The Scope and Future of National Security Exception Clauses inGATT 1994

Authors

  • Junqi Zhang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61173/yx30v721

Keywords:

GATT 1994, national security, international trade, emergency

Abstract

National security is becoming a key rationale for expanding or restricting trade measures (Gladysz 2021). Article XXI of GATT 1994 was firstly regulated in GATT 1947 and carried over to the establishment of the WTO, seeking the balance between trade and non-trade concerns and enabling Members the right to circumvent WTO provisions on national security grounds. However, Article XXI has hardly ever been invoked during the seventy years until the Russian Transit Traffic case shattered the dormant provision in 2017. This paper will first discuss the problem of jurisdiction and analyze whether the Panel should reserve certain right of jurisdiction. It then turns to the heated topic of the standard of review to examine how the WTO has refined national security exceptions and prevented members from abusing these provisions to implement measures that violate international trade rules. Subsequently, it presents some concerns faced by national security exceptions and provide some recommendations in this regard.

References

nal of International Law 43, no. 2 (2003): 365-404. Barfield, Claude E. “Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy: The Future of the World Trade Organization.” Chicago

Journal of International Law 2, no. 2 (2001): 403-415. Bossche, Peter Van den. “The National Security Exception in International Trade Law Today: Can We Avoid Abuse?” In Review of Foreign Investment in Geopolitical and Legal Perspective, 111-143. 2020. Cass, Ronald A. “National Security, Trade, and China: Risks and Responses in the Internet Age.” The Federalist

Society Review , 2019: 162-167. Claussen, Kathleen. “Trade’s Security Exceptionalism.”

Stanford Law Review, 2020: 1097-1164. Damme, Isabelle Van. “National Security.” In The Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law, by Donald McRae, Rodney Neufeld, Isabelle Van Damme Daniel Bethlehem, 714-742. Oxford University Press, 2022. Erik Gartzke, Quan Li, Charles Boehmer. “Investing in the Peace: Economic Interdependence and International

Conflict.” International Organization, 2001: 391-438. Gladysz, Jacob. “THE NATIONAL SECURITY EXCEP- TION IN WTO LAW: EMERGING JURISPRUDENCE AND FUTURE DIRECTION.” GEORGETOWN JOUR-

NAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, 2021: 836-861. Heath, J. Benton. “The New National Security Challenge

to the Economic Order.” Yale Law Journal, 2020: 1020- 1099. Panel report, Russia - Traffic in Transit, WTO Doc. WT/ DS512/R (adopted, April 5, 2019). Panel report, Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of - Measures concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights, WTO Doc. WT/DS567/R (not adopted, 16 June 2020). Panel report, United States - Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products, WTO Doc. WT/DS544/R (appealed, 9 December 2022). Panel report, United States - Origin Marking Requirement, WTO Doc. (appealed, 21 December 2022). Prazeres, Tatiana Lacerda. “Trade and National Security: Rising Risks for the WTO.” World Trade Review 19, no. 1 (2020): 137-148. Vidigal, Geraldo. “WTO ADJUDICATION AND THE SECURITY EXCEPTION: SOMETHING OLD, SOME- THING NEW, SOMETHING BORROWED – SOME- THING BLUE?” Amsterdam Law School Legal Studies

Research Paper, 2019: 203-224.

WTO IN BRIEF. 2023. https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/thewto_e.htm (accessed 4 9, 2024).

Downloads

Published

2024-06-06