Discricionariedade estatal para determinar interesses de segurança nacional no comércio exterior uma análise do artigo XXI.(b).III do Acordo Geral sobre Comércio e Tarifas - GATT

Main Article Content

Ana Vitória Muniz Bokos

Abstract

O artigo XXI.(b).III do GATT dispõe da exceção de segurança em guerra ou emergências nas relações internacionais. O problema de pesquisa do trabalho trata dos limites à discricionariedade em emergências internacionais. Assim, com ênfase no caso “Russia — Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit”, será verificada a jurisdição para revisão de legalidade, os limites ao julgamento do mérito, a possibilidade de aplicação do princípio da boa-fé e de exigir o ônus da prova como critério objetivo. Além disso, o trabalho sugere possibilidades de desenvolvimento da jurisprudência com base em interpretações do Direito Internacional Público e do Direito dos
Investimentos.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Muniz Bokos, A. V. (2023). Discricionariedade estatal para determinar interesses de segurança nacional no comércio exterior: uma análise do artigo XXI.(b).III do Acordo Geral sobre Comércio e Tarifas - GATT. Revista Do IBRAC, (2), 118–146. Retrieved from https://revista.ibrac.org.br/index.php/revista/article/view/31
Section
2.º Concurso IBRAC de monografias em comércio internacional 2021

References

AYRES, Glyn; MITCHELL, Andrew. General and Security Exceptions under the GATT and GATS. In: CARR, Indira; BHUIYAN, Jahid; ALAM, Shawkat (edit.). International Trade Law and WTO. Sidney: Federation Press, 2012. p. 228-268.

BOGDANOVA, Iryna. Adjudication of the GATT Security Clause: To Be or Not to Be, This is the Question. World Trade Institute Working Paper, Mar. 2019. Disponível em: https://www.wti.org/research/publications/1208/adjudication-of-thegatt-security-clause-to-be-or-not-to-be-this-is-the-question/. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

BOGDANOVA, Iryna. The WTO Panel Ruling on the National Security Exception: Has the Panel ‘Cut’ the Baby in Half? EJIL Talk, Apr. 12, 2019. Disponível em: https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-wto-panel-ruling-on-thenationalsecurity-exception-has-the-panel-cut-the-baby-in-half/. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2021

BOKLAN, D.; BAHRI, A. The First WTO's Ruling on National Security Exception: Balancing Interests or Opening Pandora's Box?. World Trade Review, v. 19, n. 1, p. 123-136, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745619000430.

BONNAN, Regis. The GATT Security Exception in a Dispute Resolution Context: Necessity or Incompatibility?. Currents International Trade LawJournal, v. 3, p. 449-478, 2010.

CANN, Wesley A. Jr. Creating Standards and Accountability for the Use of the WTO Security Exception: Reducing the Role of Power-Based Relations and Establishing a New Balance Between Sovereignty and Multilateralism. Yale Journal of International Law, v. 26, p. 413-485. 2001. Disponível em: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjil/vol26/iss2/7. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

CHENG, Bin. General Principles Of Law As Applied By International Courts And Tribunals. Londres: Stevens & Sons Ltd., 1953.

COOK, Graham. A Digest of WTO Jurisprudence of Public International Law Concepts and Principles. Genebra: Cambridge University Press, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316212691.

DESIERTO, Diane A. Necessity and National Emergency Clauses: Sovereignty in Modern Treaty Interpretation. Nijhoff: Brill, Jan. 2012. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004218536.

DESIERTO, Diane A. Protean ‘National Security’ in Global Trade Wars, Investment Walls, and Regulatory Controls: Can ‘National Security’ Ever Be Unreviewable in International Economic Law?. EJIL Talk, Apr. 2, 2018. Disponível em: https://www.ejiltalk.org/national-security-defenses-in-tradewars-and-investment-walls-us-v-china-and-eu-v-us/. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2021.

GATT. Contracting Parties Nineteenth Session. Doc. GATT/SR.19/12, 1961. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/SR/19-12.PDF. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

GATT. Contracting Parties Sixth Session. Doc. GATT/CP.6/5, 1951. Disponível em:REVISTA DO REVISTA DO IBRAC Número 2 - 2021 https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/English/SULPDF/90070309.pdf. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

GATT. Contracting Parties Third Session. Doc. GATT/CP.3/33, 1949. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/English/SULPDF/90320183.pdf. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

GATT. Decision Concerning Article XXI, L/5426, Nov. 30, 1982. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/english/SULPDF/91000212.pdf. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

GATT. Minute of the meeting Held in the Centre William Rappard, GATT Doc. C/M/157, May 7, 1982. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/C/M157.PDF. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GATT. Minutes of Meeting - Held in the Palais des Nations, Geneva, Doc. C/M/109, Oct. 31, 1975. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/C/M109.PDF. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

GATT. Portugal Accession, Doc. L/1764, 1962. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/English/SULPDF/90750286.pdf. Acesso em:

mar. 2021.

GATT. Sweden—Import Restrictions on Certain Footwear, L/4250, Nov. 17, 1975. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/L4399/4250.PDF. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

GATT. Trade Measures Taken by the European Community against the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, L/6948, Communication, Dec. 2,1991. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/English/SULPDF/91600060.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GATT. Trade Restrictions Affecting Argentina Applied for Non-Economic Reasons, Communication, Doc. L/5336, June 15, 1982. Disponível em:https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/L5399/5336.PDF. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GATT. Trade Restrictions Affecting Argentina Applied for Non-economic Reasons, Communication, Doc. L/5319/Rev.1, May 18, 1982. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/L5399/5319R1.PDF. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GATT. United States – Imports of Sugar from Nicaragua, L/5607, Panel Report, Mar. 2, 1984. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/gatt_e/83sugar.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GATT. United States – Restrictions on Exports to Czechoslovakia, CP.3/SR22, Record of the Twenty-second meeting, June 8, 1949. Disponívelem: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/GG/GATTCP3/SR22.PDF. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GATT. United States – Trade Measures Affecting Nicaragua, L/6053, Panel Report, Oct. 13, 1986. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/English/SULPDF/91240197.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

GOLDSTEIN, J. Creating GATT Rules: Politics, Institutions, and American Policy. In: RUGGIE, John (edit.). Multilateralism Matters. Nova York:Columbia University Press, 1993. p. 201-232.

GREENWOOD, Christopher. The Concept of War in Modern International Law. Cambridge University Press, v. 36, n. 2, p. 283-306, 1987. DOI:10.1093/iclqaj/36.2.283.

HAHN, Michael J. Vital Interests and the Law of GATT: An Analysis of GATT's Security Exception. Michigan Journal of International Law,

Michigan, v. 12, p. 558-620, 1991. Disponível em: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol12/iss3/3. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES (ICSID). CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine Republic, ICSID case No. ARB/01/8, Award of 12 May 2005. Disponível em: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0184.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES (ICSID). Sempra Energy Int’l v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case

No. Arb 02/16, Decision on the Argentine Republic’s Application for Annulment of the Award of 29 June 2010. Disponível em: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0776.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES (ICSID). Continental Casualty Company v Argentine Republic, ICSID Case no. ARB/03/9, Award of 5 Sept. 2008. Disponível em: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0228.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES (ICSID). LG&E Energy Corp., LG&E Capital Corp., and LG&E International, Inc .v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/1, Decision on Liability, Oct 3, 2006. Disponível em: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0460.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES (ICSID). Marfin Investment Group Holdings S.A. et al. v. Republic of Cyprus, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/27, Award, July 26, 2018. Disponível em: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/casedocuments /italaw10149.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ). Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) Written Observations by NewZealand, 4 April 2013. Disponível em: https://www.icjcij.org/public/files/case-related/148/17386.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ). Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Judgement, 2008.Disponível em: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/136/136-20080604-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ). Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Declaration of

Judge Kenneth Keith, 2008. Disponível em: https://www.icjcij.org/public/files/case-related/136/136-20080604-JUD-01-06-EN.pdf.Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ). Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. Estados Unidos da

America), Judgement, 1986. Disponível em: https://www.icjcij.org/public/files/case-related/70/070-19860627-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ). Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Judgement, 2003. Disponívelem: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/90/090-20031106-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

INTERNATIONAL LAW COMISSION. Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, 2001. Disponível em:

https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ddb8f804.html. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

JÜRGEN, Kurtz. Adjudging the Exceptional at International Law: Security, Public Order and Financial Crisis. Society of International Economic Law, Jul. 2008. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1154702. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

KNOLL, David D. The Impact of Security Concerns upon International Economic Law. Syracuse J. Int'l L. & Com.Syracuse, v. 11, p. 587-624, 1984.Disponível em: https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1201&context=jilc. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

LOBSINGER, Eric J. Diminishing borders in trade and terrorism: An examination of regional applicability of GATT article 21 national securitytrade sanctions. ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law, v. 13, n. 1, p. 99-138, 2006.

MOON, William. Essential Security Interests in International Investment Agreements. Journal of International Economic Law, v. 15, n. 2, p. 481-502, Apr. 2012. DOI: 10.1093/jiel/jgs024.

NAGY, Csongor István. World Trade, Imperial Fantasies and Protectionism: Can You Really Have Your Cake and Eat It Too?. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, v. 26, n. 1, p. 87-132, 2019. Disponível em: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3363951. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

NOLAN, Michael D.; SOURGENS, Frederic G. The Limits of Discretion? Self-Judging Emergency Clauses in International Investment Agreements. In: SAUVANT, Karl P. (edit.). Yearbook of International Investment Law & Policy 2010-2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. p. 363-413.

PAUWELYN, Joost. The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How far can we go?. American Journal of International Law, v. 95 , n. 3, p. 535-578, 2001.

PELC, Krzysztof J. Making and bending international rules: The design of exceptions and escape clauses in trade law. Nova York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE (PCIJ). Case of the S.S. Lotus (Frande v. Turkey), Judgement, 1927, series A, No. 10. Disponível em:http://www.worldcourts.com/pcij/eng/decisions/1927.09.07_lotus.htm. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2021.

RANJAN, Prabhash. COVID-19, India and Indirect Expropriation: Is the Police Powers Doctrine a Reliable Defence?. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, v. 13, n. 1, p. 205-228, May 2020. Disponível em: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3617770. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2021.

REINISCH, August. Necessity in International Investment Arbitration: An Unnecessary Split of Opinions in Recent ICSID Cases. Journal of World. Investment & Trade, v. 8, p. 191-201, 2007.

SANKLECHA, Jay Manoj. The limitations on the invocation of self-judging clauses in the context of WTO dispute settlement. Indian Journal ofInternational Law, v. 59, p. 77-109, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40901-019-00108-6.

SCHILL, Stephan; BRIESE, Robyn. If the State Considers: Self-Judging Clauses In International Dispute Settlement. In: WOLFRUM, Rüdiger (edit.). Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law. Nijhoff: Brill, 2009. v. 13, p. 61-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/18757413-90000037.

SCHLOEMANN, Hannes L.; OHLHOFF, Stefan. ‘Constitutionalization’ and Dispute Settlement in the WTO: National Security as an Issue of Competence. The American Journal of International Law, v. 93, n. 2, p. 424-451, 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2997999.

SIEGEL, Deborah E. Legal Aspects of the IMF/WTO Relationship: The Fund’s Articles of Agreement and the WTO Agreements. American Journalof International Law, v. 96, n. 3, p. 561-599, 2002.

TRYBUS, M. The EC Treaty as an Instrument of European Defence Integration: Judicial Scrutinny of Defence and Security Exceptions. CommonMarket Law Review, v. 39, p. 1347-1369, 2002.

UNITED NATIONS REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS (UNRIAA). Sugar Company (United States v. Germany), Decision of 1 November 1923, vol. VII. Disponível em: https://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_VII/44-63.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED NATIONS REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS (UNRIAA). Trail Smelter case (United States, Canada), Decision

of 16 April 1938, vol. III. Disponível em: https://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_III/1905-1982.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar.2021.

UNITED NATIONS. Economic and Social Council, Final Act, GATT and Protocol of Provisional Application, Doc. E/PC/T/214/Add.1/Rev.1, 1947.Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/UN/EPCT/214A1R1.PDF. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED NATIONS. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, Thirty-Third Meeting of Commission A, Declaration of US Delegate JM Leddy , Doc. E/PC/T/A/PV/33, 1947. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/UN/EPCT/APV-33.PDF. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED NATIONS. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, Thirty-Third Meeting of Commission A, Doc. E/PC/T/A/PV/33, 1947. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/UN/EPCT/APV-33.PDF. Acesso em: 31 mar.2021.

UNITED NATIONS. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, Thirty-Third Meeting of Commission A, Doc E/PC/T/196, September Draft, 1947. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/UN/EPCT/196.PDF. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED NATIONS. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, EleventhMeeting of the Tariff Agreement Committee, Doc. E/PC/T/TAC/PV/11, 1947. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/UN/EPCT/TACPV-11.PDF. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED NATIONS. Economic and Social Council, Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, Thirty-Third Meeting of Commission A, Doc. E/PC/T/A/SR/33, 1947. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/gattdocs/q/UN/EPCT/ASR-33.PDF. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED NATIONS. General Assembly Resolution No. 68/262. Territorial integrity of Ukraine, 27 Mar. 2014. Disponível em: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/a_res_68_262.pdf. Acesso em: 01 abr. 2021;

UNITED NATIONS. General Assembly Resolution No. 71/205. Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Dec. 19, 2016. Disponível em: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/858544?ln=en. Acesso em: 01 abr. 2021

UNITED NATIONS. Security Council resolution 687, Apr. 3, 1991. Disponível em: https://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/687.pdf.Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Departament of State. Proposals for Expansion of World Trade and Employment, Nov. 1945. Disponível em:http://www.worldtradelaw.net/document.php?id=misc/ProposalsForExpansi onOfWorldTradeAndEmployment.pdf. Acesso em: 20 mar. 2021.

VANDEVELDE, Kenneth J. The first bilateral investment treaties: U.S. postwar friendship, commerce, and navigation treaties. Nova York: Oxford University Press, 2017.

WEISS, Martin A. Arab League Boycott of Israel. Washington: Congressional Research Service, Ago. 2017. Disponível em: https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/59c37d214.pdf. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2021.

WRIGHT, Richard W. Causation, Responsibility, Risk, Probability, Naked Statistics, and Proof: Pruning the Bramble Bush by Clarifying the Concepts.Iowa Law Review, v. 73, p. 1001-1077, 1988.

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), DS512, European Union Third Party Written Submission, 2017. Disponível em: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/february/tradoc_156602.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Doc. WT/DS512/3, Request for the establishment of a panel by Ukraine. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/DS/51 2-3.pdf&Open=True. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Doc. WT/DS512/R/Add.1, Report of the Panel - Addendum, 2019. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/DS/51 2RA1.pdf&Open=True. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Doc. WT/DS512/R, Report of the Panel, 2019. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/FE_S_S009-DP.aspx?language=E&CatalogueIdList=253739,252975,252976,248421,240333,236742,234478,231517,231365,231300&CurrentCatalogueIdIndex=1&FullTextHash=&HasEnglishRecord=True&HasFrenchRecord=True&HasSpanishRecord=True. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials, WT/DS394/R, WT/DS395/R, WT/DS398/R, Panel report, July 5,2011. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/394_395_398r_e.htm. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

WTO. Dispute settlement activity: some figures. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispustats_e.htm. Acesso em:31 mar. 2021.

WTO. GATT 1994. Article XXI (Jurisprudence), Security Exceptions. In: WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO). WTO Analytical Index: Guideto

WTO Law and Practice. Genebra: World Trade Organization, 2012. p. 600. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gatt_ai_e/art21_e.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. GATT 1994. Provisional Application of the General Agreement of 1947. In: WTO. WTO Analytical Index: Guide to WTO Law and Practice.Genebra: World Trade Organization, 2012. p. 1071-1084. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gatt_ai_e/prov_appl_gen_agree_e.pdf. Acesso em: 01 abr. 2021.

WTO. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade - GATT, 1994. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. Korea – Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef (United States of America v Korea), WT/DS161/AB/R, WT/DS169/AB/R,Report of the Appellate Body, Dec. 11, 2000. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/FE_S_S009-DP.aspx?language=E&CatalogueIdList=28643,66170,107599,12458,13372,22203,110283,19005,7858,46659&CurrentCatalogueIdIndex=3&FullTextHash=&HasEnglishRecord=True&HasFrenchRecord=True&HasSpanishRecord=True. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), DS512, Third-Party Oral Statement of the United States of America, 25 Jan. 2018. Disponível em: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/DS/US.3d.Pty.Stmt.%28as%20delivered%29.fin.%28public%29.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), DS512, Third-Party Oral Statement of Australia, 2018. Disponível em: https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/ds512-australiasthird-party-oral-statement-240118.pdf. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

WTO. Russia - Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Doc. WT/DS512/1, Request for consultations by Ukraine. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/DS/51 2-1.pdf&Open=True. Acesso em: 30 mar. 2021.

WTO. United States – Restrictions on Imports of Tuna (México v. Estados Unidos da América), DS29/R, Panel Report. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/gatt_e/92tuna.pdf. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

WTO. United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Doc. WT/DS58/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, Nov. 1998. Disponível em: https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/FE_S_S009- DP.aspx?language=E&CatalogueIdList=49069,73647,22613,31576,97612,43205,14994,1751,52902,34963&CurrentCatalogueIdIndex=2&FullTextHash=&HasEnglishRecord=True&HasFrenchRecord=True&HasSpanishRecord=True. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.

YOO, Ji Yeong; AHN, Dukgeun. Security Exceptions in the WTO System:Bridge or Bottle-Neck for Trade and Security?. Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford, v. 19, n. 2, p. 417-444, out. 2015. Disponível em:https://ssrn.com/abstract=2809074. Acesso em: 31 mar. 2021.