地址：南京市建邺区楠溪江东街85号金润国际广场西楼1506室
电话：025-58866358、58933315
传真：025-58867358
邮件：info@bonagrain.com
第一轮发言
General Statement
感谢主席。
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
中方感谢并支持欧盟大使马克范赫克伦的发言。作为联合提案方之一，中方将就a、b、c三项分议题分享两点看法：
China thanks and supports the statement made by Ambassador Marc VanHeukelen of the European Union. As one of joint proponents, China would like to share two comments, which cover sub-items a, b and c:
第一，中欧等世贸组织成员提出联合提案，目的是回应并解决相关成员对上诉程序的关切，维护和加强上诉机构的独立性和公正性，推动世贸成员开展以文本为基础的实质性讨论，尽快启动上诉机构成员遴选程序。上诉机构危机已持续一年多时间，尚未见到解决曙光。个别世贸成员对上诉程序提出了关注，但未提出具体建议或解决方案。如该问题持续得不到解决，上诉机构将在一年后“停摆”。上诉机构成员遴选问题已成为世贸组织面临的迫在眉睫的危机，亟须尽快解决。中国古代哲学家孟子曾经说过，“徒法不足以自行”。争端解决机制是世贸组织的核心支柱。因此，为推动尽快解决上诉机构危机，中欧等40多个成员共同提出了联合提案，希籍此推动实质性讨论。
First, the joint proposal by the EU, China and other Members aims to respond to and address a particular Member’s concerns on appellate process, maintain and strengthen the independence and impartiality of the Appellate Body, promote text-based substantial discussions among WTO Members, and launch the selection process for Appellate Body Members as soon as possible. The crisis of the Appellate Body has lasted for more than a year without any silver lining. The individual WTO Member flagged its concerns over the appellate process, but providing no concrete suggestions or solutions. If this issue remains unresolved, the Appellate Body will cease to function after next year. The selection of Appellate Body Members has become an imminent crisis facing the WTO and needs to be resolved at the earliest time. As an ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius said, “laws alone cannot carry themselves into practice.” The dispute settlement mechanism is the core pillar of the WTO. Therefore, more than 40 Members, including the EU and China, collectively submitted the joint proposal aiming to promote the substantive discussions, so as to facilitate the crisis of the Appellate Body to be solved without any delay.
第二，中方呼吁世贸成员积极参与讨论磋商，争取尽快达成一致。正如印度所言，联合提案代表着开始，而非结束或最终结果。中方希望总理事会主席在此次会后，能够积极主持讨论磋商，以适当的机制保持讨论势头。维持争端解决机制和多边贸易体制，是所有世贸成员的共同责任，符合所有世贸成员的共同利益。中方希望所有世贸成员能够积极参与，以建设性的合作态度和积极务实的行动，尽快解决上诉机构危机，共同保障争端解决机制的正常运行，维护多边贸易体制的权威性和有效性。中方期待着与所有世贸成员一起推动该项工作。
谢谢。
Second, China calls on all WTO Members to actively engage in the discussions and consultations, and strive to reach consensus as soon as possible. As India just said, joint proposal marks a beginning rather than the end or the final result. China urges the Chairman of the General Council could actively host the discussions and consultations after this meeting, so that the discussion momentum could be maintained through certain appropriate mechanism. Safeguarding the dispute settlement mechanism and the multilateral trading system is the shared responsibility of all WTO Members and serves the common interest of the whole membership. China hopes that every WTO Member could vigorously participate in the spirit of the constructive cooperation, take positive and pragmatic actions to solve the crisis of the Appellate Body as soon as possible, safeguard the well-functioning of the dispute settlement mechanism by collective efforts, and maintain the authoritativeness and effectiveness of the multilateral trading system. China is looking forward to furthering this work with all WTO Members.
Thank you.
第二轮发言
Second Intervention
感谢主席，我抱歉将再次发言。
Mr. Chairman, I am sorry to take the floor again.
我认真听了谢伊大使的发言，感到有点失望和困惑，但也不惊讶。中方愿意并希望继续与包括美方在内的所有世贸成员讨论有关问题。
I listened carefully to the Statement by Ambassador Shea, but felt a little disappointed and confused, though not surprised. China is willing and hopes to continue discussions on relevant issues with all WTO Members including the United States.
我对美方的表态有几点疑问：
I have several questions regarding the statement by the United States:
一是关于90天的问题。的确，现有规则规定的上诉审限是90天，但二十多年来，案件越来越复杂，案卷材料越来越多。早先的案件，比如美国限制汽油进口案（DS2），所有案件相关材料汇总起来不过一小纸箱。但情况不同了，现在每一个案件可能都得要几十箱文件。上诉机构明显无法按期完成工作，我们该怎么办？我们很难找到解决之道。例如，未来遴选上诉机构成员时，难道我们要寻找那些能够一目十行的人？或者我们要求上诉机构成员每天工作16小时、睡觉5小时、吃饭3小时？实际上，35年前，我在准备中国的高考时曾经这么做过，但我知道这种做法是不可持续的。所以我的问题是，鉴于目前这种状况，美方建议要怎么办?
First, regarding the issue of 90 days. Of course, the existing rule stipulates the 90-day deadline for the appellate review. However, after more than twenty years, cases have become more and more complex, case materials therefore also surged. In early years cases, such as United States Gasoline (DS2), a small carton suffices for all case-related materials. That is no longer the same situation. Nowadays, we probably need dozens of cartons to pile relevant materials for almost every case. This is the reality that Appellate Body cannot finish its work on time. Given the United States’ position to oppose the increase of resources, what we should do? We are struggling to find a way, for example, in the future when we select Appellate Body members, may we look for those who are able to read ten lines at a glance or can we ask the Appellate Body members to work 16 hours, sleep 5 hours and eat for 3 hours per day? Actually, I did it myself 35 years ago, when I prepared my college entrance examination in China, but I know it is not sustainable. So my question is, what suggestions the United States would like to make under such circumstance?
二是关于越权问题。中方也希望上诉机构按照授权工作，不要扩张其判决。但坦率地说，如何界定是否越权并没有各方认同的标准。除了敦促上诉机构认真注意这一问题外，美方认为我们还能做什么？
Second, regarding the issue of overreach. China also wants the Appellate Body to stay in line with its mandate, rather than expanding its adjudications. To be frank, Members do not have consensus over the criteria to determine whether the overreach occurs. Except for urging the Appellate Body to take serious note on this issue. In the United States’ opinion, what else could we do?
三是关于先例问题。上诉机构在以往争端案件中做出的裁决，为什么不能参考？已经分析过的法律问题，为什么要浪费时间和资源重新再分析一遍？这不符合司法经济原则，与美方所主张的提高争端解决效率是互相矛盾的。
Third, regarding the issue of precedent. When the Appellate Body made adjudications in previous disputes, I don’t know why these judgments cannot be used as reference? Why should we waste time and resources to redo the analysis of the already analyzed legal issues? It also runs against the judicial economy principle, which directly conflicts with the positions of the United States to enhance the efficiency of dispute settlement.
四是关于解决美方关切问题。美方说欧盟、中国和印度的部分建议会影响对上诉机构的问责。那美方能否回答一下，提案中哪些内容解决了美方关切，还有哪些关切没有解决？对于未解决的关切，美方有哪些具体的意见？如果没有，是否美方愿意坐等上诉机构瘫痪？
Fourth, regarding solving concerns of the United States. The United States views that some suggestions by EU, China and India will make the Appellate Body even less accountable. Could the United States give a response to the proposal regarding which of its concerns have been addressed and which are not? Does the United States have specific suggestions on how to address those remaining concerns? If not, is it the intention of the United States to sit back and wait for the paralysis of the Appellate Boddy？
最后，主席，我对谢伊大使的表态表示欢迎，他说美国愿意就此问题与其他成员进行深入探讨。我希望我的这些问题能够在今后深入的讨论中得到解答。
谢谢。
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I welcome Ambassador Shea’s statement that the United States would like to engage in the deep discussions with other Members on this issue. And I hope my questions can be answered in the future in-depth discussions.
Thank you.
