WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism
------An Analysis of the DSU in Positivism
by
Chengwei, Liu
Foreword
This book is a systematically selected compilation of Reports issued by various panels and the standing Appellate Body, then adopted by the DSB under the WTO jurisdiction by the end of May 2002, in category of subjects such as causes of action, initiation of panel proceedings, function of panels, rules of evidence and special rules governing anti-dumping disputes, etc., which are in most cases ruled as “preliminary issues” or “procedural objections”. However, this book is not intended to be exhaustive. It deals only with issues in dispute settlement proceedings under the WTO jurisprudence that the author considers the more important, where such rules are mainly concerned as Art. XXIII of the GATT 1994; Arts. 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 21.5, 23, 26 of the DSU; Arts. 17.4, 17.5, 17.6 of the AD Agreement and Arts. 31, 32 of the Vienna Convention and so on.
Moreover, this book is intended to be descriptive and positive rather than prescriptive and theoretical. Most of the author’s analysis benefits much from the precise and logically organized reports by panels and the Appellate Body, administered by the DSB under the WTO jurisdiction. It must be made clear that these reports do not constitute binding “subsequent practice” referred to in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, nor do they operate as stare decisis, panels and the Appellate Body are therefore not bound by past reports. Nevertheless, it does be the case demonstrated by the DSB practice that, relevant reasoning in a particular case has been cited or followed frequently by another panel or confirmed by the Appellate Body in subsequent cases.
As ruled by the Appellate Body in Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (DS44), “[a]dopted panel reports are an important part of the GATT acquis. They are often considered by subsequent panels. They create legitimate expectations among WTO Members, and, therefore, should be taken into account where they are relevant to any dispute”. Furthermore, a panel could nevertheless find useful guidance in the reasoning of an unadopted panel report when it considers relevant. More importantly, as stated in the letter with which the Appellate Body conveyed in the February of 1996 its Working Procedures for Appellate Review to the DSB for information, “… it is also important to ensure consistency and coherence in our decision-making, which is to the advantage of every WTO Member and the overall multilateral trading system we all share”.
There is no doubt that, in line with the pragmatic evolution of the GATT dispute settlement system, the progressive clarification of a number of issues that are not precisely regulated in the DSU and the further development of the WTO dispute settlement procedures, will gradually evolve after having been tested and progressively clarified and improved in concrete dispute settlement cases.
Considering all of this, the author complete this book with serious-minded exploring examination and great diligence, bearing in mind that it is therefore practical and of great significance for WTO Members to be informed of the valuable rulings in those reports issued by panels and the Appellate Body in particular cases.
List of Abbreviations
ATC Agreement on Textile and Clothing
BISD Basic Instruments and Selected Documents (published by GATT)
DSU Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes
DSB Dispute Settlement Body
EC The European Communities
GATS General Agreement on Trade in Services
GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
IMF International Monetary Fund
PGE Permanent Group of Experts (in the SCM Agreement)
SCM Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
SG Agreement on Safeguards
SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
TBT Technical Barriers to Trade
TMB Textiles Monitoring Body
TRIMS Trade-related Investment Measures
TRIPS Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
TSB Textiles Surveillance Body
WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
Table of Contents
Chapter I Trend towards “Judicialization”:
A Rule-oriented Dispute Settlement System
Chapter II Causes of Action before the DSB:
Art. XXIII of the GATT 1994
Section One Right to Pursue a Proceeding under the WTO
I The Concept of Nullification or Impairment
II The Standing Issue before the DSB
循化撒拉族自治县草山管护条例
青海省人大常委会
循化撒拉族自治县草山管护条例
青海省人大常委会
（1994年5月9日青海省循化撒拉族自治县第十二届人民代表大会通过 1995年7月29日青海省第八届人民代表大会常务委员会第十九次会议批准 1995年10月1日起施行）
第一条 为了加强草山的管理、保护、建设和合理利用，促进农区畜牧业的发展，根据《中华人民共和国民族区域自治法》和有关法律、法规的规定，结合自治县实际，制定本条例。
第二条 本县境内的草山，包括草坡及疏林草地、灌丛草地，均适用本条例。
第三条 县人民政府畜牧部门主管本行政区域内的草山管理工作；乡（镇）人民政府负责管理本行政区域内的草山。
畜牧部门的监理机构负责监督检查草山管理。
第四条 本县境内的草山属于全民所有，法律规定属于集体所有的除外。
全民或集体所有的草山使用权可以固定到村，由个人或者联户长期承包经营。
已承包经营的草山，由县人民政府登记造册，核发证书，确认使用权。
第五条 自治县境内依法确定了所有权和使用权的草山，任何单位和个人不得侵占、买卖或者以其他形式非法转让。
未经县人民政府批准，任何单位和个人不得跨县转借草山。在本县境内，遇有自然灾害等特殊情况，需要临时调剂使用草山时，由县、乡（镇）人民政府组织协商解决。
第六条 草山权属发生争议时，有协议或裁决的，按协议或裁决执行。没有协议或裁决的，争议双方本着互谅互让、有利团结的精神协商解决；协商不成的，双方可将各自的依据和解决方案报请上一级人民政府裁决。
（一）户与户之间、户与社之间、社与社之间的草山争议，由村民委员会调处；
（二）村与村之间的草山争议，由乡（镇）人民政府处理；
（三）乡与乡、乡与县属单位之间的草山争议，报请县人民政府处理。
草山使用权属争议未解决以前，争议双方应脱离接触，不得以任何借口扩大事态，破坏草山和设施。
第七条 严格保护草山植被，禁止开垦、乱挖草皮、掘壕沟。
未经草山使用者和乡（镇）人民政府同意、县畜牧主管部门批准，不得在草山上采砂石（矿）。
第八条 国家投资或资助和集体筹资建设的草山设施，可以固定到村、社，由户或联户承包经营管理，任何单位和个人不得侵占和破坏。
第九条 建立草山防火责任制。防火期（在正常年景，每年10月1日至翌年4月30日）内应当采取安全措施，加强防火管理。
第十条 县人民政府应当把草山建设纳入国民经济和社会发展计划，并组织实施。
草山使用单位和承包经营者，应积极建设草山，改良草场，提高生产能力。
第十一条 违反本条例规定，有下列行为之一的，由县畜牧部门或者乡（镇）人民政府视情节轻重给予处罚；构成犯罪的，由司法机关依法追究刑事责任：
（一）未经批准开垦草山的，责令停止开垦，恢复植被，并按开垦面积前3年平均年产值（产草量价值和畜产品价值之和）处以10倍的罚款；
（二）越界抢牧的，责令退出草山，赔偿损失，并按每羊单位处以2～3元的罚款；
（三）未经批准在草山上采砂石（矿）的，责令赔偿损失，恢复植被，并按每平方米处以5～10元的罚款；
（四）因人为造成草山火灾的，责令赔偿损失，并处以100～1000元的罚款；
（五）未经批准跨县转借草山的，责令限期收回，并按每亩处以3－5元的罚款。
第十二条 当事人对行政处罚决定不服的，可以在接到处罚通知书之日起15日内，向作出处罚决定机关的上一级主管机关申请复议。对复议决定不服的，可以在接到复议决定之日起15日内向人民法院起诉。逾期不申请复议、不起诉又不履行处罚决定的，由作出处罚决定的机关申请
人民法院强制执行。
第十三条 本条例自1995年10月1日起施行。
1995年7月29日
