IBUL MID-TERM 2 TEST

THE REFORMS NEEDED FOR THE APPELLATE BODY

DATE:
NAME:
1. We support the reforms needed for the Appellate Body
2. Facts:
As we all know, The Appellate Body is the second and final stage in the adjudicatory part of
the dispute settlement system. They can uphold, modify, or reverse the legal findings and
conclusions of a panel, and Appellate Body Reports are adopted by the Dispute Settlement
Body (DSB) unless all members decide not to do so. However, the Appellate Body is unable
to review appeals given its ongoing vacancies.
3. Arguments / Reasoning
There are several Arguments, which can come up as a reform needed for the Appellate
Body.
The First is the narrowing of the scope for ‘advisory opinions’ by clarifying that the primary
objective of the dispute settlement system is the settlement of specific disputes and that
only findings that are necessary to achieve this objective are required.
Secondly, there must be a focus on Appellate Body reviews on legal issues by clarifying the
standard of review, which the AB applies to Panel decisions, especially regarding to factual
findings and those related to the operation of domestic law
Thirdly, allowing members the expression of minority views in AB and Panel reports, and
emphasizing that interpretations and reports of AB and Panel are only binding to the
disputes in which they are adopted and does not undermine the independence of AB
members thus couldn’t be used as precedent (case to mention: US vs Shrimp: The US–
Shrimp case was the first dispute adjudicated under the WTO dispute resolution system in
which the complex relationship between international trade regulation and the protection of
the environment was at issue)
Fourth argument is to develop guidance related to consultations with complainants and
respondents when the Appellate Body is unable to meet its deadline to avoid failure to meet
the 90 day deadline or simply increase the members of AB to 9 from 7 and treat it like a full-
time position.
4. Conclusion
So at the end a reform would be totally helpful for the Appellate Body to end most of their
criticism, and the reforms would also help the AB to function as a good dispute settlement
body, as it was meant to be when it was created.
 WHETHER THE ENVIRONMENTAL OR HEALTH CONCERNS COULD BE
INTERPRETED IN THE WTO AGREEMENTS

DATE:
NAME:
1. We support the interpretation of the environmental and health concerns in the WTO
Agreements
2. Facts:
The AoA had 3 main pillars, which contained the reducing of the scope for export subsidies,
new, more restrictive regime for domestic support and improved market access. Initially, the
goal of the WTO Agreement did not include environmental or health concerns, and how it
should be treated. However the improved market access and basically the whole free trade
between countries can be hindered if something bad happens, because the health issues
were not considered while making the trade between countries. (Case: Coronavirus – trade)
3. Arguments / Reasoning
There are 4 main environmentalist critiques of free trade:
1. May result in the unsustainable consumption of natural resources and waste production
2. Trade rules and liberalization often meant market access agreements that can be used to
override environmental regulations
3. Trade restrictions should be available as leverage to promote worldwide environmental
protection
4. Countries with lax environmental standards have a competitive advantage in the global
marketplace
There are several market failures that should be prevented with the interpretation of
environmental and health concerns in the WTO, such as the failure to internalize
environmental costs and the improper valuation of ecosystems.
There are Multilateral Environmental Agreements which have trade measures in vast form.
The product life cycle and producer responsibility laws are permitted under GATT Article III
as long as they apply equally to domestic and foreign producers.
The Eco-Labelling, Carbon taxes and Cap & trade are included in the WTO, but they should
be emphasized more.
Cap & Trade policy received many criticisms regarding it’s effectiveness. The other
alternative is carbon taxes which provides more incentive for countries, corporations, etc. to
reduce their environmental pollution. Cap & Trade can be easily evaded by firms since these
licenses can be purchased from others. (Case: Tuna-Dolphine case, Shrimp / Turtle case)
So in the long run countries should consider to emphasize the environmental and health
concerns more in the WTO agreements to avoid the downfall of their economies due to
health issues such as pandemic, pollution, etc.
4. Conclusion
So the environmental regulations should be interpreted in WTO Agreements, since there is a
high demand in today’s globalized world for the wellbeing of the environment and for better
health conditions.

SHOULD PTAS LEFT FLOURISH WITHIN THE WTO?

DATE:
NAME:
1. We support the PTAs to flourish within the WTO
2. Facts:

There are 2 kinds of PTAs: Free trade area and customs union. In the free trade area
members must liberalize trade between themselves, duties and other restrictive regulations
of commerce are eliminated on substantially all the trade between the territories. In the
customs union (which is a common trade policy with WTO members), duties and other
restrictive regulations of commerce are eliminated on substantially all the trade between the
territories; substantially the same duties and other regulations of commerce are applied by
each member against territories not included in the CU.
They do not necessarily exhaust the forms of market integration as the EU experience. So
basically, this is a highly disputed argument in the WTO.
3. Arguments / Reasoning
Size of the problem is smaller than in the past since MFN tariffs have been lowered over the
years.
Countries of the PTAs should find a line between protective and fiscal policies. (e.g.,
environmental protection, labor standards, human rights)
The restrictive regulation of commerce is one of the main reason of this controversy, and it
should mean trade instruments only (=tax). The initial goal of PTAs was the tariff advantage,
nowadays it is to safeguard the value of tariff concessions and not to protect. (Case: Japan vs
Alcoholic beverages. The complainants claimed that spirits exported to Japan were
discriminated against under the Japanese liquor tax system)
It is possible to challenge the consistency of PTAs before WTO adjudicating bodies, but the
acknowledgement of the power of Panel would result in an institutional imbalance across
WTO organs. So my view is, that Members shouldn’t challenge the consistency of PTA’s,
because that would hinder the flourishing of the PTAs.
The absence of multilateral review and absence of litigation have led to tolerance of PTAs.
4. Conclusion
With the restriction of PTAs between Members, this system wouldn’t be able to flourish as it
does in these current conditions, so in my opinion they shouldn’t make any restrictions
regarding the PTAs within the WTO.
 UK’S WITHDRAWAL OF THE EU
DATE:
NAME:
1.
2. Facts:
3. Arguments / Reasoning
4. Conclusion
SHOULD TRIPS PROVIDE MORE ASSISTANCE TO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
AND LDCS?

DATE:
NAME:
1.
2. Facts:
3. Arguments / Reasoning
4. Conclusion