在俄罗斯解释关贸总协定第21 (b)(iii)条的问题-过境运输

Ramadhan Bismono, J. Priyono, Nanik Trihastuti
{"title":"在俄罗斯解释关贸总协定第21 (b)(iii)条的问题-过境运输","authors":"Ramadhan Bismono, J. Priyono, Nanik Trihastuti","doi":"10.1108/jitlp-10-2021-0054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to further study the panel report in Russia – Traffic in Transit regarding the interpretation and application of 1994 general agreements on tariffs and trade (GATT) Article XXI(b). It analyses the threshold applied by the panel in applying Article XXI(b)(iii) and further discusses the potential problem that may arise in the future dispute. This study also investigates the notion of emergency and security interest and its development in international law.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis normative research uses a qualitative legal methodology. This study conducts desk analysis of primary legal materials and existing literature to assess the concept of security interest within the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework.\n\n\nFindings\nThis paper finds that the panel in Russia – Traffic in Transit applied subjective and objective test in reviewing Russia’s invocation of GATT Article XXI(b)(iii). Despite the adjectival self-judging clause and the political tension of the dispute, the panel is capable to review its application. This study further finds that the term security interest and emergency in international relations still leaves the possibility of open interpretation.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nBecause of the normative research approach, the research results lack empirical data and implications. Therefore, future research is encouraged to inquire on the empirical research.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper fulfils the need to study and explore security exception clause within the WTO framework as a normative rule of law and in the wider conceptual notion of security and emergency in international law.\n","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The problems of interpreting GATT Article XXI(b)(iii) in Russia – Traffic in Transit\",\"authors\":\"Ramadhan Bismono, J. Priyono, Nanik Trihastuti\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jitlp-10-2021-0054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to further study the panel report in Russia – Traffic in Transit regarding the interpretation and application of 1994 general agreements on tariffs and trade (GATT) Article XXI(b). It analyses the threshold applied by the panel in applying Article XXI(b)(iii) and further discusses the potential problem that may arise in the future dispute. This study also investigates the notion of emergency and security interest and its development in international law.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis normative research uses a qualitative legal methodology. This study conducts desk analysis of primary legal materials and existing literature to assess the concept of security interest within the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThis paper finds that the panel in Russia – Traffic in Transit applied subjective and objective test in reviewing Russia’s invocation of GATT Article XXI(b)(iii). Despite the adjectival self-judging clause and the political tension of the dispute, the panel is capable to review its application. This study further finds that the term security interest and emergency in international relations still leaves the possibility of open interpretation.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nBecause of the normative research approach, the research results lack empirical data and implications. Therefore, future research is encouraged to inquire on the empirical research.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis paper fulfils the need to study and explore security exception clause within the WTO framework as a normative rule of law and in the wider conceptual notion of security and emergency in international law.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":42719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-10-2021-0054\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-10-2021-0054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在进一步研究关于1994年关税与贸易总协定(关贸总协定)第21 (b)条的解释和适用的俄罗斯-过境运输小组报告。它分析了专家组在适用第21 (b)(iii)条时所适用的门槛,并进一步讨论了未来争端中可能出现的潜在问题。本研究还探讨了紧急和安全利益的概念及其在国际法中的发展。这项规范性研究使用了定性的法律方法论。本研究对主要法律材料和现有文献进行案头分析,以评估世界贸易组织(WTO)框架内的安全利益概念。本文发现,俄罗斯-过境交通专家组在审查俄罗斯援引关贸总协定第二十一条(b)款(iii)项时采用了主观和客观检验。尽管存在形容词自我判断条款和争议的政治紧张局势,专家组仍有能力审查其适用情况。本研究进一步发现,国际关系中的安全利益与紧急状态一词仍有开放解释的可能。研究局限/启示由于研究方法的规范性,研究结果缺乏实证数据和启示。因此,鼓励未来的研究对实证研究进行探究。原创性/价值本文满足了在WTO框架内作为一种规范性的法律规则以及在国际法中更广泛的安全和紧急情况概念中研究和探索安全例外条款的需要。
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
The problems of interpreting GATT Article XXI(b)(iii) in Russia – Traffic in Transit
Purpose This paper aims to further study the panel report in Russia – Traffic in Transit regarding the interpretation and application of 1994 general agreements on tariffs and trade (GATT) Article XXI(b). It analyses the threshold applied by the panel in applying Article XXI(b)(iii) and further discusses the potential problem that may arise in the future dispute. This study also investigates the notion of emergency and security interest and its development in international law. Design/methodology/approach This normative research uses a qualitative legal methodology. This study conducts desk analysis of primary legal materials and existing literature to assess the concept of security interest within the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework. Findings This paper finds that the panel in Russia – Traffic in Transit applied subjective and objective test in reviewing Russia’s invocation of GATT Article XXI(b)(iii). Despite the adjectival self-judging clause and the political tension of the dispute, the panel is capable to review its application. This study further finds that the term security interest and emergency in international relations still leaves the possibility of open interpretation. Research limitations/implications Because of the normative research approach, the research results lack empirical data and implications. Therefore, future research is encouraged to inquire on the empirical research. Originality/value This paper fulfils the need to study and explore security exception clause within the WTO framework as a normative rule of law and in the wider conceptual notion of security and emergency in international law.
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
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: The Journal of International Trade Law and Policy is a peer reviewed interdisciplinary journal with a focus upon the nexus of international economic policy and international economic law. It is receptive, but not limited, to the methods of economics, law, and the social sciences. As scholars tend to read individual articles of particular interest to them, rather than an entire issue, authors are not required to write with full accessibility to readers from all disciplines within the purview of the Journal. However, interdisciplinary communication should be fostered where possible. Thus economists can utilize quantitative methods (including econometrics and statistics), while legal scholars and political scientists can invoke specialized techniques and theories. Appendices are encouraged for more technical material. Submissions should contribute to understanding international economic policy and the institutional/legal architecture in which it is implemented. Submissions can be conceptual (theoretical) and/or empirical and/or doctrinal in content. Topics of interest to the Journal are expected to evolve over time but include: -All aspects of international trade law and policy -All aspects of international investment law and policy -All aspects of international development law and policy -All aspects of international financial law and policy -Relationship between economic policy and law and other societal concerns, including the human rights, environment, health, development, and national security
期刊最新文献
Revisiting Indonesia halal tourism policy in light of GATS Bilateral investment treaties and investors’ social accountability: the law and praxis in South Asia A shadowy negotiation involving dams and its fiscal and legal implications: a Portuguese case study Negotiations on food security at the WTO: a never-ending story? US technological statecraft towards China
×
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