H.Res.445 - Expressing the disapproval of the House of Representatives with respect to the report issued on November 10, 2003, by the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body which concluded that United States safeguard measures applied to the importation of certain steel products were in violation of certain WTO agreements, calling for reforms in the WTO dispute settlement system, and for other purposes.108th Congress (2003-2004)
Summary: H.Res.445 — 108th Congress (2003-2004)
Introduced in House (11/18/2003)
Disapproves the adverse decision of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body with respect to the March 5, 2002, imposition by the United States of safeguard measures on the importation of certain steel products as having added to U.S. obligations and diminished U.S. rights under the WTO agreements.
Calls upon: (1) the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) immediately to request the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to issue an advisory report with respect to the Appellate Body decision; (2) the ITC to issue its report expeditiously; (3) the USTR immediately to request the ITC under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act to make a determination rendering its actions not inconsistent with the Appellate Body decision; (4) the ITC to issue such a determination expeditiously; (5) the President immediately to repeal all exclusions to the safeguard measures which were given for the benefit of European Union (EU) steelmakers should the EU retaliate against the safeguard measures in the form of counter import restrictions; and (6) the USTR to pursue vigorously within the WTO negotiations to reform the WTO dispute settlement process to increase its transparency and to ensure that it does not act outside its authority to limit trade remedy laws, create new obligations, or undermine legitimate trade actions brought by the United States or other member countries of the WTO.
Calls for the establishment of a commission of distinguished jurists to advise Congress on the reports issued through the WTO dispute settlement system and, in particular, on whether such reports are consistent with Articles 3.2 and 19.2 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.