Wto and India
Introduction
Trade agreements on the basis of reciprocity are instruments used by governments to achieve trade liberalization. The reciprocal exchange of market access rights which occurs through such agreements amounts to an international exchange of domestic political support between governments that helps policymakers to overcome the protectionist bias of uncoordinated trade policies. In order to protect the negotiated balance of rights and obligations from eroding -e.g., by trade restrictions which one government may introduce in violation of the trade agreement in order to enhance its political support from import-competing interests - trade agreements usually include dispute settlement mechanisms based on diplomatic and/or adjudicative procedures.
Such a dispute settlement mechanism is also included in the multilateral trading system. Based on the rudimentary provisions of two articles in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1947, i.e., Article XXll on Consultations and Article XXlll on Nullification or Impairment of Benefits, dispute settlement developed gradually through evolving practice and occasional codifications thereof. With the exception of an anti-legalist phase in the '1960 the trend went from an initially rather diplomacy-oriented mechanism towards a more adjudication-oriented one.
The conclusion of the Uruguay Round of Multicultural Trade Negotiations brought the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on 1 January 1995. According to Article III.3 of the WTO Agreement, dispute settlement is one of the key functions of the WTO, The rules of the mechanism are laid down in detail in the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes in short: (Dispute Settlement Understanding; DSU) in Annex 2 of the WTO Agreement. The DSU has both incorporated the inherited concept of GATT Dispute settlement and it has codified the practices that had evolved previously into a consolidated text. In addition, it
Trade agreements on the basis of reciprocity are instruments used by governments to achieve trade liberalization. The reciprocal exchange of market access rights which occurs through such agreements amounts to an international exchange of domestic political support between governments that helps policymakers to overcome the protectionist bias of uncoordinated trade policies. In order to protect the negotiated balance of rights and obligations from eroding -e.g., by trade restrictions which one government may introduce in violation of the trade agreement in order to enhance its political support from import-competing interests - trade agreements usually include dispute settlement mechanisms based on diplomatic and/or adjudicative procedures.
Such a dispute settlement mechanism is also included in the multilateral trading system. Based on the rudimentary provisions of two articles in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1947, i.e., Article XXll on Consultations and Article XXlll on Nullification or Impairment of Benefits, dispute settlement developed gradually through evolving practice and occasional codifications thereof. With the exception of an anti-legalist phase in the '1960 the trend went from an initially rather diplomacy-oriented mechanism towards a more adjudication-oriented one.
The conclusion of the Uruguay Round of Multicultural Trade Negotiations brought the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on 1 January 1995. According to Article III.3 of the WTO Agreement, dispute settlement is one of the key functions of the WTO, The rules of the mechanism are laid down in detail in the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes in short: (Dispute Settlement Understanding; DSU) in Annex 2 of the WTO Agreement. The DSU has both incorporated the inherited concept of GATT Dispute settlement and it has codified the practices that had evolved previously into a consolidated text. In addition, it
Bibliography: BOOKS: * ANDERSON, KYM (2602): Peculiarities of Retaliation in Wl-0 Dispute Settlement; in World Trade Review, Vol * BARFIELD,C LAUQEE . (2001): Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy: The Future of the World Trade organization; Washington, D.C.: The AE1 Press * SEVILLA, CHRISTINAR * SHOYER, ANDREW W. (2003): Panel Selection in WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures; in: Journal of international Economic law, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 203- 209 * STEGER, DEBM P