Innovation and Improvement of RCEP International Trade Dispute Settlement Mechanism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/2526-6284/2024.v4n4.71573Palabras clave:
RCEP; WTO; Dispute settlement mechanismResumen
On January 1, 2022, the “Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership” (RCEP) came into force. This agreement created a special International Trade Dispute Settlement Mechanism, which effectively broke through the current practical dilemma faced by the Dispute Settlement Mechanism of WTO while conforming to the development law of the free trade system. The dispute settlement mechanism of RCEP attaches greater importance to the role of consultation and the transparency of rules and procedures compared with other dispute settlement mechanisms such as WTO. It is more autonomous and efficient and shows sufficient modesty regarding jurisdictional conflicts. However, at the same time, this mechanism still has deficiencies in the rules regarding third-party participation, special and differential treatment rules, safeguard measures for dispute settlement and enforcement procedures, and dispute settlement mechanisms between investors and countries. It needs to be supplemented and improved to play its role better. Although the dispute resolution mechanism of RCEP is carried out within the framework of regional cooperation, it complements the multilateral free trade system and jointly promotes the development of the world economy in the direction of openness, cooperation, and win-win results.
Citas
Anne Meryl M. Chua,Yolanda T. Garcia, and Emmanuel Genesis T. Andal. (2018). The Spaghetti Bowl Phenomenon in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) among APEC Economies. Journal of Global Business and Trade, 14(2), 45. https://scholar.cnki.net/zn/Detail/index/GARJ2021_2/SQGE347512578CFE2EAABBC59077FC6B1332
蔡从燕, 李尊然. (2015). 国际投资法上的间接征收(pp. 56).法律出版社. (Cai Congyan, and Li Zunran. (2015). Indirect expropriation in international investment law (pp. 56). Law Press. )
陈儒丹. (2016). TPP中选择性排他管辖权条款的效力研究.政法论坛, 34(5), 58-69. (Chen Rudan. (2016). A Study on the Effectiveness of Selective Exclusivity Jurisdiction Clause in TPP. Political Science and Law Forum, 34(5), 58-69. )
韩立余. (2009). 既往不咎——WTO争端解决机制研究(pp. 3).北京大学出版社. (Han Liyu. (2009). No Regrets for the Past——The Dispute Settlement Mechanism of WTO Research (pp. 3). Peking University Press. )
李诗娴. (2024). 论WTO争端解决机制改革的价值取向与规则构造: 以RCEP为参照样本.暨南学报(哲学社会科学版), 46(1), 97-111. (Li Shixian. (2024). On the Value Orientation and Rule Construction of WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism Reform: Take RCEP As the Reference Sample. Journal of Jinan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 46(1), 97-111. )
梁丹妮. (2007). “北美自由贸易协定”投资争端仲裁机制研究(pp. 162).法律出版社. (Liang Danni. (2007). Study on the Investment Dispute Arbitration Mechanism of “North American Free Trade Agreement” (pp. 162). Law Press. )
吕宁宁, 蒋欣. (2023). 比较视角下的RCEP争端解决机制研究.国家法学刊, 4, 131-154. (Lu Ningning, and Jiang Xin. (2023). The dispute resolution mechanism of RCEP Research from a Comparative Perspective. National Law Journal, 4, 131-154. )
马忠法, 谢迪扬. (2022). “构建人类命运共同体”理念下的“区域全面经济伙伴关系协定”.上海对外经贸大学学报, 29(1), 5-19. (Ma Zhongfa, and Xie Diyang. (2022). The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership under the Concept of “Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind”. Journal of Shanghai University of International Business and Economics, 29(1), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.16060/j.cnki.issn2095-8072.2022.01.001 )
Umenze, N. S. (2021). Is the WTO Appellate Body in Limbo? The Roots of the Crisis in the WTO Dispute Settlement Body and the Available Routes Navigating the Quagmire. Potchefstroom Elec. L. J, 24(1), 1-46. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2021/v24i0a8580
宋晓燕. (2023). 全球治理视野下的国际经济秩序发展与法治化.东方法学, 2, 99-109. (Song Xiaoyan. (2023). Development and Legalization of International Economic Order under the Perspective of Global Governance. Oriental Law, 2, 99-109. https://doi.org/10.19404/j.cnki.dffx.20230320.005. )
吴琦, 林泽伟. (2023). RCEP争端解决机制评估与中国之因应.集美大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 26(3), 40-47. (Wu Qi, and Lin Zewei. (2023). Assessment of RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism and China's Response. Journal of Jimei University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 26(3), 40-47. )
王彦志. (2022). RCEP背景下中国-东盟投资争端解决机制.政法论丛, 6, 86-96. (Wang Yanzhi. (2022). China-Asean Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism in the Context of RCEP. Political Science and Law, 6, 86-96. )
杨国华. (2019). WTO上诉机构的最后五年: 基于WTO争端解决机构会议记录的回忆.中国法律评论, 4, 68. (Yang Guohua. (2019). The Last Five Years of the WTO Appellate Body: A Recollection Based on the Minutes of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body Meetings. China Law Review, 4, 68. )
杨国华, 李詠箑, 纪文华, 于宁, 蒋成华. (2004). WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(上).法学评论, 3, 78-85. (Yang Guohua, Li Yonggan, Ji Wenhua, Yu Ning, and Jiang Chenghua. (2004). Research on Expert Group Procedure in The Dispute Settlement Mechanism of WTO (Part I). Law Review, 3, 78-85. https://doi.org/10.13415/j.cnki.fxpl.2004.03.010 )
张建. (2022). RCEP背景下国际贸易争端解决机制的创新与完善.中国政法大学学报, 2, 216-229. (Zhang Jian. (2022). Innovation and improvement of the international trade dispute settlement mechanism under the background of RCEP. Journal of China University of Political Science and Law, 2, 216-229. )
赵骏. (2013). “皇冠上明珠”的黯然失色: WTO争端解决机制利用率减少的原因探究.中外法学, 25(6), 1242-1255. (Zhao Jun. (2013). The Dimming of the Pearl on the Crown: An Inquiry into the Reasons for the Decrease in the Utilization Rate of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism. Chinese and Foreign Law, 25(6), 1242-1255. )
