This thesis analyses a trade dispute between the US and the EU concerning geographical indications, which was brought to the World Trade Organization in 1999. It deals with the differences between the american and the european approach towards geographical indications, it describes the background of the dispute, its various stages and consequences.

This master's thesis is concerned with the settlement of particular WTO disputes between Brazil and the United States. The aim of the thesis is to explain the importance of the Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM) for Brazilian trade strategy. To demonstrate the use of the mechanism the focus is placed on two specific disputes involving the United States and Brazil. These disputes, regarding patent protection and cotton subsidies, are analyzed using case-study methodology. Moreover, quantitative research based on WTO disputes data is included in the introductory chapter. The study of the disputes shows that Brazil has been one of the most active users of the DSM and that it has initiated cases predominantly against developed countries, the United States being the most frequent target. This strategy enables Brazil to pursue cases that are likely to have systemic implications and thus could have an impact on the international trade order. The two case studies are examples of disputes of potential systemic importance. They further reveal the complexity of disputes in terms such as the increasing role of NGOs, the concept of retaliatory suits, and the significance of timing and political pressure. The exposed dynamics of the settlement of disputes is useful for understanding other WTO cases as well.

Magister Legum - LLM / The World Trade Organisation (WTO) deals with regulation of trade in goods, services and intellectual property between participating countries by providing a framework for negotiating trade agreements.1 Furthermore, it has implemented a dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants' adherence to WTO agreements. Ideally, all WTO member states have ‘a level playing field’ in terms of access and equal rights under the dispute settlement mechanism. Disputes should be resolved in a fair and impartial manner. However, the WTO’s DSS has been criticised for being undemocratic, non-transparent and accountable to none. 2

臺灣與中國大陸加入WTO後，其貿易互動將更趨頻繁，此現象除了帶來兩岸經濟的活絡外，也將提高兩岸貿易糾紛發生的可能性，因此熟悉WTO爭端解決機制的運作是臺灣做為一個經貿小國必學的課題；又兩岸糾紛不同於一般國際經貿糾紛，牽涉到敏感的政治因素，臺灣面臨的是對我主權不尊重也不認同之國家，在這樣的情況下，臺灣必須學習如何訴諸WTO爭端解決機制的法律途徑以保障臺灣經貿。 WTO爭端解決機制包含諮商、斡旋等雙邊協商，協商不成則可提請爭端解決機構(DSB)成立爭端解決小組(panel)以為因應，透過小組對兩造意見之書面審查、口頭辯論等意見表達，及蒐集相關資訊蒐集後，最後由小組做成「期中報告」，若成員國無其他意見表述，則「期中報告」即為「最終報告」，DSB有權要求被控訴履行裁決。 在整個WTO爭端解決過程中，臺灣必須面臨的挑戰有：中國大陸認定臺灣無提請訴訟資格的主權抗議、國際現實的壓力、龐大的訴訟費用，以及曠日費時的訴訟期間等。倘最後中國拒絕履行義務，臺灣雖可請求DSB授權對中國大陸進行貿易制裁，但其亦將蒙受本身產業在貿易制裁過程中的損失。這些因素使得臺灣政府在對中國大陸發動WTO爭端解決程序時有所顧忌。 但將兩岸爭端訴諸WTO爭端解決程序有一好處，即使兩岸貿易 回歸到規則導向的互動，亦可嚇阻中國大陸不尊重我為WTO會員國之相關行動，使兩岸貿易走向法制化的互動。 / After Taiwan and China accession to the WTO, the activities of bilateral trade will be more frequent. Besides the busy business, the possibility of trade disputes between cross-strait parties will be arisen as well. Therefore Taiwan needs to have more intimate knowledge of WTO dispute settlement mechanism. On the other hand, the disputes between cross-strait is different to other international disputes. The opponent that Taiwan faces to is a country which doesn’t respect Taiwan’s state sovereign. In such a circumstances, Taiwan have to learn how to protect the benefits of domestic industries through resorting to the legal access of WTO dispute settlement mechanism. The procedures of WTO dispute settlement mechanism contains bilateral negotiation like consultation、good-offices etc. If the consultation is in vain, the complaining party could request the DSB to establish the panel. The panel has the rights to review the written requests、consider the rebuttal submissions、and seek concerning information, then the panel should issue an “interim report ”.If no other Member State has different requests, the “interim report ”shall be considered “ the final panel report “, and the DSB has the right to ask the defendant party to practice the recommendations. During the whole process of WTO dispute settlement, Taiwan has to face these challenges as follows: the sovereign protest from China、the pressure from international reality、huge expenses of the proceedings, long time in the proceedings etc....If China refuse the recommendations, Taiwan could request the authorization from the DSB to suspend the application to Taiwan concerned of trade sanction. But the sanction will also injury Taiwan’s own domestic industries. Those consideration make Taiwan feel fearful of operating the WTO dispute settlement procedures against China. There is an advantage of resorting to the WTO dispute settlement procedures against China, that is lead the trade activities between cross-strait to the operation of rule-oriented access ,and it also can stop China continue using the measures that will violate Taiwan’s sovereign. Those changes can legalize the trade activities between cross-strait.

[pt] O trabalho analisa a institucionalidade do mecanismo de solução de controvérsias da OMC por meio de análise empírica dos 336 casos que passaram pelo mecanismo nos seuz dez primeiros anos de funcionamento (1995-2005). Os casos são divididos em cinco categorias - (1) em desenvolvimento vs em desenvolvimento; (2) desenvolvidos vs desenvolvidos; (3) desenvolvidos vs em desenvolvimento; (4) em desenvolvimento vs desenvolvidos; (5) mistos - observando-se padrões de resolução. O objetivo é verificar se os países em desenvolvimento são capazes de se beneficiar do uso do mecanismo, colhendo os frutos da ordem liberal de comércio. O regime de comércio internacional deveria servir a países desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento do mesmo modo, mas assimetrias políticas e econômicas podem interferir, permitindo que os mais poderosos influenciem resultados, agindo em benefício próprio. O quadro teórico é marcado pela discussão entre realismo e neoliberalismo sobre o papel das instituições - instrumento dos mais poderosos ou ferramentas coletivas que permitem ganhos mútuos para seus membros e, ainda, em que medida questões distributivas são importantes. / [en] The work seeks to assess the institutionality of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism through an empirical analysis of the 336 cases filed in its first ten years in practice (1995-2005). The cases are broke down into five categories of disputes - (1) developing vs developing; (2) developed vs developed; (3) developed vs developing; (4) developing vs developed; (5) and mixed - as patterns of dispute resolution are brought into light. The aim is to verify if developing countries are able to benefit from the mechanism, ultimately reaping the benefits of a liberal world trade order. The international trade regime is supposed to work for developed and developing countries alike but in a world of political and economical asymmetries, issues of power may interfere, allowing actors to influence dispute outcomes in the service of private interests. The theoretical background is provided by questions arising from the debate between realism and neo- liberalism about the role of institutions - a sheer instrument for the powerful or collective tools that allow mutual gains for their members, and also, just how important are distributional issues in this scenario.

Apesar de o fluxo de comércio afetado por medidas antidumping não chegar nem a 1% do comércio global, aproximadamente 20% das disputas na OMC são sobre antidumping. A OMC é um órgão intergovernamental e seu sistema de solução de controvérsias tem por objetivo analisar se as medidas adotadas por seus Membros estão em conformidade com os compromissos assumidos nos acordos abrangidos. O Acordo Antidumping da OMC (ADA) estabelece os procedimentos investigatórios a serem seguidos por seus Membros para combater o dumping que comprovadamente causa dano à indústria doméstica. O objetivo é evitar que sejam adotadas medidas em circunstâncias descabidas, com o mero intuito protecionista de criar barreiras ao comércio. O dumping é uma prática do setor privado e não dos governos. Portanto, não é o dumping que é questionado perante a OMC, e sim a obediência pela autoridade investigadora dos procedimentos investigatórios estabelecidos no ADA. Tanto os órgãos da Administração Pública como a OMC exercem uma função fundamental para que o devido processo legal seja observado em matéria antidumping. A função legislativa é criar as normas que regularão o procedimento, a função executiva é aplicar/monitorar o procedimento, e a função judiciária é verificar se o procedimento tem sido aplicado corretamente. À luz dessas considerações, a tese a ser defendida é que: (i) diante das limitações trazidas aos painéis e ao Órgão de Apelação pelo Artigo 17.6 do ADA, a função do sistema de solução de controvérsias da OMC e dos judiciários nacionais, em matéria antidumping, muito se assemelham: ambos buscam controlar a discricionariedade da autoridade investigadora; (ii) mais efetivo para os importadores e/ou exportadores que pretendem questionar uma medida antidumping seria buscar inicialmente uma solução mediante recurso ao judiciário do país importador. O recurso ao sistema da OMC, além de depender do interesse do governo e ser oneroso, apresenta dificuldades no momento de implementação das recomendações; (iii) entretanto, tendo em vista o despreparo do Judiciário Brasileiro, sugerimos a criação de cortes especializadas; (iv) o recurso ao Judiciário, mesmo perante cortes especializadas, não resolveria os problemas do processo antidumping apontados ao longo da tese. Para sanar, fazemos algumas outras sugestões de mudanças estruturais para aplicação: (a) no âmbito da OMC, com vistas a delimitar a atuação do Órgão de Apelação e garantir segurança jurídica aos Membros; e (b) no âmbito brasileiro, com vistas a modificar a dinâmica das investigações antidumping conduzidas pela autoridade administrativa e assegurar o cumprimento de sua real finalidade. / Despite the fact that the flow of trade affected by anti-dumping measures does not reach 1% of global trade, approximately 20% of the disputes at the WTO are about these measures. The WTO is an intergovernmental organization and its dispute settlement system has the objective of analyzing if the measures adopted by its Members are in accordance with the commitments accepted in the covered agreements. The WTOs Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA) sets forth the investigation proceedings to be followed by its Members in order to deal with dumping proven to have caused damage to domestic industry. The aim is to avoid that measures are taken under inappropriate circumstances, with the mere protectionist purpose of creating trade barriers. Dumping is a private practice, and not a governmental one. Thus, it is not the practice of dumping itself that is questioned before the WTO, but the obedience by the investigating authority of the proceedings established in the ADA. The Public Administration organs and the WTO are equally responsible by a fundamental role of guaranteeing that the due process of law is respected in the matter of anti-dumping measures. The legislative duty is to create rules that will govern the proceedings, the executive duty is to apply/monitor the proceedings and the judiciary duty is to verify if the proceedings have been applied correctly. In light of these aspects, the thesis to be defended is: (i) considering the limitations to panels and the Appellate Body by Article 17.6 of the ADA, the duties of the WTOs dispute settlement system and the national judiciaries, in terms of anti-dumping, are similar: both try to control the discretion of the investigating authority; (ii) it would be more effective to importers and/or exporters who want to challenge an anti-dumping measure to resort initially to the judiciary system of the importer country. The resort to the WTO system, besides depending on the government`s political interest and being expensive, has difficulties when it comes to implement the recommendations; (iii) in spite of that, considering the lack of preparation of the Brazilian Judiciary, it is suggested the creation of specialized courts; (iv) the resort to the Judiciary, even before specialized courts, would not solve the problems of the anti-dumping process pointed out throughout this thesis. To tackle these problems, we make some other suggestions of structural nature: (a) in what concerns the WTO, aiming at limiting the Appellate Body`s role and guaranteeing legal security to its Members; (b) in what concerns Brazil, aiming at changing the dynamics of the anti-dumping investigations conducted by the administrative authority and securing the fulfillment of its real purpose.

[pt] A dissertação apresenta a possibilidade do surgimento de um novo paradigma internacional, baseado nos processos de integração regional e em suas instituições supranacionais que ameaçam a noção clássica de soberania estatal. Faz-se uma revisão das diferentes teorias da integração tomando a experiência européia como marco referencial. Posteriormente, no contexto das experiências de integração latino-americana, concentra-se na Comunidade Andina de Nações e no Mercosul, descrevendo sua estrutura e desenho institucional. Em particular, consideram-se os mecanismos de solução de controvérsias como meio garantidor dos compromissos assumidos pelos Estados, analisando a predominância das características supranacionais ou intergovernamentais dessas instituições. O estudo focaliza as implicações da adoção de cada uma das alternativas, tanto em relação à Comunidade Andina e ao Mercosul, quanto aos respectivos Estados que as adotaram, tendo em conta que ambos os organismos estão em constante mudança e construção institucional. / [en] The dissertation presents the possibility of the emergency of a new paradigm of international order based on processes of regional integration and the supranational institutions that challenge the classic notion of State sovereignty. The different Integration theories and conceptual approaches taking the European Union as a referential framework are reviewed. Then, in the context of Latin American integration experiences, it concentrates in the Andean Community and Mercosur, addressing their performance and institutional design with special emphasis in their dispute settlement mechanisms. Analyzing the predominance of supranational or intergovernmental characteristics for these institutions. The study focuses on the implications of the adoption of each of the alternatives in the Andean Community and the Mercosur, and in the corresponding State members that implemented them, considering the dynamic character of both organisms, constantly changing and building institutions.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:28:18Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Abrao Miguel Arabe Neto.pdf: 1811372 bytes, checksum: d92c705a8bb1f274f06a37eec85529da (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-12-15 / The WTO World Trade Organization dispute settlement system stands out as one of the most significant developments in contemporary international law. Created with strong jurisdictional features, it serves as the main forum for the resolution of conflicts of interest in international trade. Success in this task, however, is dependent upon the degree of compliance achieved by its decisions. As a consequence, it is important to assess whether WTO rules provide suitable instruments in order to secure implementation, especially when opposed by respondents. Guided by this challenge, this paper seeks to examine the current performance of WTO enforcement tools, particularly from the perspective of developing countries. After exposing the shortcomings of these instruments, the analysis focuses on its reform proposals, aiming to identify the most viable alternatives for enhancement / O sistema de solução de controvérsias da OMC Organização Mundial do Comércio destaca-se como um dos avanços mais significativos do direito internacional contemporâneo. Revestido por feições marcadamente jurisdicionais, é o principal foro para a apreciação dos conflitos de interesse do comércio internacional. O êxito nessa tarefa, no entanto, está condicionado ao grau de observância de suas decisões. Assim sendo, cumpre indagar se a normativa da OMC prevê instrumentos aptos para garantir a implementação de suas soluções, especialmente quando dificultada por seus respectivos destinatários. Motivado por esse desafio, o presente trabalho analisa o desempenho das atuais medidas de indução ao cumprimento das determinações da OMC, sobretudo a partir da perspectiva dos países em desenvolvimento. Expostas as deficiências do instituto, o exame avança sobre as propostas para sua reforma, concluindo pelas alternativas mais apropriadas em direção ao seu aperfeiçoamento

Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-10T10:47:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Eusebio Basso e Loro.pdf: 839139 bytes, checksum: 59e1de41bf9270560d1196eec33cfb11 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-01-30 / This paper aims to check whether the System of Dispute Mercosur has solved functionality trade disputes between the member of Mercosur. The hypothesis is that this system has not played its role, despite the changes brought about by the Protocol of Olivos, because since its entry into force in 2004, a few times it was requested by Member of Mercosur, showing thereby that the system of dispute settlement block has to be improved towards the creation of a Court of Justice. The method chosen for investigation was the case study. To this end, we selected nine awards given by the Arbitral Tribunal. The essay points out that a supranational court is a tool to enable the further integration of the variety of subjects covered by the structure of your organization by changing its internal evolution and its contribution to the formation of a genuine Community law. / Este trabalho tem como objetivo principal verificar se o Sistema de Solução de Controvérsias do Mercosul tem resolvido com funcionalidade os contenciosos comerciais entre os Estados- Membros. A hipótese é que esse sistema não tem desempenhado seu papel, apesar das mudanças trazidas pelo Protocolo de Olivos, uma vez que desde sua entrada em vigor, em 2004, poucas vezes o mesmo foi solicitado pelos Estados que integram o Mercosul. O que, por sua vez, demonstra que o sistema de solução de controvérsias do Bloco tem de ser aperfeiçoado rumo à criação de um Tribunal de Justiça. O método escolhido para investigação foi o estudo de caso. Para tanto, foram selecionados nove laudos proferidos pelo Tribunal Arbitral. A dissertação destaca que um tribunal supranacional é um dos instrumentos capazes de possibilitar o aprofundamento da integração pela variedade dos temas tratados, pela estrutura de Entidade, por sua constante evolução interna, e por sua contribuição à formação de um autêntico Direito Comunitário.

Este trabalho teve por objetivo analisar o processo de juridicização do sistema multilateral de comércio, por meio da aplicação do modelo teórico de K. W. Abbott et aI (2000) e contraposição dos resultados obtidos à análise do recurso a elementos normativos para justificação das decisões emanadas do sistema em procedimentos de solução de controvérsias em que foi suscitado o artigo XX(g) do GATT para defesa da medida questionada. Observou-se que, apesar do nível de juridicidade tenha permanecido praticamente o mesmo da passagem do GATT-1947 para a OMC, o recurso a elementos normativos para motivação das decisões foi incrementado. A hipótese demonstrada pelos resultados desta pesquisa é que o enfoque restrito no processo de institucionalização por meio de tratados não permite que sejam refletidas, no processo de juridicização, as alterações ocasionadas por outros elementos, como foi o caso, na presente pesquisa, das regras relativas à conformação dos órgãos auxiliares, à interpretação e à tomada de decisão - sejam elas originadas em tratados, costumes ou princípios. / This research aims at analyzing the legalization of the multilateral trade system, applying the theory developed by K. W. ABBOTT et al (2000) and confronting the results with the leveI of recourse to normative elements to justify the decisions issued on disputes where Article XX(g) of GA TT was used in defense of the challenged measure. Notwithstanding the fact that the legalization of the system did not alter from the GATT-1947 to WTO, more normative elements are used for motivation of the decisions taken by WTO. The research shows that excessive focus on the process institutionalization by treaties does not reflected the changes brought about by other elements, such as the configuration of the auxiliary organs - panels and Appellate Body - and the rules related to interpretation and decision making - be them customary international law or principIes.