A Research On Indonesia-Safeguard On Certain Iron Or Steel Products

Appellate Body issued it’s final adjudication on Indonesia-Safeguard on Certain Iron or Steel Products(Complaint: Viet Nam-DS496;Complaint: Chinese Taipei-DS490)on Aug.15 th,2018.This case is the latest one in the Safeguards of WTO Dispute Settlement System,which focuses on the issue of “whether the specific duty constitutes a safeguard measure”with the following two arguments: firstly,whether the specific duty suspends GATT obligations.Secondly,whether the specific duty is designed to prevent or remedy serious injury to the Member’s domestic industry caused or threatened by increased imports of the subject product.The author conducts a research on the Panel Report and Appellate Report in detail with a view to analyse the above two arguments.This paper consists of four parts:The first part is a brief introduction of the case,including the progress,claims of the parties in dispute and findings in Panel Report and Appellate Body Report.The second part addresses the analysis of the two arguments.Claims of the parties in dispute and the findings of Panel and Appellate Body concerning the arguments are summarized and demonstrated with the conclusion in the following: firstly,whether the specific duty suspends GATT obligations.Secondly,whether the specific duty is designed to prevent or remedy serious injury to the Member’s domestic industry caused or threatened by increased imports of the subject product.Both panel and Appellate Body find the specific duty in dispute does not constitute a safeguard measure within the meaning of Article I of the Agreement on Safeguard.The third part aim to analyze the findings of the case,which emphasizes three conclusions from the Panel Report and Appellate Body Report.Firstly,the appellate Body find that in order to constitute a safeguard measure,a measure must present certain constituent feature:(1)that measure must suspend a GATT obligation or withdraw or modify a GATT concession.(2)The suspension,withdrawal,or modification in question must be designed to prevent or remedy serious injury to the Member’s domestic industry caused or threatened by increased imports of the subject product.Moreover,the Appellate Body considers it necessary to distinguish the constituent features of a safeguard measure with the conditions to apply a safeguard measure in comply with WTO law disciplines.Additionally,the Appellate Bodyprovides with an approach to identify the constituent features of a safeguard measure,that is,evaluating the design,structure and expected operation of the measure in dispute.It is required that the panel consider all the relative factors and lists three of them expressly in the findings.It is believed that on the one hand,this case has positive impact on the export of iron or steel product of China,on the other hand,it also provides a set of operable methods for demonstration of how the measures in dispute constituent a safeguard measure in Chinese litigation strategy in DS544.