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

WTO and Non-Trade Issues: Inside/Outside WTO

The World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy

CONTEXTUALISM IN WTO CASE LAW ON MINERAL EXPORT RESTRICTIONS: PUZZLES AND IMPLICATIONS

Critically Rethinking the Law of WTO:Its 20 Years and Future：With Comments on “The Law of WTO Is the Model of International Law”

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

Legal Interpretation and Institutionalization of WTO/DSB's Power

The EU, the WTO and China: Legal Pluralism and International Trade Regulation

Alternative Dispute Settlement and the Jurisprudential Legacy of the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body

Jurisdictional Conflict Between the World Trade Organization and Regional Trade Agreements: Res Judicata Revisited

The Law on State Responsibility and the World Trade Organization

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

The Inefficiency of Efficiency: Retaliation, Equivalence and Efficient Breach in the World Trade Organisation

We Need a Global Food Safety Agency: Reflections on the Hidden Jurisprudence of the WTO

The World Trade Organization and Sustainability Standards

Between sovereignty and complexity: the settlement of tax disputes by the world trade organization

The WTO’s Exclusive and Compulsory Jurisdiction v.Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Regional Trade Agreements: A Clash of Jurisdiction?

Conflict of International Economic Laws and the Form of the Network of Inter- Governmental Organizations-Taking WTO as an Example

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

International Economic Law and the Quest for Universality

World Trade Organization Rules Before Investment Tribunals: Facilitating Cross-Fertilisation While Appreciating Particularities

China and the WTO into the Next Decade: Probing the Past and Present As a Path to Understand the Future