Abstract

In an attempt to overcome the current WTO Appellate Body crisis, a number of WTO Members agreed to participate in the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement pursuant to Article 25 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (MPIA). The majority of the WTO Members have not yet agreed to participate in the MPIA have been attempting to assess the effectiveness of the MPIA in meeting their interests. This leads to the question as to whether the MPIA can serve as the temporary solution for the Appellate Body crisis. Is it a practically effective mechanism for dispute resolution, or is it simply a political declaration by MPIA participants that they stick to the two-tier dispute settlement system? To respond to these questions, this article analyses the legal basis of the MPIA and its negotiating history. This article also addresses the differences between the appeal mechanisms provided for in the MPIA and the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) and provides a conceptual discussion with regard to the legal nature of the MPIA. Finally, the article identifies the main advantages and drawbacks of MPIA. It should be taken into account that the effectiveness of the MPIA will only be assessed when any of the disputes submitted for consideration under the MPIA rules is resolved. WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, WTO Panels, Constructed Value, CV Profit, USDOC, Anti-Dumping Investigation, US – OCTG (Korea), Reform, Best Information Available

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