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 Sustainability of the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Does It Work for Developing Countries?

How Does the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism Work for WTO Members? A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing Countries

The Hierarchy of Remedies under the WTO Dispute Settlement System and Its Impact

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

China'S Experience in Dealing with Wto Dispute Settlement: A Chinese Perspective

WTO International Trade Dispute Settlement System and Benefits for Indonesia

Long-Term Relationship over Litigation: Mediation in WTO Dispute Settlement Proceedings

How can the rule of law under the WTO framework ensure sustainable fishery governance through fishery subsidies? A study from the perspective of special and differential treatment

Limitations of WTO Disputes Settlement Mechanism in Domestic Implementation of TRIPS Agreement

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

The (surprise) return of development policy space in the multilateral trading system: what the WTO Appellate Body blockage means for the developmental state

China’s Path to the Center Stage of WTO Dispute Settlement: Challenges and Responses

Bibliometric Analysis and Review of World Trade Organization Research: Suggesting Future Avenues using WOS Database

On the Legal Enforceability of WTO S&D Treatment Provisions

From Confrontation To Coexistence: An Appeal Opt-Out Arrangement As An Inclusive Approach To Revive The WTO Dispute Settlement System?

Expert Decision and Public Participation in the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

Understanding China'S Recent Active Moves on Wto Litigation: Rising Legalism And/Or Reluctant Response?

Trade and Peace: the WTO Case

What Does the Recent WTO Litigation on Renewable Energy Subsidies Tell Us About Methodology in Legal Analysis? The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Necessary evil: water treaties and international trade

Things Have Changed: Dispute Settlement Inside and Outside of the WTO in 2022