Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Amicus Curiae Briefs in the WTO DSM: Good or Bad News for Non-State Actor Involvement?


Since 1998, non-state actors have had access to submit an ‘amicus curiae’ brief to the WTO DSM. Like other forms of non-state actor involvement in the WTO, amicus curiae access has been controversial. Despite this controversy, non-state actors have made use of this access and submitted amicus curiae briefs. This article asks: What has come of these briefs once they are submitted and what explains how amicus are treated by the DSM? This article empirically maps amici in all disputes from 1998 (after amicus access was first recognized) through 2014, arguing that amicus access is conditioned by a combination of political and legal constraints faced by the WTO panels and AB. In particular, whether the content of an amicus is considered hinges on it having the endorsement of a disputing party and whether its consideration interferes with the WTO DSM's reputation for coherence. In all, these findings have implications for the debate over whether amicus curiae access is good or bad news for the WTO and non-state actor involvement.

Corresponding author
Hide All
Previous versions of this paper have been presented at the 2015 ECPR Joint Sessions in Warsaw and the 2014 American Society of International Law Research Forum. Special thanks to Tarald Laudal Berge, Daniel Naurin, Julian Dederke, Lynn Dobson, Rachel Brewster, Ronny Patz, Per-Olof Busch, Michal Parízek, and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. This article was written under the auspices of Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence Funding Scheme, project number 223274 PluriCourts: The Legitimacy of the International Judiciary.
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

M. L. Busch and K. J. Pelc (2010), ‘The Politics of Judicial Economy at the World Trade Organization’, International Organization, 64(2): 257279.

M. L. Busch and E. Reinhardt (2006), ‘Three's a Crowd: Third Parties and WTO Dispute Settlement’, World Politics, 58(3): 446477.

J. L. Dunoff (2006), ‘Constitutional Conceits: The WTO's “Constitution” and the Discipline of International Law’, European Journal of International Law, 17(3): 647675.

M. Elsig and M. Pollack (2014), ‘Agents, Trustees, and International Courts: The Politics of Judicial Appointment at the World Trade Organization’, European Journal of International Relations, 20(2): 391415.

D. C. Esty (1998), ‘Non-Governmental Organizations at the World Trade Organization: Cooperation, Competition, or Exclusion’, Journal of International Economic Law, 1(1): 123148.

M. Hanegraaff , J. Beyers , and C. Braun (2011), ‘Open the Door to More of the Same? The Development of Interest Group Representation at the WTO’, World Trade Review, 10(4): 447472.

D. Kelemen (2001), ‘The Limits of Judicial Power: Trade–Environment Disputes in the GATT/WTO and the EU’, Comparative Political Studies, 34(6): 622650.

R. O'Brien , A. Marie Goetz , J. Aart Scholte , and M. Williams (2000), Contesting Global Governance: Multinational Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

M. M. Slotboom (2006), ‘Participation of NGOs before the WTO and EC Tribunals: Which Court is the Better Friend?’, World Trade Review, 5(1): 69101.

T. Squatrito (2012), ‘Opening the Doors to the WTO Dispute Settlement: State Preferences on NGO Access as Amici’, Swiss Political Science Review, 18(2): 175198.

J. Steffek , C. Kissling , and P. Nanz (2008), Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Governance, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

R. H. Steinberg (2004), ‘Judicial Lawmaking at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints’, American Journal of International Law, 98(2): 247275.

A. Stone Sweet and T. L. Brunell (2013), ‘Trustee Courts and the Judicialization of International Regimes: The Politics of Majoritarian Activism in the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Union, and the World Trade Organization’, Journal of Law and Courts, 1(1): 6188.

J. Tallberg , T. Sommerer , T. Squatrito , and C. Jönsson (2013), The Opening Up of International Organization: Transnational Access in Global Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

G. C. Umbricht (2001), ‘An “Amicus Curiae Brief” on Amicus Curiae Briefs at the WTO’, Journal of International Economic Law, 4(4): 773794.

P. Van den Bossche (2008), ‘NGO Involvement in the WTO: A Comparative Perspective’, Journal of International Economic Law, 11(4): 717749.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

World Trade Review
  • ISSN: 1474-7456
  • EISSN: 1475-3138
  • URL: /core/journals/world-trade-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 12
Total number of PDF views: 40 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 225 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 28th March 2017 - 25th July 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.