WTO Dispute Settlement: General Appreciation and the Role of India

Zimmermann, Thomas A. (2007): WTO Dispute Settlement: General Appreciation and the Role of India. Published in: in: K. Padmaja (ed.): WTO and Dispute Resolution; Hyderabad (India): The ICFAI University Press, 2007 (2007): pp. 147-201.

Abstract

ABSTRACT

On 1 January 1995, the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) entered into force. Until August 2006, the DSU has since been applied to 348 complaints – more cases than dispute settlement under the GATT 1947 had dealt with in nearly five decades. The system is perceived, both by practitioners and in academic literature, to work generally well. However, it has also revealed some flaws. Negotiations to review and reform the DSU have been taking place since 1997 ("DSU review"), however, without yielding any result so far. In the meantime, WTO Members and adjudicating bodies managed to develop the system further through evolving practice. While this approach may remedy some practical shortcomings of the DSU text, the more profound imbalance between relatively efficient judicial decision-making in the WTO (as incorporated in the DSU) and nearly blocked political decision-making evolves into a serious challenge to the sustainability of the system.

This article provides an overview of the first eleven years of DSU practice and the current DSU review negotiations. An outlook for future challenges to the system is also given. Moreover, specific chapters of the text focus on the role of India in WTO dispute settlement, her use of the system and her participation in the DSU review negotiations.

JEL Classification: F02, F13, K33, K41

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Institution: Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economic Research (SIAW-HSG); University of St. Gallen, Switzerland.
• Language: English
• Keywords: International Trade; Trade Policy; WTO; Dispute Settlement; Dispute Settlement Understanding; DSU Review Negotiations; India
• Subjects: F - International Economics > F1 - Trade > F13 - Trade Policy ; International Trade Organizations; K - Law and Economics > K3 - Other Substantive Areas of Law > K33 - International Law; K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior > K41 - Litigation Process; F - International Economics > F0 - General > F02 - International Economic Order and Integration

References

ANDERSON, KYM (2002): Peculiarities of Retaliation in WTO Dispute Settlement; in: World Trade Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 123-134 BAGWELL, KYLE and ROBERT W. STAIGER (1999): An Economic Theory of GATT; in: American Economic Review, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 215-248 BARFIELD, CLAUDE E. (2002): WTO Dispute Settlement System in Need of Change; in: Intereconomics – Review of European Economic Policy, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 131-134 BARFIELD, CLAUDE E. (2001): Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy: The Future of the World Trade Organization; Washington, D.C.: The AEI Press BERG, HARTMUT ed. (2001): Theorie der Wirtschaftspolitik – Erfahrungen, Probleme, Perspektiven; Berlin: Duncker und Humblot BHAGWATI, JAGDISH and MATHIAS HIRSCH eds. (1998): The Uruguay Round and Beyond – Essays in Honour of Arthur Dunkel; Berlin et al.: Springer BHALA, RAJ (2002): Mercy for the Third World through GATT Article XVIII; in: Singapore Year Book of International Law; Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 498-540 BHALA, RAJ (1999): The Myth About Stare Decisis and International Trade Law (Part One of a Trilogy); in: American University International Law Review, Vol. 14, pp. 845-956 BLOKKER, NIELS M. and HENRY G. SCHERMERS eds. (2001): Proliferation of International Organizations – Legal Issues; The Hague: Kluwer BOURGEOIS, JACQUES H. J. (2003): Comment on a WTO Permanent Panel Body; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 211-214 BUSCH, MARC L. (2000): Democracy, Consultations and the Paneling of Disputes Under GATT; in: Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 425-446 BUSCH, MARC L. and ERIC REINHARDT (2003): The Evolution of GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement; in: CURTIS, JOHN M. and DAN CIURIAK eds.: Trade Policy Research; pp. 143-183 BUSCH, MARC L. and ERIC REINHARDT (2003a): Transatlantic Trade Conflicts and GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement; in: PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH and MARK POLLACK eds.: Dispute Prevention and Dispute Settlement in the Transatlantic Partnership, pp. 465-485 BUSCH, MARC L. and ERIC REINHARDT (2002): Testing International Trade Law – Empirical Studies of GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement; in: KENNEDY, DANIEL L. M. and JAMES D. SOUTHWICK eds.: The Political Economy of International Trade Law – Essays in Honour of Robert E. Hudec; pp. 457-481 BUSCH, MARC L. and ERIC REINHARDT (2000): Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law – Early Settlement in GATT/WTO Disputes; in: Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1-2, pp. 158-172 BÜTLER, MONIKA and HEINZ HAUSER (2000): The WTO Dispute Settlement System: A First Assessment from an Economic Perspective; in: Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 503-533 CARTLAND, MICHAEL (2003): Comment on a WTO Permanent Panel Body; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 214-218 CHARNOVITZ, STEVE (2003): The WTO's Problematic "Last Resort" Against Noncompliance; http://www.worldtradelaw.net/articles/charnovitzlastresort.pdf (downloaded on 10 September 2003); updated version (15 August 2003) of an article published in: Aussenwirtschaft, Vol. 57 (2002), No. 4, pp. 409-439 CHARNOVITZ, STEVE (2001): Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions; in: American Journal of International Law, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 792-832 COLLINS, SUSAN M. and DANI RODRIK eds. (2001): Brookings Trade Forum 2000; Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press CONSULTATIVE BOARD ed. (2004): The Future of the WTO – Addressing institutional challenges in the new millennium; Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi; Geneva: World Trade Organization, 2004 (available online at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/10anniv_e/future_wto_e.pdf) COTTIER, THOMAS (2003): The WTO Permanent Panel Body – A Bridge Too Far?; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 187-202 COTTIER, THOMAS (2002): Proposals for Moving from Ad Hoc Panels to Permanent WTO Panelists; in: PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH ed. (2002): Preparing the Doha Development Round – Improvements and Clarifications of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding, pp. 40-52 COTTIER, THOMAS and SATOKO TAKENOSHITA (2003): The Balance of Power in WTO Decision-Making – Towards Weighted Voting in Legislative Response; in: Aussenwirtschaft, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 171-214 CURTIS, JOHN M. and DAN CIURIAK eds. (2003): Trade Policy Research 2003; Ottawa: Department of International Affairs and Foreign Trade DAVEY, WILLIAM J. (2003): The Case for a WTO Permanent Panel Body; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 177-186 DAVEY, WILLIAM J. (2002): A Permanent Panel Body for WTO Dispute Settlement – Desirable or Practical; in: KENNEDY, DANIEL L. M. and JAMES D. SOUTHWICK (eds.): The Political Economy of International Trade Law – Essays in Honour of Robert E. Hudec; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 496-527 DAVEY, WILLIAM J. (2002a): The WTO Dispute Settlement System; in: SAMPSON, GARY P. and W. BRADNEE CHAMBERS eds.: Trade, Environment, and the Millennium, pp. 145-174 DREZNER, DANIEL W. ed. (2003): Locating the Proper Authorities – The Interaction of Domestic and International Institutions; Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press DUNNE III, MATTHEW S. (2002): Redefining Power Orientation: A Reassessment of Jackson's Paradigm in light of Asymmetries of Power, Negotiation, and Compliance in the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System; in: Law and Policy in International Business, Vol. 34, pp. 277-342 DUVIGNEAU, JOHANN L. (2001): Die Konstitutionalisierung des WTO-Rechts – Zur juristischen Diskussion über Verfassungsstrukturen im Bereich des Handelsvölkerrechts; in: Aussenwirtschaft, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 295-325 EHLERMANN, CLAUS-DIETER (2003): Reflections on the Appellate Body of the WTO; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 695-708 EHLERMANN, CLAUS-DIETER (2002): Six Years on the Bench of the “World Trade Court” – Some Personal Experiences as Member of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization; in: Journal of World Trade, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 605-639; also published as Policy Paper No. 9 of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies; Florence: European University Institute EHLERMANN, CLAUS-DIETER (2002a): Tensions Between the Dispute Settlement Process and the Diplomatic and Treaty-Making Activities of the WTO; in: World Trade Review, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 301-308 ETHIER, WILFRIED J. (2001): Punishments and Dispute Settlement in Trade Agreements; Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU) Discussion Paper No. 2001-14 FELICIANO, FLORENTINO P. and PETER L. H. VAN DEN BOSSCHE (2001): The Dispute Settlement Process of the World Trade Organization – Institutions, Process and Practice; in: BLOKKER, NIELS M. and HENRY G. SCHERMERS eds.: Proliferation of International Organizations – Legal Issues, pp. 297-350 GALLAGHER, PETER (2002): Guide to Dispute Settlement – A Handy Guide to Bringing a Case Before the WTO; Geneva: The WTO / The Hague: Kluwer Law GEORGIEV, DENCHO and KIM VAN DER BORGHT eds. (2006): Reform and Development of the WTO Dispute Settlement System; London: Cameron May GOH, GAVIN and TRUDY WITBREUK (2001): An Introduction to the WTO Dispute Settlement System; in: University of Western Australia Law Review, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 51-74 GREENWALD, JOHN (2003): WTO Dispute Settlement – An Exercise in Trade Law Legislation?; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 113-124 GUZMAN, ANDREW and BETH A. SIMMONS (2002): To Settle or Empanel? An Empirical Analysis of Litigation and Settlement at the World Trade Organization; in: Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 205-235 HAUSER, HEINZ (2001): Die WTO-Streitschlichtung aus einer Law and Economics Perspektive; in: BERG, HARTMUT ed.: Theorie der Wirtschaftspolitik – Erfahrungen, Probleme, Perspektiven; pp. 79-111 HAUSER, HEINZ and THOMAS A. ZIMMERMANN (2003): The Challenge of Reforming the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding; in: Intereconomics – Review of European Economic Policy; Vol. 38, No. 5, pp. 241-245 HAUSER, HEINZ and ANDREA MARTEL (1997): Das WTO-Streitschlichtungsverfahren: Eine verhandlungsorientierte Perspektive; in: Aussenwirtschaft, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 525-560 HECHT, JAMES C. (2000): Operation of WTO Dispute Settlement Panels – Assessing Proposals for Reform; in: Law and Policy in International Business, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 657-664 HIPPLER BELLO, JUDITH (1996): The WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding – Less Is More; in: The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 90, No. 3, pp. 416-418 HOEKMAN, BERNARD M. and MICHAEL KOSTECKI (2001): The Political Economy of the World Trading System – From GATT to WTO; 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press HUDEC, ROBERT E. (2000): Broadening the Scope of Remedies in WTO Dispute Settlement; in: WEISS, FRIEDL and JOCHEN WIERS eds.: Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures, pp. 345-376 HUDEC, ROBERT E. (1999): The New WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure: An Overview of the First Three Years; in: Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 1-53 HUDEC, ROBERT E. (1998): The Role of the GATT Secretariat in the Evolution of the WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure; in: BHAGWATI, JAGDISH and MATHIAS HIRSCH eds.: The Uruguay Round and Beyond – Essays in Honour of Arthur Dunkel, pp. 101-120 HUDEC, ROBERT E. (1993): Enforcing International Trade Law – The Evolution of the Modern GATT Legal System; Salem, N.H.: Butterworth Legal Publishers JACKSON, JOHN H. (2002): Perceptions about the WTO trade institutions; in: World Trade Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 101-114 JACKSON, JOHN H. (2001): The Role and Effectiveness of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism; in: COLLINS, SUSAN M. and DANI RODRIK eds. (2001): Brookings Trade Forum 2000; pp. 179-219 JACKSON, JOHN H. (1998): Designing and Implementing Effective Dispute Settlement Procedures – WTO Dispute Settlement; in: KRUEGER, ANNE O. ed.: The WTO as an International Institution, pp. 161-179 JACKSON, JOHN H. (1997): The World Trading System – Law and Policy of International Economic Relations, 2nd edition; Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press JACKSON, JOHN H. (1978): The Crumbling Institutions of the Liberal Trade System; in: Journal of World Trade, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 93-106 KENNEDY, DANIEL L. M. and JAMES D. SOUTHWICK eds. (2002): The Political Economy of International Trade Law – Essays in Honour of Robert E. Hudec; New York: Cambridge University Press KOVENOCK, DAN and MARIE THURSBY (1997): GATT Dispute Settlement and Cooperation; in: Economics and Politics, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 95-98 KRUEGER, ANNE O. ed. (1998): The WTO as an International Organization; Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press MAGGI, GIOVANNI (1999): The role of multilateral institutions in international trade co-operation; in: American Economic Review, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 190-214 MAGNUS, JOHN R., NAVIN JONEJA and DAVID YOCIS (2003): What Do All These Adverse WTO Decisions Mean?; in: GULC Trade Update; 30 January 2003 MARCEAU, GABRIELLE and MATTHEW STILWELL (2001): Practical Suggestions for Amicus Curiae Briefs Before WTO Adjudicating Bodies; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 155-187 MAVROIDIS, PETROS C. (2001): Amicus Curiae Briefs Before The WTO: Much Ado About Nothing; Jean Monnet Working Paper 2/01 MAVROIDIS, PETROS C. (2000): Remedies in the WTO Legal System – Between a Rock and a Hard Place; in: European Journal of International Law, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 763-813 MITCHELL, SHANNON K. (1997): GATT, Dispute Settlement and Cooperation – A Note; in: Economics and Politics, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 87-93 ORTINO, FEDERICO and ERNST-ULRICH PETERSMANN eds. (2003): The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2003; The Hague: Kluwer Law International (Studies in International Law, Vol. 18) PALMETER, DAVID and PETROS C. MAVROIDIS (1999): Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organization – Practice and Procedure; The Hague: Kluwer PAUWELYN, JOOST (2000): Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO – Rules are Rules – Toward a More Collective Approach; in: American Journal of International Law, Vol. 94, No. 2, pp. 335-347 PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH (2002a): Additional Negotiation Proposals on Improvements and Clarifications of the DSU; in: PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH ed. (2002): Preparing the Doha Development Round: Improvements and Clarifications of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding, pp. 125-139 PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH (1999): Dispute Settlement in International Economic Law – Lessons for Strengthening International Dispute Settlement in Non-Economic Areas; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 189-248 PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH (1998): How to Promote the International Rule of Law? Contributions by the World Trade Organization Appellate Review System; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 25-48 PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH (1998a): Editorial – From the Hobbesian International Law of Co-Existence to Modern Integration Law – The WTO Dispute Settlement System; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 175-198 PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH (1997): International Trade Law and the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System; The Hague: Kluwer PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH (1997a): The GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement System – International Law, International Organizations and Dispute Settlement; London: Kluwer PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH and MARK A. POLLACK eds. (2003): Transatlantic Economic Disputes – The EU, the US, and the WTO; Oxford: Oxford University Press QURESHI, ASIF H. (2000): Challenging Quantitative Restrictions for Balance of Payment Purposes; in: International Trade Law and Regulation, Vol. 6, Part I, pp. 28-31 RAGOSTA, JOHN A., NAVIN JONEJA and MIKHAIL ZELDOVICH (2003): You Be the Judge; in: Foreign Affairs, Vol. 82, No. 3, pp. 170-171 RAGOSTA, JOHN, NAVIN JONEJA and MIKHAIL ZELDOVICH (no year specified): WTO Dispute Settlement – The System Is Flawed and Must Be Fixed; http://www.dbtrade.com/publications/ wto_dispute_settlement_is_flawed.pdf (visited on 10 September 2003) REINHARDT, ERIC (2001): Adjudication without Enforcement in GATT Disputes; in: Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 174-195 REINHARDT, ERIC (2001a): Tying Hands Without a Rope – Rational Domestic Response to International Institutional Constraints; in: DREZNER, DANIEL W. ed. (2003): Locating the Proper Authorities – The Interaction of Domestic and International Institutions, pp. 77-104 REINHARDT, ERIC (2000): Aggressive Multilateralism – The Determinants of GATT/WTO Dispute Initiation, 1948-1998; Manuscript; http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~erein/research/initiation.pdf (downloaded on 10 September 2003) REINHARDT, ERIC (2000a): To GATT or Not to GATT – Which Trade Disputes Does the U.S. Litigate?; Manuscript; http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~erein/research/ tg.pdf (downloaded on 10 September 2003) ROSENDORFF, B. PETER (2001): Stability and Rigidity – The Dispute Settlement Procedure of the WTO; Manuscript; http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~bpeter/papers/dspv4.pdf (downloaded on 24 April 2003) ROSENDORFF, B. PETER and HELEN V. MILNER (2001): The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions – Uncertainty and Escape; in: International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 829-858 SAMPSON, GARY P. and W. BRADNEE CHAMBERS (2002) eds.: Trade, Environment, and the Millennium, 2nd ed.; Tokyo/New York: United Nations University Press SCHOTT, JEFFREY J. and JAYASHREE WATAL (2000): Decision-Making in the WTO; Policy Brief 00-2; Washington: Institute for International Economics SEVILLA, CHRISTINA R. (1998): Explaining Patterns of GATT/WTO Trade Complaints; Working Paper 98/1, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University; http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/sec01 (downloaded on 26 May 2003) SEVILLA, CHRISTINA R. (1997): A Political Economy Model of GATT/WTO Trade Complaints; Jean Monnet Paper No. 5/97 (New York University School of Law) SHOYER, ANDREW W. (2003): Panel Selection in WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 203-209 STEGER, DEBRA P. (2002): Improvements and Reform of the WTO Appellate Body; in: PETERSMANN, ERNST-ULRICH ed. (2002): Preparing the Doha Development Round: Improvements and Clarifications of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding, pp. 53-66 STEGER, DEBRA P. (2002a): Review of: BARFIELD, CLAUDE E. (2001): Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy – The Future of the World Trade Organization; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 565-570 TREBILCOCK, MICHAEL J. and ROBERT HOWSE (1999): The Regulation of International Trade, 2nd ed.; London: Routledge UMBRICHT, GEORG C. (2001): An “Amicus Curiae Brief” on Amicus Curiae Briefs at the WTO; in: Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 773-794 UNION OF INDUSTRIAL AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATIONS OF EUROPE (UNICE) ed. (2001): Update of UNICE Discussion Paper on WTO Dispute Settlement System; Brussels: 31 May 2001; http://www.unice.org (downloaded on 14 September 2003) WAINCYMER, JEFFREY (2000): Transparency of Dispute Settlement Within the World Trade Organization; in: Melbourne University Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 797-838 WEISS, FRIEDL and JOCHEN WIERS eds. (2000): Improving WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures; London: Cameron May WILSON, DAVID and LYNN STARCHUK (2003): Judicial Activism in the WTO – Implications for the Doha Negotiations; Manuscript, 13 September 2003; http://www.johnstonbuchan.com/pubs/trade/Judicial%20Activism%20in%20the%20WTO.pdf (downloaded on 16 September 2003) ZIMMERMANN, THOMAS A. (2006): Negotiating the Review of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding; London: Cameron May ZIMMERMANN, THOMAS A. (2006a): The DSU Review (1998-2004): Negotiations, Problems and Perspectives; in: GEORGIEV, DENCHO and KIM VAN DER BORGHT eds.: Reform and Development of the WTO Dispute Settlement System; pp. 443-472 ZIMMERMANN, THOMAS A. (2005): WTO Dispute Settlement at Ten: Evolution, Experiences and Evaluation; in: Aussenwirtschaft – The Swiss Review of International Economic Relations; Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 27-61 ZIMMERMANN, THOMAS A. (2001): Gewährleisten umgesetzte WTO-Streitschlichtungsurteile offene Märkte? Eine Betrachtung am Beispiel des Zeitschriftenfalles; in: Aussenwirtschaft – The Swiss Review of International Economic Relations, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 359-390