Interpretation and Application of Sunset Reviews under the WTO
4
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
There have been growing debates surrounding the application of incomplete sunset review provisions since they were introduced into the WTO mechanism in 1995, under which implementation of sunset reviews could be counted on a dispute settlement body to be clearly interpreted and applied constantly with the drafting intentions of the provisions. Considering the fact that the insufficient and ambiguous provisions of the sunset reviews have historically been applied by the WTO member countries, this paper reviews the dispute settlement body’s interpretation and application of sunset review provisions to make assessment of current WTO sunset review mechanism and to look for better and more reasonable interpretations sticking to the sprit and purpose of sunset reviews. In relation with the judicial interpretation and application of sunset review provisions, the decisions of the Appellate Body have primarily been based on the analysis of procedural aspects to arrive at its conclusion, and have not been faithful to the analysis of the substantive aspects under discussion, which are incomplete to establish the definite principles regarding the interpretation and application of the sunset reviews. Moreover, unduly making much of the distinctiveness of sunset reviews, and, therefore, granting too much deference to authorities, the dispute settlement body has accordingly distracted its attention away from the legislating purpose of sunset reviews to weaken the significance of sunset review provisions, and to make it lose the main tools to improve the sunset reviews. For the sunset reviews to be conducted effectively and promote justifiable utilization of antidumping measures, the dispute settlement body is required to establish a set of expressly unified standards as far as possible to regulate the application of sunset review provisions so that the final determination in sunset reviews could be objectively deduced from the proper investigation based on factual evidence.
Abstract
There have been growing debates surrounding the application of incomplete sunset review provisions since they were introduced into the WTO mechanism in 1995, under which implementation of sunset reviews could be counted on a dispute settlement body to be clearly interpreted and applied constantly with the drafting intentions of the provisions. Considering the fact that the insufficient and ambiguous provisions of the sunset reviews have historically been applied by the WTO member countries, this paper reviews the dispute settlement body’s interpretation and application of sunset review provisions to make assessment of current WTO sunset review mechanism and to look for better and more reasonable interpretations sticking to the sprit and purpose of sunset reviews. In relation with the judicial interpretation and application of sunset review provisions, the decisions of the Appellate Body have primarily been based on the analysis of procedural aspects to arrive at its conclusion, and have not been faithful to the analysis of the substantive aspects under discussion, which are incomplete to establish the definite principles regarding the interpretation and application of the sunset reviews. Moreover, unduly making much of the distinctiveness of sunset reviews, and, therefore, granting too much deference to authorities, the dispute settlement body has accordingly distracted its attention away from the legislating purpose of sunset reviews to weaken the significance of sunset review provisions, and to make it lose the main tools to improve the sunset reviews. For the sunset reviews to be conducted effectively and promote justifiable utilization of antidumping measures, the dispute settlement body is required to establish a set of expressly unified standards as far as possible to regulate the application of sunset review provisions so that the final determination in sunset reviews could be objectively deduced from the proper investigation based on factual evidence.
참고문헌 (28)
- Cadot Olivier, "Antidumping Sunset Reviews: Did the WTO Agreement Make Any Difference? At the conference on antidumping and developing countries organized by the World Bank and the Ins", d'Etudes Politiques de Paris, ~ (2006)
- Edwin, Vermulist, "The WTO Anti-dumping Agreement, A Commentary" (2005), Oxford University Press
- Mitsuo Matsushita, "The World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy" (2003), 38 Oxford University Press
- Bhala, Raj, "WTO case review 2004", 22 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 99, ~ (2005)
- Bhala, Raj, "WTO case review 2005", 23 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 107, ~ (2006)
- Covelli, Nick, "Cumulation in Sunset Reviews: Lessons from Two WTO Cases", 11, Int’l. Trade.L. &Reg. 147, ~ (2005)
- Dohlman, Peter A, "Determinations of Adequacy in Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Orders in the United States", 14 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev. 1281, ~ (1999)
- Gustavo A. Bizai, "Recent Case Involving Anti‐dumping Duties: Sunset Reviews of Antidumping measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Argentina", Sweet & Maxwell Limited and Contributors, 214~222 (2005)
- Howse, Robert, "A legal and economic analysis of the Appellate Body ruling", World Trade Rev., ~ (2006)
- King, Jennifer Karen, "Misguided Analysis in Sunset Reviews", 43 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 2151, ~ (2002)
- Liebman, Benjamin H, "ITC Voting Behavior on Sunset Reviews", 139, Rev. World Econ., 1610, ~ (2003)
- Moore, Michael O, "An Econometrics Analysis of US Antidumping Sunset Review Decisions", 142 Rev. World Econ, ~ (2006)
- Moore, Michael O, "Commerce Department Antidumping Sunset Reviews: A First Assessment", 36 Rev. World Econ., ~ (2002)
- Sohn, Changho, "Current Developments of WTO Dispute Settlement Body Findings on the U.S. Antidumping Sunset Review Regime", 6 Rich. J. Global L. & Bus. 177, ~ (2006)
- United States–Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion‐Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany, "WTO Appellate Body Report", ~, pp.WT (2002), DS213[DOI]
- European Communities–Anti‐Dumping Duties on Imports of Cotton‐Type Bed Linen from India, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by India, WT, "DS141", AB, WTO Appellate Body Report, 2003[DOI]
- European Communities–Anti‐Dumping Duties on Malleable Cast Iron Tube Pipe Fittings from Brazil, WT, "DS219", AB, WTO Appellate Body Report, 2003[DOI]
- United States‐Sunset Review of Anti‐Dumping Duties on Corrosion‐Resistant Carbon Steel Flat products from Japan, WT, "244", AB, WTO Appellate Body Report, 2003[DOI]
- United Stated‐Sunset Review of Anti‐Dumping Measure on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Argentina, WT, "DS268", AB, WTO Appellate Body Report, 2004[DOI]
- United States–Anti‐Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Mexico, WT, "DS282", AB, WTO Appellate Body Report, 2005[DOI]
- United States ‐ Sunset Review of Anti‐Dumping Duties on Corrosion‐Resistant Carbon Steel Flat products from Japan, WT, "244", R, pp.2003, ~
- United States–Sunset Reviews of Anti‐ Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Argentina, WT, "DS268", RandCorr.1, pp.2004, ~
- United States–Anti‐Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Mexico, WT, "DS282", R, pp.2005, ~
- "Agreement on Implication of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Apr.15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex A1, Legal Instruments‐Results of the Uruguay Round, 33 I.L.M.1125", ~ (1994)
- "Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization", Apr. 15, 1994, Legal Instruments‐Results of the Uruguay Round, 33 I.L.M.1125, ~ (1994)
- "Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes", ~ (1994)
- WTO Agreement, "Annex 2, LEGAL INSTRUMENTS‐RESULTS OF THE URUGUAY ROUND", vol. 31, 33 I.L.M. 1226, Art. 3.2, ~ (1994)
- "Sunset Reviews: Beyond anti‐dumping"[URL]