A Defining Act: How TPP Rules Are Undermining WTO Jurisprudence

Abstract

Despite the withdrawal of United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) agreement, the TPP continues to remain relevant as it carries the potential to shape future bilateral and multilateral negotiations on trade issues. This article argues against the suitability of TPP rules for future negotiations at the World Trade Organization (WTO) as these rules undermine, if not directly contradict, WTO’s treaty provisions as interpreted by its adjudicating bodies. The article elaborates three instances where TPP rules are in direct conflict with WTO jurisprudence. Moreover, TPP disciplines on these three areas incorporate the arguments that were advanced by the United States (US) in disputes at the WTO and were rejected by its adjudicating bodies. This shines fresh light on the ‘norm enterpreneuring’ role of the US within the TPP and also demonstrates how TPP rules reconstruct the meaning of WTO’s treaty provisions in a manner that is most suitable for the parochial interests of the US.