Some Analysis Of Improving Methods Of Settling Disputes Between Mainland And Hong Kong Under CEPA Frame

CEPA stands for closer Economic Partnership Arrangementbetween the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong. CEPA, concluded onJune, 29, 2003 and came into performing on January, 1, 2004, is anational regional legal arrangement concerning trade in goods, servicesand trading investment simplification. CEPA initiated new era for theeconomic cooperation between mainland and Hong Kong. In conclusion,CEPA is of vital importance. With the fulfillment of CEPA, more andmore economic disputes will occur between mainland and Hong Kong,As a result, efficient methods of settling those economic disputes areindispensable.Due to quite sufficient connections between the items of disputesettlement mechanism of CEPA and the legal nature of CEPA, the themeis to analyze the legal nature of CEPA at beginning in the first chapter , Inaccordance with the researching on the legal subject, adjusting object andlaw basis of CEPA, I agreed at the viewpoint of CEPA as special domesticand regional legal arrangement other than an international agreement or asole mainland arrangement, moreover, CEPA is similar to FTA as well.Meaningfully, the subscription and impact of CEPA is of greatsignificance for the improvement of WTO system and development ofChina's "One country, Two systems" principles theoretically andpractically. However the political consultations have lots of advantagessuch as they are flexible and cost less than other methods, on the otherhand, they also have some disadvantages, the current regulation ofpolitical settlements are limited to deal with total disputes betweenmainland and Hong Kong, thus, it is necessary to improve and perfectmethods of settling disputes. The following question comes, whether theindependent dispute settlement mechanism of CEPA should beestablished or those disputes between mainland and Hong Kong shouldbe lodged to DSB of WTO, I will put forward my views of establishingindependent dispute settlement mechanism of CEPA through comparingand analyzing the current two opinions regarding this question in thesecond chapter. I will discuss how to establish independent disputesettlement mechanism of CEPA in the forth chapter, First, I will make acomparison among the dispute settlements of WTO and that of sometypical mode of FTAS, after comparison and analyzing, I concluded thatNAFTA dispute settlement mechanism worth modeling of, withconsidering the special features of CEPA and complying with someprinciples, we have reasons to establish a dispute settlement mechanismsuitable to CEPA.It is the emphasis to demonstrate that CEPA dispute settlementmechanism is necessary to establish and which mode of mechanismshould be adopted other than expounding how the dispute settlementmechanism of WTO and other FTAS work in the theme. The purpose ofreferring to those mechanisms of WTO and other FTAS in the second andthird chapter is to analyze which mode is most significant for CEPA todraw lessons from. Establishing dispute settlement mechanism of CEPAdon't mean that the current method of settling dispute according toprovision 19 of CEPA should be given up, contrarily, the method ofbilateral consultation is one of the key content of dispute settlementmechanism of CEPA. Furthermore, scope of disputes between mainlandand Hong Kong to which the dispute settlement mechanism of CEPAapply is defined in the first chapter.