Abstract

Countermeasures under World Trade Organization (WTO) law are separated into two categories, remedies and a method to induce compliance after another defaulting state fails to adhere to WTO's panel recommendation. This article will focus on the second category. The term ‘countermeasures’ specifically refers to an act of suspension of concessions or other obligations. One case of granted countermeasures is DS316, a case between the United States of America (US) and the European Union (EU). The issue of this case is the subsidies granted by the EU for Airbus, an aircraft manufacturer based in Europe which consists of four European nations, which resulted in Boeing's market loss. The US then requested countermeasures authorisation by the WTO. Countermeasures are related to the principle of proportionality both under public international law and WTO law. Additionally, countermeasures can lead to a more complex situation since it affects the human rights of the private actors of international trade as a part of society. This article explains the implementation of both the countermeasures and the proportionality principle, and analyses the precedents of cases and the countermeasures granted by the WTO as well as the effects of the granted countermeasures to society as it creates barriers for all the international trade actors.

Highlights

  • Subsidising national entities1 to promote their domestic industry is a common practice to keep up with the competitiveness of international tradeIda Bagus Mahawira Nawagani, Prita Amalia, and Helitha Novianty Muchtar and to develop the State’s education, health, security, and other sectors.2 The World Trade Organization (WTO) does not entirely prohibit States to subsidise their national entities insofar as the subsidies do not negatively affect other States’ position in international trade or distort the stability of international trade

  • Countermeasures under World Trade Organization (WTO) law are separated into two categories, remedies and a method to induce compliance after another defaulting state fails to adhere to WTO's panel recommendation

  • One case of granted countermeasures is DS316, a case between the United States of America (US) and the European Union (EU). The issue of this case is the subsidies granted by the EU for Airbus, an aircraft manufacturer based in Europe which consists of four European nations, which resulted in Boeing's market loss

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Ida Bagus Mahawira Nawagani, Prita Amalia, and Helitha Novianty Muchtar and to develop the State’s education, health, security, and other sectors. The World Trade Organization (WTO) does not entirely prohibit States to subsidise their national entities insofar as the subsidies do not negatively affect other States’ position in international trade or distort the stability of international trade. The case brought by the US was titled DS316 - EC and certain member States — Large Civil Aircraft (hereinafter, “DS316”).15 They started the negotiation on 4 November 2004. 15 European Communities and Certain Member States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/1, WTO, Request for Consultations by the US, 1. European Communities and Certain Member States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/R, WTO, Panel Report, (hereinafter, “DS316: Panel Report”) 2010, para. European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/ARB, WTO, Recourse to Article 22.6 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) by the European Union Decision by the Arbitrator, 2 October 2019, (hereinafter, “DS316, Article 22.6 Decisions”) para. European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/ARB, WTO, Recourse to Article 22.6 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) by the European Union Decision by the Arbitrator, 2 October 2019, (hereinafter, “DS316, Article 22.6 Decisions”) para. 9

Countermeasures under International Law
Countermeasures in the WTO Law
Countermeasures under the SCM Agreement
Precedents of Authorised Countermeasures
The Proportionality of Countermeasures in the SCM Agreement
Analysing the Proportionality Principle in the DS316
The Effects of ‘Countermeasures’ to the Society
CONCLUSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call