EssayQuality唯一网址：https://www.essayquality.com/品质代写-专业写作团队为您提供：英国POL政治代写、英国Politics代写、POL代写、留学生PSY心理学代写、Psychology代写、PSY代写、PHIL代写、Geography地理学代写、BIO生物学代写、HIS历史学代写、网课代修、网课托管、quiz代考、exam代考....
Research Questions
What role can WTO play in context of the new challenges faced by the developing economiess
What is the perception of the people working in the ministry of commerce regarding the laws of WTOs
What sort of legal framework is required to develop by the WTO that facilitates developing economies in facing new challengess
Literature Review:
The period preceding, the World War II was marked by isolationism and this partly contributed not only to the Great Depression but also to the World War II9. In a bid to solve these economic concerns, in July 1944, the parties attended a conference at Breton Woods, New Hampshire where the IBRD (World Bank) and IMF were formed. In 1945, the US issued a proposal for an International Trade Organization (ITO) but this soon proved to be fruitless as the US Congress refused to approve it (Ehlermann).
However, it should be noted that although the International Trade Organization did not come into fruition, the governments were interested in relaxing tariffs and other trade restrictions more rapidly hence the negotiation for the GATT 1947. This led to the Geneva Final Act, which consisted of the text of the GATT 1947 and the schedules of tariff commitments made by the 25 governments taking part. It also included a Protocol of Provisional Application (PPA). A measure intended to be temporary expedient, but which ended up being fundamental to GATT, 1947, for its 47 years of existence (Garcia B, and Garzotti, 2006).
On 1 January 1995, the GATT was overtaken by the WTO. There are some fascinating differences between the dispute settlement under the GATT 1947 and under the WTO and these will be discussed below
Dispute Settlement under the GATT 1947
Hudec (2003) noted that the dispute settlement in GATT reflected its diplomatic roots to the extent, that the process was initially dubbed as conciliation and not dispute settlement. Davey (1987) observed that the goal of the process was more to reach a solution mutually agreeable to the parties than to render a decision in a legal dispute. GATT 1947 had only two provisions dealing with dispute settlement, namely Article XXII and XXIII. However, Articles XXII and XXIII did not contain any specific procedures to be followed by disputing parties or even the Contracting Parties in resolving a dispute. Some formalities were added later on in subsequent negotiation rounds and Ministerial Conferences.
The GATT dispute settlement had fundamental shortcomings. Bossche (2005) noted that the manner in which key decisions were taken, that is, the establishment and composition of a panel, the adoption of panel reports and the authorization of suspension of concessions, were all taken by the GATT Council by consensus16. Thus, the responding party could delay or block any of these decisions and paralyze or frustrate the operation of the dispute settlement system. Thus it can be concluded that under GATT 1947, the dispute settlement system was entirely in the hands of the parties. Hudec (1999) made the following interesting remarks concerning GATT dispute settlement system:
