Law and Policy of World Trade Organization The World Trade Organization (WTO) has a system to settle disputes between member countries regarding their rights and obligations under the WTO agreements. The purpose of the WTO dispute settlement system is the prompt settlement of disputes between WTO Members concerning their respective rights and obligations under WTO law. WTO believes the dispute settlement is one of the core pillars of the multidimensional trading system and plays a critical role in promoting the stability of the global economy.[footnoteRef:1] As part of the dispute settlement process, WTO has established panels and Appellate Body, which make judgments and decisions that are enforced by the organization. [1: World Trade Organization, ‘A Unique Contribution’ (2018) accessed 22 Jan 2019] Based on the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), disputes are to be determined before impartial panels of experts, which makes enforceable decisions.[footnoteRef:2] One of the way decisions by panels and Appellate Body are enforced is through trade restrictions and concessions. In some cases, trade concessions are suspended if a member fails to adhere to the final ruling in a dispute. Secondly, these decisions are enforced through a retaliation mechanism, which entails suspension of obligations like trade concessions. Third, decisions by panels and Appellate Body are enforced through sanctions,...

Under this model, sanctions are enforced directly or indirectly as a means of inducing or forcing compliance with the decisions.[footnoteRef:3] [2: Mark L. Movsesian, ‘Enforcement of WTO Rulings: An Interest Group Analysis’ (2003) Hofstra Law Review 32, 1] [3: Steve Charnovitz, ‘The Enforcement of WTO Judgments’ (2009) Yale Journal of International Law 34, 558] While these approaches have helped promote the enforcement of decisions by WTO’s panels and Appellate Body, the enforcement can be improved through various ways. First, enforcement could be improved through authorizing collective retaliation against offending member countries. Secondly, enforcement of decisions by panels and Appellate Body can be enhanced through granting the organization’s rules direct effect in domestic courts. These two measures could improve enforcement by making it more rigorous and avoiding the coercive and rigid nature of the current framework. The other approach toward enhancing enforcement of panels and Appellate Body’s decisions is to encourage the organization’s Member governments to commit to a comprehensive domestic process for executing an adverse panel decision. This would entail inviting informal participation of national courts to help promote compliance.[footnoteRef:4] [4: Steve Charnovitz, ‘The…