972 resultados para Investor-State Dispute Settlement
Resumo:
In this paper, the expression “neighbourhood policy” of the European Union (EU) is understood in a broad way which includes the members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) contracting parties to the European Economic Area (EEA), the EFTA State Switzerland, candidate states, the countries of the European Neighbour-hood Policy (ENP), and Russia. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is the centre of gravity in the judicial dimension of this policy. The innermost circle of integration after the EU itself comprises the EFTA States who are party to the European Economic Area. With the EFTA Court, they have their own common court. The existence of two courts – the ECJ and the EFTA Court – raises the question of homogeneity of the case law. The EEA homogeneity rules resemble the ones of the Lugano Convention. The EFTA Court is basically obliged to follow or take into account relevant ECJ case law. But even if the ECJ has gone first, there may be constellations where the EFTA Court comes to the conclusion that it must go its own way. Such constellations may be given if there is new scientific evidence, if the ECJ has left certain questions open, where there is relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights or where, in light of the specific circumstances of the case, there is room for “creative homogeneity”. However, in the majority of its cases the EFTA Court is faced with novel legal questions. In such cases, the ECJ, its Advocates General and the Court of First Instance make reference to the EFTA Court’s case law. The question may be posed whether the EEA could serve as a model for other regional associations. For the ENP states, candidate States and Russia this is hard to imagine. Their courts will to varying degrees look to the ECJ when giving interpretation to the relevant agreements. The Swiss Government is – at least for the time being – unwilling to make a second attempt to join the EEA. The European Commission has therefore proposed to the Swiss to dock their sectoral agreements with the EU to the institutions of the EFTA pillar, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) and the EFTA Court. Switzerland would then negotiate the right to nominate a member of the ESA College and of the EFTA Court. The Swiss Government has, however, opted for another model. Swiss courts would continue to look to the ECJ, as they did in the past, and conflicts should also in the future be resolved by diplomatic means. But the ECJ would play a decisive role in dispute settlement. It would, upon unilateral request of one side, give an “authoritative” interpretation of EU law as incorporated into the relevant bilateral agreement. In a “Non-Paper” which was drafted by the chief negotiators, the interpretations of the ECJ are even characterised as binding. The decision-making power would, however, remain with the Joint Committees where Switzerland could say no. The Swiss Government assumes that after a negative decision by the ECJ it would be able to negotiate a compromise solution with the Commission without the ECJ being able to express itself on the outcome. The Government has therefore not tried to emphasise that the ECJ would not be a foreign court. Whether the ECJ would accept its intended role, is an open question. And if it would, the Swiss Government would have to explain to its voters that Switzerland retains the freedom to disregard such a binding decision and that for this reason the ECJ is not only no foreign court, but no adjudicating court at all.
Resumo:
Reports of the divisions of the Dept. also issued separately.
Resumo:
Considerando que houve uma intensificação no fluxo de investimento estrangeiro direto (IED) tanto no mundo quanto especialmente em Angola nos últimos anos, é a intenção deste trabalho explorar quais ferramentas outorgam ao investidor privado um sistema de proteção do seu investimento bem como sistema institucionalizado de solução de controvérsias (e.g. ICSID) por meio de Acordos de Proteção e Promoção de Investimentos (APPIs) firmados por Angola comparados à proteção que poderá ser garantida aos investidores privados brasileiros na ausência de tais documentos legais. A pergunta inerente a este trabalho é, portanto, como certo grau de proteção é outorgado aos investidores brasileiros em Angola tendo em vista as atuais correntes e tendências no direito internacional do investimento e o fluxo crescente de investimento brasileiro em Angola.
Resumo:
In response to the increases in pCO2 projected in the 21st century, adult coral growth and calcification are expected to decrease significantly. However, no published studies have investigated the effect of elevated pCO2 on earlier life history stages of corals. Porites astreoides larvae were collected from reefs in Key Largo, Florida, USA, settled and reared in controlled saturation state seawater. Three saturation states were obtained, using 1 M HCl additions, corresponding to present (380 ppm) and projected pCO2 scenarios for the years 2065 (560 ppm) and 2100 (720 ppm). The effect of saturation state on settlement and post-settlement growth was evaluated. Saturation state had no significant effect on percent settlement; however, skeletal extension rate was positively correlated with saturation state, with ~50% and 78% reductions in growth at the mid and high pCO2 treatments compared to controls, respectively.
Resumo:
This paper is a constructivist attempt to understand a global political space where states as actors (the traditional domain of international relations theory and international law) are joined by international organizations, firms, NGOs, and others. Today we know that many supposedly private or international orders (meaning sources of order other than the central institutions of the territorial state) are engaged in the regulation of large domains of collective life in a world where the sources of power are multiple, sovereignties are overlapping, and anarchy is meaningless. The paper begins with an attempt, discussed in the first section, to sort out what the rule of law might mean in the context of the WTO, where we soon see that it can only be understood by also considering the meaning of Administrative Law. Much of the debate about rule of law depends on positivist and centralist theories of “law,” whose inadequacy for my purposes leads, in the second section, to a discussion of legal pluralism and implicit law in legal theory. These approaches offer an alternative theoretical framework that respects the role of the state while not seeing it as the only source of normativity. The third section looks directly at WTO law and dispute settlement. I tr y to show that the sources and interpretations of law in the WTO and the trading system cannot be reduced to the Dispute Settlement Body. I conclude in the fourth section with some suggestions on how a WTO rule of law could be understood as democratic.
Resumo:
The flux of foreign investment into the water industry led to the internationalisation of contracts and of the method of settlement of possible disputes. When disputes over the performance of a water concession give origin to investor-state arbitrations, public authorities are put in a challenging position. The state need to combine two different roles – its role in the provision of services of public interest and the fulfilment of its international legal obligations arising from international investment agreements. The complexity of this relationship is patent in a variety of procedural and substantive issues that have been surfacing in arbitration proceedings conducted before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. The purpose of this dissertation is to discuss the impact of investment arbitration on the protection of public interests associated with water services. In deciding these cases arbitrators are contributing significantly in shaping the contours and substance of an emerging international economic water services regime. Through the looking glass of arbitration awards one can realise the substantial consequences that the international investment regime has been producing on water markets and how significantly it has been impacting the public interests associated with water services. Due consideration of the public interests in water concession disputes requires concerted action in two different domains: changing the investment arbitration mechanism, by promoting the transparency of proceedings and the participation of non-parties; and changing the regulatory framework that underpins investments in water services. Combined, these improvements are likely to infuse public interests into water concession arbitrations.
Resumo:
Emissions trading schemes have been introduced throughout the world in order to achieve an environmental end. In the pursuit of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, these schemes will have a direct impact on the global economy. This book examines the details of emissions trading schemes through the lens of the World Trade Organization (WTO) law. Emissions trading schemes both implemented and proposed will be deconstructed to understand whether they will have a single uniform legal status within the WTO law, or indeed whether the legal status of the units of trade will differ on a case-by-case basis. This book examines non-discrimination provisions and exceptions within four significant WTO ‘covered agreements’. This analysis will be undertaken with a goal to understand how emissions trading scheme measures may be labelled and treated by WTO dispute settlement bodies. Moreover, the narrative of this publication demonstrates where decisions must be made by WTO Members in relation to the legal treatment of emissions trading units and liabilities. The aim of the book is to consider the issues associated with emissions trading that arise within the existing WTO law. This monograph will consider emissions trading schemes through the lens of WTO law to establish how these schemes will be defined, where they may potentially breach the non-discrimination provisions of the law and, whether the WTO law should be amended through Member agreement in order to accommodate these schemes. The book is an adaptation of a PhD thesis, which is an analysis of one emissions trading framework – the Australian Clean Energy Package – using WTO law as the theoretical framework. The aim of the proposed monograph is to increase the scope of analysis from the Clean Energy Package to emissions trading schemes more generally. It is envisaged that to do this effectively, examples of frameworks that have been proposed and implemented by various WTO members must be used as case studies for both WTO compliance and non-compliance.
Resumo:
There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.
Resumo:
Esta dissertação concentra suas investigações nas contramedidas do direito internacional geral e da Organização Mundial do Comércio (OMC). No âmbito do direito internacional, estudou-se a essência política da sociedade internacional descentralizada, bem como a tendência do processo de fragmentação do direito internacional em direção a regimes mais regulados pelo direito. Além disso, investigou-se a tentativa de ampliação da normatização das contramedidas por meio do Projeto de Artigos sobre Responsabilidade Internacional do Estado de 2001. No âmbito do regime especial da OMC, analisou-se o maior adensamento jurídico das contramedidas como ponto culminante na fase de implementação das decisões no sistema de solução de controvérsias da OMC. Com base na avaliação sobre a necessidade de reforma do instituto das contramedidas da OMC, foram pesquisadas as principais propostas para sua modificação, buscando-se identificar a tentativa de redução do espaço político. A hipótese deste trabalho partiu da afirmação sobre a existência de uma tendência evolutiva no direito internacional geral e na OMC no que tange ao aumento da juridicidade do instituto das contramedidas. Entretanto, essa hipótese confirmou-se apenas parcialmente, pois a tentativa de aprimorar a regulamentação jurídica do instituto das contramedidas ocorre em meio à permanência de elementos políticos.
Resumo:
A presente dissertação é sobre a atuação do Estado na economia como acionista minoritário, focando, em especial, no caso do Brasil. Em um primeiro momento, tratamos das possibilidades do uso das participações minoritárias, apontando que, embora estejamos falando de propriedade pública sobre parcelas do capital social de empresas privadas, essas participações não configuram, somente, forma de exploração direta da atividade econômica, devendo ser compreendidas como uma técnica jurídica ou uma ferramenta da qual o Estado pode se valer para realizar as diferentes modalidades de atuação na economia. Nesse sentido, mostramos como as participações minoritárias possibilitam a atuação do Estado como empresário, regulador, fomentador e investidor. Em seguida, falamos dos mecanismos societários que a Administração Pública pode utilizar para que, mesmo como acionista minoritária, possa influenciar a direção das empresas público-privadas, tais como os acordos de acionistas e as golden-shares. Após cuidarmos da natureza jurídica e das vantagens comparativas da atuação estatal na economia por meio de participações minoritárias, passamos a analisar os limites dessa atuação. Desse modo, deve-se distinguir entre o uso das participações públicas como opção legítima de atuação na economia versus sua aplicação como burla ao regime jurídico aplicável às empresas estatais mediante o controle societário disfarçado e a simulação de contratações administrativas. Por fim, tratamos da questão da escolha de parceiros privados pela Administração Pública, bem como dos controles públicos que incidem sobre as empresas participadas.
Resumo:
Rhodes, Mark. 'US Foreign Sales Corporations, Export Tax Credits and the WTO', in: 'The WTO and the Regulation of International Trade: Recent Trade Disputes between the European Union and the United States', (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2005), pp.177-189 RAE2008
Resumo:
The primary aim of this thesis is to analyse legal and governance issues in the use of Environmental NPR-PPMs, particularly those aiming to promote sustainable practices or to protect natural resources. NPR-PPMs have traditionally been thought of as being incompatible with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, the issue remains untouched by WTO adjudicatory bodies. One can suggest that WTO adjudicatory bodies may want to leave this issue to the Members, but the analysis of the case law also seems to indicate that the question of legality of NPR-PPMs has not been brought ‘as such’ in dispute settlement. This thesis advances the argument that despite the fact that the legal status of NPR-PPMs remains unsettled, during the last decades adjudicatory bodies have been scrutinising environmental measures based on NPR-PPMs just as another expression of the regulatory autonomy of the Members. Though NPR-PPMs are regulatory choices associated with a wide range of environmental concerns, trade disputes giving rise to questions related to the legality of process-based measures have been mainly associated with the protection of marine wildlife (i.e., fishing techniques threatening or affecting animal species). This thesis argues that environmental objectives articulated as NPR-PPMs can indeed qualify as legitimate objectives both under the GATT and the TBT Agreement. However, an important challenge for the their compatibility with WTO law relate to aspects associated with arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination. In the assessment of discrimination procedural issues play an important role. This thesis also elucidates other important dimensions to the issue from the perspective of global governance. One of the arguments advanced in this thesis is that a comprehensive analysis of environmental NPR-PPMs should consider not only their role in what is regarded as trade barriers (governmental and market-driven), but also their significance in global objectives such as the transition towards a green economy and sustainable patterns of consumption and production.
Resumo:
Despite the growing sophistication of antitrust regimes around the world, export cartels benefit from special treatment: they are almost universally tolerated, if not encouraged in the countries of origin. Economists do not offer an unambiguous policy recommendation on how to deal with them in part due to the lack of empirical data. This article discusses arguments for and against export cartels and it identifies the existing gaps in the present regulatory framework. The theoretical part is followed by an analysis of the recent case law: a US cartel challenged with different outcomes in India and South Africa, as well as Chinese export cartels pursued in the USA. The Chinese cases are particularly topical as the conduct at stake, apart from being subject to private antitrust actions before US courts, was also challenged within the WTO dispute settlement framework, pointing out to the existing interface between trade and competition. While the recent developments prove that unaddressed issues tend not to vanish, the new South-North dimension has the potential of placing export cartels again on the international agenda. Pragmatic thinking suggests looking for the solution within the WTO framework.
Resumo:
The EU has historically been portrayed as a distinctive international actor both in terms of the norms and values it exports in context of its international relations and the manner in which it seeks to influence others. However, such claims to the EU’s distinctiveness are increasingly being questioned. This article joins this chorus of voices arguing the non-distinctiveness of the EU’s foreign policy power by focusing on a specific feature of the EU’s external trade policy, the role of World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement in the EU’s attempts to promote its interests, values and norms.
Resumo:
Le critère de l’effet direct des accords conclus par la Communauté européenne n’a pas encore été étudié de manière exhaustive par la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne de Justice. Certaines affaires sont trompeuses puisqu’elles mèneraient à croire que l’effet direct des ententes multilatérales peut être atteint en optimisant les mécanismes internationaux de résolution des conflits. Ceci n’est pas convaincant, en premier lieu, puisque dans le contexte des relations intergouvernementales, le contrôle de l’action des parties contractantes demeure élusif. Toute amélioration des procédures judiciaires, particulièrement en contexte multilatéral, est destinée à être marginalisée tant que l’on est confiné aux mécanismes intergouvernementaux de résolution des conflits. En second lieu, les implications de cela sur l’effet direct sont ténues. L’effet direct, ou le droit d'agir en justice des individus, n’est pas simplement une question légale abstraite ; il implique aussi des décisions de politique. Le désir d’application effective est mesuré avec d’autres objectifs tels que le maintien d’un certain niveau de démocratie et l’instrumentalisation des traités poursuivant des objectifs de politique interne et étrangère. L’examen de l’ancienne question de l’effet direct en combinant certains éléments de doctrine juridique et d’analyse de science politique offre un meilleur aperçu sur le critère de l’effet direct que la simple dépendance de la jurisprudence émergente.