| Summary: | 碩士 === 南台科技大學 === 財經法律研究所 === 99 === The World Trade Organization (WTO) convened the Doha Ministerial
Conference and restarted the review of provisions of Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) in November 2001. Inter alia, the issue of ‘amicus curiae’ was very controversial, opposite positions were raised during the( DSU) Special Session between the developed countries and developing countries. Furthermore, the issue of ‘amicus curiae’had not been expressed in the main body and its annex of (DSU).Nevertheless,
certain specific rulings have been developed by (DSU0 after rounds of key judgments, such as ban on American shrimp, sea turtles, by taking Article 10,Section 1, Article 13, Article 17.9 and Article 16(1) in the appealing process in which the written report from ‘amicus curiae’ are regarded as proper legal documents. In this article, the concept of ‘amicus curiae’, its origination and evolution, application in the disputed cases, and the key issues in the disputed topics are discussed. By taking the development trend of legal aspect and proper interpretation on existing clauses, it is observed that the clauses mentioned above are not able to provide suitable legal grounds and therefore improper judgments from appellate body is seen.
Focusing on the reviewing process by (DSU) as the main legal ground, the correlation between legal aspect and policy aspect is addressed while analyzing the role and purpose of ‘amicus curiae’. It is also suggested that certain degree of breakthrough in the norm of international law shall be taken by WTO so that the citizen member of(WTO) can, either directly or indirectly, take part in the process of dispute tribunal process under the status of ‘amicus curiae’ so as to gain the support and concurrence from the citizen all over the world on the action taken by (WTO). Furthermore, to resolve the dispute arisen from ‘amicus curiae’, certain amendment on the clause on (DSU), or an annexure to it is also suggested so that the status of ‘amicus curiae’ could be further clarified and addressed. As such, a unified observation and legal ground on the status of
‘amicus curiae’ in terms of dispute resolution could be achieved, as long as it is formed, accepted and taken as a proper reference benchmark.
|
|---|
