Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Australia, Why has the Australian Government Negotiated a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with Indonesia?, online: DFAT . Formal economic analysis of trade agreements generally treats disputes as synonymous with enforcement concerns. But in reality, most disputes in the WTO are related to differences of opinion on the agreement or in cases where the agreement is simply silent. Some have also suggested that the WTO dispute resolution body (DSB) can fulfil a useful objective by granting “exceptions” to rigid contractual obligations in certain circumstances. In each of these three cases, the role of the DSE is to “complete” different dimensions of an incomplete contract. In addition, there is a debate among lawyers as to whether or not precedents in DSB cases can improve the institution`s performance. All of this shows how important it is to understand the implications of the different levels of activism possible in the role of the DSB. In this paper, we present a formal analysis on this general issue. We characterize the choice of the form of the contract and the role of RGB, which is optimal for governments under different contractual conditions. What is new in our approach is that it emphasizes the interaction between contract organization and the organization of the dispute resolution process and sees it as two components of a single institutional design problem. 264. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Australia, Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Partnership Agreement, Outcome: Skills Development (updated June 27, 2019), online: DFAT .
208th ASEAN Protocol on the Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism, 29 November 2004 (came into force on 29 November 2004), online: ASEAN-. 64. The World Trade Organization, Historic Development of the WTO Dispute Settlement System, online: WTO [WTO 2]. 88. LOCKHART, John and VOON, Tania, “Review of the Appellate Review in the WTO Dispute Settlement System” (2005) 6 Melbourne Journal of International Law 474Google Scholar at 476. 90. Chad P. BOWN, “Participation in WTO Dispute Settlement: Complainant, Interested Parties and Free Riders” (2005) 19 World Bank Economic Review 287 at 293. 50.
JO, Hyeran and NAMGUNG, Hyun, “Disputes settlement Mechanisms in Preferential Trade Agreements: Democracy, Boilerplates, and the Multilateral Trade Regime” (2012) 56 Journal of Conflict Resolution 1041CrosRef Google Scholar at 1041. 87. ZIMMERMANN, Thomas A., “WTO Dispute Settlement at Ten: Evolution, Experiences – Evaluation” (2005) 60 Swiss Review of International Economic Relations 27Google Scholar at 53.