Billy Melo Araujo

Labour Provisions in EU and US Mega-regional Trade Agreements: Rhetoric and Reality

The EU and the US have long called for the linking of trade and labour standards in trade agreements at both the multilateral and bilateral level. This article examines their practice of including labour provisions in trade agreements, with a particular focus on recent attempts to include such provisions on so-called ‘mega-regionals’, which were presented by their proponents as providing the benchmark for labour protection in future trade agreements. It discusses the rationale behind the inclusion of such provisions and their practical limitations, and examines the extent to which mega-regionals address these limitations. It is argued that whilst the EU and the US have been keen advocates for trade-labour linkages, there has also been an unwillingness to convert this rhetoric into practice, raising questions about the extent of their commitment to these values.

The Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA): Assessing the State of Play and Potential Pitfalls

This article aims to provide an overview of the state of play regarding the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA). It pinpoints some of the potentially novel aspects and limitations of the agreement and addresses some of the more problematic legal questions that surround its negotiation, particularly the issue of its potential multilateralisation and incorporation within the WTO framework. Section 2 provides a brief description of the history and rationale behind the negotiation of the TiSA. Sections 3 and 4 describe the current GATS framework in relation to liberalization commitments and non-discriminatory regulatory principles, and the extent to which TiSA can go beyond this. Section 5 examines the compatibility of the TiSA with WTO law by focusing on the issue of whether the TiSA can comply with conditions set out under Article V GATS for the establishment of a preferential trade agreements (PTAs) covering services. Finally, Sect. 6 addressees the manner and the conditions under which the TiSA may be multilateralised in the future.

The 'Ordinariness' of the EU's Foreign Policy Power: The Use of WTO Litigation as a Means to Export EU Norms, Values and Interests

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.

The EU’s Deep Trade Agenda: Stumbling Block or Stepping Stone Towards Multilateral Liberalisation?

As negotiations on the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) have stalled, a number of WTO members have turned to bilateral and regional trade agreements to pursue the objectives and interests that they are no longer able to achieve at a multilateral level. In the context of the EU, this trend is best embodied by the 2006 Global Europe strategy, which spelled out the EU’s desire to enter into deep free trade agreements (FTAs) that are comprehensive insofar as they are not limited to tariffs but extend to non-tariff barriers, including services, intellectual property, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, technical barriers to trade, public procurement, competition, and investment. The manner in which such integration is planned to be achieved is indicative of the type of trade liberalisation being pursued. Great emphasis is placed on regulatory convergence as a means to secure greater market openings. This emphasis on the removal of domestic non-tariff regulatory measures that affect trade, as opposed to the traditional focus on the removal of trade barriers at borders, has been referred to as the ‘deep trade agenda’ and is at the root of an ongoing debate that highlights the tensions between trade liberalisation and regulatory autonomy.