| The world’s antidumping multilateral legal system does not require the implementation period of antidumping before the Uruguay Round, That gives international trade and the global economy had a negative impact for the abuse of anti-dumping measures by most of country. Then the Uruguay Round established the Sunset Review for the purpose of reducing the abuse of the anti-dumping measures.However, things go contrary to one’s wishes. A large number of “sun never setâ€phenomenon occurs in practice because ADA’s provisions of sunset review is too general and member country has lots of discretion.Therefore, this article aim to explore the core issues, determination of likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury and dumping, of sunset review from inside.First, this article insisted the anti-dumping is not a punitive act but a point of view of a country’s domestic industry temporary relief measure based on the economic theory,then describes the negative economic effects of anti-dumping measures to demonstrate that the anti-dumping measures shall be terminated at a certain time. Second, this article has analysis the relevant legal provisions and practice content of WTO, the EU,the US and China by comparative analysis and case analysis. Then, this article point that Article 11.3 of ADA is too vague about the way to determine “likelihood†of continuation or recurrence of injury and dumping, thus causing disputes arising and the sunset review not conducive to play its due role. Finally, this paper presents a modification of ADA Article 11.3 of two proposal, one is place strict conditions on the register, the other is should be based on real data analyze the “likelihood†of dumping and injury after filing, for the purpose of focusing on long-term development of the international economy out of the limitations of one country’s economic interests,reducing the abuse of anti-dumping measures and looking for the long-term overall interests instead short-term interests. |
PDF Full Text Request