Comments On China Certain Publications Case

On August12,2009, the appellate body of the world trade organization WTOmembers to distribute of United States v. China publications and audiovisualentertainment products, trading rights and distribution service measures case(hereinafter referred to as the "publication" China and the United States, the casenumber for WT/DS363) ruling report (WT/DS363/ABR). Ruled the report related tomeasures taken by the Chinese government violates the General Agreement on Tariffsand Trade1994(the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade1994, GATT1994), thelaw of the People’s Republic of China to join protocol "and" the regulation of China tojoin the working group report. Throughout the case of the dispute settlement process,due to China’s domestic legislation there are some problems and responding strategy,directly may indirectly led to the case.In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the total is divided into five parts.The first part is the cause of action. The case is "China—Measures AffectingTrading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and AudiovisualEntertainment Products"(hereinafter referred to China Certain Publications case, theCase No is DS363).The second part is the merits introduction, introducing the opinion of theprosecution, the respondent party’s response to the report of the Expert Group and theAppellate Body ruling points. Understanding the case will lay the foundation for thethird part is the focus of controversy in this case and disagreement between bothparties.The third part is the focus of dispute and their differences. By investigating thedebate on the process of the United States and China and the decision of the disputesettlement body, to find out the cause of the China losing. The United States andChina about whether the steps involved in violation of the China’s trading rightscommitments, whether government can be quoted GATT1994article20(a) whether the public morality exception clauses and distribution service constitutesdiscrimination, in violation of the obligation of national treatment problem such aslaunched a fierce debate.The fourth part is the theory dispute involved related problems to the case study.Because GATT1994article20(a) public morals of exception clause for theinterpretation of the schedules of commitments and trade in services is the key to thecase the battle or not, in-depth discussion on the two theories question, for thefollowing analysis of the case in China against the cause of the foundation.The fifth part is about the enlightenment to the case. By analyzing the case of theproblems exposed by the Chinese, to explore the ways to solve the problem. Thisarticle mainly from the domestic legislation defects, fault responding strategies ofthese two aspects analysis appear in the case of China, and puts forward the solutionto solve the problem.