Below is abstract of the article: “Transparency And Public
Participation In The WTO: A Report Card On WTO Transparency Mechanisms” written
by Gabrielle Marceau, Mikella Hurley . It has been published in the
latest issue of "Trade, Law and Development" and the full text is
available here. The
article presents and compares transparency and public participation practices
in the WTO dispute settlement mechanism with other dispute settlement
mechanisms, particularly arbitration mechanisms such as NAFTA and ICSID.
In contemporary society where transparency has become a
widely shared and recognized value, international organizations are
increasingly being called upon to open their internal decision-making processes
to greater public participation and scrutiny. The World Trade Organization
[WTO], and its predecessor, the GATT, like many other institutions in the field
of international economic law, have commonly been perceived as lacking
sufficient transparency. However, since its inception in 1994, the WTO has
systematically worked to increase public access to information, both in the
context of rulemaking and dispute settlement, and has set an early example for
other institutions. This article reviews the WTO’s efforts in this area,
including recent developments on issues such as open hearings and amicus curiae
briefs. Comparisons are drawn with other fora, particularly regional trade
agreements and investor-State dispute settlement mechanisms. This transparency
“report card” finds that, on the whole, the WTO’s track record compares
favourably with that of other similar institutions. Nonetheless, some suggest
that further work is warranted, particularly in the context of dispute
settlement. The article concludes recalling practical suggestions that could
help make the WTO even more transparent, and further increase the public’s
trust in its mission.
Transparency is a key element of any international legal or non-legal system which determines its legitimacy in the international order. It is also an important democratic norm which shapes the transparency of any legal or non-legal system. At a time when the WTO still faces various criticisms which attack its legitimacy as an apolitical organization, the WTO's transparency practices in the WTO DSS are worth mentioning. Truly, the WTO DSS's legitimacy receives a boost when it is determined to be so open.
ReplyDeleteThis brings me to transparency practices in international arbitration. Investment arbitration fora such as the ICSID have clearly evolved and become more transparent than earlier (given the open hearings, the admission of amicus briefs, inter-alia), thus contributing to its legitimacy. However, the issue of public participation in international commercial arbitration involving states where public policy is under scrutiny needs to be highlighted. Investment arbitration is clearly more transparent than it ever was, but more needs to be done, especially in other aspects such as mutual settlement of disputes (where the WTO is more transparent).