ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

INTRODUCTION. This paper is devoted to interpretation of so-called WTO “Security Exception Articles”, namely Article XXI of the GATT, XIV bis of the GATS and 73 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to their possible applicability to trade restrictive measures adopted against Russia, and Russian count...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Daria S. Boklan, Vadim V. Absaliamov, Yury S. Kurnosov
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) 2018-12-01
Series:Московский журнал международного права
Subjects:
wto
Online Access:https://www.mjil.ru/jour/article/view/269
id doaj-809546af3ee04ea8a47ada53c4785fd7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-809546af3ee04ea8a47ada53c4785fd72021-07-13T08:25:31ZengMoscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO)Московский журнал международного права0869-00492619-08932018-12-0103182910.24833/0869-0049-2018-3-18-29254ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAWDaria S. Boklan0Vadim V. Absaliamov1Yury S. Kurnosov2National Research University “Higher School of Economics”National Research University “Higher School of Economics”National Research University “Higher School of Economics”INTRODUCTION. This paper is devoted to interpretation of so-called WTO “Security Exception Articles”, namely Article XXI of the GATT, XIV bis of the GATS and 73 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to their possible applicability to trade restrictive measures adopted against Russia, and Russian countermeasures, based on the assumption that these trade restrictive measures violate WTO disciplines.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials for the article were norms of general international law and norms of WTO law, containing so-called security exception provisions and their respective interpretation by international tribunals, international organizations and scholars. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods.RESEARCH RESULTS. Taking into account that there is a lack of WTO jurisprudence and no common view of WTO members regarding the issue at hand, the analysis is based on the scope of Security Exception Articles and on the Panel’s jurisdiction to resolve disputes arising from them. In particular, the paper addresses whether security exceptions are of a self-declaratory nature; and, as it was stated by the GATT Council in 1985 in relation to the US trade embargo against Nicaragua, “the Panel cannot examine or judge the validity or motivation for the invocation of article XXI (b) (iii) by the United States” or whether it is possible to apply an objective test to Security Exception Articles.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. With respect to the objective test, the interpretation of the following notions should be analyzed: “essential security interests”, “emergency in international relations” and “necessary to protect”. The analysis should be based on rules of general international law and the Appellate Body’s approach according to which previously established interpretations of certain provisions of one WTO Agreement can be used to inform the content of the same ‘words’ in another WTO Agreement. With respect to the subjective approach we may face a tendency to interpret “self-judging clause”, in the light of “a good faith” principle and therefore the issue at hand can be subject to the Dispute Settlement Body's analysis.https://www.mjil.ru/jour/article/view/269wtosecurity exceptionsarticle xxi of the gattessential security interestsemergency in international relationsself-judging clauseobjective test
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Daria S. Boklan
Vadim V. Absaliamov
Yury S. Kurnosov
spellingShingle Daria S. Boklan
Vadim V. Absaliamov
Yury S. Kurnosov
ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
Московский журнал международного права
wto
security exceptions
article xxi of the gatt
essential security interests
emergency in international relations
self-judging clause
objective test
author_facet Daria S. Boklan
Vadim V. Absaliamov
Yury S. Kurnosov
author_sort Daria S. Boklan
title ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
title_short ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
title_full ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
title_fullStr ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
title_full_unstemmed ARE RESTRICTIVE MEASURES AND COUNTERMEASURES JUSTIFIABLE BY WTO SECURITY EXCEPTIONS: OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE APPROACH? RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
title_sort are restrictive measures and countermeasures justifiable by wto security exceptions: objective or subjective approach? responsibility in international law
publisher Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO)
series Московский журнал международного права
issn 0869-0049
2619-0893
publishDate 2018-12-01
description INTRODUCTION. This paper is devoted to interpretation of so-called WTO “Security Exception Articles”, namely Article XXI of the GATT, XIV bis of the GATS and 73 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to their possible applicability to trade restrictive measures adopted against Russia, and Russian countermeasures, based on the assumption that these trade restrictive measures violate WTO disciplines.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials for the article were norms of general international law and norms of WTO law, containing so-called security exception provisions and their respective interpretation by international tribunals, international organizations and scholars. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods.RESEARCH RESULTS. Taking into account that there is a lack of WTO jurisprudence and no common view of WTO members regarding the issue at hand, the analysis is based on the scope of Security Exception Articles and on the Panel’s jurisdiction to resolve disputes arising from them. In particular, the paper addresses whether security exceptions are of a self-declaratory nature; and, as it was stated by the GATT Council in 1985 in relation to the US trade embargo against Nicaragua, “the Panel cannot examine or judge the validity or motivation for the invocation of article XXI (b) (iii) by the United States” or whether it is possible to apply an objective test to Security Exception Articles.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. With respect to the objective test, the interpretation of the following notions should be analyzed: “essential security interests”, “emergency in international relations” and “necessary to protect”. The analysis should be based on rules of general international law and the Appellate Body’s approach according to which previously established interpretations of certain provisions of one WTO Agreement can be used to inform the content of the same ‘words’ in another WTO Agreement. With respect to the subjective approach we may face a tendency to interpret “self-judging clause”, in the light of “a good faith” principle and therefore the issue at hand can be subject to the Dispute Settlement Body's analysis.
topic wto
security exceptions
article xxi of the gatt
essential security interests
emergency in international relations
self-judging clause
objective test
url https://www.mjil.ru/jour/article/view/269
work_keys_str_mv AT dariasboklan arerestrictivemeasuresandcountermeasuresjustifiablebywtosecurityexceptionsobjectiveorsubjectiveapproachresponsibilityininternationallaw
AT vadimvabsaliamov arerestrictivemeasuresandcountermeasuresjustifiablebywtosecurityexceptionsobjectiveorsubjectiveapproachresponsibilityininternationallaw
AT yuryskurnosov arerestrictivemeasuresandcountermeasuresjustifiablebywtosecurityexceptionsobjectiveorsubjectiveapproachresponsibilityininternationallaw
_version_ 1721305698910863360