Latest Procedural Developments Related to the WTO Dispute US – Clove Cigarettes

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 548-549
Author(s):  
Eugenia Costanza Laurenza
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Smoking Prevention ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Menthol Cigarettes ◽  
Federal Food ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Government ◽  
Special Meeting

On 13 August 2013, the Government of Indonesia requested a special meeting of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (hereinafter, DSB) in order to obtain authorisation to suspend concessions or other obligations (i.e., to ‘retaliate’) against the United States (hereinafter, the US). This request stems from the US alleged failure to comply with the rulings and recommendations of the WTO DSB in the dispute US – Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes (hereinafter, US – Clove Cigarettes). In that dispute, the WTO dispute settlement organs found that Section 907(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (hereinafter, the FFDCA), introduced by Section 101(b) of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act discriminated against Indonesian clove cigarettes in favour of ‘like’ domestic menthol cigarettes, in a manner which was inconsistent with, inter alia, Article 2.1 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (hereinafter, TBT Agreement). The DSB recommended that the US bring its legislation relating to the ban on flavoured cigarettes into conformity with its obligations under the WTO. On 22 August 2013, the US objected to the level of suspension of concessions proposed by Indonesia and requested that the matter be referred to arbitration. Following such request from the US, the DSB agreed that the matter be referred to arbitration and informed WTO Members that arbitration would be carried out by the original panel.

SENGKETA PERDAGANGAN ROKOK KRETEK ANTARA INDONESIA DAN AMERIKA SERIKAT DI WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-116
Author(s):  
Gregorius Luna Bagaskara ◽  
Aluisius Hery Pratono ◽  
Firman Rosjadi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
The United States ◽  
Smoking Prevention ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Menthol Cigarettes

Since its establishment, the WTO has been issued a lot of policies that are deemed by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body to violate GATT and other WTO agreements. One of the policies is the dispute on clove cigarettes between Indonesia and the United States of America. In 22nd of June 2009, United States issued an act called Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, where the Section 907(a)(1)(A) stated about the restriction against the selling of characterized flavors cigarettes but excluding menthol cigarettes from the restriction. As the biggest clove cigarettes exporter to the United States, Indonesia is suffering from a huge loss due to the implementation of the act. This study aims to analyze the clove cigarettes dispute resolution process between Indonesia and United States. By using Scenario Building method, the analysis indicates the four dispute resolution scenarios. The scenario with the condition of Indonesia won the dispute clove cigarettes is the best solution because the positive impact on the economy, social and politics, especially bilateral relations between Indonesia and the United States of America.

Extraterritorial Shrimps, NGOs and the WTO Appellate Body

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asif H. Qureshi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Market Access ◽  
The United States ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Wto Appellate Body ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

At the centre of the international trading order, under the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO), lies a dispute-settlement system. This system offers a graduated conflict-resolution mechanism that begins with a consultation process; progresses to adjudication, through a panel system, and ends in an appellate process.1 Under this machinery, in October 1996 India, Malaysia, Pakistan and Thailand (the complainants) requested joint consultations with the United States, regarding the US prohibition on the importation of certain shrimps and shrimp products caught with fishing technology considered by the United States adversely to affect the population of sea turtles—an endangered species under CITES.2 The US prohibition arose from section 609 of Public Law 101–1623 and associated regulations and judicial rulings (hereafter referred to as section 609). In a nutshell the complainants claimed denial of market access to their exports, and the United States justified this on grounds of conservation. However, as a consequence of the failure of the consultations, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body established a panel, around April 1997, to consider a joint complaint against the United States in relation to section 609. Australia, Ecuador, the European Communities, HongKong, China, Mexico and Nigeria joined the complainants as third parties. In May 1998 the panel's report was published, containing a decision in favour of the complainants. In July 1998 the United States appealed to the WTO Appellate Body, and in October 1998 the Appellate Body issued its report.4

The United States embargo on shrimp imports: legal and economic considerations

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
TAIMOON STEWART
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Current Case ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Shrimp Industry ◽  
Economic Considerations ◽  
Trade Measures

The use of trade measures for environmental purposes has given rise to a series of economic and legal issues. These are explored in the paper through an examination of the United States embargo on imports of shrimp from several countries for environmental reasons, currently being considered by a WTO dispute settlement panel. The paper examines the effect on competitiveness of compliance with the higher standard imposed by the US, the appropriateness of universalizing those standards, and whether the US action is consistent with WTO rules. The major findings are that, in the case of Trinidad, (a) the competitiveness of the affected fishermen was reduced, (b) the US regulation was inappropriate to the conditions which prevailed in the shrimp industry there, and (c) the US action was WTO inconsistent given current interpretation of WTO rules. The paper anticipates that the current case could lead to a review of WTO rules, in favour of the environment.

scholarly journals US – Lamb: United States – Safeguard Measures on Imports of Fresh, Chilled or Frozen Lamb Meat from New Zealand and Australia: What Should be Required of a Safeguard Investigation?

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (S1) ◽  
pp. 72-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Horn ◽  
Petros C. Mavroidis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Safeguard Measures ◽  
Lamb Meat ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Serious Injury ◽  
Gatt 1994

The United States (US) imposed, in July 1999, a safeguard on lamb meat, in the form of tariff rate import quotas, which were to be applied for a period of three years. The measure was based on findings by the US International Trade Commission that increased imports of lamb meat were a substantial cause of threat of serious injury to the US industry producing the like product. Following complaints by New Zealand and Australia that the measure was inconsistent with Articles I, II and XIX of GATT 1994, and several provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards, the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body established, in November 1999, a panel to review the consistency of the US measure with the mentioned WTO rules.

scholarly journals China – Countervailing and Anti-dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel from the United States: exporting US AD/CVD methodologies through WTO dispute settlement?

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
THOMAS J. PRUSA ◽  
EDWIN VERMULST
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Electrical Steel ◽  
The United States ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Target Country ◽  
Injury Analysis

AbstractIn July 2009, Chinese steel producers of grain oriented electrical steel filed anti-dumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) cases against US and Russian producers. The US challenged the duties for a variety a reasons, many of which involved deficiencies in the producers' application to China's investigating authority, the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China (MOFCOM). The US also challenged certain aspects of MOFCOM's injury analysis. The Panel and Appellate Body ruled in favor of the US on virtually every issue. Given the deficiencies in the application and China's handling of the case, the Panel and AB decisions were justified. In a larger sense, however, we believe China may well emerge as the ‘winner’ in this dispute as this case establishes important standards for allegations and evidence in applications, standards that other countries (including the US) likely have failed to meet when they have imposed AD and CVD orders on the largest target country, China.

scholarly journals US – Lamb United States – Safeguard Measures on Imports of Fresh, Chilled or Frozen Lamb Meat from New Zealand and Australia: what should be required of a safeguard investigation?

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
HENRIK HORN ◽  
PETROS C. MAVROIDIS
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Safeguard Measures ◽  
Lamb Meat ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Serious Injury ◽  
Gatt 1994

The United States (US) imposed, in July 1999, a safeguard on lamb meat, in the form of tariff rate import quotas, which were to be applied for a period of three years. The measure was based on findings by the US International Trade Commission that increased imports of lamb meat were a substantial cause of threat of serious injury to the US industry producing the like product. Following complaints by New Zealand and Australia that the measure was inconsistent with Articles I, II and XIX of GATT 1994, and several provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards, the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body established, in November 1999, a panel to review the consistency of the US measure with the mentioned WTO rules.

scholarly journals United States – Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology: the end of Zeroing?

2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
THOMAS J. PRUSA ◽  
EDWIN VERMULST
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Appellate Body Report ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Continued Use ◽  
New Perspective

AbstractThis is the eighth Appellate Body Report in which some aspect of zeroing was adjudicated. As in the prior cases, the AB again found the US practice inconsistent with several aspects of the Anti-Dumping Agreement. The novelty in this dispute was the EC attempt to broaden the concept of what constitutes an appealable measure. The EC challenged whether a WTO decision regarding zeroing could apply to subsequent proceedings that might modify duty levels and asked the AB to decide whether the United States' continued use of zeroing in the context of a given case was consistent with WTO obligations. The AB stated that in its attempt to bring an effective resolution to the zeroing issue, the EC is entitled to frame the subject of its challenge in such a way as to bring the ongoing use of the zeroing methodology in these cases, under the scrutiny of WTO dispute settlement. The AB then cautiously applied the new perspective to US zeroing practice.

scholarly journals The Future of Turkey - United States Relations

Jurnal ICMES ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-196
Author(s):  
Firmanda Taufiq
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Role Of The Government

Throughout 2018, relations between Turkey and the United States seemed to deteriorate. The leaders of the two countries issued sharp diplomatic statements and the US even imposed economic sanctions on Turkey. This article aims to analyze how the future of relations between Turkey and the United States. Cooperation between the two has a long historical side after the Cold War. Relations between the two countries are based on various interests, both economic, political, military and security interests. The theory used in this study is the theory of national interest. The US has great interests in the Middle East and Turkey is the front-line ally in achieving those interests. However, there are many US foreign policies that ignore the Turkish concern and create tensions between the two countries. On the contrary, Turkey also has considerable economic interests, but the role of the government elite (in this case, President Erdogan) has a significant influence in the determination of Turkish foreign policy. The findings of this study, although it will go through complex challenges and processes, the US and Turkey will continue to maintain their relations.

scholarly journals Warlords, the United States, and the state of anarchy in Afghanistan

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Shah Azami
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Building ◽  
The State ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Illegal Mining ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

As part of its “War on Terror”, the United States (US) provided immense sums of money and advanced equipment to Afghan warlords in order to defeat and dismantle the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Nearly two decades after the 2001 US-led intervention in Afghanistan that toppled the Taliban regime, the US continues supporting the warlords in various ways. As the intervention was also aimed at establishing a functioning state and reconstruction of the war-torn country, the US needed the support of local warlords to achieve its goals. However, over time, warlords and warlordism became a major challenge to the postTaliban state-building project and in many ways undermined the overall security and the state monopoly on violence. These warlords, who had been mostly expelled and defeated by the Taliban regime, returned under the aegis of the B52 bombers, recaptured parts of the country and reestablished their fiefdoms with US support and resources. They not only resist giving up the power and prestige they have accumulated over the past few years, but also hamper the effort to improve governance and enact necessary reforms in the country. In addition, many of them run their private militias and have been accused of serious human rights abuses as well as drug trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal mining and extortion in the areas under their control or influence. In many ways, they challenge the government authority and have become a major hurdle to the country’s emerging from lawlessness and anarchy. This paper explores the emergence and reemergence of warlords in Afghanistan as well as the evolution of chaos and anarchy in the country, especially after the US-led intervention of late 2001. It also analyzes the impact of the post-9/11 US support to Afghan warlords and its negative consequences for the overall stability and the US-led state-building process in Afghanistan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document