行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫 期末報告
中國在 WTO 中角色之轉變：爭端解決機制、決策機制與發
展議題
計 畫 類 別 ： 個別型 計 畫 編 號 ： NSC 101-2410-H-004-050- 執 行 期 間 ： 101 年 08 月 01 日至 102 年 07 月 31 日 執 行 單 位 ： 國立政治大學法律學系 計 畫 主 持 人 ： 許耀明 計畫參與人員： 碩士班研究生-兼任助理人員：戴楷恩 碩士班研究生-兼任助理人員：范榕容 報 告 附 件 ： 出席國際會議研究心得報告及發表論文 公 開 資 訊 ： 本計畫可公開查詢中 華 民 國 102 年 10 月 29 日
中 文 摘 要 ： 本研究集中處理中國在 WTO 爭端解決機制之正式參與程度與 動機，並全面性地檢視中國所參與之所有案例。 中國乃世界上新興之經濟強權，其任一舉動都受到世界 矚目。從中國於 2001 年底加入 WTO 之後，原本普遍預期將立 即有許多對中國提起之爭端；然而，此等貿易戰爭在中國入 世後之前五年間，並未發生。起初中國積極以第三方參與， 迄今共參與 102 個案件。藉由此等參與經驗，中國迄今共涉 及 42 個爭端案件，其中作為原告 11 個案件，被告 31 個案 件；相關爭訟主題則相當廣泛，尤其是關於傾銷與補貼等等 事項。 本研究並不鉅細靡遺地處理每一案件之相關事實與法律 爭點；相反地，本研究集中分析中國在貿易爭端中之策略與 態度。藉由能力建置、各部門之爭端與相關貿易協定之分 析，並觀察中國在 WTO 爭端解決機制中從被動者到主動者之 角色轉變，本研究並分析了由中國與其他發展中國家所提出 之相關爭端解決機制改革之提議。 中文關鍵詞： 世界貿易組織、爭端解決機制、中國
英 文 摘 要 ： This research will focus on the motive for and degree of Chinese participation in the formal WTO dispute settlement process. It will get a comprehensive point of view through the trade dispute cases in which China involved since it became a WTO member.
As we know, China as an emerging new power in the world, no matter in political or economic meaning, has attracted the attention of all. Since Chinese entrance to WTO in late 2001, people estimated that many trade disputes will follow against China
immediately； however, such a trade war did not happen at once until recent five years. At first, China actively participated until now in several disputes as third party for 102 cases. By these experiences, China encountered 42 cases (11 as complaint and 31 as defendant) in pretty dispersed domains till now, especially most of which relates to antidumping measures and subsidy and counter
measures.
This research would not deal with fact details and legal arguments in each case； by contract, it would like to analyze the relevant strategy and
attitude towards trade disputes in China. By studies in capacity building, disputes analyses in sectors and relevant trade agreements, and finally in the transformation of the role of China from a passive obedient to an active actor in WTO dispute settlement mechanism, this research will forecast some necessary DSB and/or WTO reform proposed for/by China and other developing countries.
1
行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫
□期中進度報告
■期末報告
中國 在 WTO 中角色之轉變：爭端解決機制、決策機制與發展
議題
計畫類別：■個別型計畫 □整合型計畫
計畫編號：NSC 101－2410－ H －004－050 －
執行期間：101 年 8 月 1 日至 102 年 7 月 31 日
執行機構及系所：國立政治大學法律學系
計畫主持人：許耀明副教授
共同主持人：無
計畫參與人員：兼任助理兩名
臺灣大學法律研究所范榕容碩士研究生
交通大學科技法律所戴楷恩碩士研究生
本計畫除繳交成果報告外，另含下列出國報告，共 1 份：
□移地研究心得報告
■出席國際學術會議心得報告
□國際合作研究計畫國外研究報告
處理方式：除列管計畫及下列情形者外，得立即公開查詢
□涉及專利或其他智慧財產權，□一年□二年後可公開查詢
中 華 民 國 102 年 10 月 28 日
附件一2 中文摘要 本研究集中處理中國在 WTO 爭端解決機制之正式參與程度與動機，並全面性地檢視中國所參與 之所有案例。 中國乃世界上新興之經濟強權，其任一舉動都受到世界矚目。從中國於 2001 年底加入 WTO 之後， 原本普遍預期將立即有許多對中國提起之爭端；然而，此等貿易戰爭在中國入世後之前五年間，並未 發生。起初中國積極以第三方參與，迄今共參與 102 個案件。藉由此等參與經驗，中國迄今共涉及 42 個爭端案件，其中作為原告 11 個案件，被告 31 個案件；相關爭訟主題則相當廣泛，尤其是關於傾銷 與補貼等等事項。 本研究並不鉅細靡遺地處理每一案件之相關事實與法律爭點；相反地，本研究集中分析中國在貿 易爭端中之策略與態度。藉由能力建置、各部門之爭端與相關貿易協定之分析，並觀察中國在 WTO 爭端解決機制中從被動者到主動者之角色轉變，本研究並分析了由中國與其他發展中國家所提出之相 關爭端解決機制改革之提議。 Summary
This research will focus on the motive for and degree of Chinese participation in the formal WTO dispute settlement process. It will get a comprehensive point of view through the trade dispute cases in which China involved since it became a WTO member.
As we know, China as an emerging new power in the world, no matter in political or economic meaning, has attracted the attention of all. Since Chinese entrance to WTO in late 2001, people estimated that many trade disputes will follow against China immediately; however, such a trade war did not happen at once until recent five years. At first, China actively participated until now in several disputes as third party for 102 cases. By these experiences, China encountered 42 cases (11 as complaint and 31 as defendant) in pretty dispersed domains till now, especially most of which relates to antidumping measures and subsidy and counter measures.
This research would not deal with fact details and legal arguments in each case; by contract, it would like to analyze the relevant strategy and attitude towards trade disputes in China. By studies in capacity building, disputes analyses in sectors and relevant trade agreements, and finally in the transformation of the role of China from a passive obedient to an active actor in WTO dispute settlement mechanism, this research will forecast some necessary DSB and/or WTO reform proposed for/by China and other developing countries.
關鍵詞：世界貿易組織、爭端解決機制、中國 Keywords: WTO, DSB, China
3
一、 前言
中國在 2001 年底加入 WTO 後，迄今恰好滿十年。其與國際間最重要之經貿組織產生密不可分之 連結，與 WTO 各成員也因之發生多邊主義(Multilateralism)之互動。然而，中國是否真能服膺 WTO 架
構下之「最惠國待遇」(Most-favored Nation Treatment)、「國民待遇」(National Treatment)與「禁止數量
限制」(prohibition of quantitative restriction)等基本原則？中國是否及如何主張 WTO 前述原則之各項例 外？而在個別協定領域，尤其是國際間關注中國的傾銷問題、國家主義與補助問題，甚至是智慧財產 權保護問題，中國是否能如期依其「入會議定書」(Protocol of Accession)在國內層次切實履踐各項國際 法義務並確保其執行？此等國際義務之遵循、國際法與國內法轉化等問題，除從表面之法制層面觀察 外，更需要瞭解中國於國際關係、國際經濟與國際政治中之立場，如此方能清楚解析中國所為「選擇 性調適」(selective adaptation)的背後成因。 對於前述問題，本計畫原則上集中在 WTO 法律與政策之層面，亦即以中國在 WTO 之角色為研究 中心；而必要時，則再以個別領域問題在中國之實踐問題（例如對於智慧財產權之保護）為例，兼及 相關中國之國內法制與政策以為輔助說明。至於「全面性」的 WTO 相關義務於中國之實踐轉化國內 法之問題，囿於研究時間與精力，只能留待他日後研究再進行。 二、 研究目的 本研究計畫從中國在 WTO 爭端解決機制之參與程度，瞭解其為何及如何從被動變為主動。研究 之具體面向上，本研究從中國於爭端解決機制之各案例（迄今為原告 11 件，為被告 31 件）出發，而 分三階段（被動階段 2002-2005，學習階段 2006-2007，主動階段 2008-2011），瞭解中國在 WTO 爭端 解決機制中之角色。 三、 文獻探討與研究方法 本研究主要採取文獻探討與案例分析法。相關文獻研討如下： （一） 本計畫規劃階段之文獻分析： 1. 關於中國在 WTO 爭端解決角色變化相關之中文參考文獻，龔柏華教授所編「WTO 爭端解 決與中國，第一卷」(2009)一書，首先針對中國參與 WTO 爭端解決機制之實踐予以評析， 並以圖表彙整方式清楚呈現中國加入 WTO 後參與爭端解決程序之角色變換，同時提供中國 利用 WTO 爭端解決機制之思考途徑與策略運用。依據龔教授之見解，中國於入世之初積極 以第三方身分參與 WTO 爭端解決案件對於中國主要有以下數項意涵：首先，可藉此獲取並 了解爭端各方國內相關貿易法規與管理制度之大量資訊，此類訊息對於中國未來與其他 WTO 會員之貿易以及對照並修正本身貿易相關法規和管理體制，皆具有重要參考價值；再 者，藉由觀察爭端各方於訴訟過程中之攻防，培養政府層面之法律專家及律師團隊，有效提 升對於爭端解決程序及實體規則之理解；此外，藉由於爭端案件中提交第三方書面陳述、參 加聽證會及回答 Panel 或專家小組之問題，闡述本身對於 WTO 規則之理解，間接影響各爭 端 Panel 及 Appellate Body （簡稱 AB）之認定；最後，從維護貿易利益之角度出發，中國 以第三分身分參與 WTO 爭端案件之審理，可公開表達中國對該項議題之立場，對於增加中 國在該項議題之影響力亦有所助益。
4
2. 陳欣教授所著「WTO 爭端解決中的法律解釋—司法克制主義 v.s.司法能動主義」(2010)一書 則從 WTO 爭端解決案例中之法解釋哲學分析 Panel 或 AB 針對 WTO 相關協定規範之見解對 於中國參與 WTO 爭端解決程序之意涵。陳教授於書中特別提到，WTO 爭端解決機制係採 取「規則導向」，以 WTO 協定為依據所作成之裁決具有確定性及可預測性等特點，對於經 貿實力較強之國家存在明顯、有力之約束，足以平衡爭端雙方經濟力量懸殊所導致之利益失 衡現象，雖然會員間提起之爭端具有政治意涵，惟仍包括市場進入(market access)及其他立 法和執法之問題。而透過 WTO 爭端解決機制解決貿易糾紛對於削弱主要國家貿易保護主義 之國內立法或行政管制措施具有正面助益，同時亦能敦促中國國內立法之修正，此相較於透 過雙邊諮商之方式更為有效及迅速。本書更援引若干中國以控訴方或被控訴方參與之爭端解 決案件，說明中國於 Panel 或 AB 審理過程中對於系爭措施之合法性爭議所持之立場，藉此 窺得中國參與爭端解決機制之角色轉換，文末更針對中國未來參與 WTO 爭端解決機制應秉 持之立場提出政策建議。
3. 有關中國參與 WTO 爭端解決角色變化之相關英文文獻，Kong Qingjiang 教授所著 CHINA AND
THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION(2002)一書中指出中國國內相關貿易法規、行政管制及司法
審查因應 WTO 多邊貿易體制與爭端解決機制之缺陷，如司法不獨立、欠缺審理國際貿易案 件之專業司法人才、行政機關存在貪污執法，以及行政管制和司法審查欠缺透明性等，此類 因素一方面可能造成中國國內法規違反 WTO 之相關規定及原則，而遭致其他會員之指控； 另一方面更凸顯中國國內相關立法、執行與司法制度及能力建構因應 WTO 多邊貿易體制衝 擊之不足，此類因素皆促使中國於入世之初不願積極參與正式爭端解決程序，寧願透過一段 期間之調適，藉由修正國相關法規以符合 WTO 相關協定，或從事制度性改革以強化國內行 政及司法機關執行 WTO 協定之效力及效能，從而蓄積本身參與 WTO 爭端解決程序之能量。 4. Chulsu Kim 教授所著 East Asia in the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism (2007)一文則從歷史
文化傳統角度分析東亞國家（含中國）於 GATT 時期及 WTO 解決貿易爭端之思維及策略， 主張中國與多數東亞國家（如日本、韓國）相同，對於貿易爭端均抱持不興訟(non-litigious) 之立場，而較偏好透過雙邊諮商的途徑予以解決，此亦與中國欠缺相關經驗與能力有關。作 者於文中亦提到，由於中國剛加入 WTO 即面臨國內相關法規與 WTO 多邊貿易體制之衝突 或調和問題，故西方國家願意給予中國一段調適期，此即表現於中國入會議定書中針對若干 議題所載明之過渡期限(transitional period)，惟該期間目前已屆滿，在各國要求中國相關國內 法規與貿易管制措施必須回歸 WTO 多邊貿易規範之前提下，中國系爭法規必然遭受各會員 更嚴厲之檢視，從而使系爭措施或法規招其他會員提交 WTO 爭端解決機制之機率大增。換 言之，中國參與 WTO 爭端解決機制之立場必將作出調整，一方面透過加入初期第三方參與 之途徑培養相關實務經驗，以強化本身直接與充分利用 DSB 之能力，另一方面利用多邊途 徑解決與其他會員間之貿易爭端亦能促進 WTO 多邊貿易體制之穩定性及可預測性，同時避 免透過傳統外交導向進行雙邊諮商所可能引發之潛在衝突。作者於文中另提及中國於杜哈回 合中積極參與 DSU 規則之修訂與 DSB 制度改革之談判，並提出若干提案，此亦足以證明中 國積極主導 WTO 爭端解決機制之企圖與決心。
5. 謝笠天(Pasha L. Hsieh)教授所著 China-United States Trade Negotiations and Disputes: The
WTO and Beyond (2009)一文則以中美經貿關係為例，從探索引發中美兩國間貿易爭端之成因
與歷史背景為出發點，指出 WTO 爭端解決機制對於解決中國與其他國家貿易糾紛之重要性。 謝教授認為，中國參與 WTO 爭端解決機制之角色轉變不僅代表其逐漸整合至全球經濟秩序 中，更增強了 WTO 多邊貿易體制之正當性。
5 析了中國加入 WTO 以來三個階段的態度演變，並分析其原因，最後提出中國應對 WTO 爭 端解決中的問題與對策。首先，在加入 WTO 初期，中國多以第三方身份積極參與 WTO 爭 端解決，透過第三方參與作為學習過程。由於對訴訟程序的不熟悉，加以中國儒家傳統的和 諧思想和非訟法律文化影響，中國在國際爭端解決中對以國家為主體直接訴諸國際法庭一直 持抵觸態度，因此，中國早期待爭端解決中作為被訴方時，往往採取妥協調和的立場。至 2006 年的中美汽車零件案，中國始轉換其調和立場。究其原因乃遂熟悉程序，WTO 訴訟經 驗的日益豐富，加上中國決策者認為中國的利益日益受到損害，於是認同訴諸 WTO 爭端解 決程序。2007 年 9 月，中國主動出擊，要求與美國磋商其決定對來自中國的銅版紙徵收初 步反傾銷和反補貼稅的問題，作為申訴方積極維護其權益。迄今已有多個作為申訴方的案子 在審理中。姜教授謂此現象表示中國已經學會了用法律語言表達其訴求，對抗廣義的貿易自 由主義，而 WTO 爭端解決程序也成為中國用來挑戰外國貿易壁壘的合法途逕。最後，提出 三點中國應對之對策：第一，中國在對 WTO 裁決幸行上應借鑒已開發國家的策略，盡可能 利用 DSB 程序之漏洞，「拖延」執行，以最大限度地維護國家利益；第二，建立私人產業推 動政府發起爭端解決程序的機制；第三，整合產業組織、民間團體和專業諮詢機構，承擔起 運用 WTO 爭端解決機制的專門工作。 7. 龔柏華教授在〈中國入世十年主動參與 WTO 爭端解決機制實踐述評〉（2011）中，則進一步 對中國入世十年來做為申訴方主動參與 WTO 爭端解決的實踐進行評述。首先，自總體觀察 面作評價，同樣是以 2007 年作為一轉捩點。在 2007 年之前，中國政府原則上不會主動發起 WTO 爭端解決，且中國政府採取的立場乃力求協商解決，以讓步為結局。惟自 2007 年後， 中國政府對待 WTO 爭端解決的態度已經趨於理性，並認知道應善於運用多邊規則處理貿易 爭端，爭取對中國最有利的結果。其次，本文針對中國作為申訴方參與 WTO 爭端解決的個 案個別作評析，可得結論乃肯定中國加入 WTO 十年來參與 WTO 爭端解決機制實踐之表現， 並提出未來中國政府應積極聯繫企業、專業服務機制和學者，形成互動機制，以便合理使用 WTO 爭端解決機制。 （二） 本計畫執行階段之文獻分析 在本計畫執行階段，較重要之國際參考文獻與引用觀點頁數如下，相關觀點已經整理並引用 在本研究初步成果之文章中（如後附件）。
1. Matthew Kennedy, China’s Role in WTO Dispute Settlement, 11(4) WORLD TRADE REVIEW 555,
558 (2012)
2. Lisa Toohey, China and the World Trade Organization: the First Decade, 60 INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY 788, 789 (2011)
3. Chi Manjiao, China’s Participation in WTO Dispute Settlement over the Past Decade:
Experiences and Impacts, 15(1) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW 29, 32 (2012)
4. Tong Qi, China’s First Decade Experience in the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Practice and
Prospect, 7 ASIAN J.WTO&INT’L HEALTH L.&POL’Y 143, 147 (2012)
5. Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, China’s Ten Years in the WTO: its Performance and New Challenges, 7(3) FRONTIERS OF LAW IN CHINA 329, 333 (2012)
6. Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a
Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 2 (2011)
7. Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Path to the Center Stage of WTO Dispute Settlement:
6
四、 結果與討論（含結論與建議）
依據本研究，吾人對於中國與 DSB 互動關係之轉變已有概略性理解，亦即中國從加入 WTO 初期 之透過雙方諮商而拒絕利用正式爭端解決程序演變為後期正式以原告或被告身分參與 DSB，此凸顯中 國參與 WTO 爭端解決程序之角色變換，係從原本被動觀察者(passive observer)轉變為後期之主動參與 者(active participant)。促成此種轉變之可能原因如下： 首先，東亞國家會員之文化偏好(cultural preference)習慣透過談判方式解決彼此間糾紛，對於將爭 端提交法律程序較反感。某些學者甚至認為中國加入 WTO 後傾向透過談判方式解決爭端，本質上顯 示出將爭端提交正式法律程序象徵雙邊諮商之失敗。 其次，WTO 爭端解決機制之立法思維較偏向西方國家之規範價值，此與中國國內規範並不相似， 中國尚須時間調整與適應。有學者提出所謂「選擇性調適」(selective adaptation)觀點解釋中國入世後不 主動興訟之原因，本概念係指國家接納國際規範與實踐並將其吸收於國內法之過程，目的在於使國內 相關法規能與國際法及國際制度相符，而欲達成此目標，國家透過國內法執行國際規範之制度能力 (institutional capacity)至為關鍵。 最後，若干評論家認為中國加入 WTO 初期缺乏利用爭端解決機制之制度能力，此構成其充分利 用該機制之阻礙。為彌補這方面能力之不足，中國於入世後前五年期間積極以第三分身分參與爭端解 決程序，藉此培訓爭端解決機制之專業能力與實務經驗。此外，中國更進一步與其國內私部門抱持良 好之溝通，藉以填補其資訊及能力之落差，透過強化與各產業公協會之聯繫，針對外國政府所實施可 能違反 WTO 協定相關規定之貿易障礙措施，亦諮詢各公協會之意見。透過培訓 WTO 爭端解決機制專 業人才與能力建構，並與私部門緊密聯繫，促成中國近年內積極以原告或被告身分參與 WTO 爭端解 決程序。
本研究具體研究成果，已經撰寫成學術論文，口頭發表在 2013 年 5 月底 Asian Law Institute 於印度 Bangalore 所舉辦第十屆學術研討會中，如後附件。近期將修改後投稿到 TSSCI 或相關英文期刊。
7
Celebrating Diversity: 10years of ASLI
10
th
Asian Law Institute Conference
Thursday and Friday, 23 & 24 May 2013, India
COVER PAGE FOR PAPER SUBMISSION
The Transformation of the Role of China in DSB/WTO: Transformation from a Passive Actor to an Active One
Yao-Ming Hsu
National Cheng-Chi University, Taiwan ymhsu@nccu.edu.tw
Note:
Please note that ASLI will distribute the papers to conference participants only for the sole purpose of discussion. The papers might also be put on a USB thumb drive to be distributed to conference participants. Neither the copies in the USB drive nor the printed copies of individual papers will constitute publication; papers will not thereafter be published by the conference organizers nor made available to individuals or libraries. Presenters retain the copyright to their papers and are free to commit them for publication elsewhere. All papers should not be cited without prior permission from the authors.
Submissions may be made separately to the Asian Journal of Comparative Law. Please refer to their website at http://law.nus.edu.sg/asli/asjcl.html. The decision to publish will be made independently by the journals’ editorial boards, not the conference organizers or ASLI.
For ASLI Secretariat Use Only
Date of Presentation
(delete where applicable):
Thursday, 23 May 2013 Friday, 24 May 2013
8
Introduction
China as a super global economic power certainly plays a significant role in international trade. Meanwhile, since its accession to WTO, the interaction between China and other Members in regular trade activities and disputes remarks the development of international trade law regime. Especially, how China would face the complaints from other Members and how China would corporate in the WTO dispute settlement system both model the future of WTO regime. Thus, this article will focus on the motive for and degree of Chinese participation in the formal WTO dispute settlement process. It will get a comprehensive point of view through the trade dispute cases in which China was involved in since it became a WTO member.
As we know, China as an emerging new power in the world, no matter in political or economic meaning, has attracted the attention of all. Since Chinese entrance to WTO in late 2001, people estimated that many trade disputes would follow against China immediately; however, such a trade war did not happen at once until recent years. At first, China actively participated in 97 disputes as third party until the end of April 20131. By these experiences, China encountered 41 cases (11 as complaint and 30 as defendant) in pretty dispersed distinct matters, particularly most of which relates to antidumping measures and subsidy and counter measures.
This article would not deal with all factual details and legal arguments in each case; by contract, it would like to analyze the relevant strategies and China’s attitude towards trade disputes. By simultaneous studies in capacity building, disputes analyses in sectors and relevant trade agreements, and finally in the transformation of the role of China from a passive obedient to an active actor in WTO dispute settlement mechanism (“DSM”), this article will forecast some necessary DSB and/or WTO reform proposed for/by China and other developing countries.
Section 1 of this article will at first describe the increasing participation of China in WTO disputes, both as defendant and complaint; section 2 will reveal its strategies in and the capacity building for participation in WTO/DSM; section 3 finally analyses the reasons for Chinese compliance to DSM. In the conclusion part, some propositions for/from China for the future reform of WTO/DSM will also be discussed.
1. China’s Increasing Participation of in WTO/DSM
To date in April 2013, China has filed 11 cases as complainant but has been involved in 30 cases as respondent as indicated in the following Table 1.
Table 1 Number and Frequency of China’s WTO Cases
Year 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 Total As complaint 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 1 3 11 As respondent 0 0 1 0 3 4 5 4 4 2 7 30 1
See Statistics on the webpage of “China and the WTO”, available at:
9
Total Number
1 0 1 0 3 5 6 7 5 3 10 41
Source: World Trade Organization, Disputes by Country/territory2
If we look into the details of each case, all the subjects and results could be summarized in the following Table 2 (China as defendant) & Table 3 (China as complainant).
Table 2 Subjects and Results of China’s WTO Cases-- China as Respondent (total 30 cases, 19 distinct matters)
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
China United States (“US”) DS 309 2004 VAT on Integrated Circuits 2004 mutually agreed solution
China EC, United States, Canada
DS 339, 340, 342 2006 Auto Parts July 2008 Panel Report December 2008 AB Report Implementation notified by China 21 Aug 2009 China US, Mexico DS 358, 359 2007 Taxes August 2007 Panel
established
Dec 2007 agreed solution with US
Feb 2008 agreed solution with Mexico
China US DS 362 2007 IPR Jan 2009 Panel Report
(adopted March 2009) China reported
implementation March 2010 8 April 2010, China and the United States notified the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
China US DS 363 2007 Publication
and
Audio-visual Projects
Panel Report August 2009 AB Report December 2009 China Implement Report March 2011
China EC,US, Canada
DS 372, 373, 378 2008 Financial Information
Dec 2008, agreed solution with EC
10
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
Services China US, Mexico,
Guatemala
DS 387, 388, 390 2008- 2009
Grants, Loans Ongoing
China Us, Mexico, Canada, Turkey, Columbia
DS 394, 395, 398 2009 Exportation of Raw Materials
July 2011 Panel Report Jan 2012 AB Report China agreed to implement by Dec 2012.
On 17 January 2013, China and the United States informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU.
China EU DS 407 2010 Provisional Anti-Dumping Duties on Certain Iron and Steel Fasteners Ongoing China US DS 413 2010 Electronic Payment Services
Panel Report July 2012 China agreed to implement by 31 July 2013 China US DS 414 2010 Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel
Panel Report June 2012 AB Report October 2012 November 2012 China agreed to implement, Feb 2013 the Director-General appointed Mr Claus-Dieter Ehlermann to act as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the DS 4 March 2103, Mr Ehlermann accepted this appointment. China US DS 419 2010 Measures concerning wind power equipment Ongoing On 12 January 2011, the European Union requested to join the consultations. On 17 January 2011, Japan requested to join the consultations.
11
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
China EU DS 425 2011 Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on X-Ray Security Inspection Equipment
26 Feb 2013 Panel Report circulated China US DS 427 2011 Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products Ongoing
China US, EU, Japan DS 431, 432, 433 2012 Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and Molybdenum Panel composed on 24 September 2012 China US DS 440 2012 Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Automobiles Panel composed on 11 February 2013 China US DS 450 2012 Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile and Automobile- Parts Industries Ongoing
China Mexico DS 451 2012 Measures
Relating to the Production and Exportation of Apparel and Ongoing
12
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
Textile Products
China Japan DS 454 Dec
2012 Measures Imposing Anti-Dumping Duties on High-Perform ance Stainless Steel Seamless Tubes Ongoing
Source: reorganized by the author according to the datum on the webpage of World Trade Organization, China and the WTO3
Table 3 Subjects and Results of China’s WTO Cases-- China as Complainant (total 11 cases, 11 distinct matters)
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
US EC, Japan, Korea, China, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand, Brazil DS 248,249, 251,252,253,254, 258,259 2002 Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products
Panel Report July 2003 AB Report Dec 2003 December 2003, the US informed Members that the US terminated all of the safeguard measures subject to this dispute US China DS 368 Sep 2007 Preliminary Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Determination s on Coated Free Sheet Paper No panel established (Ongoing?) US China DS 379 Sep 2008 Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products
Panel Report Oct 2010 AB Report March 2011 Implementation notified by respondent
on 31 August 2012
13
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
US China DS 392 April 2009 Certain Measures Affecting Imports of Poultry
Panel Report Apr 2009 AB Report Sep 2010 EC China DS 397 July 2009 Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners
Panel Report Dec 2010 AB Report July 2011 Implementation notified by respondent
on 23 Oct 2012
On 25 October 2012, China and the European Union informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
US China DS 399 Sep 2009 Measures Affecting Imports of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tyres
Panel Report Dec 2010 AB Report Sep 2011 EU China DS 405 Feb 2010 Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Footwear
Panel Report Feb 2010 AB Report Oct 2011 Implementation notified by respondent
on 17 Dec 2012
On 25 October 2012, China and the European Union informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
US China DS 422 Feb 2011 Anti-Dumping Measures on Shrimp and Diamond Sawblades
Panel Report June 2012 Implementation notified by respondent
on 26 March 2013
14
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
2012 Duty Measures on Certain Products US China DS 449 Sep 2012 Countervailing and Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Products
Panel established, but not yet composed on 17 December 2012 European Union and certain Member States China DS 454 Nov 2012 Certain Measures Affecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector Ongoing
Source: reorganized by the author according to the datum on the webpage of World Trade Organization, China and the WTO4
From the cases list mentioned above, we could clearly know that China is now one of the “Big Three”5, along with the US and the EU in WTO disputes settlement. For analyzing the transformation of China’s role in WTO/DSM, some scholars divided the stages of China’s participation in WTO disputes into two stages, and some others defined them as three stages.
For example, Matthew Kennedy used the two stages analyses by the criteria of every five years since the China’s accession in 2001; he argued that in the first five years (2002-2006), China was a perennial third party in panel proceeding and since the second five years (2007-2011), China became a principal party in its own rights at the consultations, panel and appellate stages6. Moreover, Minyou Yu and Hen Liu basically took the same chronicle division as first and second five years for China’s role in WTO/DSM7. In addition, a little bit different, Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang used the year of 2009 for the division of two phases8, because since 2009, China became a major player in WTO/DSM.
Amongst the three stages analyses, Lisa Toohey described the China’s participation in WTO disputes as “early engagement”9
(2001-2006), “escalating involvement”10 (2007-2008) and final “key litigant asserting
4 Available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/china_e.htm (visited: April 28, 2013) 5
Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, China’s Ten Years in the WTO: its Performance and New Challenges, 7(3) FRONTIERS OF LAW IN CHINA 329, 333 (2012).
6 Matthew Kennedy, China’s Role in WTO Dispute Settlement, 11(4) WORLD TRADE REVIEW 555, 558 (2012). 7
Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, supra note 5, at 352. 8
Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 2 (2011); Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Path to the Center Stage of WTO Disput Settlement: Challenges and
Reponses, 5(9) GLOBAL TRADE AND CUSTOMS JOURNAL 365, 365 (2010).
9 Lisa Toohey, China and the World Trade Organization: the First Decade, 60 INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY 788, 789 (2011).
15
influence”11 (2009-). Similarly, Tong Qi also divided the China’s participation in WTO/DSM into three phases12: “an active third-party”13 (before 2006), “from a reluctant and easy-to-compromise respondent to a more hardened opponent”14 (2006-2009) and “from a shy complainant to a proactive challenger”15 (after 2009). Besides, Chi Manjiao also tacitly share the three stages division by using the two landmark years of 2006 (the end of “the transitional period”) and 2009 (“the year of China for the WTO dispute settlement since 7 of 14 case filed in that year involved China”)16. Furthermore, Marcia Don Harpaz shared the years of 2006 and 2007 for division, because in the year of 2006 “China decides to fight to the finish”17 in Auto Parts case, and in 2007 “China lodged its first independent formal complaint”18.
Nevertheless, all the statistics in the above mentioned studies dated before 2012. If we include the datum in 2012, we could find an amazing engagement of China in WTO/DSM in amount of 10 cases, more than the Year of China in 2009 in 7 cases. Especially, in 2012, China as respondent was involved in 7 cases. Therefore, if we observed the China’s participation to date in April 2013, we could pick up some important years for remarking different periods, as show in Table 4.
Table 4 Remarkable Years and Events for China’s Participation in WTO/DSM
Year Event
2002 China’s first win in DSM (along with other countries) against US
2004 First complaint against China
2006 Auto Parts Case: The first Case that China decided to go through all the proceedings (but China’s first loss) 2007 China’s first independent claim (no results yet)
2009 Year of China in WTO/DSM
2012 Involved in 10 cases more than in 2009 (7 cases) A Super Year of China?
Source: by the Author
If we observe the respondent role of China, the year of 2004 is worthy of attention because of the first compliant against China was filed and finally the case was settled by mutual agreement. In addition, the year of 2006 is without doubt the most important because China firstly decided to go through all the proceedings in dispute settlements. In addition, some special developments in cases where China was respondent also attract us, for example, in the case of Auto Parts (DS 339, 340 & 342) where China firstly lost as respondent, China reported its implementation in 2009; in the case of IPR (DS 362), it’s the first time that China entered the
11 Ibid., at 795. 12
Tong Qi, China’s First Decade Experience in the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Practice and Prospect, 7 ASIAN J. WTO & INT’L HEALTH L. & POL’Y 143, 147 (2012).
13 Ibid., at 160. 14
Ibid., at 161. 15
Ibid., at 163.
16 Chi Manjiao, China’s Participation in WTO Dispute Settlement over the Past Decade: Experiences and Impacts, 15(1) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW 29, 32 (2012).
17 Marcia Don Harpaz, Sense and Sensibilities of China and WTO Dispute Settlement, 44(6) Journal of World Trade 1155, 1171 (2010).
16
stage of compliance proceedings (DSU articles 21 & 22) as respondent; later in the case of Raw Materials (DS 394, 395 & 398), the proceedings of compliance also intervened.
However, if we look at the role of complaint, even though China at the outset won a case in 2002 along with other Members, the year of 2007 is significant for China’s first independent compliant, even though there’s no further development of this case but just remaining in the consultation stage. And, the year of 2009 will be noteworthy cause in that year China began its active participation for filing complaints against other Members. The year of 2009 is also momentous because China enjoyed its first sole victory in Poultry case (DS 392). But, in the case of Tyres (DS 399), it’s the first time that China as complaint did not convince the Panel and the Appellate Body for favoring its arguments against the US. On the other hand, China also started to intervene in compliance proceedings against the EU in the case of Footwear (DS 405) in Oct 2012. In sum, if we take a synthesis perspective, China’s participation in WTO/DSM majorly began in 2006, and remains till now in the average of more than 5 cases per year, especially reaching the new peak of 10 cases in 2012 (A Super Year of China?). Maybe we could describe the participation of China as a linear increasing development to date.
2. China’s Strategies and Capacity Building for Participation in WTO/DSM
In a board sense, we could summarize the development of the role of China in WTO/DSM as from a passive obedient to active participant. In addition, the development of capacity building for the participation and the experiences in third-party participation reinforce the China’s transformation of role.
2.1 Strategies for Participation: from Passive to Active Role
During the negotiation and in the beginning of China’s accession to WTO, some scholars argued the possible flood of disputes against China would happen19, or China might disrupt or reshape the WTO’s works. This did not happen in the honeymoon period20 of the first five years of China’s accession. However, more and more disputes against China were initiated, especially in 2012. Besides, some other even worried about the willingness of the Dragon (China) to fully participate in the WTO legalism; nevertheless, the evidence finally shows that at least to date, WTO/DSM has been quite effective in dealing with China21. What are the strategies of China for the participation in WTO/DSM? We could summarize them in two different roles that China plays in WTO/DSM: passive stage and active one.
In the passive stage, some scholars proposed that maybe the traditional Chinese culture for peaceful negotiation for disputes settlement and the litigation avoidance strategy play a significant role22. Besides, China prefers bilateral and diplomatic solution for international disputes rather than litigation23. However, some other argued that “such a Chinese tradition in itself should in no way be interpreted as on that
19 Sylvia Ostry, WTO Membership for China: To Be and Not To Be: Is that the Answer? in THE STATE OF ECONOMICS IN CANADA: FESTSCHRIFT IN HONOUR OF DAVID SLATER 263 (Patrick Grady & Andrew Sharpe eds., 2001)
20
Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 2 (2011).
21 Henry Gao, Taming the Dragon: China’s Experience in the WTO Dispute Settlement System, 34(4) LEGAL ISSUES OF ECONOMIC INTEGRATION 369, 390 (2007). Even Gao set this conclusion in 2007, the effectiveness of WTO/DSM to China is beyond any doubts nowadays in 2013.
22
For example, see Marcia Don Harpaz, supra note 17, at 1169. 23 Tong Qi, supra note 12, at 161.
17
emphasizes unilateral concession or self-surrender.”24 In fact, the author would prefer to describe this phase as “incapable to effective participation” because the lack of international trade litigation knowledge and expertise hindered the effective participation of China in WTO disputes legal proceedings. This disadvantage was overcome by enormous third-party participations in DSM in first years and continuous capacity building. When China is ready and well-equipped with western, legalist international trade law weapons, it is not afraid
at all and change its strategy from defense to offense. In the active stage, China uses both the defensive and offensive strategies for assuring its rights in WTO
and its trade interests, quite different from its unwillingness to engage in other international tribunals.
2.2 Capacity Building & Third-Party Experiences
In fact, China has gained a lot from its experiences as Third Party participation in lots of cases between other WTO members25. Even before 2003, China only reserved its Third Party rights for only three times; but since 2003, China participated in every case till 2007. Since 2007, China participated as Third Party on a selective base26. The reasons for intensive Third Party participation (“learning by doing”) could be summarized as27: (1) China has increasing trade and interests in multilateral trade system; (2) application and clarification of WTO rules will affect all Members: (3) the process of WTO/DSM becomes more and more technical. Thus, the Third Party participation would reinforce China in the following domains: personnel training, learning for other party, information collection and participation in WTO governance28.
Remarkably, for preparation in participation in WTO/DSM, China launched several institutional reforms and received at the same time the helps from foreign law firms and from some WTO research centers. For example, institutionally, China reorganized its Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) in 2003 and set the Department of WTO Affairs and the Department of Treaty and Law under it. The former department primarily deals with WTO notifications and enquiries; the latter department mainly engages in WTO disputes negotiation and litigations. In addition, besides of installations in academic filed the discipline of international economic law29, China also cooperates with think tanks such as Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen WTO Affairs Consultation Centers, which were installed by local governments, to bridge the information and communication gaps. Moreover, domestic and foreign law firms both participate in several cases for the preparation of litigation submissions30.
3. China’s Reasons for Participation and Compliance to WTO/DSM
At first, as Matthew Kennedy remarked, certain features of WTO, especially the DSM, could have been
24 Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 35 (2011).
25 Tong Qi, supra note 12, at 161.
26 Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 25 (2011).
27
Ibid, at 25.
28 Tong Qi, supra note 12, at 161; Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, supra note 5, at 353; Marcia Don Harpaz, supra note 17, at 1169; Lisa Toohey, supra note 9, at 790. See also Pasha L. Hsieh, China’s Development of International Economic Law and WTO Legal
Capacity Building, 13(4) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW 997, 1028-9 (2010). 29
Pasha L. Hsieh., ibid., at 1003. 30 Ibid., at 1023.
18
challenging for China31. First, WTO/DSM features compulsory jurisdiction and subsequent possible trade sanctions, in which some sovereignty issue is involved; second, WTO dispute settlement panels and Appellate Body will conduct independent review of the legality of Members’ measures; third, effective participation in WTO/DSM requires considerable legal and technical capacity and; finally, the transitional review mechanism in China’s terms of accession serves as a reminder of the gulf existing between China and its major trading partners. However, empirically in many cases to date, as we mentioned above, China gradually grows in its capacity building for the participation in litigations, and the compulsory jurisdiction and review of domestic measures are also well accepted by China32.
The participation of China in WTO/DSM originates from several reasons: (1) the immense trading interactions between China and other major trade partners, especially the US and the EU, force China to follow the same trade rules in WTO; (2) the WTO/DSM directly calls for enhanced WTO capacity building33 in China for defending its own interests, even for taking an offensive position to other WTO members.
It’s also noteworthy that till now, China has been quite restrained in its reactions and has shown due respect for the authority of the WTO/DSM, always expressing its willingness to implement and complete implementation within a period of time34, even though some disputes about the full implementation have also emerged. It’s also because the close interactions between China and its major trading partners drive China to comply with WTO/DSM rulings. However, China’s contemporary conformity to dispute settlement practices does not necessarily guarantee the brilliant future of DSM. There seems to be a danger that China will follow its major trading partners to delay the full implementation, even for no implementation, because non-compliance with DSM recommendations sometimes appears to be some kind of tacit mutual understanding35 among these major trading actors in the world.
Conclusion
To date China plays an incomparable role in international trade and also participate as “Big Three” along with the US and the EU in WTO/DSM. By experiences as Third Party participation in plenty of cases, China gradually changes its role in the WTO/DSM from passive actor to active one, both as defendant and complainant. As for compliance with the DSB recommendations, till now China acts without doubt in conformity with the rulings in each case. The future is to be witnessed, especially in the forum of possible DSM reform for developing countries’ needs.
31
Matthew Kennedy, supra note 6, at 573-4. 32 Tong Qi, supra note 12, at 166.
33 Pasha L. Hsieh, supra note 28, at 1007.
34 Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 31 (2011); Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, supra note 5, at 369.
1
國科會補助專題研究計畫出席國際學術會議心得報告
日期： 102 年 6 月 4 日一、參加會議經過
因班機往返關係，出國報告人於 5/21 下午搭機，經新加坡轉機，於 5/21 晚上抵達印度班加羅爾 5/23 上午，報告人偕同本院其他兩位與會教授（張冠群副教授與沈宗倫副教授）一同抵達會場 5/23 聆聽各場次報告人報告，包括跨國法律規範、法律與發展、智財與競爭法等場次。 5/24 上午，報告人進行自己之學術專題報告「中國在世界貿易組織爭端解決機制角色之轉變」，下 午並聆聽憲政發展場次其他發表人報告。 5/24 傍晚前往機場搭機，經新加坡轉機，於 5/25 下午返抵台北。二、與會心得
亞洲法學院聯盟今年適逢該會議召開第十週年，每年均有百餘位學者與會，單稱亞洲地區最 大綜合性法學年會，發表論文涵蓋各法律子領域。今年與會，主辦單位 National Law School of India University 相當用心規劃會議，除專 題演講、平行 Panel 各場次討論外，閉幕前並有印度文化舞蹈音樂表演，相當多元與豐富。
計畫編號
NSC 101-2410-H-004-050-
計畫名稱
中 國 在 WTO 中 角 色 之 轉 變 ： 爭 端 解 決 機 制 、 決 策 機 制 與 發 展
議 題
出國人員
姓名
許耀明
服務機構
及職稱
國立政治大學法律學系
會議時間
102 年 5 月 23 日
至
102 年 5 月 24 日
會議地點
印度、班加羅爾 Bangalore
會議名稱
(中文)第十屆亞洲法學院聯盟年會：慶祝多元性
(英文) 10
thASLI Conference: Celebrating Diversity: 10
thyear of ASLI
發表題目
(中文)中國在世界貿易組織爭端解決機制角色之演變：從被動到主動
(英文) The Transformation of the Role of China in DSB/WTO:
Transformation from a Passive Actor to an Active One
2 會議中各國代表發表之論文，多為各法學子領域最新之議題，參與會議除有學術上最新之交 流外，並可藉此與各國學者結識與交流，增進學術合作情誼。 稍稍可惜的是，今年台灣部分僅有五位教授與會（政大三位，台大兩位），與歷屆相比，稍稍 減少。此可能因為許多老師未必知道有此會議，或者是因為該會議註冊費用可觀而不願參與，希 望日後有機會能多多宣導或多加以補助。
三、發表論文全文或摘要
如後
3
Celebrating Diversity: 10years of ASLI
10
th
Asian Law Institute Conference
Thursday and Friday, 23 & 24 May 2013, India
COVER PAGE FOR PAPER SUBMISSION
The Transformation of the Role of China in DSB/WTO: Transformation from a Passive Actor to an Active One
Yao-Ming Hsu
National Cheng-Chi University, Taiwan ymhsu@nccu.edu.tw
Note:
Please note that ASLI will distribute the papers to conference participants only for the sole purpose of discussion. The papers might also be put on a USB thumb drive to be distributed to conference participants. Neither the copies in the USB drive nor the printed copies of individual papers will constitute publication; papers will not thereafter be published by the conference organizers nor made available to individuals or libraries. Presenters retain the copyright to their papers and are free to commit them for publication elsewhere. All papers should not be cited without prior permission from the authors.
Submissions may be made separately to the Asian Journal of Comparative Law. Please refer to their website at http://law.nus.edu.sg/asli/asjcl.html. The decision to publish will be made independently by the journals’ editorial boards, not the conference organizers or ASLI.
4
Date of Presentation
(delete where applicable):
Thursday, 23 May 2013 Friday, 24 May 2013
Panel Assigned:
Introduction
China as a super global economic power certainly plays a significant role in international trade. Meanwhile, since its accession to WTO, the interaction between China and other Members in regular trade activities and disputes remarks the development of international trade law regime. Especially, how China would face the complaints from other Members and how China would corporate in the WTO dispute settlement system both model the future of WTO regime. Thus, this article will focus on the motive for and degree of Chinese participation in the formal WTO dispute settlement process. It will get a comprehensive point of view through the trade dispute cases in which China was involved in since it became a WTO member.
As we know, China as an emerging new power in the world, no matter in political or economic meaning, has attracted the attention of all. Since Chinese entrance to WTO in late 2001, people estimated that many trade disputes would follow against China immediately; however, such a trade war did not happen at once until recent years. At first, China actively participated in 97 disputes as third party until the end of April 20131. By these experiences, China encountered 41 cases (11 as complaint and 30 as defendant) in pretty dispersed distinct matters, particularly most of which relates to antidumping measures and subsidy and counter measures.
This article would not deal with all factual details and legal arguments in each case; by contract, it would like to analyze the relevant strategies and China’s attitude towards trade disputes. By simultaneous studies in capacity building, disputes analyses in sectors and relevant trade agreements, and finally in the transformation of the role of China from a passive obedient to an active actor in WTO dispute settlement mechanism (“DSM”), this article will forecast some necessary DSB and/or WTO reform proposed for/by China and other developing countries.
Section 1 of this article will at first describe the increasing participation of China in WTO disputes, both as defendant and complaint; section 2 will reveal its strategies in and the capacity building for participation in WTO/DSM; section 3 finally analyses the reasons for Chinese compliance to DSM. In the conclusion part, some propositions for/from China for the future reform of WTO/DSM will also be discussed.
1. China’s Increasing Participation of in WTO/DSM
To date in April 2013, China has filed 11 cases as complainant but has been involved in 30 cases as
1 See Statistics on the webpage of “China and the WTO”, available at:
5
respondent as indicated in the following Table 1.
Table 1 Number and Frequency of China’s WTO Cases
Year 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 Total As complaint 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 1 3 11 As respondent 0 0 1 0 3 4 5 4 4 2 7 30 Total Number 1 0 1 0 3 5 6 7 5 3 10 41
Source: World Trade Organization, Disputes by Country/territory2
If we look into the details of each case, all the subjects and results could be summarized in the following Table 2 (China as defendant) & Table 3 (China as complainant).
Table 2 Subjects and Results of China’s WTO Cases-- China as Respondent (total 30 cases, 19 distinct matters)
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
China United States (“US”) DS 309 2004 VAT on Integrated Circuits 2004 mutually agreed solution
China EC, United States, Canada
DS 339, 340, 342 2006 Auto Parts July 2008 Panel Report December 2008 AB Report Implementation notified by China 21 Aug 2009 China US, Mexico DS 358, 359 2007 Taxes August 2007 Panel
established
Dec 2007 agreed solution with US
Feb 2008 agreed solution with Mexico
China US DS 362 2007 IPR Jan 2009 Panel Report
(adopted March 2009) China reported
implementation March 2010 8 April 2010, China and the United States notified the DSB of Agreed Procedures
6
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
China US DS 363 2007 Publication
and
Audio-visual Projects
Panel Report August 2009 AB Report December 2009 China Implement Report March 2011 China EC,US, Canada DS 372, 373, 378 2008 Financial Information Services
Dec 2008, agreed solution with EC
China US, Mexico, Guatemala
DS 387, 388, 390 2008- 2009
Grants, Loans Ongoing
China Us, Mexico, Canada, Turkey, Columbia
DS 394, 395, 398 2009 Exportation of Raw Materials
July 2011 Panel Report Jan 2012 AB Report China agreed to implement by Dec 2012.
On 17 January 2013, China and the United States informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU.
China EU DS 407 2010 Provisional Anti-Dumping Duties on Certain Iron and Steel Fasteners Ongoing China US DS 413 2010 Electronic Payment Services
Panel Report July 2012 China agreed to implement by 31 July 2013
7
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
China US DS 414 2010 Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel
Panel Report June 2012 AB Report October 2012 November 2012 China agreed to implement, Feb 2013 the Director-General appointed Mr Claus-Dieter Ehlermann to act as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the DS 4 March 2103, Mr Ehlermann accepted this appointment. China US DS 419 2010 Measures concerning wind power equipment Ongoing On 12 January 2011, the European Union requested to join the consultations. On 17 January 2011, Japan requested to join the consultations. China EU DS 425 2011 Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties on X-Ray Security Inspection Equipment
26 Feb 2013 Panel Report circulated China US DS 427 2011 Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products Ongoing
China US, EU, Japan DS 431, 432, 433 2012 Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and Molybdenum Panel composed on 24 September 2012
8
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
and Countervailing Duties on Certain Automobiles on 11 February 2013 China US DS 450 2012 Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile and Automobile- Parts Industries Ongoing
China Mexico DS 451 2012 Measures
Relating to the Production and Exportation of Apparel and Textile Products Ongoing
China Japan DS 454 Dec
2012 Measures Imposing Anti-Dumping Duties on High-Perform ance Stainless Steel Seamless Tubes Ongoing
Source: reorganized by the author according to the datum on the webpage of World Trade Organization, China and the WTO3
Table 3 Subjects and Results of China’s WTO Cases-- China as Complainant (total 11 cases, 11 distinct matters)
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
US EC, Japan, Korea, China, Switzerland, Norway, New DS 248,249, 251,252,253,254, 258,259 2002 Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of
Panel Report July 2003 AB Report Dec 2003 December 2003, the US informed Members that the
9
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
Zealand, Brazil
Certain Steel Products
US terminated all of the safeguard measures subject to this dispute US China DS 368 Sep 2007 Preliminary Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Determination s on Coated Free Sheet Paper No panel established (Ongoing?) US China DS 379 Sep 2008 Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products
Panel Report Oct 2010 AB Report March 2011 Implementation notified by respondent on 31 August 2012 US China DS 392 April 2009 Certain Measures Affecting Imports of Poultry
Panel Report Apr 2009 AB Report Sep 2010 EC China DS 397 July 2009 Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners
Panel Report Dec 2010 AB Report July 2011 Implementation notified by respondent
on 23 Oct 2012
On 25 October 2012, China and the European Union informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
10
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
US China DS 399 Sep 2009 Measures Affecting Imports of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tyres
Panel Report Dec 2010 AB Report Sep 2011 EU China DS 405 Feb 2010 Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Footwear
Panel Report Feb 2010 AB Report Oct 2011 Implementation notified by respondent
on 17 Dec 2012
On 25 October 2012, China and the European Union informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
US China DS 422 Feb 2011 Anti-Dumping Measures on Shrimp and Diamond Sawblades
Panel Report June 2012 Implementation notified by respondent on 26 March 2013 US China DS 437 May 2012 Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain Products Ongoing US China DS 449 Sep 2012 Countervailing and Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Products
Panel established, but not yet composed
11
Respondent Complainant Dispute number Year Subject Results
European Union and certain Member States China DS 454 Nov 2012 Certain Measures Affecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector Ongoing
Source: reorganized by the author according to the datum on the webpage of World Trade Organization, China and the WTO4
From the cases list mentioned above, we could clearly know that China is now one of the “Big Three”5, along with the US and the EU in WTO disputes settlement. For analyzing the transformation of China’s role in WTO/DSM, some scholars divided the stages of China’s participation in WTO disputes into two stages, and some others defined them as three stages.
For example, Matthew Kennedy used the two stages analyses by the criteria of every five years since the China’s accession in 2001; he argued that in the first five years (2002-2006), China was a perennial third party in panel proceeding and since the second five years (2007-2011), China became a principal party in its own rights at the consultations, panel and appellate stages6. Moreover, Minyou Yu and Hen Liu basically took the same chronicle division as first and second five years for China’s role in WTO/DSM7. In addition, a little bit different, Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang used the year of 2009 for the division of two phases8, because since 2009, China became a major player in WTO/DSM.
Amongst the three stages analyses, Lisa Toohey described the China’s participation in WTO disputes as “early engagement”9
(2001-2006), “escalating involvement”10 (2007-2008) and final “key litigant asserting influence”11 (2009-). Similarly, Tong Qi also divided the China’s participation in WTO/DSM into three phases12: “an active third-party”13 (before 2006), “from a reluctant and easy-to-compromise respondent to a
4 Available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/china_e.htm (visited: April 28, 2013)
5 Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, China’s Ten Years in the WTO: its Performance and New Challenges, 7(3) FRONTIERS OF LAW IN CHINA 329, 333 (2012).
6 Matthew Kennedy, China’s Role in WTO Dispute Settlement, 11(4) WORLD TRADE REVIEW 555, 558 (2012). 7 Minyou Yu & Hen Liu, supra note 5, at 352.
8 Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Experience in Dealing with WTO Dispute Settlement: a Chinese Perspective, 45(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD TRADE 1, 2 (2011); Wenhua Ji & Cui Huang, China’s Path to the Center Stage of WTO Disput Settlement: Challenges and
Reponses, 5(9) GLOBAL TRADE AND CUSTOMS JOURNAL 365, 365 (2010).
9 Lisa Toohey, China and the World Trade Organization: the First Decade, 60 INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY 788, 789 (2011).
10 Ibid., at 791. 11 Ibid., at 795.
12 Tong Qi, China’s First Decade Experience in the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Practice and Prospect, 7 ASIAN J. WTO & INT’L HEALTH L. & POL’Y 143, 147 (2012).
12
more hardened opponent”14 (2006-2009) and “from a shy complainant to a proactive challenger”15 (after 2009). Besides, Chi Manjiao also tacitly share the three stages division by using the two landmark years of 2006 (the end of “the transitional period”) and 2009 (“the year of China for the WTO dispute settlement since 7 of 14 case filed in that year involved China”)16. Furthermore, Marcia Don Harpaz shared the years of 2006 and 2007 for division, because in the year of 2006 “China decides to fight to the finish”17 in Auto Parts case, and in 2007 “China lodged its first independent formal complaint”18.
Nevertheless, all the statistics in the above mentioned studies dated before 2012. If we include the datum in 2012, we could find an amazing engagement of China in WTO/DSM in amount of 10 cases, more than the Year of China in 2009 in 7 cases. Especially, in 2012, China as respondent was involved in 7 cases. Therefore, if we observed the China’s participation to date in April 2013, we could pick up some important years for remarking different periods, as show in Table 4.
Table 4 Remarkable Years and Events for China’s Participation in WTO/DSM
Year Event
2002 China’s first win in DSM (along with other countries) against US
2004 First complaint against China
2006 Auto Parts Case: The first Case that China decided to go through all the proceedings (but China’s first loss) 2007 China’s first independent claim (no results yet)
2009 Year of China in WTO/DSM
2012 Involved in 10 cases more than in 2009 (7 cases) A Super Year of China?
Source: by the Author
If we observe the respondent role of China, the year of 2004 is worthy of attention because of the first compliant against China was filed and finally the case was settled by mutual agreement. In addition, the year of 2006 is without doubt the most important because China firstly decided to go through all the proceedings in dispute settlements. In addition, some special developments in cases where China was respondent also attract us, for example, in the case of Auto Parts (DS 339, 340 & 342) where China firstly lost as respondent, China reported its implementation in 2009; in the case of IPR (DS 362), it’s the first time that China entered the stage of compliance proceedings (DSU articles 21 & 22) as respondent; later in the case of Raw Materials (DS 394, 395 & 398), the proceedings of compliance also intervened.
14 Ibid., at 161. 15 Ibid., at 163.
16 Chi Manjiao, China’s Participation in WTO Dispute Settlement over the Past Decade: Experiences and Impacts, 15(1) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW 29, 32 (2012).
17 Marcia Don Harpaz, Sense and Sensibilities of China and WTO Dispute Settlement, 44(6) Journal of World Trade 1155, 1171 (2010).
