A Study on the Legal Issues Arising from the Investigation on Various Industrial Impacts of Trade in Services Outside of the WTO Framework
Social Sciences
Volume 7, Issue 2, April 2018, Pages: 88-93
Received: Feb. 22, 2018; Accepted: Apr. 2, 2018; Published: Apr. 24, 2018
Views 617      Downloads 15
Author
Cheung Chai Hong, School of International Law, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, China
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
This paper examines existing multilateral trade agreements except the WTO in terms of their regulations concerning investigation on industrial impacts of trade in services. The main purpose of the paper is to provide possible legal reference for continuing to promote negotiations on emergency safeguard measures in WTO trade in service. Mainly through Legal Positivism, in terms of identifying industrial impacts of trade in services, there are clear and objective regulations within the European Union and in its multilateral agreements with Eastern European countries; NAFTA permits Mexico to take protectionist measures in banking and financial services, and has established relevant standards for industrial impacts; the bilateral trade agreements signed by China and other countries are mostly treaties of principle, thus not unpractical. To reach an agreement on this issue so as to facilitate trade in services, this paper suggested that the international community should promote the WTO to adopt investigation on industrial impacts of trade in services, so as to further increase multilateral disciplines.
Keywords
Trade in Services, Safeguard Measures, Investigation System of Industrial Impact
To cite this article
Cheung Chai Hong, A Study on the Legal Issues Arising from the Investigation on Various Industrial Impacts of Trade in Services Outside of the WTO Framework, Social Sciences. Vol. 7, No. 2, 2018, pp. 88-93. doi: 10.11648/j.ss.20180702.16
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Bernard Hoekman, Michael Kostecki, “The Political Economy of the World Trading System: From GATT to WTO”, translate by Liu Ping, Law Press, 1999, p. 159. Wang Qian, “Trade in Service of WTO”, Law Press of China, 2014. Nikolas P. Sellheim, “The Legal Question of Morality: Seal Hunting and the European Moral Standard”, 2 “Social & Legal Studies”, 2016, pp. 149-150.
[2]
Mo Shi Jian, “Research on Trade Safeguard Measures”, Peking University Press, 2005, p. 1. Wang Chuanli, “International Economic Law”, 4th ed., China Renmin University Press, 2015. Chen Li-hu & LIU Fang, “Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA): Beyond the WTO and China's Countermeasures”, 22 “Journal of SUIBE” 2015, pp. 5-14.
[3]
See Department of International Trade and Economic Affairs of China Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Co-operation, “The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: the Legal Text”, Law Press, 2000.
[4]
See Nozomi Sagara, “Provisions for Trade Remedy Measures (Anti-dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard Measures) in Preferential Trade Agreements”, RIETI Discussion Paper Series 02-E-13, September 2002, p. 7. Katie Sykes, “Sealing Animal Welfare into the GATT Exceptions: the International Dimension of Animal Welfare in WTO Disputes”, 13 “World Trade Review” 2014, p. 480. N. F. Diebold, “Standards of Non-discrimination in International Economic Law”, 4 “International and Comparative Law Quarterly” 2011. Harold Godsoe, “The Depth of the Trade in Service Agreement”, 10 “International Law & Management Review” 2014.
[5]
See Working Party on GATS Rules, “Note by the Secretariat: Safeguard Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements,” S/WPGR/W/2, 5 October 1995; Working Party on GATS Rules, “Note by the Secretariat: Safeguard Procedures in Regional Trade Agreements,” S/WPGR/W/4, 24 November 1995; Working Party on GATS Rules, “Note by the Secretariat: Safeguard-Type Provisions in Economic Integration Agreements,” S/WPGR/W/4/ Add.1, 20 February 2003.
[6]
See Agreement on the European Economic Area, OJ No L 1, 3.1.1994; and EFTA States’ Official Gazettes.
[7]
See Protocol 13 on the non-application of anti-dumping and countervailing measures, in Declaration by One or More of the Contracting Parties to the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
[8]
See Agreement on the European Economic Area, OJ No L 1, 3.1.1994; and EFTA States’ Official Gazettes.
[9]
See Declaration by One or More of the Contracting Parties to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, March 27, 1998, Updated Text.
[10]
See Convention Establishing the European Free Trade Association, Consolidated Version, 1 June 2002.
[11]
See Directive 98/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, June 22, 1998, “Concerning Common Rules for the Internal Market in Natural Gas,” Official Journal L 204, July 21, 1998. N. F. Diebold, “Standards of Non-discrimination in International Economic Law”, 4 “International and Comparative Law Quarterly” 2011. Oisin Suttle, “What Sorts of Things are Public Morals? A Liberal Cosmopolitan Approach to Article XX GATT”, 4 “Modern Law Review”, 2017, p. 597.
[12]
See Europe Agreement between the European Communities and Hungary, 1 February 1994; Europe Agreement between the EC and the Republic of Poland, 1 February 1994; Europe Agreement between the European Communities and Bulgaria, 1 February 1995; Europe Agreement between the European Communities and the Czech Republic, 1 February 1995; Europe Agreement between the EC and the Slovak Republic, 1 February 1995; Europe Agreement between the European Communities and Romania, 1 February 1995; European Communities – Lithuania Europe Agreement, 1 February 1998; European Communities – Estonia Europe Agreement, 1 February 1998; Europe Agreement between the European Communities and Latvia, 1 February 1999; European Communities – Slovenia Europe Agreement, 1 February 1999.
[13]
See the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, Annex 1413.6-Section B-Payments System Protection, 1 January 1994.
[14]
See “Joint Press Statement on the Inaugural Meeting of Japan-Thailand Joint Committee on Economic Partnership”, Tokyo, 1 November 2007, available at http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/thailand/joint0711.html.
[15]
See New Zealand China Free Trade Agreement Contents, Article 121 Safeguard Measures.
[16]
See Working Party on GATS Rules, “Note by the Secretariat: Safeguard Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements”, S/WPGR/W/2, 5 October 1995.
[17]
See Agreement on Trade in Services of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Co-operation between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the People’s Republic of China, Article 9, December 2006.
[18]
See Nozomi Sagara, “Provisions for Trade Remedy Measures (Anti-dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard Measures) in Preferential Trade Agreements”, RIETI Discussion Paper Series 02-E-13, September 2002, p. 34. Tao Siyu, “Potential Inconsistency between China’s GATS Obligations and Relevant Domestic Legislation”, 18“International Trade and Business Law Review” 2015. Gregory Shaffer & David Pabian, “European Communities-Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products”, 109 “American Journal of International Law” 2015, p. 158.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
548 FASHION AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10018
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-688-8931