Skip Navigation

Journal of International Economic Law 1998 1(3):407-432; doi:10.1093/jiel/1.3.407
© 1998 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mavroidis, P.
Right arrow Articles by Zdouc, W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Legal means to protect private parties' interests in the WTO. The case of the EC new trade barriers regulation

PC MavroidisZ and W ZdoucY

Z University of Neuchatel Y Legal Affairs Division, WTO.

The WTO contract is essentially a government contract with important repercussions on private parties' interests. WTO Members enjoy wide discretion when it comes to regulating the way in which private interests will be represented; the WTO contract itself imposing only an obligation to perform the WTO contract in good faith. In principle, three solutions seem legally possible: WTO Members recognize direct effect to the WTO rules and consequently allow private parties to invoke WTO rules before national courts; WTO Members do not recognize any direct effect on the WTO rules and continue to be the sole judges of whether private parties' interests should be represented before the WTO adjudicating bodies; recently, in the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, the so-called 'challenge procedures' were agreed whereby WTO Members would allow private parties to check whether government behaviour in the field of government procurement is in conformity with the relevant WTO rules. This paper argues that since the first option is still 'wishful thinking' and the third option is limited, for the time being, strictly to government behaviour, private parties' interests will continue to be represented for some time by governments. Hence, the need to study such instruments and their evolution. We propose a comparative study of the two most elaborate instruments in this respect (the EC and the US instruments) and draw the conclusion that over time they have become more responsive to private parties' concerns but that they can by no means be construed as perfect substitute of the other two options.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.