Expanding Democracy: Why Australia Should Negotiate for Open and Transparent Dispute Settlement in its Ftas

31 Pages Posted: 2 Jan 2006

See all articles by Bryan Christopher Mercurio

Bryan Christopher Mercurio

Chinese University of Hong Kong - Faculty of Law; University of New South Wales - Faculty of Law

Rebecca Faith LaForgia

University of Adelaide - School of Law

Abstract

State-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms are included in all bilateral free trade agreements ('FTAs'). A large percentage of these mechanisms are very closely modelled on the World Trade Organization's dispute settlement system, in which dispute settlement procedures remain largely insulated from public scrutiny. In this sense, the WTO model of dispute settlement is a 'closed' model. By contrast, some countries, such as the United States, endorse an 'open' model of dispute settlement that promotes transparency and non-governmental involvement in trade disputes. Australia is presently negotiating FTAs with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, China, Malaysia and the United Arab Emirates, but has yet to formulate a policy on the important issue of whether to favour open or closed dispute settlement - it endorses the closed model in its FTA with Singapore, while endorsing the open model in its FTA with the US.

This commentary argues that Australia should, as a matter of policy, negotiate for an open model of dispute settlement in its future FTAs. Firstly, even though the WTO relies on a closed model of dispute settlement, WTO Appellate Body interpretations have slowly changed the nature of the system to embrace greater openness, and recent WTO activities indicate that amendments will further open the system in the near future. Secondly, the 'open' model of dispute settlement is consistent with both Australia's foreign policy and its national interest. Even if ASEAN and other potential FTA partners oppose the open model, that barrier does not appear to be insurmountable: Singapore, a leading member of ASEAN, has recently endorsed the open model in its FTA with the US, indicating that it does not have an intractable objection to public proceedings or non-governmental involvement. Other ASEAN states may also be willing to consider an open model and to discuss the issue in their dealings with Australia. If they are not, it is still in Australia's policy interests to promote, even if only symbolically, a commitment to democratic and open dispute settlement systems in all of its FTAs.

Keywords: international trade, free trade agreements, dispute settlement, transparency, participation

JEL Classification: F10, F13, K33, N40, N70

Suggested Citation

Mercurio, Bryan Christopher and LaForgia, Rebecca Faith, Expanding Democracy: Why Australia Should Negotiate for Open and Transparent Dispute Settlement in its Ftas. Melbourne Journal of International Law, Vol. 6, p. 485, 2005. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=868762

Bryan Christopher Mercurio (Contact Author)

Chinese University of Hong Kong - Faculty of Law ( email )

6/F Western Teaching Complex
Shatin, New Territories
Hong Kong
(852) 2696 1139 (Phone)

University of New South Wales - Faculty of Law

Kensington, New South Wales 2052
Australia

Rebecca Faith LaForgia

University of Adelaide - School of Law ( email )

Adelaide, South Australia 5005
Australia

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
139
Abstract Views
1,136
rank
209,420
PlumX Metrics