSB:
1. Power to establish panels;
2. Adopt panel reports;
3. supervisory powers;
4. Implementation of recommendations and rulings;
5. Authorizing sanctions on failure in complying
with dispute settlement decisions.
The General Council of WTO serves as DSB.
But, DSB has its own chairman and follows itsown separate procedure.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
20/39
Good Offices, Conciliation & Mediation
Art. 5 : Failure of Consultation
Within 60 days
WTO members may approach DSUs Good Offices,
Conciliation or Mediation services
* Good Offices, Conciliations & Mediation available beforesetting up of Panel, and not afterwards.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
21/39
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
22/39
Request for the establishment
of a panelIn writing
Addressed to the DSB
Indicate whether consultations were held
Identify the specific measures at issue
Brief summary of the legal basis claims
Article 6.2 of the DSU and specific disputesettlement provisions
to Members as document WT/DSXXX/X
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
23/39
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
24/39
Functions of Panels
1. To enquire into the facts of the case;
2. To assess relevant elements for a decision on themeasures;
3. To submit a proposal for such a decision;
The panel reports donot have legal force behind them.
The panel reports then go to the contracting partieswhere mediating and political aspects are re-consideredand the panel report if gets adopted, achieves legalforce.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
25/39
Due to the lack of legal sanction behind behind panel reports, the
dispute settlement mechanism of GATT 1947 is often termed as softlaw.
An eminent result of which was blocking of unfavorable panelreports by the contracting parties.
This consequent blocking of panel reports was later overcome byMontreal rules, 1989.
Montreal Rules were applied on trial basis from May 1, 1989 till
conclusion of Uruguay Round in 1994.
Montreal Rules placed time limits on consultations and providedfor automatic establishment of panels.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
26/39
Panel proceedings
Appendix 3DSU
Generalworkingprocedures
1. First written submissions of the parties
2. [Third party submissions]
3. First substantive meeting with the parties and third
parties - Third party session4. Written rebuttals of the parties
5. Second substantive meeting with the parties
6. Descriptive part of the report to the parties
7. Parties comments on the descriptive part
8. Interim review
9. Final report issued to parties
10. Final report circulated to all Members
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
27/39
Adoption of Panel Reports
Procedure of GATT1947
( Faulty)
Procedure of GATT1994
(Improved)
GATT1947: Panel Reports to be adopted only by Consensus; possibility of blocking of unfavorable panel reports.
GATT1994:DSU changed the procedure; Interim review of pros and cons of dispute; Parties may ask for review of interim report or its
parts.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
28/39
Appellate Body
..Established in 1995, under Art. 17 of DSU;innovation of WTO dispute settlement system
A standing body of 7 Members. 4-year term,renewable once.
Requirements:Authority and expertise in internationaltrade law;Unaffiliated with any government;Impartiality, broad representativeness.
*Appointed by the DSB on consensus, based on
nominations by WTO Members
Requirements:Authority and expertise in internationaltrade law;Unaffiliated with any government;Impartiality, broad representativeness.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
29/39
What can be appealed?
Article 17.6 of the DSU
Appeals limited to issues of law covered in the panel
report and legal interpretations developed by the panel;
No factual findings by the Appellate Body;
Panels factual findings: In principle, outside the scope ofappellate review.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
30/39
Role of third parties in Appellate hearings
Only those Members that were third parties on the panel
stage;
Cannot appeal;
Right to file written submissions and to participate in theoral hearing.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
31/39
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
32/39
Implementation Mechanism
Art.21 : Mechanism for surveillance of implementation ofrecommendations and rulings of Panel & Appellate BodyReports.
* If Recommendations/Rulings of Panelor Appellate Body are notimplemented; the winning party isentitled to :
seek compensation; and/or request the Authority to suspend
Concessions previously made to theoffending member.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
33/39
CASESCASESBANANA DISPUTE:
The recent Banana dispute has thrown up problems relatingto Articles 21, 22 and 23 of the DSU.
FACTS: The dispute involves the EU's regulatory regime for
imported bananas, enacted in 1993. Prior to 1992 each of the 12 EU member states had its own
banana import regime. Germany operated on a free marketsystem and had no import restrictions. The other 11 membersimposed a 20% tariff, and 6 members (France, Italy, Portugal,Spain, Greece, and the UK) also applied quotas on bananas
produced in Central and South America. These latter restrictionswere designed to protect the EU market from bananas producedin former EU territories and in ACP countries (developingcountries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific). As part of its1992 integration program the EU established, an EU-wide
banana trade regime.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
34/39
Complaints made by Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico andthe US. The complainants alleged that the EC's regime for import,sale and distribution of bananas is inconsistent with GATT
Articles I, II, III, X, XI and XIII as well as provisions of theImport Licensing Agreement, the Agreement on Agriculture, theTRIMs Agreement and the GATS.
Panel established on 8 May 1996.Panel found that the EC's banana
import regime, and licensing procedures for import of bananas,were inconsistent with GATT.
Following an appeal by the EC, the Appellate Body mostly upheldthe Panel's findings. In September 1997, the Appellate Bodyreport and the modified Panel report were adopted by the DSB.Subsequently, the Arbitrator settled the reasonable period forimplementation to be the period from 25 September 1997 to 1January 1999.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
35/39
The dispute entered another phase when the complainantsquestioned the WTO-consistency of the measures introduced bythe EC. On 15 Dec. 1998, EC requested the establishment of a
panel to determine that its implementing measures must bepresumed to conform to WTO rules unless challenged.
About the same time, Ecuador also requested the re-establishmentof the original panel to examine whether the EC measures are
WTO-consistent.
DSB agreed on 12 Jan. 1999 to reconvene the original panel toexamine both Ecuador's and the EC's requests. On 14 Jan. 1999,the US, pursuant to Art. 22.2 ofDSU, requested authorization fromthe DSB for suspension of concessions to the EC in an amount ofUS$520 million. At the same time, the original panel determinedthat the EC bananas regime was still not fully WTO-compatible.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
36/39
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
37/39
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
38/39
Conclusion
Thus we can ascertain that the dispute-settlement process ofWTO, which came into existence as a result of the UruguayRound of trade negotiations on 1st Jan. 1995, is by any objectivestandard, a resounding success.
Over 100 cases have been brought to the WTO, and at the end of1997, 25 cases had been settled at the consultation stage, 61 wereunder consultations and 36 were in or beyond the panel-appeal
process.
The newly created Appellate Body has decided nine cases, thequality of its opinions as well as those of the dispute-settlement
panels is generally excellent. Member States of the WTO arecomplying with the rulings and recommendations adopted by theDSB.
-
8/8/2019 GATT & WTO - DSB
39/39
Thank You..!!
Presented by- Navneet KaurLLM (ITBL) Bat h: 2009-11
NALSAR Univ. of Law, Hyderabad.