|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Oct25/03) Geneva, 29 Sep (D. Ravi Kanth) — For the 90th time, the United States on 26 September blocked a joint proposal by Colombia on behalf of 130 countries to expeditiously fill the vacancies at the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body, declaring unilaterally that Washington will advance its interests while preserving US sovereignty, said people familiar with the development. At a meeting of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) on 26 September, Colombia drove home the message that “the extensive number of members submitting the proposal reflects a common interest in the functioning of the Appellate Body and, more generally, in the functioning of the WTO’s dispute settlement system.” In their separate interventions, many members, including the European Union and China, appeared to have reiterated their support for the joint proposal and for the urgent need to restore a fully functioning dispute settlement system. In its response, the US, which appears to be emboldened by its allegedly unilateral reciprocal and other tariffs imposed on WTO members, ruled out any support for the proposal from the 130 countries. Washington maintained that it continued to reflect on the extent to which it is possible to achieve a reformed WTO dispute settlement system that advances US interests while preserving US sovereignty, according to people present at the meeting. The US said that “it has been among the most active participants in WTO dispute settlement but is of the view that its legal successes have often failed to translate to real results for the affected industry”, noting that respondents “often delay or do not repair the breach or that measures taken to comply are often unsatisfactory,” said people familiar with the DSB proceedings. More worryingly, the US signalled that it is increasingly looking “to alternative tools to address US stakeholder concerns,” said people familiar with the discussions. Meanwhile, in a separate development at the DSB meeting, Vietnam said that it is undertaking final domestic procedures to join the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA). The MPIA was agreed by approximately two dozen countries to provide the possibility of resorting to arbitration under Article 25 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) in cases of disputes between any two or more participating members. In another development at the meeting, a group of industrialized countries – Australia, Canada, the EU, Iceland, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom – condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and expressed their support for, and solidarity with, Ukraine and its people. The Russian Federation said this issue does not concern the DSB and should not be addressed in this forum. Meanwhile, Indonesia criticized the EU for its decision to appeal the panel report (DS618) that ruled against the countervailing duties imposed by the EU on imports of biodiesel from Indonesia. The panel report was circulated to WTO members on 22 August 2025 and was originally on the agenda for adoption by the DSB; the item was instead removed from the agenda following the appeal by the EU. In a sharp rebuke, Indonesia criticized the EU for appealing the panel’s findings before a non-functioning Appellate Body at a time when Indonesia and the EU are making efforts to build closer relations. Indonesia said the EU’s decision is contrary to its role as a member of the MPIA, which counts among its key principles the importance of preserving a binding resolution of disputes. In its response, the EU argued that it has repeatedly invited Indonesia to join the MPIA so that both parties can preserve their rights to a binding resolution of trade disputes despite the blockage of appointments to the Appellate Body. The EU noted that Indonesia instead decided to appeal before a non-functioning Appellate Body in DS592, “Indonesia – Measures Relating to Raw Materials”, thus blocking the final resolution of that dispute. The EU said in the absence of appeal arbitration in DS618, it had no choice but to exercise its right to appeal. Meanwhile, China said it has fully complied with the decision resulting from the MPIA appeal arbitration in DS611, “China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights”, but emphasized that it does not find the arbitration award to be persuasive. The EU said it will assess China’s full implementation of the arbitration award. +
|
||
