This is from the U.S. statement at today's DSB meeting:
7. APPOINTMENT OF APPELLATE BODY MEMBERS: PROPOSAL BY THE EUROPEAN UNION (WT/DSB/W/597/REV.3)
- As mentioned under item 6, we are not in a position to support the proposed decision.
- We consider that the first priority is for the DSB to discuss and decide how to deal with reports being issued by persons who are no longer members of the Appellate Body.
- Members should consider how resolution of those issues might affect a selection process.
- An informal DSB meeting would be a good place to start.
Second Intervention
- The United States thanks Members for their interventions. We have been listening carefully.
- A number of Members have raised questions on the logic of linking the concerns the United States has raised under Item 6 with the selection of Appellate Body members. There also seems to be some confusion regarding the U.S. position. We further hear the concern that the DSB has the responsibility to address the systemic concerns raised.
- As Members are aware, the United States has a number of long-standing concerns frequently expressed in the DSB regarding the critical necessity of the DSB asserting the authority assigned to it under the DSU.
- The issue the United States raised earlier concerning the continued service of former Appellate Body members is an important example of these concerns that we have been raising for some time.
- In our view, simply moving forward with filling vacancies risks perpetuating and leaving unaddressed the concerns we believe require the urgent attention of the DSB.
- Our view under this item also applies to the proposal that has been put forward under Item 8 by Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Guatemala, and Peru.
The U.S. seems to be saying that it will not work towards filling any Appellate Body vacancies until there is further DSB discussion of systemic issues related to those vacancies.
I want to hear more about what exactly the U.S. is looking for here. As we know, the U.S. has a number of concerns with the role of the Appellate Body, and has used Appellate Body appointments to make its point in the past. Now there are two openings on the Appellate Body, and another one coming soon. There is the potential here for serious conflict. I hope everyone can find a way forward.
