Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
The Study of the Problems and Reform Proposals of Trade Sanctions Authorized by WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism
WTO Dispute Settlement
Authorization of Sanctions
|Issue Date: ||2009-09-11 17:04:16 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract: ||摘 要
「世界貿易組織」（World Trade Organization，以下簡稱WTO）爭端解決下之貿易制裁，對於確保其任務之達成，扮演著十分重要的角色。惟自WTO成立後至今的數年間，所出現之「爭端解決機構」（The Dispute Settlement Body）授權貿易制裁之實例，透露了本機制之引發之問題，例如除了被制裁國強力反彈外，採取制裁措施之國自身也倍嚐其苦。針對上述問題，不論是學界或WTO會員國均有一些檢討改革的方案。
上述改革方案包括倡議以其他手段完全取代現行「爭端解決程序與規則瞭解書」（Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes，以下簡稱DSU）之貿易制裁者，經過本文之分析，發現此等手段縱然取代DSU之貿易制裁，仍無法解決問題，蓋彼等或不具可行性、或有強制執行之困難。
The authorization of trade sanction, which secures the objectives of the World Trade Organization (hereinafter the “WTO”) to be achieved, plays a very important role in WTO dispute settlement mechanism. However, since the establishment of the WTO, the DSB authorization of trade sanctions in some cases has revealed some problems. In some instances, the exercise of the trade sanctions triggers counter-measures of the respondent member, while in others, the complaint member also suffers for the trade sanction it imposes as authorized. In response to the aforementioned problems, commentators as well as WTO members have proposed some ideas of reform.
The reform proposals include replacing the WTO trade sanctions with alternative measures. Nevertheless, after careful analyses of these proposals for alternatives, it is found in this thesis that the replacement of the WTO trade sanctions cannot resolve the aforementioned problems, in the sense that those alternatives suggested are not feasible or lack of ways to enforce them.
In light of the fact that currently no feasible alternative can have the function as trade sanction has in assuring the compliance of the WTO rules, this thesis argues that it needs to be preserved. Besides, this thesis believes that it does not cause any conflict in the current WTO legal framework. To preserve it under the WTO framework, the abuse can be avoided through the surveillance of the DSB. Moreover, the built-in review mechanism, which will continue reform trade sanction measures, can minimize their negative effects.
1. ERNST-ULRICH PETERSMANN ed., INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW AND THE GATT/WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM (Kluwer Law International, October 1997).
2. JACKSON, JOHN HOWARD, MARCO BRONCKERS, REINHARD QUICK ed., NEW DIRECTIONS in INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW ESSAYS in HONOUR of JOHN H. JACKSON (Kluwer Law International, January 2001).
3. JAMES CAMERON, KAREN CAMPBELL ed., DISPUTE RESOLUTION in the WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION (Cameron May London, March 1998).
4. JOHN COLLIER, VAUGHAN LOWE, THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW：INSTITUTIONS AND PROCEDURES (Oxford University Press, October 2000 ).
5. KENNEDY, DANIEL L. M. and JAMES D. SOUTHWICK ed., THE POLITICAL ECONOMY of INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW ESSAYS in HONOUR of ROBERT E. HUDEC (Cambridge University Press, June 2002).
1. ANDERSON, KYM, Peculiarities of Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement, WORLD TRADE REVIEW, Vol.1 ,No.2 ,p.127-129(July 2002).
2. BERNARD M. HOEKMAN AND PETROS C. MAVROIDIS, WTO Dispute Settlement, Transparency and Surveillance, THE WORLD ECONOMY, Vol.23, No.4, p.527-542 (July 2001).
3. CHI CARMODY, Remedies and Conformity under the WTO Agreement, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW, Vol.5, No.2, p.307-329 (July 2002).
4. PATRICIO GRANE, Remedies under WTO Law, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW, Vol.4, No.4, p.755-772 (July 2001).
5. PAUWELYN JOOST, Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO :Rules are Rules-Toward a More Collective Approach, 94 AM.J. INT’L L.347（April 2000).
6. STEVE CHARNOVITZ, Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, Vol.95, No.4, p.792-831 (July 2001).
1. WT/DS27/ARB, European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas-Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU, Decision of the Arbitrators, 9 April, 1999.
2. WT/DS27/ARB/ECU, European Communities-Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas-Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU, 22 March, 2000.
3. WT/DS26/1, European Communities-Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)-Request for Consultations by the United States, 31 January, 1996.
4. WT/DS26/6, European Communities –Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)-Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the United States, 25 April, 1996.
5. WT/DS26/R/USA, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)-Complaint by the United States-Report of the Panel, 18 August, 1997.
6. WT/DS26/9, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)-Notification of an Appeal by the European Communities under Paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), 25 September, 1997.
7. WT/DS26/AB/R, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) – AB – 1997- 4 - Report of the Appellate Body, 16 January, 1998.
8. WT/DS26/14, European Communities - Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) - Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings - Request for Arbitration by the European Communities, 16 April, 1998.
9. WT/DS26/15, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)-Arbitration under Article 21.3 (c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Dispute - Award of the Arbitrator, 29 May, 1998.
10. WT/DS26/19, European Communities - Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) - Recourse by the Unites States to Article 22.2 of the DSU, 29 May, 1999.
11. WT/DS26/20, European Communities - Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), Request by the European Communities for Arbitration under Article 22.6 of the DSU, 9 June, 1999.
12. WT/DS26/ARB, European Communities - Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) Original Complaint by the United States Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU, 12 July, 1999.
13. WT/DS26/21, European Communities – Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), Recourse by the United States to Article 22.7 of the DSU, 15 July, 1999.
14. JOB(03)/69, Special Session of the DSB “ Framework Document ”, 9 April, 2003.
15. Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, 15 April, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 2, available at URL:
16. Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, 15 April, 1994, available at URL:
17. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947 available at URL:
|Source URI: ||http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0090351039|
|Data Type: ||thesis|
|Appears in Collections:||[國際經營與貿易學系 ] 學位論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.