RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE WT/DSB/W/74
26February 1998
ORGANIZATION(98-0775)
PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW OFTHE
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT UNDERSTANDING
Atitsmeeting on13February 1998, theDispute Settlement Body tooknoteofthefollowing
report bytheChairman.
_______________
AttheDSBmeeting of18November 1997, theChairman drew attention totheterms ofthe
Ministerial Decision ontheApplication andReview oftheUnderstanding ontheRules andProcedures
Governing theSettlement ofDisputes, andinvited delegations tosubmit views tohimontheprocedural
issues towhich theMinisterial Decision gives rise,concerning suchquestions astheappropriate venue
forconducting thereview, itstiming, theprocedures forseeking inputs tothereview etc.
TheMinisterial Decision, interalia,“invite(s) theMinisterial Conference tocomplete afull
review ofdispute settlement rules andprocedures under theWorld Trade Organisation within four
years aftertheentry intoforce oftheAgreement Establishing theWorld Trade Organisation, andto
takeadecision ontheoccasion ofitsfirstmeeting afterthecompletion ofthereview, whether to
continue, modify orterminate suchdispute settlement rules andprocedures ”.
Thisnoteconstitutes areport bytheChairman ontheinformal consultations which hehasheld
withMembers ontheprocedural aspects ofthereview. Itreflects bothgeneral comment andcomment
offered onspecific aspects ofthereview process andisputforward withaview tofacilitating that
process.
General
Thedelegations which Ihaveconsulted havebeenofthebroad, general opinion thattheDSU
iscentral tothesuccessful operation oftheWTO; that,asMinisters stated inSingapore, itisworking
effectively; thatitsattributes, suchasautomaticity andpredictability, arepositive features asisits
two-track approach allowing either theresolution ofdisputes bypanel (and Appellate Body)
recommendations andrulings, ortheopportunity topursue mutually agreed solutions. Accordingly,
thegeneral disposition towards thereview appeared tofocus onthose references intheMinisterial
Decision,dealingwithcontinuationormodificationoftheDSU;myconsultationsrevealednodelegation
which favoured theoption oftermination.
Itwasapparent from myconsultations thatbecause theDSU isconsidered tobeworking
effectively, almost alldelegations wereoftheviewthatacareful approach tothereview waswarranted.
Intheirview,thereviewwouldprovideanopportunityforaconsideredexchangeofviewsandevaluation
ofthescope forconsensus onselected improvements -others referred insimilar veintorefinementsWT/DSB/W/74
Page2
orfine-tuning -inthepractical working oftheDSU. Many alsoreferred totheimportance ofnot
conveying amisleading impression ofserious orwidespread shortcomings intheDSU’soperation.
Some considered thatthereview might alsoprovide anopportunity forageneral appreciation ofthe
attributes oftheDSU.
Venue forConducting theReview
Thereference intheMinisterial Decision totheMinisterial Conference isreadbythedelegations
Ihaveconsulted inthelightofArticle IV:1, IV:2andIV:3oftheAgreement Establishing theWTO,
vizthattheGeneral Council, meeting astheDSB, should conduct thereview consistent withits
responsibility todischarge thefunctions oftheMinisterial Conference intheintervals between meetings
ofthelatter. Since theMinisterial Decision indicates thatthereview should becompleted byJanuary
1999-fouryears afterentry intoforce oftheWTO -thegeneral viewappeared tobethattheconduct
ofthereview should beinthehands oftheDSB, which would report onittotheGeneral Council
andthence tothesubsequent Ministerial Conference, which hasyettobescheduled butwhich may
takeplace in1999.
Numerous delegations inaddition commented thatinviewofthealready fullagenda ofregular
meetings oftheDSB, itwould notbepracticable toprovide timeatsuchmeetings forin-depth discussion
ofthereview. Accordingly, Ireceived many suggestions thattheactual discussion should induecourse
betaken upatinformal meetings oftheDSB; orpossibly aworking group oftheDSB, constituted
onanopen-ended basis, andreporting totheDSB.
Timing ofReview
Asnoted above, theMinisterial Decision indicates thatthereview should becompleted by
January 1999. Many delegations commented thatwhile thistiming suggests anactive programme of
work, theyconsidered thatthere would beimportant preoccupations forMembers inthefirstmonths
of1998, particularly inthelead-up totheMay1998 Ministerial Conference. Accordingly, many
delegations indicated thatrealistically theywould notexpect tobeabletoengage inthesubstantive
aspects ofthereview untilafterMay; while theforegoing viewwaswidely shared, some Members
indicated inaddition thataprocess ofseeking delegations ’initial views onthesubstantive aspects of
thereview could possibly beinitiated priortotheMinisterial Conference, although forpractical reasons
ofworkload, Members should notbeexpected tobeabletorespond immediately.
TheReview Process
TheMembers which Ihaveconsulted ingeneral identified thedesirability ofareview process
which attheoutset would allow Members theopportunity, should theysowish, tocomment onthe
operation oftheDSU andtoidentify those aspects ofitwhich could usefully betheobject offurther
discussion inthereview. Thetiming andnature ofthose initial inputs wereconsidered tobeamatter
tobetaken upbythenextChair oftheDSB: inthatregard, several Members considered themost
appropriate firststeptobeaninformal exchange ofviews among members oftheDSBontheoperation
oftheDSU.
Arange ofother possible inputs wasidentified byvarious Members: many considered that
theSecretariat could beinvited toprovide apaper listing those issues which havebeenraised orally
byMembers, andsome suggested thiscould follow aninitial exchange ofviews among Members;
many alsofeltthatitcould beappropriate fortheincoming Chair oftheDSBtoinvite theAppellate
Body tosubmit itsviews induecourse ontheoperation oftheDSU andonanyparticular problems
ithadencountered. Several Members proposed thatother possible inputs could bedrawn onforthe
benefitofMembers,suchasan“in-house”seminaratwhichprominentacademicswhoarewell-informedWT/DSB/W/74
Page3
ondispute settlement intheWTO could share theirperspectives -orageneral invitation topastpanellists
toshare theirviews onanadpersonam basis; however, thereappeared tobearange ofviews onthese
suggestions.
__________