US Blocks
Renewal of Korean Appointment to WTO Appellate Panel, Claims Judge going beyond
Stated Law
The
six remaining members of the World Trade Organization (WTO)'s adjudicating
body, the Appellate Body (AB), on Wednesday (18 May) spoke their mind against
the unilateral decision of the United States to block the reappointment of Mr Seung Wha
Chang on unjustifiable grounds.
The
US decision has generated chilling "risks" for the "trust"
placed in the independence and impartiality of Appellate Body Members on which
the dispute settlement system depends, the members said in a letter to the
Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), a copy of which was obtained by
the SUNS.
In
a strong letter to the chair of the DSB, Ambassador Xavier Carim
of South Africa, on 18 May, the six members of the AB - Mr
Thomas R. Graham, chair for the AB, Mr Ujal Singh Bhatia, Mr Ricardo
Ramirez Hernandez, Mr Shree Baboo
Chekitan Servansing, Mr Van Den Bossche, and Ms Yuejiao Zhang - challenged the
reasons cited by the US for blocking Mr Chang's
reappointment.
The
US has alleged that Mr Chang deviated from the
covered agreements in three cases which he had presided at the AB.
The
three cases involve China's complaint against the countervailing duties imposed
by the US, China's dispute against allegedly inconsistent anti-dumping and
countervailing duties imposed by the US on several Chinese products, and
Panama's dispute against Argentina concerning Buenos Aires' allegedly
restrictive measures against goods and services.
Besides,
Mr Chang also participated in several cases involving
the US as part of the three-member division.
Without
naming the US, the AB members addressed their letter to the US through the
offices of the DSB chair and the WTO Director-General who was clearly aware of
the storm that was building up at the WTO, several trade envoys told the SUNS.
"With
regard to accuracy, no case is the result of a decision by one Appellate Body
Member, nor should interpretations or outcomes be attributed to a single
Member," the six AB members maintained.
The
main criticism of the US is that Mr Chang deviated
from the covered agreements and entered in obiter dicta in the rulings.
"Appeals
are heard and decided by three Members who are chosen randomly to constitute
the Division for each case," the AB members maintained.
"During
a Division's consideration of a case, there is always a formal, intensive
exchange of views, in person in Geneva, between the three Division Members and
the Appellate Body Members who are not on the Division," the six members
argued.
In
short, "Our reports are reports of the Appellate Body," they
asserted.
Effectively,
the AB members pointed a finger at the US by asking how could
it direct criticism at the doorstep of Mr
Chang when decisions in the three cases were decided by the full AB Division
after consultations with the rest of the AB members.
Further,
the AB members said that they are guided by Articles 3.2, 17, and 19.2 of the
Dispute Settlement Understanding in adjudicating appeals and clarifying
existing provisions of the covered agreements "without adding to or
diminishing the rights and obligations provided in those [covered] agreements."
"We
strive to adhere to that mandate when deciding complex issues that arise in a
variety of circumstances, frequently on matters of first impression," the
AB members said.
"Whether
we have always succeeded is a subject we leave to the WTO membership to
discuss," the six members suggested, maintaining that the WTO members are
well within their rights to comment on the AB reports as set out in Article
17.14 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding. The AB members said they are
open to "other informed and constructive comments."
As
regards the "trust that WTO Members place in the independence and
impartiality of AB Members," the six members said, "we are concerned
about the tying of an Appellate Body Member's reappointment to interpretations
on specific cases and even doing so publicly."
"The
dispute settlement system depends upon WTO Members trusting the independence
and impartiality of Appellate Body Members," the six members emphasized.
"Linking
the reappointment of a Member to specific cases could affect that trust,"
they lamented.
Commenting
on the work done by Mr Chang, the six members said
"we have the highest respect for Mr Seung Wha Chang as a person of
integrity, independence and impartiality."
"He
[Mr Chang] has worked hard together with us to
maintain the quality of our reports and to foster constructive improvement of
our operations," the AB members stressed.
"We
recognize that there is no right of reappointment," the six members
argued, suggesting that they have no role in decisions for reappointment.
However,
the AB members said that they "felt compelled" to make their reasons
known to the DSB chair.
The
AB members copied their letter to the WTO Director-General Roberto Azevedo who is yet to make a public comment on the
"lawlessness" created unilaterally by the United States in destroying
the adjudicating role of the trade body after severely undermining the
negotiating functions of the trade body, several trade envoys told the SUNS.
The
DG was aware of the US action well before it became public but he maintained a
deafening silence until it blew up into a grave systemic crisis, said a trade
envoy who is familiar with the development.