Online forum

Forum Talkback

China is a large country which has little effect on economy in economic crisis.There are not only large frontier market but also low-cost labor force.So that is a wise choice to cooperate with China.Our company named Beijing Tiantan Haiqiao Passenger¡¯s Vehicle Company which is specialized in manufacturing special purpose vehicle.Such as ambulance,armoured vehicle,all sorts of inspection vehicle,police vehicle,refrigerated vehicle,motor vehicle etc. We sincerely hope to seek cooperation parter to develop Chinese market and creat a better life. Website:www.haiqiao.com.cn www.haiqiao.de Email:info@haiqiao.com.cn Tel:86 10 87913142 Fax:86 10 87913042 [view message]

Your name: Guestat 3:54 on 12/19/08

can some one help me is the swiss cash legallyplease send m mail m.tokallo@gmail.comthanks [view message]

Your name: mohammad tokalloat 11:37 on 9/5/07

MARTA QUINTERO?? PUEDE DARNOS LA IMPORTANCIA DEL TURISMO ANTE LA OMC ?? ES, UN PRODUCTO ? ...LA INDUSTRIA DEL SERVICIOES PARA LA OMC..., DERECHOS SOCIALES O DERECHOS DEL COMERCIO INTERNACIONAL../PARTICULARMENTE, ME INTERESA UNA REPUESTA QUE PUEDA DEFINIR EL TURISMO COMO HERRAMIENTA FABRIL PARA EL TURISMO LABORAL...Y EL DERECHO DE PAZ Y TRABAJO PARA EL DESARROLLO DE CADA PUEBLO Y CULTURA..., GRACIAS [view message]

Your name: marta.quintero.morrocoy.@gmail.comat 19:36 on 7/25/07

i divide your subject in to two parts. existing WTO rule for dispute settlement and the second one reforms portion aps per the existing procedure the paties to thedispute can onlybe sovereion member states.the law aplicable the substantive and procedural aspects of the dispute is the law agreed upon of the country. If there is no consesusus on the law applicable a ruling on the issue is required. this is an area of dispute where one of the party not willingly accepting the award. on the question of selecting panel judge and his impartiality .if there is a challenge to it what mutually acceptable procedure is thereto replace such judge either before entering trial or even during the course of proceedings. at the end of proceedings if the award is not acceptable what mechanism is provided for an appeal to a equally impatial body having judicial characteristics.and what mechanism is divised by the international bodies to enforce the final such award. secondly unless... [view message]

Your name: lakshmaat 9:27 on 7/21/07

Defintivamente considero que el OSD adolece del poder vinculante que deben realmente tener los tratados multilaterales como pretende ser el que le diera origen a la OMC - MARRUECOS, raz?n suficiente para que el principio de soberan?a de los estados siga imponi?ndose a las decisiones, auncuando existan los mecanismos de sanci?n. Mi parecer al respecto es que deben establecerse sanciones de ?mbito mundial y no particulares a los pa?ses o estados en conflicto, la sanci?n debe enfocarse m?s a la consumaci?n de lo esperado en DOHA y no a la simple compensaci?n de favores u obligaciones t?picamente comerciales, debemos ir pensando en el alcance social del capitalismo como lo propone HANS KUNG. [view message]

Your name: GERMAN GARZONat 22:38 on 7/13/07

Your name: Guestat 22:35 on 7/13/07

This forum provides civil society with an opportunity to consider how to improve the trade remedy of the WTO dispute settlement. It seems that the trade remedy did work well because all of remedy cases (EC-Bananas III DS/27, EC-Hormones DS26/48, Brazil- Aircraft DS46, US-FSC DS108, US-1916Act DS 136/162, US-Offset Act (Byrd Amendment) SDS217/234, US-Section 110(5) Copyright Act DS160, Canada-Aircraft Credits and Guarantees DS222) have not been resulted in fully implementation of the DSB adopted recommendation and rulings under Art. 22.1 of DSU. It would be a challenge for the credibility of WTO dispute settlement system if most unsolved remedy cases are evolved with United States and EC. Zhang Naigen (Fulbright Scholar at Georgetown Law Center, Washington DC and Law Professor of Fudan University, Shanghai) [view message]

Your name: Zhang Naigen <zhangng@fudan.edu.cn>at 19:07 on 7/8/07

a [view message]

Your name: aat 22:41 on 7/6/07

sunny [view message]

Your name: sunny.gureja@yahoo.comat 20:01 on 6/29/07

Se podria hablar de sistemas de solucion de diferencias, an existiendo \"dificultades\" en la configuracion del Acuerdo de Propiedad Intelectual? , especialmente con el tercer mundo. Gracias [view message]

Your name: stanarvaez@yahoo.es at 4:51 on 6/25/07

how do wto settle disputes?do you think that this procedure favors the developed nations, the less -developed nations or either? [view message]

Your name: glennat 14:52 on 6/24/07

i think we should prevail the justice and equality among all..be tansparent... [view message]

Your name: gleenat 14:46 on 6/24/07

One important question to me is how the DSU could better deal with other international dispute resolution fora. Since WTO is fundamentally a trade-based organization, should it be absolute authority on other issues, such as environment and health (although these are trade-related)? What, if, a DSU decision is contrary to a WHO opinion? The DSB should consider such problems of conflict of jurisdiction a.s.a.p.. [view message]

Your name: eric tian (eric-tian@hotmail.com)at 5:25 on 6/21/07

Whereas the DSU is good the developing countries do not have enough capacity to understand and use it. WTO should do something about capacity building on the use of DSU . Secondly, the procedures need to be more simplified and probably the hearings should be decenralised and merged with other regional bodies dispute settlement cetres for ease of access. [view message]

Your name: Y.N. OKUBOat 18:03 on 6/20/07

El OSD, tal como lo manifiestan Davey y Jackson, funciona. El tema es que funciona por la \"buena voluntad\" y \"compromiso\" de las partes integrantes y no porque exista una sancion severa a algun pais que incumpliese. De hecho, nunca ha pasado, pero seria peligroso que los paises simplemente no cumplan las disposiciones, podria inestabilizar el sistema de la OMC. -->--> --> Existen medidas compensatorias economicas o de acceso a mercado para \"resarcir\" los danios; sin embargo, como muy lucidamente explica Jackson, existiria la posibilidad de \"comprar\" obligaciones. Y los paises ricos tendrian los medios para hacerlo. --> --> Creo que la unica sancion que podrian aplicar los paises que conforman este foro mundial de comercio, OMC, que ademas no tiene poder supranacional, (despues de establecer tiempos y plazos para cumplir con los informes de los paneles o tecnicos de la OSD), podria ser que el pais sea expulsado temporalmente (dependiendo del caso se establecerian los... [view message]

Your name: andreymkat 0:34 on 6/20/07

The reforms for the 21st, should be made taking into account the operation of the system so far. You will agree with me that it is the enforncement of the rulings and recommendation of the DSU that is the problem confronting the system. This debate must therefore concentrate on how to make compliance within the stipulated time posible. With prompt conpliance, developing countries with feel confortable using the system. [view message]

Your name: Nekkeat 22:22 on 6/19/07

WTOs Dispute Settlement Mechanism has two aspects: political and judicial. Two questions can be raised here: 1. how these two aspects are balanced and how the desired balance is institutionalized? Currently and historically speaking, the balance has been moved towards legalization. Although this shift of balance may back-fire and e.g. result in low level of use of the system especially by weaker states, it also makes it possible to strengthen the \"rule of law\" and predictability of the system. In this regard the future work should address three very important issues that at the moment are under-utilized:1. Allowing the secretariat or another organ to initiate a case;2. linking the DSM to Trade Policy Review; and3. differentiating between two different types of disputes: a. procedural or smaller cases which can be addressed faster and b. substantial cases that may need more time or more political types of dispute settlement systems. Practically the initiating party my decide which... [view message]

Your name: Amin Alavi (aal@diis.dk)at 10:38 on 6/19/07

Se debera considerar la posibilidad de que sea la propia OMC la que establezca algn tipo de mecanismo sancionador para los pases que se resisten a cambiar sus normas cuando el OSD ha encontrado que no cumplen los Acuerdos de la OMC. [view message]

Your name: Ral COmps Lpezat 9:45 on 6/19/07

Setting up this Forum will prove its importance very shortly. I really appriciate this effort by the WTO concern team. Many Governments, Multinational and International Companies will get fruits from this set up. Very shortly I would say that it is a great contribution towards a Global Community. [view message]

Your name: Dr. Chaudhary Javaid, Solicitor Advocate, Pakistanat 22:26 on 6/18/07

SI [view message]

Your name: FRANKLINat 21:12 on 6/18/07

I think that the monetary compensation may be a good measure to obligate the members to comply. It may work better if every member endorse a guarantee with the WTO as beneficiary so that it may be cashed when a country refuse to comply and the WTO transfer the funds to the damaged Country. [view message]

Your name: Lenin Goveaat 18:30 on 6/18/07

What Reforms for 21st Century?It should allow the use of online mechanism to settle trade disputes. WTO may learn from Online Dispute Resolution Provider how to settle disputes online. Employing Online mechanism will help all members to defend their interests cheaper and faster. \"WTO\'s Online Dispute Settlement: Enriching Understanding On Rules and Procedures Governing Settlemet of Disputes\". [view message]

Your name: paustburian@yahoo.comat 16:40 on 6/17/07

i see it really nice [view message]

Your name: Guestat 4:58 on 6/17/07

One point that is important to raise is that, in terms of domestic political incentives, monetary compensation is probably more effective than simply complying with the panel\'s recommendations. But this might have a bad side-effect if countries that usually comply with the panel report decide that they will give monetary compensation instead of simply complying. I have already written a paper on this and it will soon be available. [view message]

Your name: Igor A. V. Barbosa at 17:27 on 6/16/07

The problem with monetary compensation is that it does not give enough incentives for the violating country to comply with the panel\'s decision. If the violating country does not want to - or cannot - follow the recommendations of the panel report, why would it give monetary compensation to the country that is being harmed? For the government of the violating country, the immediate domestic political costs of suffering a retaliation are smaller than those of having to give monetary compensation or new trade concessions. In fact, suffering retaliation might be an interesting way of \"laundering\" the government\'s interest in throwing public opinion and other interest groups against that specific protective sector. [view message]

Your name: Igor A. V. Barbosaat 17:15 on 6/16/07

it was great thaks for the message [view message]

Your name: mohamedrizwan265@rediffmai.comat 16:36 on 6/16/07

how to deal with the problem of overlap of jurisdicton of the dispute settlement mechanism exsiting both in WTO and Regional Trade Agreements? [view message]

Your name: Chen Weidongat 4:50 on 6/16/07

A new era of the International Trade have been rising,along with new disputes settlements,equity should be observed and appleid. [view message]

Your name: Al Touni Consulting Law Firmat 23:28 on 6/15/07

I continue to believe that the best approach to compensation would be that already proposed by Mexico, see Proposal by Mexico, TN/DS/W/23 (Nov. 4, 2002)(sorry I don\'t have a URL handy), which would make the retaliatory license marketable. Under such a regime, natural market forces would operate to cause rights to retaliate to flow to those with retaliatory capacity, in effect normalizing incentive structures to a great degree--all without the difficult enforcement issues raised by a monetary compensation scheme. [view message]

Your name: tstostadat 23:17 on 6/15/07

In a recent paper, Professor Kamal Saggi and I analyze whether financial compensation is preferable to the current system that relies on the threat of tariff retaliation. We show that monetary fines are more efficient than tariffs in terms of granting compensation to the injured country when violations occur. However, fines suffer from an enforcement problem since they must be paid by the violating country. If the payment of fines must ultimately be supported by the threat of retaliatory tariffs, then we show they do not yield a more cooperative outcome than the current system. We also consider the exchange of bonds as an enforcement mechanism. These instruments can improve cooperation relative to the current system based on retaliatory tariffs but only if bonds are exchanged between countries of asymmetric size. The paper is available in my website if you are interested: http://www.wam.umd.edu/~limao/ [view message]

Your name: N. Limaoat 23:07 on 6/15/07

I disagree that with the notion that monetary compensation is necessarily bad. True, it facially resembles something a bit like \"efficient breach\" and (apparently) would allow a wealthier country to circumvent the spirit, if not the letter, of the MFN principle by compensating *one* trading partner, rather than discontinuing its treaty-inconsistent behaviors that affect *all* trading partners. This is a valid concern, but I believe there are answers. Bear in mind that something not unlike this very scenario is already possible when \"temporary\" retaliatory measures are implemented by prevailing complainant parties against non-compliant respondents. The respondent continues to enjoy whatever protective benefits accrue from restricted access to its markets, less whatever detriment is imposed by the one retaliating country--a detriment that may well be negligible, depending on the size of the retaliating party\'s markets. So, at a minimum, monetary compensation is no worse than the... [view message]

Your name: T.Stostadat 21:01 on 6/15/07

Let\'s focus on developing countries and their capacity to post their arguments in a fair manner... [view message]

Your name: nbdieat 18:12 on 6/15/07

Balanced perspectives I think with just one exception. Any particular reason why no panellist articulating developing country interests? It might have been a remarkably different angle for discussion by emerging/developing members re compliance and remedy issues. [view message]

Your name: NicoleHoo-Fatt(Jamaica)at 17:34 on 6/15/07

The Dispute Settlement System in the 21st Century needs to be non litigative, meaning thereby that the Dispute Settlement System must pave way to identification of disputes in a very effective way and take preemptive measures to nip it from becoming a dispute. The second aspect of 21st Century Dispute Settlement System of the WTO must focus on little more speedy disposal of dispute when arisen. However monetary measure to make Dispute Settlement System effective is not a good and viable option. sanjay pandey [view message]

Your name: pandeysanjayat 17:17 on 6/15/07

Monetary transfer as a remedy option is unlikely to improve compliance as nobody can force a sovereign government to take any action such as transfering money. However, it might reduce the frequency of retaliations since a defendent prefers to buy out its obligations rather than being punished by the complainant. From a global welfare point of view, monetary compensation is prefered to retaliatory actions. That is because, retaliations undermine free trade but monetary transfers don\'t. [view message]

Your name: M. Beshkarat 17:04 on 6/15/07

It is an interesting point. Now you mentioned it, there is necessary the \"will\" of the Parties of the WTO to enforce that decissions...in accordance to the rules of Public International Law. J. Manzur [view message]

Your name: Guestat 16:37 on 6/15/07

The Dispute Settlement System: What Reforms for 21st Century?I think that the system is not complete at all. Private Persons or Enterprises cannot use it. Notwithstanding, some of the meaures adopted by the States may affect them directly or indirectly. Probably thinking in the creation of a tribunal or an organ (like the icsid, but for the international commerce protection) giving to -this new subjects of international law- some \"locus standi\". Could be an interesting new development. The question I make to you Mr. Davey and Mr. Jackson is: why we have a system on the disputes on the foreign investments and we do not have one for the problems arising in regard to commerce...? [view message]

Your name: Jeremias Manzur S. (Chile)at 16:32 on 6/15/07

Dispute settlement system must be more flexible in the 21st century as it will face many challenges and problems. It must survive from the pressure of developed countries and also, has to draw more attention to the issues of implementation. It has to try to strengthen its role and become a dominant organ in trade dispute settlement system. [view message]

Your name: Janelidze Mat 14:49 on 6/15/07

I think that the title \"The DS System: What Reforms for the XXIst Century? \" is too ambitious. Let\'s be serious: we cannot objectively know how much of the XXI century the system will last. A better title would be something like \"The DSS: what reform after a decade of functionning?\", it\'s more modest, and less marketing [view message]

Your name: dennisat 14:00 on 6/15/07

What about the problems of enforcing decisions of WTO settlement system? [view message]

Your name: dario veniceat 13:50 on 6/15/07

Good point about monetary compensation allowing countries to essentially buy out of their obligations. That sounds like moving away from hallowed WTO principles to me. [view message]

Your name: Guestat 11:36 on 6/15/07

Good choice of speakers for this theme. [view message]

Your name: Guestat 16:19 on 6/14/07

The Dispute Settlement System: What Reforms for 21st Century? [view message]

Your name: WTOadminat 11:19 on 6/7/07

Posted by: