China enters ASEAN-China FTA ready to cooperate

On January 1st 2010, a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) took effect. The newly formed FTA is the third largest in the world, with a GDP of $6.6 trillion and a population of 1.9 billion. Prior to the agreement in 2008, China was ASEAN’s third-largest trading partner.

Despite the concerns of members like Indonesia over the impact that the agreement will have on domestic industry, ASEAN is confident that China will act cooperatively in order to ensure mutual gains. The State Councilor of the People’s Republic of China, H.E. Dai Bingguo, recently met with the ASEAN Secretariat to discuss China’s commitment to aid in the transition process, confirming China’s position in a speech before more than 300 dignitaries. This was the first time that a high-level Chinese Diplomat visited the ASEAN Secretariat.

Further, as the Secretary General of ASEAN notes, there are mechanisms such as anti-dumping safeguards in the FTA to protect the domestic markets of ASEAN member states.

For further information, please click here.

Permalink

Comments Welcome: USITC to evaluate proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership

The United States is interested in pursuing a free trade agreement, which will be known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), with Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.  As a result, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has asked the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) to investigate the likely economic effects of removing duties and non-tariff barriers on product imports from TPP countries.  The probable effects of eliminating tariffs on specific agricultural products are also under investigation. While conducting this analysis, the USITC will use the 2010 Harmonized Tariff Schedule and 2008 trade data.

The USTIC is asking the public for input as it explores the potential effects of the TPP. A public hearing will take place on March 2, 2010 in Washington, D.C., and written submissions for the record will be accepted until March 23, 2010. The USITC’s report to the USTR should be completed by early June.

For further information, please click here.

Permalink

ECtHR Holds Bosnian Constitutional Provisions Violate European Convention on Human Rights

On December 22, 2009, the European Court of Human Rights issued its ruling in Sejdic and Finki v. Bosnia and Herzegovina. In its opinion, the court held that the Bosnian Constitution, which requires that the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Presidency be solely composed of persons belonging to the three constituent peoples (Bosniacs, Croats, and Serbs), discriminates against ethnic minorities and infringes electoral rights in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. In order to prevent the government from adopting legislation contrary to the wills of any of the constituent peoples, the drafters of the Bosnian Constitution created a second legislative chamber (the House of the Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly) composed of five members of each of the constituent peoples, and a collective Presidency composed of one member of each of the constituent peoples. In this case, a Jew and a Rom complained that the Bosnian Constitution and the Election Act of 2001 barred them from being candidates for office in the Presidency and the House of the Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly, even though they possess experience comparable to the highest elected officials, because they refuse to declare affiliation with any of the constituent peoples.

The European Court of Human Rights acknowledged that the power-sharing mechanisms of the Bosnian Constitution were justifiably designed to achieve the aim of restoring peace to a war-torn country rife with ethnic conflict; however, it also noted that the country has made considerable progress in the fourteen years since the Dayton Peace Agreements. The court further noted the existence of other power-sharing mechanisms that do not require the exclusion of ethnic minorities not belonging to the three constituent peoples from high public office. As a result, the court found that the rule prohibiting non-constituent peoples from holding office in the House of the Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly violated Article 14 of the European Convention on human rights (prohibiting discrimination in the enjoyment of rights guaranteed by the Convention) read in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (guaranteeing the right of free elections). The court also found that the constitutional rule prohibiting the applicants from running for President violated Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 (prohibiting discrimination in the enjoyment of any right set forth by law). In terms of remedy, the court held that the finding of a violation provided just satisfaction with regards to the plaintiffs’ non-pecuniary injuries, and ordered the State to pay 1,000 Euros to the first applicant and 20,000 Euros to the second to cover their costs and expenses.

For further information, please click here.

Permalink