|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Oct23/22) At a DSB meeting on 26 October, Argentina pressed ahead with its second request for establishing a panel over Washington’s anti-dumping duties on imported oil country tubular goods from Argentina. Though the US expressed disappointment with Argentina’s second request, it could not prevent the establishment of a panel, under the provisions of the Dispute Settlement Understanding. Also, for the 68th time, the US blocked a request from 130 members to start the selection processes for filling vacancies on the Appellate Body (AB). The US has been blocking the request from more than two-thirds of the membership for almost six years on grounds that the AB has deviated from its mandate. However, the US decision to go against the request from a large majority of members seems to be an indication that Washington may not allow a strong Appellate Body to re-emerge despite the ongoing informal negotiations on WTO reform before the WTO’s 13th ministerial conference (MC13), to be held in Abu Dhabi in February next year, said a trade envoy, who asked not to be quoted. Meanwhile, in another trade dispute concerning the European Union’s countervailing duties on imports of biodiesel from Indonesia, Brussels blocked a first-time panel request from Indonesia. INFORMAL DS REFORM TALKS At the DSB meeting, the chair, Ambassador Petter Olberg of Norway, who acted as a facilitator at the just- concluded Senior Officials Meeting, said that senior officials strongly supported the ongoing informal process being carried out in Geneva by technical experts. At the same time, the chair said, the senior officials were cognizant of the different views expressed on the issue of the timing of the formalization of this process. He said that senior officials conveyed their political support for the dispute settlement (DS) reform work while highlighting the following elements on the way forward. The elements include: (1) the need to focus on addressing the dispute settlement challenges with a sense of urgency; (2) the need to take into account the dispute settlement interests of all members; and (3) the need to uphold the WTO member-driven nature as well as to ensure full participation, inclusiveness and transparency, including by facilitating the effective participation of developing and LDC members, taking into account capacity constraints. Privately, several participants told the SUNS that their views on formalizing the informal process before MC13 were not properly reflected in the facilitator’s report. It is unfortunate that the facilitator’s report seems to be “doctored”, said a participant, who is familiar with the discussions. Meanwhile, in his report presented at the DSB meeting, the facilitator overseeing the informal discussions on the DS reform, Mr Marco Molina, the deputy trade envoy of Guatemala, said senior officials strongly supported the ongoing informal process that is being carried out in Geneva by technical experts and that they recognized the value of the process and the progress made so far to achieve a tangible and meaningful outcome at MC13. He said that senior officials were cognizant of the different views expressed on the issue of the timing of the formalization of the reform process. There was general support for the idea of formalization, although views diverged as to when this could occur, he noted. Apparently, 34 members intervened to convey their specific concerns. They raised concerns on the need to take better account of the needs of developing and least developed country members in the reform discussions, as well as concerns with the pace and frequency of the discussions. The 34 countries including Indonesia and the African Group said the process needed to be more transparent and inclusive, with a number of members calling for the process to be formalized by moving the discussions up to the DSB and General Council. However, major industrialized countries and some developing countries praised the facilitator for conducting the negotiations in a transparent, inclusive and participatory manner. Several industrialized countries, including the US, opposed moving the discussion prematurely from its current informal basis to a formal discussion in the DSB or General Council, arguing that the informal nature of the discussion was key to the progress achieved so far.+
|
||
