Font Size: a A A

The Unreasonable Parts Of The Rules Of Evidence In WTO Dispute Settlement System And Chinaís Coping Strategies-Taking The Case Of Rare Earths For Example

Posted on:2018-03-27Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:S HuFull Text:PDF
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
As the old saying goes:"Where there is burden of proof,there lies the losing a lawsuit.,,?From the China-Raw Materials case in 2009 to China-Rare Earths case in 2012,China has failed once and once again in the WTO dispute settlement system,?to say the least,the problem of evidence is the main cause of losing the cases.The research of the problem of evidence and the breaking of the awkward situation is the priority in the WTO dispute settlement system.The purpose of this article is:How can China put up a defense under Article XX of the GATT 1994 successfully?How can China match the burden of proof that DSB laid on us.After the caseóChina Raw Materials,China has failed again in another important case related to natural energy resources.This wasnít just a failure in just a case we lose in WTO dispute settlement system,this is going to bring great trouble in Chinaís energy industry chain structureís upgrade."We tried to make our defense under the Article XX of the GATT 1994 in both two cases,but we didnít make it,by failing to complete the burden of proof.China didnít prove that the measures related to the exportation of rare earths,tungsten and molybdenum meet the spirit of Article XX of the GATT 1994.If we canít settle this mess,as a country great for energy,I am afraid that we couldnít make it well in protecting the environment,peopleís health and in preserving the energy.Methods of this research relies on the case China-Rare Earths.I went through the defense and claim held up by the US,the European Union and China as well as the evaluation of the evidence that all parts submitted to the Panel.The results can be summarized as:the Panel didnít make it clear that how the burden of proof is distributed,the standard of proof and the weight of each evidence.With the fact-finding process trying to be practical and realistic,the Panel has too much power in judging the value of evidences,some practices formed in the past disputes settled are actually very unfair to developing countries,helping the developed countries escape from the responsibilities of protecting the environment,plunder resources of energy in developing countries at low price,which will do harm to the order of international trade ís developing to be healthy,fair,orderly,and I suggest DSB to improve its rules.
Keywords/Search Tags:Illegal evidence exclusion rule, Exception clause, Burden of proof, Standard of proof
PDF Full Text Request
Related items