The GSP Fallacy: A Critique of the Appellate Body's Ruling in the GSP Case on Legal, Economic, and Political/Systemic Grounds

Abstract

abstract : The principal aim of this reflection paper is to provide a critique of the Appellate Body's reasoning and its ultimate conclusion in the EC – Tariff Preferences dispute. Because this is a reflection paper , it briefly examines some of the problems with the Appellate Body's ruling on legal, economic, and political/systemic grounds against the backdrop of the Seminar on WTO Law participants who presented papers on this topic specifically, and those participants who offered more general comments on the soundness of special and differential treatment for developing countries in today's multilateral trading system. After putting forth the argument that the Appellate Body's ruling cannot be supported on either legal and economic grounds, the reflection paper advances the argument that the decision is also untenable on broader political/systemic grounds, primarily because it maintains the status quo and squanders an opportunity to give WTO Members the impetus to thoroughly review whether the Enabling Clause, in whole or in part, still fulfills its original mandate. Introduction Background to the Dispute On April 7, 2004, the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) issued its much anticipated report in the EC – Tariff Preferences dispute.