Rational Relationships

Chapter Six continues Chapter Five’s examination of the regulatory coherence standard in WTO dispute settlement, this time focusing on ‘rational relationship’ testing under the non-discrimination provisions in the chapeau to the GATT and GATS general exceptions, as well as under the TBT and SPS Agreements. WTO non-discrimination jurisprudence looks for a rational relationship between a regulatory measure’s otherwise discriminatory aspects and the measure’s policy objectives. Rational relationship tests, like necessity tests, embody the emerging global regulatory standard of regulatory coherence, calling for a certain relationship between trade measures and their objectives. Like necessity testing, rational relationship testing lends itself to application in a way that accommodates decision-making at the domestic level on matters requiring important value judgements.

Necessity Testing

Part III comprises two chapters, Chapter Five and Chapter Six. These chapters together investigate the decisions of WTO panels and the Appellate Body in environmental and health cases. The chapters examine the major contribution made through WTO dispute settlement to the emerging global regulatory standard of regulatory coherence. Specifically, Chapter Five analyses the elaboration of the ‘necessity’ formula in the GATT and the GATS general exceptions’ subparagraphs, as well as under the TBT and SPS Agreements. The WTO adjudicatory process appears to have been protecting the traditional procedural justification of international law’s relative authority claim by enabling respect for domestic decision-making through democratic processes. Members’ entitlement to choose their level of protection against a risk is still at present fully recognised and there is vital scope for recognition of the importance to WTO Members of long-term non-economic interests requiring a multifaceted policy response.

Principles of Non-Discrimination against Trading State Party of Powerful Country on the basis of World Trade Organization “Case Study Banning Thai Coconut Products”

The principle of Non-discrimination of the World Trade Organization (WT0) aims to provide fairness to all member countries by means of the Most Favored Nations Treatment and National Treatment under the General Agreement of Trade and Tariffs (GATT). Accordingly, the free trade has been promoted in all regions of the world. However, many WTO members resort to take advantage of general exceptions to the non-discriminatory practice by invoking Article XX of WTO in disguise, thus affecting the free trade principle of WTO.

PECULIARITIES OF THE PROCEDURAL ORDER OF PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PEOPLE’S DEPUTIES OF UKRAINE

The article provides a comprehensive study of theoretical and practical problems of pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings against people’s deputies of Ukraine, given the regulations of current criminal procedure legislation and the theory of criminal procedure law of Ukraine. It is emphasized that the current legislation of Ukraine, which regulates the activities of the People’s Deputy of Ukraine, is based on the principles of traditional law and bears the imprint of the totalitarian past, so now it can not fully ensure the effectiveness of the institution of inviolability, leading to violations of human rights and freedoms. Criminal proceedings against a People’s Deputy of Ukraine may be carried out only under the condition of the procedural guidance of the Prosecutor General (acting Prosecutor General) or the Deputy Prosecutor General – the head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office and can be initiated only when there is sufficient evidence to indicate signs of a criminal offense, and the adequacy of the data is assessed in each case according to the internal convictions of the investigator. The main condition for the notification of suspicion against people’s deputies is the availability of sufficient evidence. The procedural procedure for summoning an investigator, prosecutor, summons during a pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings against people’s deputies of Ukraine is a set of procedural actions to draw up a summons (another document), send and serve it in the manner prescribed by procedural law, confirm receipt of summons, meet deadlines notification of the person about the call, as well as the procedural consequences of non-appearance on the call. The procedural position of the suspect-People’s Deputy of Ukraine must be considered in accordance with the procedural conditions. The general legal basis for the application of measures to ensure criminal proceedings is the decision of the investigating judge on the basis of an agreed request for their application with the Prosecutor General (acting person of the Prosecutor General). Exceptions are certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings, which can be applied without the decision of the investigating judge. The directions of improvement of the procedural order of decision-making on the beginning of pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses committed by the People’s Deputy of Ukraine on the basis of entering information into the Unified Register of pre-trial investigations, resolving issues of jurisdiction, notification of suspicion, application of criminal proceedings.

Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues

Taking Venezuela’s complaint against the United States at the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) as the inflection point, this Article will explore whether a characterisation of cryptocurrencies as a ‘currency’ (similar to a fiat currency) would ensure that cryptocurrencies are not covered by WTO disciplines on goods and services. Despite customary international law principles such as ius cudendae monetae and the persuasive argument that a ‘currency’ is neither a good or service – the Article answers this question in the negative. It will divide issues that can arise during such a WTO dispute into three categories: threshold, substantive and compliance issues. Threshold issues would involve interpretative challenges to determine whether the General Agreement on Trade in Services (“GATS”) and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“GATT”) regulate cryptocurrencies. Since the GATS Schedule of Commitments has historically been interpreted in a technologically neutral manner, identifying cryptocurrencies as a ‘service’ may not prove to be insurmountable. However, the claim that cryptocurrencies are barter goods that will be subject to disciplines of the GATT deserves critical scrutiny – more so because the GATT regulates tangible products and contains specific provisions relating to balance-of-payments. The Article also undertakes a theoretical analysis of the heterodoxical nature of the cryptocurrency to evaluate whether it can be classified as a ‘security’ within the meaning of the GATS’ Annex on Financial Services. These threshold issues are, however, the tip of the iceberg. Once a WTO Panel commences its analysis, the substantive issues for consideration would involve determining whether a unique product such as cryptocurrencies has a ‘like product’ in the respondent Member’s market. Further, the Panel’s analysis would involve a consideration relating to ‘general exceptions’ under Article XIV, GATS or Article XX, GATT which would entail an examination of whether the measure was necessary to achieve, amongst other regulatory objectives, either compliance with domestic regulations or the maintenance of public order. If the measure adversely impacting cryptocurrencies is determined to be WTO-inconsistent, issues of compliance and suspension of concessions are imminent. WTO Panels have historically estimated the . quantum of suspensions of concessions by determining the trade volumes affected by the WTO-inconsistent measure and factoring it for a future time period. The decentralised nature of the distributed ledger technology underlying cryptocurrencies complicates any country-specific quantification of the impact on trade volumes of cryptocurrencies affected by the WTO inconsistent measure. Accordingly, determining suspensions of concessions in relation to cryptocurrencies would require significant judicial innovation by the arbitrator. Adjudicating Cryptocurrencies at the WTO: Potential Threshold and Substantive Issues.

PEMBERLAKUAN PEMBATASAN EKSPOR MINYAK BUMI DIKAITKAN DENGAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 22 TAHUN 2001 TENTANG MINYAK DAN GAS BUMI DAN THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994 (GATT)/WTO SERTA IMPLIKASINYA TERHADAP KEDAULATAN EKONOMI INDONESIA

<p><em>The crude oil export restrictions which is necessary to supply domestic needs. However, the crude oil export restrictions must be applied in accordance with the provisions of the WTO / GATT that have been ratified and binding on Indonesia to avoid any claim from other WTO/GATT’s member. Indonesia have applied non tariff measures which may restrict the crude oil export in the form of management and utilization of government’s crude oil entitlement under Joint Cooperation Contract (JOC) by SKKMIGAS and PT. Pertamina, and contractor’s domestic market obligation equal to 25% (twenty five percent) of contractor’s crude oil entitlement under JOC production sharing. This research attempts to analyze are restrictions non tariff crosses wto to limit oil exports and has implications to sovereignty indonesian economyResearcher used a descriptive specification analysis, using the method of juridicial approach normative, that is an approach of the norms of the law, the comparison of law which emphasized the research through literature or secondary data. The technique used was literature study practice to a secondary data and retirement conclusions from the results of studies that have been collected perfomed by using the method of juridical analysis quantitative.</em><em> </em><em>Based on the research, Indonesia apply export restrictions petroleum by domestic market obligation didn’t the violation of the provisions article XI GATT which are in accordance with article XX General exceptions ( g ) having GATT which is the main objective of natural resource conservation . the government limit in the form of non tariff of by means of dmo .DMO is interpretation of Sovereignty Indonesian Economy. Export restrictions petroleum also have an implication to sovereignty economy which is to change law No. 22 year 2001 concerning Oil and natural Gas. Export restrictions petroleum been written in law no. 22 2001 about oil and gas the earth not have an implication to sovereignty indonesian economy .Indonesia has implement authority and not the violation of the provisions GATT/WTO</em></p><p><strong><em> </em></strong></p><p><strong><em>Keywords: </em></strong><em>Petroleum restrictions, implications, economic sovereignty</em></p>

Reasons, Institutions, Authorities

This chapter examines the logic of exceptions in World Trade Organization (WTO) law, and their relation to the reasons that apply to members, and to the authority of WTO law and adjudicators. Many exceptions can be understood as qualifying rules, in order that those rules should better track the reasons that apply to those subject to them. However, others are better explained as reflecting the limits of law’s authority: at least sometimes, exceptions identify areas wherein the law falls silent, not because its subjects necessarily have reasons to act otherwise than in accordance with the unqualified rule, but rather because they have good claims to decide for themselves whether they should so act. Joseph Raz’s service conception of authority is applied to develop an account of the grounds, scope, and limits of WTO law’s authority, which account is in turn applied to explain three specific sets of exceptions or quasi-exceptions: the GATT Article XX General Exceptions, the trade remedies rules, and the ‘non-exception-exceptions’ for domestic regulation deviating from international standards.

The Compelling Law of Jus Cogens and Exceptions to Peremptory Norms

In this chapter, the problematic of exceptions to peremptory norms is investigated in view of the defining feature of jus cogens rules as not admitting of derogation. This problematic appears singularly concerned with exceptions to the prohibition of the use of armed force, since that prohibition is regularly claimed to constitute a peremptory norm but admits of exceptions. Different legal constructions have been proposed to explain why exceptions would not amount to derogation. One construction, logically coherent but not (fully) borne out by positive law, is to see exceptions as limiting and lying outside of the substantive scope of a general rule and thus not amounting to derogation. Another construction concerns the claim that the prohibition of the use of armed force is not a jus cogens rule but rather the prohibition of aggression. As such, exceptions such as self-defence, force pursuant to a Security Council authorization, and consent would not amount to derogation, since they would not entail the commission of aggression. This construction would allow for the conclusion that peremptory prohibitions are absolute in character and not subject to exception or justification. Circumstances precluding wrongfulness, as general exceptions, appear to qualify as derogation, since Article 26 of the Articles on the Responsibility of States bars their invocation when conduct would be contrary to a peremptory norm. Finally, a narrow interpretation of the word derogation, as being involved only when states attempt to legalize or justify conduct in relation to already existing, concrete circumstances, could also explain why exceptions to peremptory prohibitions may be considered admissible.

10 Part IV: Miscellaneous Provisions

This chapter studies Part IV of the Energy Charter Treaty, which is entitled ‘Miscellaneous Provisions’. Article 18, dealing with sovereignty over natural resources, is the first article in Part IV of the ECT. This is significant, because the placement of Article 18 outside of Part III of the ECT means that the provisions in Article 18 cannot be made the subject of the dispute settlement mechanism in Article 26 of the ECT, which requires that there be an alleged breach of an obligation under Part III of the ECT. Meanwhile, Article 19 deals with environmental aspects and Article 20 with transparency. Article 21, concerning taxation, has a complex structure such that interpretation based on the Vienna Convention may be required. Article 22 deals with a Contracting Party's obligations in relation to the conduct of state enterprises (paragraphs 1 and 2); the conduct of entities which it has entrusted with governmental authority (paragraph 3); and the conduct of entities which have been granted exclusive or special privileges (paragraph 4). Article 23 addresses the responsibility of Contracting Parties for acts of all organs of government, be they at the national, regional, or local level. Article 24 sets forth a number of general exceptions to the obligations set out in the ECT. Lastly, Article 25 sets forth a separate exception related to most-favoured-nation treatment for members of an economic integration agreement (EIA).