Mapping the Law of WTO Accession

This chapter explores the looming and potentially controversial legal issues surrounding the law of accession in the World Trade Organization (WTO). Many of the recent accession negotiations have been quite detailed with WTO members nailing down numerous commitments asked of the applicant government (e.g., China) seeking to join the WTO. If these commitments are not implemented, the governments that insisted upon them may invoke WTO dispute settlement. Dispute settlement in the WTO has proven to be more legalized than many in the trade community anticipated during the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations that established the WTO. The WTO panel system has been described as “judicial”by the Appellate Body, which has supported this observation by making it clear that first-level panels “necessarily” have to consider its views, and “rely” on its reasoning and rulings. The Appellate Body’s decisions are meant to provide, “interpretive guidance for future panels”. During the past decade, the dispute settlement system has successfully grappled with many difficult legal issues, and seems prepared to continue doing so alongside the languishing Doha Development Round negotiations. In September 2006, the first case alleging a violation of an accession commitment commenced at the WTO: the case of China-Auto Parts. The three complainants, Canada, the European Communities, and the United States, alleged a number of violations of WTO multilateral agreements, and violations of particular accession commitments by China on auto parts. In those proceedings, there may be pleadings on and consideration by the panel as to (whether and) why an accession agreement is enforceable in WTO law…