Resolution in international trade - Dissertation Example

 'Resolution of disputes in the context of international trade. GATT v WTO Dispute Settlement System'. The introduction of GATT in 1947 has been considered as a necessary initiative in order to control the turbulences in the global market. Indeed, because of severe disputes on various international trade agreements, the development of trade within the international community faced severe delays. GATT was thought as an appropriate solution for facing the above challenge. The benefits of the specific system have been significant; however, in practice GATT didn’t manage to perform as expected by its planners. The update of the International Dispute Resolution process had been necessary. The establishment of the new WTO Dispute Settlement System helped to the limitation of the drawbacks of GATT and the elimination of severe conflicts in the context of the international trade. Different views have been developed in regard to the effectiveness of GATT and the performance of its successor, the WTO Dispute Settlement System. Research Hypothesis In the context of GATT the resolution of disputes in the context of international trade faced severe delays. The establishment of the WTO Dispute Settlement System has covered the gaps of GATT and introduced an integrated dispute resolution scheme regarding the disputes developed in the context of international trade. Aims and Objectives The aims and the objectives of this study could be described as follows: a) to present the overall framework and the role of GATT in the resolution of international trade disputes, b) to show the benefits/ weaknesses of GATT especially in comparison to the WTO Dispute Settlement System, c) to identify and evaluate the reasons that led to the replacement/ update of GATT, d) to explore the effectiveness of the WTO Dispute Settlement System as a tool for settlement of the international and its potentials for further improvement – if necessary. Research Methodology The research methodology used for this study will be aligned with the nature of the study, as a legal research paper. In this context, the research required for the development of this paper will have two different forms: a) literature review, i.e. review of the academic studies (books, journals and so on) published on the issues under discussion and b) case studies analysis, i.e. review of the case law related to the specific subject. Literature Review Since its introduction, GATT helped towards the expansion of international trade law framework; however, through the years, the specific system was proved inadequate for the conflicts developed in international trade agreements. It was probably the fact that the international political and economic climate had changed and new needs were developed in regard to the settlement of disputes related to international trade. The above fact is made clear through the study of Davey (2006) where reference is made to the effectiveness of GATT in ‘dispute related to agricultural trade products’ (Davey, 2006, p. 185). Despite the fact that GATT has been highly related to the specific sector, still its rules where not adequately enforced in disputes developed in the particular field (Davey, 2006, p. 185). Another important weakness of GATT was the fact that it did not offer ‘development-specific provisions’ (Hocking, 2004, p.135) – actually, it is noted that up to 1960s only two such provisions could be identified in GATT (Hocking, 2004, p.135) - and that its decisions ‘were taken by consensus’ (Hocking, 2004, p.135) even if not all members were present – been assumed as present. Through these failures, the targets sets by the planners of GATT - referring especially to ‘the balance of benefits between the signatories’ (Benitah, 2001, p.28) – were difficult to the achieved. The value of GATT in the resolution of disputes in international trade cannot be doubted. However, it should be mentioned that because its structure, GATT was offered for violations of common international ethics, a fact which was appropriately used by countries worldwide when they tried to improve their position in the context of the international market. Deveraux et al. (2006) refer to the case of Japan, which used the benefits derived from the ‘liberalization countermeasures’ scheme - available in GATT (2006, p.164). It became clear that the GATT system should be alternated in order to respond to the increased needs of international trade. The update of the GATT system and the introduction of WTO Dispute Settlement System were the main subjects of the Uruguay Round (1994). In accordance with Petersmann (1997) the main differentiation between GAPP and the WTO Dispute Settlement System (DSS) is the fact that the former offered to the parties of a dispute the option to choose the jurisdiction applied on their case. On the other hand, in the context of WTO DSS there is no such option available. Rather, the new System is more integrate introducing specific criteria on the choice of jurisdiction; under the WTO DSS ‘there is no scope for ‘rule shopping’’ (Petersmann, 1997, p.178). In practice, most of the features of WTO DSS have been proved to be effective – especially compared to GATT. For this reason, WTO DSS could be characterized as an ideal tool for dispute resolution in the context of international public law. One of the most important advantages of WTO DSS is that it helps towards ‘the reduction of high costs of legal uncertainty in foreign trade’ (Petersmann et al., 2003, p.513). Furthermore, the structure of WTO promotes fairness and equality in the discussion of international trade disputes. The above target is achieved through the establishment of two different types of institutions, which have the power to deal with international trade disputes in accordance with the WTO rules; ‘the political institutions, like the Dispute Settlement Body, and the judicial – type institutions, the panels and the Appellate Body’ (Van den Bossche, 2005, p.228) guarantee the effective process of international trade dispute through any process (political or judicial) that the parties may choose. Indicative Bibliography Benitah, M (2001) The law of subsidies under the GATT/WTO system. Kluwer Law International Davey, W. (2006) Enforcing world trade rules: essays on WTO dispute settlement and GATT obligations. Cameron May Deveraux, C., Lawrence, R. Watkins, M. (2006) Case Studies in US Trade Negotiation: Resolving disputes. Peterson Institute Esty, D. (1994) Greening the GATT: trade, environment, and the future, Τόμος 1994. Peterson Institute Hocking, B., McGuire, S. (2004) Trade politics. Routledge, 2004 Karns, M., Mingst, K. (2004) The United States and Multilateral Institutions: Patterns of Changing Instrumentality and Influence. Routledge Petersmann, E., Pollack, M. (2003) Transatlantic economic disputes: the EU, the US, and the WTO. Oxford University Press Petersmann, E. (1997) The GATT/WTO dispute settlement system: international law, international organizations, and dispute settlement. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Stoll, P., Schorkopf, F. (2000) WTO: world economic order, world trade law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Van den Bossche, P. (2005) The law and policy of the World Trade Organization: text, cases and materials. Cambridge University Press Zimmermann, A. (2006) Negotiating the review of the WTO dispute settlement understanding. Cameron May Declaration: I understand that the completed work must be my own and that all ideas and materials used must be fully referenced through footnotes and a consolidated bibliography. Signature of Student: Date: Proposed Supervisor: I agree to this proposal: I agree to this proposal subject to the following revisions: I do not agree with this proposal (not appropriate to the module / not a coherent proposal: (tick as appropriate) Signature of the tutor: Date: Read More