Since the appointment of new appellate judges by the World Trade Organization(WTO)was banned in 2019,the paralysis of the appellate body has seriously damaged the Dispute Settlement Mechanism(DSM),leaving a gap in res...Since the appointment of new appellate judges by the World Trade Organization(WTO)was banned in 2019,the paralysis of the appellate body has seriously damaged the Dispute Settlement Mechanism(DSM),leaving a gap in resolving the escalating digital services trade disputes involving complex issues such as data flow and algorithm governance,and the existing WTO rules have failed to fully address these problems.Although MPIA offers a temporary alternative,its limited membership,uncertain executability,and untested applicability to new types of digital disputes make it inadequate.Meanwhile,the rising technological nationalism and fragmented regulations(such as the GDPR and the CLOUD Act)have exacerbated the global digital governance divide,marginalizing China and the countries in the Global South.This article analyzes the decline of DSM,highlighting the eroded rule predictability and legal fragmentation,and critically assesses the limitations of MPIA and the deficiencies of the traditional WTO framework in disputes such as data localization.A series of cases has revealed the trends of“pre-dispute governance”and unilateralism.In the face of this dual crisis,this article holds that China and the Global South must embark on a path of transformation from“system participants”to“system shapers,”rather than merely conforming.The strategies it explores include leveraging domestic regulations(such as data outbound security assessment),promoting regional cooperation(such as the mediation mechanism of RCEP),and advancing initiatives like the Global Data Security Initiative.This dual approach of maintaining“policy sovereignty”and establishing“compliance sovereignty”aims to ensure institutional autonomy,enhance rule-making capabilities,and establish a fairer,rule-based digital trade order in the context of DSM paralysis and regulatory fragmentation.展开更多
文摘Since the appointment of new appellate judges by the World Trade Organization(WTO)was banned in 2019,the paralysis of the appellate body has seriously damaged the Dispute Settlement Mechanism(DSM),leaving a gap in resolving the escalating digital services trade disputes involving complex issues such as data flow and algorithm governance,and the existing WTO rules have failed to fully address these problems.Although MPIA offers a temporary alternative,its limited membership,uncertain executability,and untested applicability to new types of digital disputes make it inadequate.Meanwhile,the rising technological nationalism and fragmented regulations(such as the GDPR and the CLOUD Act)have exacerbated the global digital governance divide,marginalizing China and the countries in the Global South.This article analyzes the decline of DSM,highlighting the eroded rule predictability and legal fragmentation,and critically assesses the limitations of MPIA and the deficiencies of the traditional WTO framework in disputes such as data localization.A series of cases has revealed the trends of“pre-dispute governance”and unilateralism.In the face of this dual crisis,this article holds that China and the Global South must embark on a path of transformation from“system participants”to“system shapers,”rather than merely conforming.The strategies it explores include leveraging domestic regulations(such as data outbound security assessment),promoting regional cooperation(such as the mediation mechanism of RCEP),and advancing initiatives like the Global Data Security Initiative.This dual approach of maintaining“policy sovereignty”and establishing“compliance sovereignty”aims to ensure institutional autonomy,enhance rule-making capabilities,and establish a fairer,rule-based digital trade order in the context of DSM paralysis and regulatory fragmentation.
文摘世界贸易组织(WTO)的争端解决上诉机构(DSB)于2019年12月11日起停摆。中国与欧盟等19个成员国于2020年4月30日向DSB通报了关于《依据DSU第25条的多方临时上诉仲裁安排》(Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement Pursuant to Article 25 of the DSU,以下简称MPIA),并明确了临时代替DSB进行上诉仲裁。MPIA的主要作用是当WTO成员发生争端时以裁判者的角度进行裁定,同时也是作为处理应急事件的一个有效手段,其创设和实践也将会对上诉机构重启和WTO争端解决机制产生影响。但它设计的最初目的是否能代替上诉机构对争端进行解决,需要做进一步的分析与研究。
