Economic Interventionism and International Trade Law in the Covid Era

Economic interventionism in the form of subsidization and operation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) is today among the main frontlines of international trade conflicts. Along with trade restrictions and new legislation designed to impact cross-border investment, mergers, and acquisitions, the use of subsidies and countervailing measures by governments and trade-distorting effects of SOEs have lately caused harsh controversies within and outside the World Trade Organization (WTO) between its members. Going forward, there are reasons to expect these tensions to intensify rather than diminish in number and importance. This Special Issue aims at examining the development of international trade rules regulating state interventionism against the background of the Covid-19 global pandemic and present shifts in global geopolitics and the economy. This introduction, in presenting the state of the art on the questions tackled by this Special Issue and highlighting its contribution to existing literature on the topic, offers different considerations aimed at bringing together various trends emerging from the Articles contained in this Special Issue. It also explores avenues for further research and reflection.

A CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 16 OF THE IRELAND–NORTHERN IRELAND PROTOCOL

Article 16 of the Ireland–Northern Ireland Protocol annexed to the EU–UK Withdrawal Agreement is an escape clause which allows the parties to deviate from their obligations under certain conditions. This article maps out the main features of the safeguards provision in the Protocol in light of international trade law and international relations literature on treaty design. It provides a detailed examination of the safeguards provision in the Protocol and highlights the key design flaws associated with this regime as well as some potential solutions to such flaws.

The European Agri-Food Legislation and Trade Agreements in the Context of the covid -19 Crisis: Reshaped Priorities into a New Scenario under a Complex Legal Framework

This article performs an assessment of the EU Agri-food legislation in the context of the covid-19 crisis: new priorities into a new scenario. Taking the General Food Law as a focal point, this article analyses and explains the institutional, substantive, and procedural elements of EU food law and his intersection with International Trade Law. Principles are discussed as well as specific rules addressing food as a product, the processes related to food and communication about food to consumers. In fact, it is interesting to retrace the points of contact that food legislation shares with other legal disciplines since it is well known that the matter has a cross-cutting scope, i.e., from Agricultural Law to ip Law, from Criminal Law to International Trade Law. Although, the importance of food and related trade issues have always been regulated in times of emergency, as the bse crisis (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, commonly known as "mad cow disease") or during a worldwide pandemic (covid-19). However, until the publication of the Reg. 178/2002, it would have been impossible any given attempt to attribute the requisites of a coherent legal framework to the disordered, episodic, and often dictated by hot reactions of Food Law, understood as a system of rules ordered based on its own principles. Progress made by regulatory interventions that allows today to observe the matter under a different angle. In fact, attention is given to the international context (wto, Codex Alimentarius) as well as to the relationship with food trade policies and the current legal framework and regulatory provisions (such as those contained in Chapter i and ii) of Reg. 178/2002, the latter titled General Food Law. © 2022 Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck Ruprecht, Böhlau Verlag and VR Unipress..

WTO Members Can Save Their 'Crown Jewel': A View from the Arab World

On 10 December 2019, the impending impasse at the WTO Appellate Body (AB) cemented itself after the terms of two of the three remaining AB members expired as the US continued to block new nominations. Recent developments, like the proposals for unilateral countermeasures in trade and the COVID-19 pandemic, have sharpened the need to resolve the AB crisis. Interim solutions have indeed come forward such as the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Agreement (MPIA) under Article 25 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) with additional interim solutions that include the Director General's (DG's) good offices, conciliation, and mediation. This article examines some of the existing proposals, including the difficulties in implementing them. It also describes the Arab countries' participation at the dispute settlement boday so far as well as views and positions on the practical matters on trade-related disputes resolution processes. It is argued that traditional Arab jurisprudence on dispute resolution can make valuable contributions to bypass the current situation whilst the stalemate at the AB is resolved.