The Inherent Jurisdiction of WTO Tribunals: The Select Application of Public International Law Required by the Judicial Function
The Inherent Jurisdiction of WTO Tribunals: The Select Application of Public International Law Required by the Judicial Function
复制标题
WTO法庭的固有管辖权：司法职能所要求的国际公法的选择性适用
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Heaton
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Mitchell;D. Heaton
世贸组织法律面临的许多重要问题--区域贸易协定(“区域贸易协定”)阻止在世贸组织裁决申诉的能力、一成员要求另一成员担任代表的能力、以及世贸组织专家组和上诉机构能够在多大程度上控制申诉程序--几乎完全取决于国际法规则在世贸组织争端解决中的适用程度。鉴于区域贸易协定的日益泛滥，世贸组织专家组不得不处理相互冲突的国际义务的可能性正在增加--事实上，在即将到来的美国-金枪鱼/海豚(墨西哥)争端中可能需要这样做。本文认为，在世贸组织争端解决中对国际法采取一种原则性的(如果是复杂的)方法是必要的，以提供“多边贸易体系的安全性和可预测性”。这种做法的基础是认识到世贸组织专家组和上诉机构(“世贸组织法庭”)具有固有的管辖权，允许它们在满足三项标准的情况下适用选定的国际法(世贸组织协定之外)。具体而言：国际法的适用必须是世贸组织法庭正确履行其职能的必要条件；相关国际法不得有其本身的实质性内容；国际法的适用不得与《争端解决谅解》的规定以及所涉协定的目的和宗旨相抵触或不相容。在这一框架下，本文审查了可能与世贸组织争端有关的几项基于程序和善意的国际法原则，以及它们造成的概念性困难。
Many important issues confronting WTO law - the capacity of regional trade agreements (‘RTAs’) to prevent a claim from being adjudicated before the WTO, the ability of a Member to hold another Member to a representation, and the extent to which WTO Panels and the Appellate Body can control the procedure of complaints - depend for their resolution almost entirely on the degree that rules of international law are applicable in WTO dispute settlement. Given the increasing proliferation of RTAs, the likelihood of WTO Panels having to deal with conflicting international obligations is increasing - indeed, it may be required in the impending US - Tuna/Dolphin (Mexico) dispute. This paper argues that a principled (if sophisticated) approach to international law in WTO dispute settlement is necessary to provide ‘security and predictability to the multilateral trading system’. This approach is based on recognizing that WTO Panels and the Appellate Body (‘WTO Tribunals’) have an inherent jurisdiction that allows them to apply select international law (outside the WTO Agreements) where three criteria are satisfied. Specifically: the application of international law must be necessary for the WTO Tribunal to properly discharge its function; the relevant international law must have no substantive content of its own; and the application of international law must not be inconsistent or incompatible with the provisions of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (‘DSU’) as well as with the objects and purposes of the covered Agreements. Given this framework, this paper examines several procedural and good-faith based principles of international law that may be relevant to WTO disputes, as well as the conceptual difficulties that they cause.