Explore the vast range of titles available.

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have exerted a profound influence on the scope and dictates of international law. NGOs have fostered treaties, promoted the creation of new international organizations (IOs), and lobbied in national capitals to gain consent to stronger international rules. A decade ago, Antonio Donini, writing about the United Nations, declared that “the Temple of States would be a rather dull place without nongovernmental organisations.” His observation was apt and is suggestive of a more general thesis: had NGOs never existed, international law would have a less vital role in human progress.

In the first dispute on renewable energy to come to WTO dispute settlement, the domestic content requirement of Ontario's feed-in tariff was challenged as a discriminatory investment-related measure and as a prohibited import substitution subsidy. The Panel and Appellate Body agreed that Canada was violating the GATT and the TRIMS Agreement. But the SCM Article 3 claim by Japan and the European Union remains unadjudicated, because neither tribunal made a finding that the price guaranteed for electricity from renewable sources constitutes a ‘benefit’ pursuant to the SCM Agreement. Although the Appellate Body provides useful guidance to future Panels on how the existence of a benefit could be calculated, the most noteworthy aspect of the new jurisprudence is the Appellate Body's reasoning that delineating the proper market for ‘benefit’ analysis entails respect for the policy choices made by a government. Thus, in this dispute, the proper market is electricity produced only from wind and solar energy.

John Jackson's long, fruitful association with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was unique in the annals of international organizations. His 1969 book, World Trade and the Law of GATT, became the Baedeker for government officials, practitioners, and academics seeking an overall understanding of the trading system or an explanation of a particular GATT provision. Yet the uniqueness of Jackson's relationship to the GATT was not just his foundational scholarship; every international organization in the twentieth century spawned a scholarly community. The uniqueness came from his role as a teacher attracting graduate law students from around the world who traveled to Ann Arbor to study with him and then returned to their countries to take on leadership roles in international trade. These decades of students inspired by Jackson and educated by his synoptic understanding of trade law enhanced Jackson's influence on the GATT in a way that has no parallel in other agencies.

The most salient feature of dispute settlement in the World Trade Organization (WTO) is the possibility of authorizing a trade sanction against a scofflaw member government. This feature, however, is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it fortifies WTO rules and promotes respect for them. On the other hand, it drains away the benefits of free trade and provokes “sanction envy.” Undoubtedly, putting teeth in the WTO was one of the key achievements of the Uruguay Round ending in 1994, and a very significant step in the evolution of international economic law.1 Yet after six years of experience, WTO observers are questioning whether the availability of trade enforcement is sensible.2 This article undertakes an appraisal of trade sanctions as a WTO instrument, and concludes that this practice undermines the trading system. In view of this dysfunction, the article explores alternatives to trade enforcement and points to some softer measures that might have promise.

Charnovitz examines the continuing failure of the US Federal Government to comply with the Avena judgment following the execution of Mexican national Humberto Leal Garcia by the State of Texas. Texas's execution of Leal was promptly criticized by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay, who declared that the execution of Mr. Leal Garcia places the US in breach of international law. The \"breach of international law\" refers to the fact that in 2003, Mexico lodged the Avena case against the US at the International Court of Justice after the American law enforcement officials failed to comply with US obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

One of the biggest challenges facing the World Trade Organization is to determine its own mission. The failure to launch new trade talks at the WTO’s Ministerial Conference at Seattle in late 1999 was due, in large part, to disagreements between members about what “new” issues should be placed on the negotiating agenda. These problems continued to stymie the WTO in the run-up to the Doha ministerial meeting in 2001.

In 2009, the United States imposed additional tariffs for a three-year period on imports of automotive tires from China under a special-safeguard provision included in China's Protocol of Accession to the WTO. China challenged the measure in the WTO. The case marked the first WTO dispute in which a challenged safeguard was upheld by the Appellate Body; the first in which an accession protocol was used successfully as a defense; and the first that China lost as a complaining party. It also was noteworthy in that the safeguard was sought by a labor union, not the domestic industry. This paper reviews the WTO Appellate Body's findings and discusses a number of the legal and policy implications regarding China's Accession Protocol, the Safeguards Agreement, and WTO accession law, as well as economic aspects of the case.

The first significant GATT case regarding the principle of trade discrimination was ‘Belgian Family Allowances,’ a complaint by Denmark and Norway against Belgium. This 1952 decision expounding the meaning of the unconditional ‘most-favoured-nation’ principle is often cited for the proposition that origin-based conditions are inconsistent with that core principle. This article reconsiders ‘Family Allowances’ through the window of Professor Hudec's classic case study written in 1975. In particular, the article considers whether the panel and Professor Hudec correctly interpreted the term ‘unconditionally,’ in light of the pre-1947 international trade law practices. In addition, the article explores the status of ‘Family Allowances’ as the first GATT case holding that a governmental social program violated trade rules. Although Belgium did not invoke GATT Article XX as a defense, this paper assesses how current WTO jurisprudence would be applied to the facts in ‘Family Allowances,’ and concludes that Belgium would still lose the case.