On September 8, 2018, it was the sixth training day of the first week offourth training session of the China-AALCO Exchange and Research Program on international law. In the morning, Prof. Yenkong Nganijoh Hodu from the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom continued to focus on the theme of ‘the challenge of international trade dispute settlement under the new international relationship’,  previously taught. Based on the previously-taught three aspects of the historical development and disputes of the dispute settlement mechanism,the applicable law of the organization and the understanding of professional terminology, the principles and rules of jurisdiction, expert group procedures and appeal procedures in the GATT/WTO dispute settlement system are further introduced.

Professor Hodu first pointed out that in the international community, the actions taken by each country contribute to the development of international law, whether it is positive or negative. Among the various activities of the country, international trade is a topic of broad connotation, and trade disputes and their solutions are the focus of the topic. There are two ways of peacefully resolving international disputes: one is to negotiate between the parties to the dispute without involving third parties; the other is to participate and mediate by independent third parties. The dispute settlement method under GATT and WTO belongs to the latter.

In explaining the jurisdiction of DSU, Professor Hodu pointed out that the DSU operation under WTO has a time and logical starting point for its jurisdiction over related disputes. The DSU is applicable to the negotiation and dispute settlement of WTO members' rights and obligations under the WTO Agreement and the Covered Agreement, such as disputes arising from import side anti-subsidy, anti-dumping and other trade remedies and other social measures. DSU' s jurisdiction has three attributes: one is mandatory (DSU Article 6) and the second is exclusive (DSU Article 23); the third is limited to accepting controversial issues (DSU Article 3.2). It should be noted that although DSU jurisdiction over related disputes help to quickly resolve and balance the rights and obligations between members, the rights and obligations of the WTO Agreement and the members of the Covered Agreement cannot be increased or eliminated.

Around the panel process, Professor Hodu pointed out that in the initial version of GATT1947, there was only a consultation system (Consultation), which is the ‘birth defect’ of GATT1994. With the continuous improvement of GATT, the establishment of the WTO, the panel system has gradually matured. Compared with the previous dispute settlement procedure, DSU has the quasi-judicial nature because the DSU under the WTO system has added an appeal procedure based on the panel, and the appeal agency is stable and permanent. Professor Hodu emphasized that the scope of the appeal review of the panel of experts is limited to legal issues, and the judgments and conclusions of the panel on factual issues should not be overturned. In addition, Prof. Hodu gave an in-depth explanation of the appealing body's instructions, the characteristics of the Appellate Body, the workflow of the appeal review, the timetable of the appeal process, and the confidentiality of the Appellate Body.

Professor Hodu pointed out that the DSU under the WTO is highly efficient and meets the needs of business contacts. In this regard, in the teacher-student interaction, students from Macao asked about the costs of the parties to submit the dispute to the DSU. In this regard, Professor Hodu believes that the cost of solving a single dispute is relatively high, but it should also be placed in a specific situation to compare and measure the benefits obtained by winning the entire case. In practice, this high cost can be the burden of the matter. Of course, DSU' s ruling also faces challenges such as ‘acceptability of rulings’, but after all, as a broad multilateral trade organization, the WTO and the DSU provide members with an efficient platform for dialogue, consultation and judgment.

Professor Hodu conducted an accurate and meticulous explanation for the students through his exploratory teaching style and the combination of theory and case teaching mode. The students said that through this class, they had a deeper and more concrete understanding of the WTO and the DSU.