scholarly journals Data Flows and Global Trade Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 11-41
Author(s):  
Mira Burri
Keyword(s):  
2003 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olu Fasan

The Uruguay Round of trade negotiations, completed in 1994, has fundamentally transformed the legal landscape of the world trading system, making the WTO arguably the most powerful international economic institution in the world. Yet, the systemic problems that have dogged the WTO since its establishment in 1995 have their roots in the nature of this transformation and its implications for developing countries, especially African states. Developing countries, hitherto excluded from GATT rules, became subject to expanded WTO legal rules and disciplines on a range of new areas, including services, intellectual property rights and investment measures. The possibility of deepening and widening the rule-base of the trade regime is also likely with the Doha agenda, which includes possible negotiations on new rules dealing with investment, competition policy, trade facilitation, and transparency in government procurement.Clearly, the increasing legalization and internationalization of trade rules have implications for weak states. International legalization involves sophisticated bargaining where power relations play a significant role. The purpose of this article is to explore, in the context of some of the theories of international law and political economy, how the preferences and interests of African countries are reflected in international rule making that involves both weak and powerful states. The article traces the institutional and legal evolution of the world trading system and how African countries have been affected by these developments. The new Doha agenda is examined with a view to establishing whether it holds out any real hope of redressing the imbalances in the system. Finally, suggestions are made as to how global trade rules can be fair, and therefore made to work for poor states.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-364
Author(s):  
Neha Mishra

AbstractMeasures restricting data flows outside one's borders, including mandatory data/server localization measures, are not only a barrier to trade, but also largely ineffective in achieving better internet security or trust. Nevertheless, governments deploy such measures, primarily on grounds of cybersecurity and privacy, potentially violating their obligations under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). In this article, I investigate whether GATS-inconsistent measures may be justified under GATS Art. XIV when aimed at ensuring privacy or cybersecurity, and, if so, whether GATS Art. XIV effectively balances trade and internet policy. As the internet governance framework is complex and somewhat ambiguous, applying GATS Art. XIV to cybersecurity/privacy measures necessitates balancing of trade liberalization principles and domestic internet policy. This exercise can be effective in weeding out data localization measures disguised as privacy/cybersecurity measures, particularly by employing relevant technical and factual evidence. However, given the lack of binding international law/norms on these issues, GATS Art. XIV has a limited role, particularly in cases involving direct conflict between multistakeholder/transnational internet norms and domestic internet policies, or where the measures are founded on contentious standards/benchmarks on privacy/cybersecurity. Ultimately, ensuring free and secure data flows requires a multidimensional policy response, including strengthening linkages between trade law and internet governance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document