The CAFTA panel set up to hear the U.S. complaint regarding Guatemala's enforcement of its labor laws has issued a procedural ruling. The basic question was, "how the panel should address, as a matter of procedure, a request by Guatemala for a preliminary ruling"? Guatemala was seeking a separate, expedited procedure to address issues related to the terms of reference.
The panel majority rejected the request, saying that it could handle these issues as part of the normal process (i.e., along with the substantive issues). A dissenter thought there should have been a special process to handle these procedural matters.
Here was one interesting point, related to the panel's view of the role of WTO jurisprudence:
54. In reaching the foregoing conclusion, we are mindful of the practice of panels in WTO dispute settlement proceedings. Although such practice has evolved under different international agreements, not the CAFTA-DR, both disputing Parties have referred to WTO dispute settlement practice in their written submissions. Since both disputing Parties see such practice as relevant here, it is not inappropriate for us to consider how WTO dispute settlement panels have dealt with preliminary ruling requests and how they have taken account of due process in doing so. ...
Clearly, WTO case law can carry some weight in FTA disputes.
These cases are more difficult to follow than WTO cases. Thanks to Matt Schewel of Inside U.S. Trade for the tip.
