The WTO and Trade-Related Human Rights Measures: Trade Sanctions vs. Trade Incentives**

in Austrian Review of International and European Law Online
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

References

" This article was submitted as Conference Paper to the "Hong Kong Trade and Development Symposium", organized by the International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development and the Hong Kong University from 13-17 December 2005.

I E.g. Singapore Ministerial Declaration, adopted on 13 December 1996, WT/MIN(96)/DEC, para. IV; WTO (Ed.), The Future of the WTO. Addressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millenium (2004), paras. 11 et seq.

2 The "International Bill of Rights" is formed by the UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA res. 217 A (III) (1948), the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 999 UNTS 171, and the 1966International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3. Basic social standards are defined in the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, available at http://www. ilo.org/dyn/declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.static,jump?var language=EN&var-pagena me=DECLARATIONTEXT, and further specified in the various ILO Conventions, which are based on the economic and social rights guaranteed in Art. 23 and 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Preamble and Art. 6-8), available at http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/index.htm. 3 C. M. Vaszquez, "Trade Sanctions and Human Rights - Past, Present, and Future", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 797 distinguishes between general trade sanctions and tailored sanctions; see also S. H. Cleveland, "Human Rights Sanctions and International Trade: A Theory of Compatibility", 5 Journal of International Economic Law (2002) 133, at 138. 4 An overview of the existing sanctions can be found at http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/ INTRO.htm. For a detailed discussion of the UN Security Council sanctions cf. M. P. Doxey, International Sanctions in Contemporary Perspective (1996); V. Gowlland-Debbas (Ed.), United Nations Sanctions and International Law (2001) with further reference. 5 Cf. C. J. Le Mon/R. S. Taylor, "Security Council Action in the Name of Human Rights", 11 African Yearbook of International Law (2003) 263. 6 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947), 55 UNTS 194, now integrated in 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994), 33 ILM (1994) 1154.

7 Art. XXI (c) GATT: "Nothing in this agreement shall be construed [...] (c) to prevent any contracting party from taking any action under the pursuance of its obligations under the United Nations Charter for the maintainance of international peace and security." 8 Massachusetts Act of 25 June, 1996, chapter 130, §1, 1996 Mass. Acts 210, codified at Mass. Gen. Laws, ch.7, §§ 22G-22M. For a detailed description see S. Fullerton, "State Foreign Policy: The Legitimacy of the Massachusetts Burma Law", 8 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade (1999) 249; P. L. Fitzgerald, "Massachusetts, Burma and the World Trade Organization: A Commentary on Blacklisting, Federalism, and Internet Advocacy in the Global Trading Area", 34 Cornell International Law Journal (2001) 1. 9 1994 Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), available at http://www.wto.org/ english/docs_e/legal e/legal e.htm. cm US - Measures affecting Government Procurement (WT/DS88 and WT/DS95), available at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop-e/dispu e/dispu-e.htm. The EC and Japan had requested consultations about the Burma law in June 1997 at the WTO and then requested the establishment of a Panel on 8 September 1998. The Panel was established in January 1999. In February of 1999 the Panel suspended its work. The authority lapsed in 2000. 1 ' The question of the legality of such trade-related measures under international law was not addressed. burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003, 7 January 2003, 108`" Congress, H. R. 2330, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/; Executive Order 13310 of 28 July 2003, Federal Register, Vol. 68, No. 146, Wednesday, 30 July 2003, at 44853 et seq., available at http://treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13310.pdf; see also Report

on U.S. Trade Sanctions Against Burma, Congressionally mandated report submitted to Congress on April 28, 2004, available at http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/32106.htm. These sanctions have not yet been brought to the WTO. " For the EC system see B. Brandtner/A. Rosas, "Trade Preferences and Human Rights", in P. Alston/M. Bustelo/J. Heenan (Eds.), The EU and Human Rights (1999) 699; A. N. Cole, "Labour Standards and the General System of Preferences: The European Labor Incentives", 25 Michigan Journal of International Law (2003) 179; further information also available at http://www.europa.eu.int/conini/trade/issues/globaVgsp/index_en.htm; for the US system see J. H. Jackson/W. J. Davey/A. O. Sykes, Legal Problems of International Economic Relations: Cases, Materials, and Text on the National and International Regulation of Transnational Economic Relations (2002), at 1190 et seq.; further information at the USTR homepage at http://www. ustr.gov /Trade_Development/Preference _Programs/GSP/Section_Index .html; for detailed information on GSP programs of all industrialized countries see the UNCTAD homepage at http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=1418&lang=1. `4 Cf. for the US system J. H. Jackson/W. J. Davey/A. O. Sykes, Legal Problems of Interna- tional Economic Relations: Cases, Materials, and Text on the National and International Regulation of Transnational Economic Relations (2002), at 1192 et seq. ; Council Regulation (EC) 2501/2001 of 10 December 2001 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2004, Official Journal 2001 L 346/1, Art. 26; Council Regulation (EC) 980/2005 of 27 June 2005 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences, Official Journal 2005 L 169/1, Art. 16. 'S European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246. '6 Council Regulation (EC) 2501/2001 of 10 December 2001 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2004, Official Journal 2001 L 346/1.

" For details see infra at Chapter V. '8 T. Cottier, "Trade and Human Rights: A Relationship to Discover", 5 Journal of International Economic Law (2002) 111, at 112. '9 Cf. C. M. Vaszquez, "Trade Sanctions and Human Rights - Past, Present, and Future", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 797, at 797 et seq. for the development of international trade law and international human rights law. 2° For an overview of the trade and human rights linkages with further reference cf. H. Lim, "Trade and Human Rights. What's at Issue?" 35 Journal of World Trade (2001) 275; T. Cottier, "Trade and Human Rights: A Relationship to Discover", 5 Journal of International Economic Law (2002) 111; R. Howse/M. Mutua, "Protecting Human Rights in a Global Economy: Challenges for the World Trade Organization", Rights & Democracy. International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development (2000), available at http://www.ichrdd.ca/english/commdoc/publications/globalization/wtoRightsGlob.html.

21 For a general overview see J. H. Jackson, The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (1997); A. F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (2002); S. Dillon, International Trade and Economic Law and the European Union (2002). 22 This theory was developed by David Ricardo, cf. J. H. Jackson, The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (1997), at 14 et seq.; A. F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (2002), at 1 et seq. z' Cf. J. H. Jackson, The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (1997), at 139 et seq.; A. F. Lowenfeld, International Economic Law (2002), at 28 et seq.; S. Dillon, International Trade and Economic Law and the European Union (2002), at 25 et seq. 24 Art, XI GATT. 25 Art. I GATT, this principle is enshrined in all WTO agreements, e.g. 1994 General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), 33 ILM (1994) 1168, Art. II; 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), 33 ILM (1994) 1197, Art. 4; for details cf. J. H. Jackson, The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (1997), at 157 et seq. zb Art. III GATT; cf. also Art. XVII GATS, Art. 3 TRIPS Agreement; for details see J. H. Jackson, The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (1997), at 213 et seq.

27 Such standards have to comply with the 1994 Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) and the 1994 Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs3flegaI3flegal- e.htm. 28 These criteria were developed by the 1970 Working Party Report on Border Tax Adjustments, 2 December 1970, cf. Japan - Customs Duties, Taxes and Labelling Practices on Imported Wines and Alcoholic Beverages, GATT Panel Report, 10 November 1987, L/6216-34S/83, para. 5.6; European Communities - Measures Affecting the Prohibition of Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 5 April 2001, WT/ DS 135, para. 101. z9 Similar exception clauses are contained in other WTO Agreements, such as Art. XIV GATS, or Art. XXIII 1994 Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), available at http://www. wto.org/english/docs e/legal e/legal e.htm; details at J. H. Jackson, The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations (1997), at 229 et seq. 30 Art. XX (a), (b), (e), and (g) GATT. " Cf. United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 May 1996, WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, at 22 et seq.; for further details and the jurisprudence on Art. XX cf. WTO, WTO Analytical Index: Guide to WTO Law and Practice (2003), Art. XX GATT, paras. 488 et seq. and infra Chapter IV.

3z GATT Contracting Parties, Differential and More Favorable Treatment, Reciprocity and Fuller Participation of Developing Countries, Decision of 28 November 1979 (L/4903) (1979). '3 Cf. European Communities-Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, paras. 89 et seq. 34 parma. 1 of the Enabling Clause. 35 parma. 2 (a) of the Enabling Clause. 36 For a description of the Enabling Clause see L. Bartels, "The WTO Enabling Clause and Positive Conditionality in the European Community's GSP Program", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 507, at 513 et seq.; A. A. Yusuf, ""Differential and More Favourable Treatment": The GATT Enabling Clause", 14 Journal of World Trade (1980) 488; further details infra Chapter V.

" Cf. e.g. Thailand - Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, GATT Panel Report, adopted on 7 November 1990, DS10/R-37S/200, paras. 73 et seg.; United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 May 1996, WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, 29 et seq. ; United States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 16 June 1994 (not adopted), DS29/R, para. 5.42. 38 E.g. Thailand - Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, GATT Panel Report, adopted on 7 November 1990, DS 10/R-37S/200; United States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 3 September 1991 (not adopted), DS21/R-39S/155; United States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 16 June 1994 (not adopted), DS29/R; United States - Import Prohibition of

Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58; European Communities - Measures Affecting Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), Appellate Body Report, adopted on 13 February 1998, WT/DS26 and WT/ DS48; for details see S. Dillon, International Trade and Economic Law and the European Union (2002) 122 et seq. ; N. Notaro, Judicial Aproaches to Trade and Environment. The EC and the WTO (2003) 141 et seq. 39 Cf supra FN 29. '° Cf. S. Bal, "International Free Trade Agreements and Human Rights: Reinterpreting Art. XX of the GATT", 10 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade (2001) 62, at 76 et seq. with further reference; F. Francioni, "Environment, Human Rights and the Limits to Free Trade", in F. Francioni (Ed.), Environment, Human Rights and International Trade (2001) 1, at 18; the public morals exception of Art. XIV GATS that is similar to Art. XX (a) GATT was applied for the first time as a defense in United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Panel Report, circulated on 10 November 2004 (appealed), WT/DS285, where the Panel interpreted the meaning of public morals, at paras. 6.459 et seq. " United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, WT/DS285.

'2 United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Panel Report, circulated on 10 November 2004 (appealed), WT/DS285, para. 6.447 et seq. and Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2005, para. 291; European Communities - Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 25 September 1997, WT/DS27, para. 231. 43 United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2005, WT/DS285, paras. 296 et seq. 44 united States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Panel Report, circulated on 10 November 2004 (appealed), WT/DS285, para. 6461. 45 United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Panel Report, circulated on 10 November 2004 (appealed), WT/DS285, paras. 6465 et seq. 46 For similar exceptions in other international agreements see S. Charnovitz, "The Moral Exception in Trade Policy", 38 Virginia Journal of International Law (1998) 689, at 705 et seq. 47 United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Panel Report, circulated on 10 November 2004 (appealed), WT/DS285, paras. 6469 et seq. and paras. 6481 et seq.

48 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3; cf. also UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (Art. 12), at UN, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, HRI/GEN/l/Rev.7 (2004). 49 Cf S. Charnovitz, "The Moral Exception in Trade Policy", 38 Virginia Journal of International Law (1998) 689, at 724 et seq. 50 F. Francioni, "Environment, Human Rights and the Limits to Free Trade", in F. Francioni (Ed.), Environment, Human Rights and International Trade (2001) 1, 11; cf. however United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Panel Report, circulated on 15 May 1998 (appealed), WT/DS58, para. 7.45, note 649. 5' For an analysis of Art. XX (e) GATT in the light of the PPM debate see infra at Chapter IV.B. sz Cf supra FN 48. 5' European Communities - Measures Affecting the Prohibition of Asbestos and Asbestos- Containing Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 5 April 2001, WT/DS135, paras. 155 et seq.; Art. XX (b) was also invoked by Thailand as a defense in Thailand - Restrictions on Importation of and Internal Taxes on Cigarettes, GATT Panel Report, adopted on 7 November 1990, DS 10/R-37S/200, at paras. 14 and 21.

54 Cf S. Bal, "International Free Trade Agreements and Human Rights: Reinterpreting Art. XX of the GATT", 10 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade (2001) 62, at 80. ss United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58, paras. 127 et seq. more specific provisions on these questions contain the 1994 Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), and the 1994 Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), both available at http://www.wto.org/english/ docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm. 57 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3, Art. 11 I and 12, cf. also UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 12: The Right to Adequate Food (Art. 11) and General Comment No. 15: The Right to Water (Arts. 11 and 12 of the Covenant), both at UN, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, HRI/GEN/l/Rev.7 (2004). s8 Cf. Korea - Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 10 January 2001, WT/DS 161 and WT/DS 169, paras. 163 et seq. ; European Communities - Measures Affecting the Prohibition of Asbestos and Asbestos - Containing Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 5 April 2001, WT/DS 135, paras. 170 et seq.; United States - Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Panel Report, circulated on 10 November 2004 (appealed), WT/DS285, paras. 6.476 et seq. s9 Cf United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Panel Report, circulated on 29 January 1996 (appealed), WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, paras. 6.24 et seq. and Korea - Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 10 January 2001, WT/DS161 and WT/DS169, para. 166, which both

refer to United States - Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, GATT Panel Report, adopted on 7 November 1989, L/6439-36S/345. 60 Korean - Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 10 January 2001, WT/DS 161 and WT/DS 169, para. 172. 61 Cf. United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 May 1996, WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, 14 et seq. 62 Cf. United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58, paras. 141 et seq. 6' United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 May 1996, WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, 22 et seq. �' Cf. WTO, WTO Analytical Index: Guide to WTO Law and Practice (2003), Art. XX, paras. 488 et seq. ; S. Bal, "International Free Trade Agreements and Human Rights: Reinterpreting Art. XX of the GATT", 10 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade (2001) 62, at 72 et seq. 65 United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 May 1996, WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, 25; United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58, paras. 156 et seq.

`� Cf. e.g. United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58, paras. 131 et seq. ; for further reference see WTO, WTO Analytical Index: Guide to WTO Law and Practice (2003), Art. XX GATT, at paras. 488 et seq. 6' Cf. also the reasoning in European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Panel Report, circulated on 1 December 2003 (appealed), WT/DS246, para. 7.228. 68 For an overview cf. C. Stevens, "Trade and the Environment: The PPM debate", in W. Lang (Ed.), Sustainable development and international law (1995) 239; F. Francioni, "Environment, Human Rights and the Limits to Free Trade", in F. Francioni (Ed.), Environment, Human Rights and International Trade (2001) 1, at 13 et seq.

69 Cf. Japan - Customs Duties, Taxes and Labelling Practices on Imported Wines and Alcoholic Beverages, GATT Panel Report, 10 November 1987, L/6216-34S/83, para. 5.6; European Communities - Measures Affecting the Prohibition of Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 5 April 2001, WT/DS135, paras. 101 et seq. 70 united States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 16 June 1994 (not adopted), DS29/R, para. 5.9; cf. also F. Francioni, "Environment, Human Rights and the Limits to Free Trade", in F. Francioni (Ed.), Environment, Human Rights and International Trade (2001) 1, at 14; S. Bal, "International Free Trade Agreements and Human Rights: Reinterpreting Art. XX of the GATT", 10 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade (2001) 62, at 80 et seq. for details. 71 F. Francioni, "Environment, Human Rights and the Limits to Free Trade", in F. Francioni (Ed.), Environment, Human Rights and International Trade (2001) 1, at 17; L. Bartels, "Art. XX of GATT and the Rules of Public International Law on Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: The Case of Trade Measures for the Protection of Human Rights", 36 Journal of World Trade (2002) 353, at 355 et seq. with further reference. '2 F. Francioni, "Environment, Human Rights and the Limits to Free Trade", in F. Francioni (Ed.), Environment, Human Rights and International Trade (2001) 1, at 18.

73 United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Panel Report, circulated on 15 May 1998 (appealed), WT/DS58, para. 7.45, note 649. " European Communities - Measures Affecting the Prohibition of Asbestos and Asbestos- Containing Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 5 April 2001, WT/DS135, paras. 113 et seq. 'S Cf. also the distinction between product-related and non-product-related PPMs in the definition of a technical regulation contained in Annex 1, para. 1 of the 1994 Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), available at http://www.wto.org/english/ docs e/legal e/legal e.htm. '6 United States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 3 September 1991 (not adopted), DS21/R-39S/155, paras. 5.25 et seq.

" United States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 16 June 1994 (not adopted), DS29/R, paras. 5.16 and 5.31. '8 United States - Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, GATT Panel Report, circulated on 16 June 1994 (not adopted), DS29/R, paras. 5.27 and 5.39. '9 United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58, para. 133 and paras. 164 et seq. 8° E.g. Art. 2 (1) of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 999 UNTS 171; Art. 1 of the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11, available at http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/ Treaties/Html/005.htm; cf. however for recent jurisprudence C. Tomuschat, Human Rights. Between Idealism and Realism (2003), at 106 et seq. 81 Cf. W. Meng, "Extraterritorial Effects of Administrative, Judicial and Legislative Acts", in R. Bernhardt (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Volume 11 (1995) 337; M. N. Shaw, International Law (2003), at 611 et seq. 82 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3, Art. 2 (1); for details see M. Craven in R. Hanski/M. Suksi, An Introduction to the International Protection of Human Rights: A Textbook (1999), at 108; A. Eide, in J. Symonides (Ed.), Human Rights: Concept and Standards (2000), at 126.

83 UN General Assembly, Declaration on the Right to Development, GA res. 41/128 (1986), Art. 3 and 6; on discussions about the binding nature of the right to development see UN, The Legal Nature of the Right to Development and Enhancement of its Binding Nature, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2004/16 (2004); on the right to development generally S. R. Chowdhury/E. M. G. Denters/P. J. I. M. d. Waart (Eds.), The Right to Development in International Law (1992). 84 For the status of ratification of the main UN human rights instruments see http://www.ohchr. org/english/countries/ratification/index.htm.

85Cf. supra FN 2. 86 Cf. http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/; for details see R. Hanski/M. Suksi, An Introduction to the International Protection of Human Rights: A Textbook (1999); J. Symonides (Ed.), Human Rights: International Protection, Monitoring, Enforcement (2003). $' UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA res. 217 A (III) (1948), Art. 2; UN, Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, A/CONF.157/23 (1993), para. 5. 88 A. Rosas and M. Scheinin, in R. Hanski/M. Suksi, An Introduction to the International Protection of Human Rights: A Textbook (1999), at 49 et seq. 89 Cf. only J. Carrillo Salcedo, "Human Rights, Universal Declaration (1948)", in R. Bernhardt (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Volume II (1995) 922, at 925 et seq.; A. Eide/et al. (Eds.), The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Commentary (1992), at 6 et seq.; H. Hannum, "The Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in National and International Law", 25 Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law (1995/6) 287, at 289; see also the references in B. Simma/P. Alston, "The Sources of Human Rights Law: Custom, Ius Cogens and General Principles", 12 Australian Yearbook of International Law (1992) 82, at 84 et seq. for an overview of existing reservations to UN human rights instruments see http://www. ohchr.org/english/countries/ratification/index.htm. 9' E.g. 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 999 UNTS 171, Art. 4; 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3, Art. 4. 92 E.g. 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 999 UNTS 171, Art. 12

(3) and 18 (3); 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3, Art. 8 (2). 93 Cf Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 3: The Nature of States Parties' Obligations (Art. 2, para. 1 of the Covenant) (1990), and Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31: The Nature of General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant (2004), both at UN, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, HRI/GEN/l/Rev.7 (2004). 9' Cf. M. Novak, in J. Symonides (Ed.), Human Rights: International Protection, Monitoring, Enforcement (2003), at 69 et seq.; A. Eide, in J. Symonides (Ed.), Human Rights: Inter- national Protection, Monitoring, Enforcement (2003), at 109 et seq. ; C. Tomuschat, Human Rights. Between Idealism and Realism (2003), at 37 et seq. 95 Cf. C. Tomuschat, Human Rights. Between Idealism and Realism (2003), at 112 et seq.; M. Scheinin, in J. Symonides (Ed.), Human Rights: International Protection, Monitoring, Enforcement (2003), at 429 et seq. with further reference. 96 For details cf. C. Tomuschat, Human Rights. Between Idealism and Realism (2003), at 136 et seq.; all conventions are available at http://www.ohchr.org/english/Iaw/.

9 Cf. C. Tomuschat, Human Rights. Between Idealism and Realism (2003), at 160 et seq. 98 For details see http://www.ohchr.org/english/issues/escr/group.htm. 99 Cf. UN, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, HRI/GEN/l/Rev.7 (2004). '°° The first time that such trade-related measures are provided for is in the 2003 WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, 42 ILM (2003) 518.

101 1994 Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), 33 ILM (1994) 1226. 102 For the weaknesses of the WTO dispute settlement system and in particular the problems developing countries face see, e.g. V. Mosoti (Ed.), Towards A Development-Supportive Dispute Settlement System in the WTO, ICTSD Resource Paper No. 5 (2003). 103 Cf. e.g. United States - Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 May 1996, WT/DS2 and WT/DS4, 16 et seq. '°' Cf. D. Palmeter/P. Mavriodis, "The WTO Legal System: Sources of Law", 92 American Journal of International Law (1998) 398, at 409 et seq.; J. Cameron/K. R. Gray, "Principles of International Law in the WTO Dispute Settlement Body", 50 International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2001) 248; J. Hu, "The Role of International Law in the Development of WTO Law", 7 Journal of International Economic Law (2004) 143. 105 Both available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm. Cf. http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index en.jsp.

'°' European Communities - Measures Affecting Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), Appellate Body Report, adopted on 13 February 1998, WT/DS26 and WT/DS48; European Communities - Trade Description of Sardines, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 23 October 2002, WT/DS231. 108 1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, 12 ILM (1973) 1055. 109 Cf. United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 6 November 1998, WT/DS58, para. 132.

110 Similar problems occur between the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice, cf. D. Spielmann, "Human Rights Case Law in the Strasbourg and Luxem- bourg Courts: Conflicts, Inconsistencies, and Complementarities", in P. Alston/M. Bustelo/ J. Heenan (Eds.), The EU and Human Rights (1999) 757. "' For references on those regimes see supra FN 13 and the UNCTAD homepage available at http:Hwww.unctad.orgfTemplates/Page.asp?intltemlD= 1418&lang= 1. "Z E.g. 2000 Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the United Mexican States, of the other part, OJ 2000 L 276/45, Art. 1; 2000 Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, OJ 2000 L 317/3, Art. 9.

"' E.g. EC Council Regulation 2501/2001, 10 December 2001, Official Journal of the European Union 2001 L 346/1. 114 Negative conditionality is applied in the US system, cf. J. H. Jackson/W. J. Davey/A. O. Sykes, Legal Problems of International Economic Relations: Cases, Materials, and Text on the National and International Regulation of Transnational Economic Relations (2002) 1192 et seq. 115 Art. I (1) GATT. "6 UNCTAD, Expansion and Diversification of Exports of Manufacturers and Semi- manufacturers of Developing Countries, Resolution 21 (II) (1968), and Agreed Conclusions of the Special Committee on Preferences (1970), at: Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Second Session, Vol. I, Report and Annexes (1968) 38 and 431 et seq. ; both reproduced in European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Panel Report, circulated on 1 December 2003 (appealed), WT/DS246, Annex D; for a description see A. A. Yusuf, ""Differential and More Favourable Treatment": The GA IT Enabling Clause", 14 Journal of World Trade (1980) 488, at 493 et seq. ; see also European Communities - Conditions

for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Panel Report, circulated on 7 December 2003 (appealed), WTlDS246, paras. 7.64 et seq. 117 GATT Contracting Parties, General System of Preferences, Decision of 5 June 1971 (L/3545) (1971). ). "8 GATT Contracting Parties, Differential and More Favorable Treatment, Reciprocity and Fuller Participation of Developing Countries, Decision of 28 November 1979 (L/4903) (1979). "9 For details on these developments see A. A. Yusuf, ""Differential and More Favourable Treatment": The GATT Enabling Clause", 14 Journal of World Trade ( 1980) 488; L. Bartels, "The WTO Enabling Clause and Positive Conditionality in the European Community's GSP Program", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 507, at 510 et seq. for a description see A. A. Yusuf, ""Differential and More Favourable Treatment": The GATT Enabling Clause", 14 Journal of World Trade (1980) 488, at 493 et seq. '2' European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, WT/DS242 and WT/DS246.

'zz C f EC Council Regulation 2501/2001, 10 December 2001, Official Journal of the European Union 2001 L 346/1. 123 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Panel Report, circulated on 1 December 2003 (appealed), WT/DS246, paras. 7.55 et seq. 124 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Panel Report, circulated on 1 December 2003 (appealed), WT/DS246, paras. 7.100 et seq., 7.161 and 7.176.

125 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, paras. 178 et seq., in particular para. 189. 'zb Cf European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, paras. 128 et seq. and paras. 178 et seq. 'z' Cf. for an analysis L. Bartels, "The WTO Enabling Clause and Positive Conditionality in the European Community's GSP Program", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 507, at 518 et seq. 128 Cf. for the discussion L. Bartels, "The WTO Enabling Clause and Positive Conditionality in the European Community's GSP Program", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 507, at 513 et seq. 129 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Panel Report, circulated on 1 December 2003 (appealed), WT/DS246, paras. 7.37 et seq.

130 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, paras. 148, 158, and 179. "' European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, paras. 154 and 165. european Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, para. 155. 133 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, para. 154. "' Cf. L. Bartels, "The WTO Enabling Clause and Positive Conditionality in the European Community's GSP Program", 6 Journal of International Economic Law (2003) 507, at 526 et seq.; cf. also A. A. Yusuf, "'Differential and More Favourable Treatment': The GATT Enabling Clause", 14 Journal of World Trade (1980) 488, at 502 et seq.

135 In para. 167 of the EC - GSP case, the Appellate Body mentioned the criteria of Art. 3 (a) as relevant context, but did not examine it thoroughly. 136 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, paras. 158 et seq. and para. 169. "' European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, para. 163. 138 Cf. for these concerns e.g. J. L. Stamberger, "The Legality of Conditional Preferences to Developing Countries under the GATT Enabling Clause", 4 Chicago Journal of International Law (2003) 607, at 616. "9 Cf for many UNDP (Ed.), 2005 Human Development Report (2005), at 17 et seq. ; Nowak, Einfuhrung in das lnternationale Menschenrechtsregime (2002), at 55 et seq. "° WTO Agreement, Preamble, para. 1.

"' UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA res. 217 A (III) (1948); UN General Assembly, Declaration on the Right to Development, GA res. 41/128 (1986), in particular Art. 1; UN, Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, A/CONF.157/23 (1993), in particular para. 8 of the Declaration; UN, Millenium Declaration, GA Res. 55/2 (2000). 142 Cf. supra note 86. 143 For this discussion see supra at Chapter IV.D. 144 European Communities - Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, Appellate Body Report, adopted on 20 April 2004, WT/DS246, para. 164. for a general discussion on this issue see infra at Chapter VI.

"6 Cf. e.g. the arguments brought forward in M. J. Trebilcock/R. Howse, The Regulation of International Trade (1999), at 453 et seq. 147 Cf. J. Bhagwati, Free Trade and Labor, Financial Times, 29 August 2001; for further reference regarding the positions of industrialized as well as developing countries cf. S. Bal, "International Free Trade Agreements and Human Rights: Reinterpreting Art. XX of the GATT", 10 Minnesota Journal of Global Trade (2001) 62, at 64 et seq. "8 Cf. for many R. M. Stern/K. Terrell, Labor Standards and the World Trade Organization (2003); M. J. Slaughter/P. Swagel, Does Globalization Lower Wages and Export Jobs? (1997); OECD, Trade, Employment and Labour Standards: A Study of Core Workers' Rights and International Trade (1996).

149 H. Sautter, "Sozialklauseln fur den Welthandel - wirtschaftsethisch betrachtet", 40 Hamburger Jahrbuch fur Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftspolitik (1995) 227, at 231. �so R. M. Stern/K. Terrell, Labor Standards and the World Trade Organization (2003), at 6; cf. also OECD, Trade, Employment and Labour Standards: A Study of Core Workers' Rights and International Trade (1996), at 101 et seq. 's' OECD, Trade, Employment and Labour Standards: A Study of Core Workers' Rights and lnternational Trade (1996), at 112 et seq. ; R. M. Stern/K. Terrell, Labor Standards and the World Trade Organization (2003), at 6. isz Erg. M. P. Doxey, lnternational Sanctions in Contemporary Perspective (2nd edition) (1996); M. Brzoska (Ed.), Smart Sanctions: The Next Step (2001); V. Gowlland-Debbas (Ed.), United Nations Sanctions and International Law (2001).

153 C f. OECD, Trade, Employment and Labour Standards: A Study of Core Workers' Rights and lnternational Trade (1996), at 162 et seq. ; A. Flasbarth/M. Lips, Effects of a Humanitarian WTO Social Clause on Welfare and North South Trade Flows (2003), at 12 with further reference. this was recently also acknowledged by UNDP (Ed.), Making Global Trade Work for People (2003); World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization (Ed.), A Fair Globalization - Creating Opportunities for All (2004). 155 R. M. Stern/K. Terrell, Labor Standards and the World Trade Organization (2003), at 5 et seq. referring to a study from M. Aggarwal, "International Trade, Labor Standards, and Labor Market Conditions: An Evaluation of Linkages", USITC, Office of Economics Working Paper No. 95-06-C (1995) . 'sb Cf. R. M. Stern/K. Terrell, Labor Standards and the World Trade Organization (2003), at 8.

157 Cf. for a comprehensive economic analysis B. Hoekman/C. Ozden, "Trade Preferences and Differential Treatment of Developing Countries: A Selective Survey", World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3566 (2005) . 'S8 K. Koch, Handelspraferenzen der Europdischen Gemeinschaft fiir Enrwicklungsldnder (2004), at 91 et seq. 159 Cf supra note 112 and note 114. B. Simma/J. B. Aschenbrenner/C. Schulte, "Human Rights Considerations in the Development Cooperation Activities of the EC", in P. Alston/M. Bustelo/J. Heenan (Eds.), The EU and Human Rights (1999) 571, at 579 et seq. 161 B. Simma/J. B. Aschenbrenner/C. Schulte, "Human Rights Considerations in the Develop- ment Cooperation Activities of the EC", in P. Alston/M. Bustelo/J. Heenan (Eds.), The EU and Human Rights (1999) 571, at 582; OECD, Trade, Employment and Labour Standards: A Study of Core Workers' Rights and International Trade (1996), at 162 et seq. ; cf e.g. the holistic approach in the 2000 Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP) of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, OJ 2000 L 317/3.

'62 C f. B. Simma/J. B. Aschenbrenner/C. Schulte, "Human Rights Considerations in the Development Cooperation Activities of the EC", in P. Alston/M. Bustelo/J. Heenan (Eds.), The EU and Human Rights (1999) 571, at 580.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 11 11 8
Full Text Views 0 0 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0