Abstract:This book, examining the efficacy of the dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organization (WTO), is very timely. The WTO negotiating machinery is on “life support” because of the failure of the Doha Round and the increasing propensity of its members to negotiate trade agreements outside the WTO. However, the number of cases initiated by members in the past year has increased significantly, and the dispute settlement system, viewed by many commentators and members as the “jewel in the crown” of the WTO, has remained robust and strong. In this interesting book, Jacqueline D. Krikorian examines the WTO dispute settlement system through a unique prism. Rather than looking at it as an international legal system, she adopts a “law and politics” approach, which essentially means examining the WTO panel system and Appellate Body as if they were “courts” conducting “judicial review” in a domestic legal system, and she assesses the impact of their decisions on domestic political systems. She assumes that the Uruguay Round signalled a major shift from a “non-binding” to a “binding” dispute settlement system and asks why WTO members would have been keen to adopt a strong, binding dispute settlement system if it would affect their ability to regulate in the future. She sets out to examine whether, in fact, the experience with the WTO panels and the Appellate Body in the cases involving the United States and Canada from 1995 to 2011 limited those countries’ abilities to regulate in their interests. While it may be fashionable in some circles to apply domestic administrative and constitutional law concepts when analyzing the functioning of international treaties and dispute settlement systems, several of the assumptions that Krikorian makes relating to the WTO dispute settlement system simply do not apply. Terms such as judicial review and courts have a specific meaning and do not apply in the WTO context. Judicial review relates to a court’s authority to review a legislative or executive act under administrative law or constitutional law. WTO panels and the Appellate Body do not conduct judicial review; they resolve disputes as requested by members. Nor can panels and the Appellate Body be characterized as courts. The Appellate Body is not permanent; it is composed of part-time members, and it has jurisdiction (like panels) only to hear specific appeals on a case-by-case basis. It does not have continuing jurisdiction (e.g., it cannot enforce its own orders). It does not have jurisdiction to (1) decide what cases to accept on appeal, (2) decide what legal questions to address, (3) decide what laws to apply, or (4) decide the appropriate remedy. In fact, panels and the Appellate Body may not order a remedy and almost never HUMANIT IES 425

The National Security Exception at the WTO: Should It Just Be a Matter of When Members Can Avail of It? What About How ?

THE NATIONAL SECURITY EXCEPTION IN WTO LAW: EMERGING JURISPRUDENCE AND FUTURE DIRECTION

The First WTO's Ruling on National Security Exception: Balancing Interests or Opening Pandora's Box?

Trade Multilateralism and U.S. National Security: The Making of the GATT Security Exception

The Unsettled Governance of the Dual-Use Items under Article XXI(b)(ii) GATT: A New Battleground for WTO Security Exceptions

The Determination of “Basic Security Interests” in the WTO Security Exception Clause

Unpacking the Concept of ‘Energy Security’: Lessons from Recent WTO Case Law

Systemic Fatigue in the WTO Regime: The Case with Trade, Security and Technological Transition

Security Exception Negotiation from the Perspective of Habermas’ Discourse Ethics

The Exception on Exhaustible Natural Resources under the WTO Context

International Trade Dispute Settlement and Protection of National Security Interests——from the Perspective of GATT Article XXI

Protectionism in the Era of Globalisation: The Misuse of Anti-Dumping Instruments From an EU Perspective.

Trade Remedy Actions by WTO Members: A Cause for Concern or a Reflection of Improved Market Access?

Free Trade vis-à-vis Morality: Revisiting the Public-Morals Exception Clause in the World Trade Organization

Do Exceptions Prove the Rule: An Inquiry Into the Exceptions to The (Commercial) Data Flow Rules in the WTO JSI on E-Commerce (SIEL 2021 Conference Poster)

International Trade Law and Domestic Policy: Canada, the United States and the WTO by Jacqueline D. Krikorian (review)

The WCO SAFE Framework of Standards: Avoiding Excess in Global Supply Chain Security Policy

Lessons from the Case of Restrictive Exportation of Raw Materials and Reflections on the WTO Exception Rules

WTO Crisis through the Lens of Hegemony Theories: When International Trade Law and Geopolitics Collide

The Legal Analysis on GATT Article 20 Invoked in China's Export Restriction Measures on Various Raw Materials

The National Security Consequences of the Major Questions Doctrine