世贸组织争端解决和贸易制裁作为习惯国际法允许的第三方反措施

Satoru Taira
{"title":"世贸组织争端解决和贸易制裁作为习惯国际法允许的第三方反措施","authors":"Satoru Taira","doi":"10.1163/18719732-12341498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The requirements for invoking <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> security exceptions as expounded in recent <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> dispute settlement cases are notably stricter than previously thought by <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> members. Consequently, not all <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> members who have imposed trade sanctions against Russia will be able to invoke these exceptions to justify their actions when accused by Russia of violations of their <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> obligations. This article considers whether <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> members who may be unsuccessful in invoking security exceptions may nonetheless be able to justify their measures within the context of <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> dispute settlement under the customary international law on third-party countermeasures. It does so by exploring the scope of the relevant provisions within the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (<jats:sc>DSU</jats:sc>) as well as competence of <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> adjudicative bodies (i.e., <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> panels and the Appellate Body) to look beyond the four corners of the <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> covered agreements.","PeriodicalId":43487,"journal":{"name":"International Community Law Review","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"WTO Dispute Settlement and Trade Sanctions as Permissible Third-Party Countermeasures under Customary International Law\",\"authors\":\"Satoru Taira\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18719732-12341498\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The requirements for invoking <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> security exceptions as expounded in recent <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> dispute settlement cases are notably stricter than previously thought by <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> members. Consequently, not all <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> members who have imposed trade sanctions against Russia will be able to invoke these exceptions to justify their actions when accused by Russia of violations of their <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> obligations. This article considers whether <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> members who may be unsuccessful in invoking security exceptions may nonetheless be able to justify their measures within the context of <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> dispute settlement under the customary international law on third-party countermeasures. It does so by exploring the scope of the relevant provisions within the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (<jats:sc>DSU</jats:sc>) as well as competence of <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> adjudicative bodies (i.e., <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> panels and the Appellate Body) to look beyond the four corners of the <jats:sc>WTO</jats:sc> covered agreements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Community Law Review\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Community Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341498\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Community Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341498","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在最近的世贸组织争端解决案例中,对援引世贸组织安全例外规定的要求明显比世贸组织成员以前认为的要严格。因此,并非所有对俄罗斯实施贸易制裁的世贸组织成员都能在俄罗斯指控其违反世贸组织义务时援引这些例外条款来为自己的行为辩护。本文探讨了援引安全例外条款失败的世贸组织成员是否仍能在世贸组织争端解决框架内根据有关第三方反措施的习惯国际法为其措施辩护。为此,本文探讨了《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解书》(DSU)中相关条款的范围,以及世贸组织裁决机构(即世贸组织专家组和上诉机构)在世贸组织所涵盖协定的四角之外的权限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
WTO Dispute Settlement and Trade Sanctions as Permissible Third-Party Countermeasures under Customary International Law
The requirements for invoking WTO security exceptions as expounded in recent WTO dispute settlement cases are notably stricter than previously thought by WTO members. Consequently, not all WTO members who have imposed trade sanctions against Russia will be able to invoke these exceptions to justify their actions when accused by Russia of violations of their WTO obligations. This article considers whether WTO members who may be unsuccessful in invoking security exceptions may nonetheless be able to justify their measures within the context of WTO dispute settlement under the customary international law on third-party countermeasures. It does so by exploring the scope of the relevant provisions within the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) as well as competence of WTO adjudicative bodies (i.e., WTO panels and the Appellate Body) to look beyond the four corners of the WTO covered agreements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Journal aims to explore the implications of various traditions of international law, as well as more current perceived hegemonic trends for the idea of an international community. The Journal will also look at the ways and means in which the international community uses and adapts international law to deal with new and emerging challenges. Non-state actors , intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, individuals, peoples, transnational corporations and civil society as a whole - have changed our outlook on contemporary international law. In addition to States and intergovernmental organizations, they now play an important role.
期刊最新文献
Reflections on the Role of Fairness for the Sources of International Law The Imbalanced Geography of the Law on Use of Force in Self-Defence Government Recognition and the Dispute over the Venezuelan Gold Reserves in the Bank of England The Role of General Assembly Resolutions in the Identification of Customary International Law and the Chagos Archipelago Advisory Opinion An Indigenous Cosmovision for Earth-Centric Governance: Deconstructing the Normative Structure of International Law?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1