Sunday, January 11, 2009

Nation Treaty Breaches

Nation Treaty Breaches

First, private litigation between trading partners revolves around self-regulated arbitration and mediation contractual terms which differs greatly in scope and scale from perceived nation treaty breaches. For example, certain government agencies may or may not assist or investigate complaints such as the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, The Canadian Competition Bureau, or the US International Trade Commission.

Canadian International Trade Tribunal

Canadian Competition Bureau

US International Trade Commission

Other international arbitration groups exist such as may also administer arbitration proceedings which for all intensive purposes provide a suitable forum for dispute settlement which is more equitable and economical in terms of contractual resolution rather than costly and time-consuming litigation such as:



Centre for Public Resources

European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration

UNCITRAL (Closely coordinated with the WTO)



Quebec National and International Commercial Arbitration Centre

Japan Commercial Arbitration Association


World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration Centre

Outright nations breaching of bilateral treaties may be arbitrated under terms of NAFTA or the WTO among Canada, the USA and Mexico for example. Dependent upon the particulars of the treaties themselves arbitration solutions may be settled in one of more of the arbitration fora listed above.

Increasingly the WTO administrates disputes among member nations for either WTO or GATT treaty infringements or violations. Following failure to meet resolution terms results in binding arbitration panels which may be enforced through more serious means such as punitive actions limited to enforcing trade access agreements and recommendations as to conformance with WTO dispute resolution agreements.

"An examination of GATT/WTO arbitration procedures" (Zekos, 1999)

Prohibitive trade practices may then come to effect on a nation by nation level and plaintiff nations may seek further removal of trade concessions to delinquent nations under terms of the Uruguay Round. Rewards for plaintiffs may not be enforced however as the WTO does not have the political support to do so, yet. Retaliatory measures while submitted for further claims more clearly are determined by the comparative economic powers of the disputing states rather than legal rulings. Since the US appears to remain the largest enforcement of rulings often may appear to revolve around the elephant in the room. Canadians recalling the soft-wood lumber debate might confirm this. States with many outstanding awards and claims become, "the black sheep of the family" and acquire reduced FDI and trade developments as a result.




No comments: