Originally from:
The WTO: Governance, Dispute Settlement & Developing Countries
The WTO: Governance, Dispute Settlement & Developing Countries-Digital
Chapter 38 - Preview Page
Does the World Trade Organization Prohibit Retorsions and Reprisals? Legitimate “Contracting Out” or “Clinical Isolation” Again?
Pieter-Jan Kuijper
It was not without reason that the Appellate Body, very early in its existence, remarked rather loudly that WTO law did not exist “in clinical isolation from” general international law. There had been some justified complaints from practitioners as well as commentators that panels under the GATT did not properly use the normal methods of treaty interpretation under international law, that they had primitive views of State responsibility and the GATT’s federal clause (Article XXIV:12), that they did not have the proper notions about the relationship between GATT and other international agreements. These concerns led some to question whether the GATT had not isolated itself so far from general international law that it had become a closed system. The question was also raised, perhaps more maliciously, whether it was not simply a question of ignorance of international law.
The last explanation is certainly no longer a viable option with the presence of some excellent international lawyers, like Florentino P. Feliciano and Georges Abi-Saab in the Appellate Body since its inception.
About the Author:
Pieter-Jan Kuijper is Director/Principal Legal Advisor for the European Commission.