Holistic Approach of Treaty Interpretation: A Critique on China-Rare Earths

Naigen ZHANG

Abstract


The holistic approach of treaty interpretation is an emerging manner in the last decade to apply international customary law of treaty interpretation in WTO practices of dispute settlement, in particular, the cases related to China. Currently, it is uncertain to apply this manner in WTO dispute settlement due to lack of expressed treaty provisions, which have drawn highly attentions of WTO Members and even resulted in controversies inside the Panel of China-Rare Earths. The analysis of this thesis demonstrates that the holistic approach involves in the customary rules of treaty interpretation. The separate opinion of one panelist in China-Rare Earths provides an example to apply the holistic approach, even though the Appellate Body gave no further explanation of this approach. China-Rare Earths indicates that the basic practices of dispute settlement since the establishment of the WTO remain unchanged, but, facing the new problems and challenges, the practitioners and the academies of the WTO Dispute Settlement must conduct more researches on holistic approach in order to develop the legal theory of treaty interpretation. It would be also benefited from relevant researches to improve Chinese capacity for responding to the WTO dispute settlement and other international dispute settlements by peaceful means.


Keywords


china-rare earths; Treaty interpretation; WTO

Full Text:

PDF

References


Crawford, J. (2012). Brownlie’s principles of public international law (8th ed., pp.378-379). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gardiner, R. (2010). Treaty interpretation (p.8). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gardiner, R. (2012). The Vienna convention rules on treaty interpretation. In D. B. Hollis (Ed.), The Oxford guide to treaties (p.476). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jackson, J. H. (2006). Sovereignty, the WTO and changing fundamentals of international law (p.177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ortino, F. (2006). Treaty interpretation and the WTO appellate body report in US-gambling: A critique’ 9 (1). Journal of International Economic Law, 117.

Villiger, M. E. (2011). The rules on interpretation: Misgiving, misunderstanding, miscarriage? The “crucible” intended by the international law commission. In E. Cannizzaro (Ed.), The law of treaties beyond the Vienna convention (p.108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zhang, N. G. (2013). WTO law and china involved disputes settlement (pp.230-250). Shanghai: Shanghai People Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/7378

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2015



Reminder

  • How to do online submission to another Journal?
  • If you have already registered in Journal A, then how can you submit another article to Journal B? It takes two steps to make it happen:

1. Register yourself in Journal B as an Author

  • Find the journal you want to submit to in CATEGORIES, click on “VIEW JOURNAL”, “Online Submissions”, “GO TO LOGIN” and “Edit My Profile”. Check “Author” on the “Edit Profile” page, then “Save”.

2. Submission

Online Submission: http://cscanada.org/index.php/css/submission/wizard

  • Go to “User Home”, and click on “Author” under the name of Journal B. You may start a New Submission by clicking on “CLICK HERE”.
  • We only use four mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

 Articles published in Canadian Social Science are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).

 

Canadian Social Science Editorial Office

Address: 1020 Bouvier Street, Suite 400, Quebec City, Quebec, G2K 0K9, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138 
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org 
E-mail:[email protected]; [email protected]

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture