Demystifying the Prudential Carve-out: A proposal
| Autor | Samuel Trujillo |
| Cargo | Abogado de la Universidad Externado de Colombia |
| Páginas | 157-208 |
con-texto • revista de derecho y economía • n.º 43 • enero-junio 2015 • pp. 157-208
Demystifying the
Prudential Carve-out:
A proposal1
sAmuEl truJillo2
ABSTRACT
This article explores how the broadest spirited exception in the framework of the
World Trade Organization, commonly referred to as the prudential carve-out, could
be applied without adding to or diminishing the rights and obligations of Wto Mem-
bers. It argues that through the customary rules of interpretation of international law,
the only standard applicable to the prudential carve out is that of a reasonable means
to ends connection. However, this broad standard of review can be enriched by expert
knowledge on financial and prudential regulation, given that the form of dispute settle-
ment established in the Annex to Financial Services of the gats provides a window for
dissecting the concept of “prudential”. The afs requires that an “expert panel” decide on
controversies regarding financial and prudential issues, instead of the ordinary “highly
qualified” Wto panel. The article draws on principles developed by the disciplines of
1 Una versión anterior de este trabajo se presentó como requisito para obtener el título de Abogado. Esta
versión está actualizada y adaptada al formato de la revista. Since the writing of this article, the pru-
dential carve-out has been addressed by the Panel in Argentina - Measures Relating to Trade in Goods
and Services (September 30, 2015), see pp 7.811-7.949.
Para citar el artículo: Trujillo, s. (2015). Demystifying the Prudential Carve-out: a proposal. Revista Con-
texto, (43), pp. 157-208. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18601/01236458.n43.05
2 Abogado de la Universidad Externado de Colombia, eximido de presentar exámenes preparatorios por
el alto rendimiento académico. Representó a su universidad en las competencias internacionales Phillip
C. Jessup Moot Court, European Law Students Association Moot Court y Foreign Direct Investment
International Arbitration Moot. Asociado en Brigard & Urrutia Abogados, donde apoya operaciones de
financiación nacionales e internacionales como miembro del Equipo de Derecho Bancario y Servicios
Financieros. Correo electrónico: samuel.trujillo@est.uexternado.edu.co
Attorney from Universidad Externado School of Law, exempted from presenting preparatory exams due
to academic performance. He represented his University in the international competitions Phillip C.
Jessup Moot Court, European Law Students Association Moot Court, and Foreign Direct Investment
International Arbitration Moot. Associate at Brigard & Urrutia Abogados where ass part of the Banking
and Financial Services Team he assists in national and international finance operations.
derecho económico
internacional
158
Samuel Trujillo
con-texto • revista de derecho y economía • n.º 43 • enero-junio 2015 • pp. 157-208
micro- and macroprudential regulation to exemplify how expert knowledge can guide
an otherwise vague standard of review.
Keywords: World Trade Organization, General Agreement on Trade in Services, pru-
dential Carve-out, expert panel, micro-prudential regulation, macro-prudential regulation.
DESMITIFICANDO LA EXCEPCIÓN CAUTELAR: UNA PROPUESTA
RESUMEN
Este artículo explora cómo la excepción con el espíritu más amplio en el marco de la
Organización Mundial de Comercio, conocida como la excepción cautelar, puede ser
aplicada sin disminuir, o agregarle a, los derechos y obligaciones de los miembros.
Argumenta que, a través de las reglas consuetudinarias de interpretación del derecho
internacional, el único estándar aplicable a la excepción cautelar es el de una conexión
razonable entre medios y fines. Sin embargo, este amplio criterio de revisión puede ser
enriquecido por conocimiento experto en regulación financiera y prudencial, ya que
el Anexo a Servicios Financieros del agcs establece que debe ser un panel experto el
que decida controversias sobre cuestiones financieras y prudenciales, en vez del panel
“altamente cualificado” ordinario. El artículo hace referencia a principios desarrollados
por las disciplinas de regulación micro y macroprudencial para ejemplificar cómo dicho
conocimiento experto puede guiar un criterio de revisión, de otra forma vago.
Palabras clave: Organización Mundial del Comercio, Acuerdo General sobre Co-
mercio de Servicios, excepción cautelar, panel experto, regulación micro-prudencial,
regulación macroprudencial.
I. INTRODUCTION: THE PRUDENTIAL CARVE-OUT’S RELEVANCE
AND ITS PROBLEMATIC
The Annex on Financial Services (afs) to the World Trade Organization’s (Wto) General
Agreement on Trade in Services (gats) establishes in an exception that allows Member
States, notwithstanding any other provisions of the Agreement to adopt measures for
prudential reasons. An analysis of this provision, commonly referred to as the prudential
carve-out, is relevant as it has yet to be invoked by any Wto Member, and consequently
lacks a clear scope of application3. Furthermore, despite not having been invoked before
3 mamiko yokio-arai, “gats’ Prudential Carve Out in Financial Services and Its Relation with Prudential
Regulation” (2008) 57 Int’l & Comp. L.Q. 613 at 639 [Yokio-Arai]; sydney j. key, “Trade liberalization
and prudential regulation: the international framework for financial services” (1999) 75 r.i.i.a. 61 at 67-
68 [Key] mary mcaLLister sHepro, “Preserving National Regulatory Autonomy in Financial Services:
The gats’ Prudential Carve-Out” (2013) Notre Dame University (QL) [McAllister]; Panagiotis Delimatsis
159
Demystifying the Prudential Carve-out: A proposal
derecho económico
internacional
con-texto • revista de derecho y economía • n.º 43 • enero-junio 2015 • pp. 157-208
an international tribunal, the prudential carve-out has proliferated in many other ins-
truments of international law4 as it can be found in many Free Trade Agreements (ftas).
Consequently this provision and the mist surrounding it, not only envelop the
multilateral trading system as the prudential carve-out also constitutes applicable law
in a significant quantity of bilateral and regional trade relations. As a result of the most
recent global financial crisis and the subsequent concern regarding banking regulation,
the legal vacuum regarding the exception’s correct interpretation and application is
further highlighted.
The problem centers on determining what can be considered “prudential”, and the
limits to the use of the prudential carve-out. Following dsu Article 3.2, this analysis
cannot add to, or diminish the rights and obligations of Wto Members, as these may
only be clarified through the application of customary rules of interpretation of public
international law. Such interpretative processes is difficult since most Wto Members
did not, and still do not, wish to clearly determine the meaning of “prudential”, both in
the Wto framework and in their regional and bilateral trade relations. Instead, they find
comfort in the mist that surrounds the provision.
As the comfort that most Wto Members currently enjoy in the prudential carve-
out’s ambiguity could one day be challenged, a Wto Panel would have the need, and
obligation, to clarify the provision’s content. The purpose of this work is to show how
this could be achieved, removing the mist that surrounds the provision in a manner
consistent with Wto interpretation that respects and follows the will of its Members.
The starting point in the analysis, is to understand the Wto concept of a “measure”,
which unlike the concept of prudential, has been addressed by the Appellate Body (Section
ii). Such understanding will demonstrate the existence of a vast panorama of situations
in which the prudential carve-out could be found to be applicable. Subsequently, the
analysis will compare the original afs prudential carve-out with those introduced into
the fta’s of some of the most representative Wto Members (Section iii). Such comparison
will provide perspective as to the evolution of the provision, showing that there are two
main approaches preferred by certain Wto Members. One of these approaches strives
to severely limit the provision.
Afterwards, Section iv will show to what extent the prudential carve-out’s ambiguity
can be limited through a strict analysis that follows the customary rules for the interpre-
tation of treaties. First through an interpretation the follows the general rule, and then
recurring to the supplementary means, seeking to confirm and further clarify the will of
the Wto Members. This Section will show that although prudential measures must ha-
ve a reasonable means to ends connection with the legitimate objectives they peruse, a
narrower standard cannot be applied. As Section iv will demonstrate certain conformity
& Pierre Suavé, “Financial services trade after the crisis: Policy and legal conjectures” (2010) 13(3) J.
Int’l Econ. L. 837 at 849 [Delimatsis & Suavé].
4 Key (p. 67).
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba