Abstract

Although sanctions targeting political regimes receive the most media attention, the EU can also sanction states for labour rights violations through its trade policy. Although in practice such sanctions are applied only in extreme cases, the possibility of suspending trade preferences increases the EU’s leverage. In modern trade agreements, the EU incorporates Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapters for labour and environmental matters. However, trade sanctions for non-compliance with this chapter are absent. Instead, a dedicated dispute settlement arrangement exists, leading to recommendations by a panel of experts. In 2019 the EU launched proceedings against South Korea for failing to uphold commitments to ratify and implement International Labour Organisation core conventions regarding trade unions under the 2011 EU–Korea Trade Agreement. In 2021, the panel of experts sided with the EU’s interpretation of commitments under the TSD chapter. This initial case represents the EU’s intention to focus on the implementation of TSD chapters. Using data from official documents, this article process-traces the dispute with Korea. It argues that the outcome of the case, and Korea’s ratification of fundamental International Labour Organisation conventions in 2021, demonstrate the potential of the TSD chapter, when forcefully enforced, to partially redress the weak sanctioning capacity in TSD chapters. It also uncovers important caveats regarding state capacity and alignment with government objectives as conditioning the effectiveness of TSD chapters’ non-legally binding sanctioning mechanisms.

Highlights

  • In late 2019, after insufficient progress in bilateral consul‐ tations, the European Union formally launched dispute proceedings against South Korea under the Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapter of the EU–Korea free trade agreement (FTA) of 2011

  • Unlike the conditionality of the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) system, and the US approach to labour and environmental chapters in FTAs, where trade preferences can be suspended in the case of violation of labour and environmental chap‐ ters via the general dispute settlement mechanism of the FTA, the approach to TSD chapters in modern EU trade agreements excludes the possibility of trade pref‐ erence cancellation over breach of these chapters, as these are excluded from the dispute settlement of the FTA

  • This article has examined the first, and far only, case that has resulted in the launching of the sui generis dispute settlement mechanism created in an EU FTA TSD chapter

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In late 2019, after insufficient progress in bilateral consul‐ tations, the European Union formally launched dispute proceedings against South Korea under the Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapter of the EU–Korea free trade agreement (FTA) of 2011 This marked the first time that the dispute mechanism under a TSD chap‐ ter was triggered. Despite the limitations inherent in single case studies in terms of generalisability, the case allows us to delve into debates surrounding the merits and demerits of approaches to TSD chapters that refrain from the imposition of trade sanctions in cases of non‐compliance and to shine a light into the potential of promotional approaches It facil‐ itates an analysis of the possibilities for monitoring, nam‐ ing, and shaming to be deployed as tools for eliciting behavioural changes in international relations without the recourse to more traditional trade sanctions. A final conclusion considers the potential implications of this dispute

EU Trade Policy and Labour Standards
Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters in EU Free Trade Agreements
EU–Korea Dispute Under the Trade and Sustainable Development Chapter
Conclusion

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.