TOWARDS THE RULE OF LAW OR THE RULE OF THE BOOTS？ A LIBERAL PERSPECTIVE ON DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Since the beginning of the ＂war＂ on terror, governments have implemented counter-terrorism laws and policies, in breach of their obligations under international human rights law, on account of the necessity to protect democracy against its enemies. Reliance on the human rights discourse in order to justify the violations committed renders it difficult to criticise these drawbacks without rethinking the concepts of rights and democracy and reformulating them. The present article attempts to answer this challenge along the lines of the reconstruction of the notions of liberal democracy as the rule of law and liberty, and human rights as spheres of individual sovereignty.     

THE ASYMMETRY OF THE WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MECHANISM AND CHINESE STRATEGY： IN WHAT WAYS DO THE SYSTEM AND RESULTS FAVOR COMPLAINANTS？

By referring to 400 WTO cases, this paper reviews the results of WTO dispute settlement proceedings and the systemic causes in order to find out whether the WTO dispute settlement system ＂s results reflect a clear tendency of favoring complainants, and if so, whether the internal asymmetry of the system leads to such results. Based on these findings, and by considering a number of factors, this paper analyses the influence on national interests brought about by such asymmetry, so as to find whether there is a two-way adjustment effect and relative deprivation effect for developing countries. Then, according to the current economic situations of the WTO＇s Asian countries, this paper suggests that the Asian members should reform their policies to overcome the disadvantages of the WTO asymmetric proceedings. In this part, this paper comprehensively evaluates the measure of actively using the WTO dispute settlement system that favors the complainants, in order to develop overseas markets and realize potential benefits of treaty negotiations.