How WTO interacts with other organizations

The fragmented structure of e-commerce raises a few issues:

- How the international rules fit into domestic law; and

- The interface among international organizations. As they have:

o Different mandates (E.g. WTO TRIPS and WIPO – The preamble of the TRIPS Agreement
calls for a mutually supportive relationship between the two organizations. The TRIPS
Agreement specifically mentions relevant agreements administered by WIPO, such as
the ‘Relation to the Bern Convention’ in TRIPS Article 9 and the ‘Relation to the IPIC
Treaty’ in TRIPS Article 9); and

o Different functions (E.g. WTO has an enforcing branch that is not necessarily present in
other agencies).

Different layers and institutions can be connected in different ways. Let’s take the case of the
WTO as a departing point.

This will display how the WTO has interacted with other organizations and their rules so far as to
explore what options there could be when it comes to comprehensive topics such as e-
commerce, where multiple organizations are naturally involved.

So far, the relationship between the WTO and other organizations takes place through two main
avenues: observer status and the involvement of experts on regulatory issues in WTO disputes.

1. Observer status

International organizations mentioned in WTO Agreements usually have observer status in the
Council or Committee dealing with such Agreement. E.g. Codex, OIE and IPPC are observers in
the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Similarly, WIPO is an observer at the
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. Organizations that are not
specifically mentioned in WTO agreements can also be observers, such as the case of ISO at
the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade.1
As to achieve greater coherence at the global economic policy-making level, the WTO works
closely with the World Bank and the IMF, with whom it has signed several agreements,
ministerial declarations and decisions. These two organizations also have observer status at
several WTO bodies. However, cooperation with them goes beyond the observer status,

1
Jensen, M., ‘Defining the Borders of the WTO Agenda’, Chapter 8, in “The Oxford Handbook on The
World Trade Organization”, edited by Daunton, M., Narlikar, A., and Stern, R., 2012.

E-commerce for SMEs: An Introduction for Policymakers

covering regular consultation, high-level coordination, and joint efforts for technical assistance
and training as well as for trade liberalization. For more information check the WTO and IMF
websites.
2. Regulatory bodies in WTO dispute settlement

WTO dispute settlement panels are generally composed of experts in trade law, trade policy or
international economy. Therefore, they do not necessarily have a strong expertise on specific
regulatory matters.2
Article 13 of the Understanding on the Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes stipulates that Panels can consult specialists (individuals or bodies) when necessary.
Both the SPS and TBT Agreements also include provisions in this regard as to guarantee access
to the relevant expertise through consultation with external experts. In the case of the Annex on
Financial Services to the GATS Agreements, the wording of Article 4 is different and it requires
the Panel itself to have expertise on financial regulation.3
An interesting fact is that parties can object candidates from international standard-setting
bodies if they have participated in designing the relevant international regulation. The spirit of
this rule is noble as it tries to guarantee the independence of the WTO dispute settlement
system. However, given the small community of experts in certain regulatory fields, this could
result in having only a few alternative experts to consult, potentially compromising quality.4

2
Ibid
3
Ibid
4
Ibid

E-commerce for SMEs: An Introduction for Policymakers