This is from the WTO's summary of last week's DSB meeting:
Morocco said that the anti-dumping measure at issue in its dispute with Turkey in DS513, "Morocco — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel from Turkey", expired on 26 September 2019, and that Morocco therefore did not need to take any further action to ensure compliance with the ruling.
Turkey said it agreed Morocco did not need to take any further action with regard to the anti-dumping measure at issue but said it trusted Morocco would take the ruling fully into account in future anti-dumping determinations. Turkey also said it regretted that Morocco's anti-dumping measure has now been replaced by a safeguard measure.
Did Turkey concede too much here? I would like to see the full statement, but this is all we have for now. It looks like Turkey is taking the view that the DS513 dispute is over, and that any concerns it has about the new safeguard measure would have to be dealt with in a separate dispute. But is that right? The scope of Article 21.5 is somewhat broad. Here's how the Appellate Body described it in the Lumber DS257 Article 21.5 case:
77. ... Some measures with a particularly close relationship to the declared "measure taken to comply", and to the recommendations and rulings of the DSB, may also be susceptible to review by a panel acting under Article 21.5. Determining whether this is the case requires a panel to scrutinize these relationships, which may, depending on the particular facts, call for an examination of the timing, nature, and effects of the various measures. This also requires an Article 21.5 panel to examine the factual and legal background against which a declared "measure taken to comply" is adopted. Only then is a panel in a position to take a view as to whether there are sufficiently close links for it to characterize such an other measure as one "taken to comply" and, consequently, to assess its consistency with the covered agreements in an Article 21.5 proceeding.
I would be interested to see the timing of the safeguard measure. Did it come about when the anti-dumping duty looked likely to be withdrawn? And with regard to the effects of the safeguard measure, I would imagine they are pretty similar to the effects of the anti-dumping duty. As to the nature of the safeguard measure, it's not exactly like an anti-dumping duty, but they are both categories of trade remedy measures.
Putting all that together, could the safeguard measure be reviewed by an Article 21.5 panel?
