Study On The WTO Case Of Indonesia-Measures Concerning The Importation Of Chicken Meat And Chicken Products

In October 2014,Brazil submitted a request to WTO Dispute Settlement Body for consultation with Indonesia,believing that the measures identified in a series of regulations issued by Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Trade of Indonesia have restricted and prohibited Brazil's exportation of chicken and chicken products to Indonesia market.Brazil requested panel to find that the relevant measures are not consistent with relevant provisions of WTO covered agreements.China thereafter joined the consultation as a third party.The panel report was issued and circulated to members in October 2017.Indonesia accepted the findings and recommendation of the panel and promised to modify the relevant measures,would not appeal.The study of this case will help China to understand the latest interpretation of the relevant provisions of the WTO covered agreements,learn the policy information about poultry international trade,and accumulate the litigation experience of international trade disputes.It is of great theoretical and practical significance for China to participate in international trade and solve international disputes.In this paper,normative analysis and empirical analysis are used to analyze the consistency between the relevant measures in Indonesia and the relevant provisions of the WTO covered agreements.This paper is consisted of five main parts:The first part "Basic Information of the Case" summarizes the background and development of the case,and points out that the disputes of the case focus on whether the relevant measures are consistent with Article XI:1 of GATT 1994,Article III:4 of GATT 1994,Article 8 of SPS Agreement and Annex C.The second part "Whether the Relevant Measures of the Case are Consistent with Article XI:1 of GATT 1994" lists the opinions of the complainant,the respondent,the third parties and the findings of the panel,analyzes how "positive list",intended use and import licensing requirement are not consistent with article XI:1 of GATT 1994,but Brazil fails to prove that the general prohibition measures and direct transportation requirement do not comply with article XI:1 of GATT 1994,points out the problems existing in Indonesia's border measures,and puts forward the procedural and substantive issues which need to be paid attention to when proving whether a measure is consistent with article XI:1 of GATT 1994 in the international disputes of WTO.The third part " Whether the Relevant Measures of the Case are Consistent with Article III:4 of GATT 1994 " lists the opinions of the complainant,the respondent and the third parties as well as the findings of the panel,analyzes that the intended use requirement is not consistent with article III:4 of GATT 1994 in terms of the implementation provisions,i.e.the distribution plan and the distribution report,but Brazil fails to prove that the intended use is not consistent with article III:4 of GATT 1994 in terms of the refrigeration requirements,and Brazil fails to prove that the halal labelling requirement is not consistent with article III:4 of GATT 1994,points out the problems existing in Indonesia's domestic administrative measures,and puts forward the procedural and substantive issues that need to be paid attention to when proving whether a measure is consistent with article III:4 of GATT 1994 in the international disputes of WTO.The fourth part " Whether the Relevant Measure of the Case are Consistent with Article 8 and Annex C of SPS Agreement" analyzes that Indonesia's excessive delay in the approval of veterinary health certificate does not conform to Article 8 and Annex C of SPS agreement by listing the views of the complainant,the respondent and the third parties as well as the findings of the panel,points out the problems existing in Indonesia's SPS procedures,and puts forward the following issues in international trade: How to abide by SPS agreement.The fifth part "the Enlightenment to China" analyzes the theoretical and practical significance of this case to China's participation in international trade and settlement in international disputes,points out China's advantages and disadvantages in the field of poultry importation and exportation,and puts forward the measures China deal with non-tariff barriers in international poultry trade.The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:1.China shall have in-depth understanding and mastery of the panel's interpretation of Article XI:1 of GATT 1994,Article III:4 of GATT1994 and Article 8 of SPS agreement.2.China shall master and make full use of the rules of WTO dispute settlement procedure,such as the rules of panel's term of reference,the rules of evidence and the judicial economy principle.3.China's related central government should regularly review the compliance of existing laws and regulations with WTO obligations.4.It is advisable for China to set up a special WTO non-tariff measure research and management organization.5.China shall formulate a law and regulation specifically for the importation and exportation of poultry meat,and constantly improve the relevant laws and regulations.6.China shall establish an effective poultry product safety supervision system.