I. Introduction介紹

1.從專家組報(bào)告的法律和法律解釋中的一些問(wèn)題提出上訴土耳其，土耳其 - 對(duì)紡織品和服裝產(chǎn)品（“小組報(bào)告”）的進(jìn)口限制。該小組的成立是為了審議關(guān)于印度土耳其對(duì)印度紡織品和服裝產(chǎn)品的進(jìn)口引進(jìn)數(shù)量限制的投訴。
2. 1995年3月6日，土耳其-EC協(xié)會(huì)理事會(huì)通過(guò)了決定1/95，其中規(guī)定了規(guī)則實(shí)施土耳其和歐洲共同體之間的關(guān)稅同盟的最后階段。第12（2）本決定規(guī)定：
在與關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定土耳其第24條的要求一致將從進(jìn)入這個(gè)決定，基本在紡織部門，包括紡織品和服裝貿(mào)易的協(xié)定或安排相同的商業(yè)政策作為社會(huì)的力量為適用。
1. Turkey appeals from certain issues of law and legal interpretations in the Panel Report, Turkey – Restrictions on Imports of Textile and Clothing Products (the "Panel Report").   The Panel was established to consider a complaint by India regarding quantitative restrictions introduced by Turkey on imports of Indian textile and clothing products.
2. On 6 March 1995, the Turkey-EC Association Council adopted Decision 1/95 , which sets out the rules for implementing the final phase of the customs union between Turkey and the European Communities.  Article 12(2) of this Decision states:

In conformity with the requirements of Article XXIV of the GATT Turkey will apply as from the entry into force of this Decision, substantially the same commercial policy as the Community in the textile sector including the agreements or arrangements on trade in textile and clothing.

為了應(yīng)用它認(rèn)為是“大致相同的商業(yè)政策”作為貿(mào)易的紡織品和服裝在歐盟，土耳其介紹，截至1996年1月1日，來(lái)自印度的19類紡織品和服裝產(chǎn)品的進(jìn)口數(shù)量限制。
印度小組審議聲稱，土耳其引入的數(shù)量限制為與第XI和GATT 1994年第十三，以及紡織品和服裝（以下簡(jiǎn)稱“ATC”），該協(xié)議第2.4條不一致。在專家組報(bào)告，在1999年5月31日為流傳，小組得出的結(jié)論是，數(shù)量限制是與第XI的GATT 1994年第十三，因此與那些ATC第2.4條的規(guī)定，并不符，，拒絕了土耳其的防御引進(jìn)任何這種否則GATT / WTO不相容的進(jìn)口限制是由GATT 1994第二十四條允許的。

In order to apply what it considered to be "substantially the same commercial policy" as the European Communities on trade in textiles and clothing, Turkey introduced, as of 1 January 1996, quantitative restrictions on imports from India on 19 categories of textile and clothing products. 
The Panel considered claims by India that the quantitative restrictions introduced by Turkey were inconsistent with Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994, and Article 2.4 of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (the "ATC").  In the Panel Report, circulated on 31 May 1999, the Panel reached the conclusion that the quantitative restrictions were inconsistent with the provisions of Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994 and consequently with those of Article 2.4 of the ATC, and rejected Turkey's defence that the introduction of any such otherwise GATT/WTO incompatible import restrictions is permitted by Article XXIV of the GATT 1994. 
On 26 July 1999, Turkey notified the Dispute Settlement Body (the "DSB") of its intention to appeal certain issues of law covered in the Panel Report and legal interpretations developed by the Panel, pursuant to Article 16.4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (the "DSU"), and filed a Notice of Appeal pursuant to Rule 20 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review (the "Working Procedures").  On 5 August 1999, Turkey filed its appellant's submission.   On 20 August 1999, India filed an appellee's submission.   On the same day, Hong Kong, China;  Japan;  and the Philippines filed third participant's submissions. 
The oral hearing in the appeal was held on 14 September 1999.  The participants and third participants presented oral arguments and responded to questions put to them by the Members of the Division hearing the appeal.

I. Introduction 1
II. Arguments of the Participants 2
A. Claims of Error by Turkey – Appellant 2
B. Arguments of India - Appellee 5
III. Arguments of Third Participants 8
A. Hong Kong, China 8
B. Japan 8
C. The Philippines 9
IV. Issue Raised in this Appeal 10
V. Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 10
VI. Findings and Conclusions 18

VI. Findings and Conclusions調(diào)查結(jié)果和結(jié)論

61. For the reasons set out in this report, the Appellate Body concludes that the Panel erred in its legal reasoning by focusing on sub-paragraphs 8(a) and 5(a) and by failing to recognize the crucial role of the chapeau of paragraph 5 in the interpretation of Article XXIV of the GATT 1994, but upholds the Panel's conclusion that Article XXIV does not allow Turkey to adopt, upon the formation of a customs union with the European Communities, quantitative restrictions on imports of 19 categories of textile and clothing products which were found to be inconsistent with Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994 and Article 2.4 of the ATC.

62. We wish to point out that we make no finding on the issue of whether quantitative restrictions found to be inconsistent with Article XI and Article XIII of the GATT 1994 will ever be justified by Article XXIV.  We find only that the quantitative restrictions at issue in the appeal in this case were not so justified.  Likewise, we make no finding either on many other issues that may arise under  
Article XXIV.  The resolution of those other issues must await another day.  We do not believe it necessary to find more than we have found here to fulfill our responsibilities under the DSU in deciding this case.
63. The Appellate Body recommends that the DSB request that Turkey bring its measures which the Panel found to be inconsistent with Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994 and Article 2.4 of the ATC into conformity with its obligations under these agreements.

本文編號(hào)：35024