Open Access
China and the future of international economic law : European perspectives on the way forward
Loading...
Files
LAW_WP_2022_13.pdf (459.76 KB)
Full-text in Open Access
License
Attribution 4.0 International
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
1725-6739
Issue Date
Type of Publication
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
EUI LAW; 2022/13
Cite
PETERSMANN, Ernst-Ulrich, China and the future of international economic law : European perspectives on the way forward, EUI LAW, 2022/13 - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/75146
Abstract
Human civilization is characterized by the transformation of power-based into rules-based social, economic, legal and political orders protecting rights of citizens against abuses of public and private power. All UN member states have adopted national Constitutions (written or unwritten) aimed at constituting, limiting, regulating and justifying governance powers for protecting public goods (PGs). Globalization and its transformation of national into transnational PGs also prompt states to participate in treaties of a higher legal rank protecting transnational PGs like human rights, rule-of-law and the sustainable development goals (SDGs). The current non-compliance with UN and WTO rules, illegal wars of aggression, violent suppression of human and democratic rights, global health pandemics, climate change, ocean pollution, overfishing and other biodiversity losses reflect ‘governance failures’ (e.g. to limit ‘market failures’) and ‘constitutional failures’ (e.g. to protect human and democratic rights and the SDGs). The geopolitical rivalries among totalitarian governments and democracies render constitutional UN and WTO reforms unrealistic. They entail ‘regulatory competition’ (e.g. among trade and investment agreements) and plurilateral responses aimed at limiting abuses of power (like collective countermeasures against Russia’s illegal wars and war crimes) and at protecting transnational PGs (like plurilateral ‘climate change mitigation clubs’, appeal arbitration among WTO members, regional human rights and security agreements). The power politics disrupting the UN and WTO legal systems is bound to promote regionalization of economic law, re-globalization of supply chains, and geopolitical rivalries resulting from conflicting value priorities and neglect for the human rights underlying the SDGs.