WTO Dispute Settlement and Human Rights 6. Some Thoughts in Conclusion WTO Members must comply, in good faith, with their human rights obligations and with their WTO obligations at the same time without letting a conflict arise between the two sets of legislation. Hence, it is only reasonable to expect that WTO adjudicating bodies would interpret WTO provisions taking into account all the relevant international obligations of the disputing states. Accordingly, in light of the inherent flexibility of many of the WTO obligations, including Articles XX and XXI of GATT, WTO Members can simultaneously respect both their human rights and their WTO rights and obligations. It is not for WTO adjudicating bodies to determine whether human rights have been violated or respected, but for states to act consistently with international law. Panels and the Appellate Body do not have the capacity to interpret, apply or enforce other treaties or customs; they are not courts of general jurisdiction and their mandate and jurisdiction is well defined and limited. Yet, since WTO law must be interpreted as having been drafted, and as evolving, consistently with international law, conflicts with human rights treaties should not occur. But in the event of irreconcilable conflict between a WTO provision and human rights law, and/or between a specific application or implementation by a WTO Member and human rights law, WTO adjudicating bodies cannot reach a conclusion that a human rights provision has superseded a WTO provision, as in doing so they would need to interpret and apply international obligations other than those of the WTO; they would also be adding to, diminishing or amending the WTO treaty, contrary to the DSU. In case of irreconcilable conflicts, panels and the AB should report to the DSB. It is therefore possible that a single measure may be considered consistent with the relevant WTO covered agreements but inconsistent with a human rights treaty or customs, and vice versa. Compliance with WTO law does not justify or excuse human rights violations. Members must ensure that all their measures comply with both WTO law and human rights law. WTO Members remain responsible and liable for their human rights violations, but their responsibility cannot be pursued or enforced before WTO adjudicating bodies. In other words, the systems of state responsibility for trade and human rights matters are not yet coordinated and have evolved in parallel courses. In situations of conflict between the system of human rights law and that of WTO law, it may be best considered as a matter for states to decide, rather than for WTO adjudicating bodies.
	© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute. This file was last modified: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 12:52AM