In four further parts of this comment, I undertake to fulfill my "obligation" to present a more thorough analysis. In part II, I briefly introduce some of the different elements that would go into normal treaty interpretation related to the issue in question, such as which text should be part of the analysis and whether "preparatory work" or intent of the parties, including statements by some nation-state governmental officials made contemporaneously with the drafting of the treaty, should be considered. Likewise, I mention the importance of the forty seven years of GATT practice to the interpretive process, and I note that one way to sharpen the focus of treaty interpretation is to assess the relevance of a prediction of what the WTO Appellate Body would decide if the issue came before it. In part III, I take a detailed look at the various treaty text provisions. The texts themselves are contained in an appendix so that the reader can examine them in context, if he or she wishes. In part IV, I outline several of the important policies that support the view I am taking and that I believe to be enormously significant in suggesting that the Schwartz and Sykes approach is markedly deficient. Finally, in part V, I briefly summarize my conclusions and perceptions.
98 Am. J. Int'l L. 109-125 (2004)
Scholarly Commons Citation
Jackson, John H., "International Law Status of WTO Dispute Settlement Reports: Obligation to Comply or Option to "Buy Out"?" (2004). Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works. Paper 111.