u Ottawa L'Universite' canadienne Canada's university FACULTE DES ETUDES SUPERIEURES mn FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND ET POSTOCTORALES U Ottawa POSDOCTORAL STUDIES L'Univcrsittf canadienne Canada's university Alberto Alvarez AUTEUR DE LA THESE / AUTHOR OF THESIS Ph.D. (LL.D.) GRADE/DEGREE Faculty of Law FACULTE, ECOLE, DEPARTEMENT / FACULTY, SCHOOL, DEPARTMENT The WTO Appellate Body's Autonomy to Transform the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Insights from Theory and A Comparative Analysis of the International Court of Justice and the U.S. Supreme Court TITRE DE LA THESE / TITLE OF THESIS Anthony VanDuzer DIRECTEUR (DIRECTRICE) DE LA THESE / THESIS SUPERVISOR CO-DIRECTEUR (CO-DIRECTRICE) DE LA THESE / THESIS CO-SUPERVISOR EXAMINATEURS (EXAMINATRICES) DE LA THESE/THESIS EXAMINERS William Flanagan Debra Steger Donald McRae Peter Swan Gary W. Slater Le Doyen de la Faculte des etudes superieures et postdoctorales / Dean of the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies THE WTO APPELLATE BODY'S AUTONOMY TO TRANSFORM THE WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM: INSIGHTS FROM THEORY AND A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Alberto Alvarez Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Doctorate of Laws Common Law Section Faculty of Law University of Ottawa ©Alberto Alvarez, Ottawa, Canada, 2008 Library and Bibliotheque et 1*1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-48383-1 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-48383-1 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par Plntemet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. Canada ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To Eliana. A tu lado la vida tiene el mas profundo de los sentidos. To Leticia, and Valeria Aluna. To Alberto & Concha, Omar & Mariela. In memoriam: Carlos & Susa, Eulogio & Rosa A. This thesis would not have been possible without the devotion, encouragement, kindness, and profound critical judgment of Professor Anthony VanDuzer, to whom the author expresses the deepest gratitude. The author is also grateful to Mitali Das for her constant and professional editing support during the writing of this thesis. THE WTO APPELLATE BODY'S AUTONOMY TO TRANSFORM THE WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM: INSIGHTS FROM THEORY AND A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 CHAPTER I. Luhmann's Theory of Autopoiesis and the Self-Development of Judicial or Quasi-Judicial Bodies 8 1.1. The Basic Characteristics of Autonomous Systems 13 1.1.1. The Identity of Autonomous Systems 14 1.1.2. Self-Observation of Autonomous Systems 15 1.1.3. Recursivity: Circular Operation and Re-creation of Autonomous Systems 17 1.1.4. Autonomous Systems and Their External Environment 17 1.1.5. Autonomous Systems'Capacity to Self-Transform 19 1.1.6. Co-evolution of Autonomous Systems 21 1.1.7 Summary 22 1.1.8 The Theoretical Context for Luhmann's Theory of Autonomous Systems 23 1.2. The Operation of Some Judicial Bodies as Autonomous Systems 27 1.2.1. The Definition of Courts for the Purpose of This Thesis 29 1.2.2. The Identity of Courts 34 1.2.3. The Self-Observation of Courts 38 1.2.4. The Recursive Operation of Courts 40 1.2.5. Courts and their External Environment 43 1.2.6. The Self-Transformative Autonomy of Courts 45 1.2.6.1. Conditions for the Existence of A Court's Autonomy to Self-Transform 47 1.2.6.1.1. A Court's Capacity to Adopt Decisions Related to Itself 47 1.2.6.1.2. The Existence of a Menu of Choices for Autonomous Courts to Self-Transform 49 1.2.6.1.3. Courts' Ability to Steer Their Self-Transformations by Determining Their Timing, Extent, and Justification 60 1.2.1.6.1.3.1 Public Choice Theory's Description of Collective Decision Making 62 1.2.1.6.1.3.2. The Costs of Collective Decision-Making in Collegial Courts 64 1.2.1.6.1.3.3. General Description of the Operation of the Decision-Making Process in Collegial Courts 65 1.2.1.6.1.3.4. What Do Judges in Collegial Courts Bargain About? 68 1.2.1.6.1.3.5. Collective Decision-Making and Courts' Steering of Their Self-Transformations by the Selection of Their Timing, Extent, and Rationale 77 1.2.1.6.1.3.5.1. Courts' Direction of Self-Transformation in the Face of External Indifference 78 1.2.1.6.1.3.5.2. Courts' Direction of Self-Transformation in the Face of Powerful External Opposition 79 1.2.1.6.1.3.5.3. Courts' Direction of Self-Transformation in the Face of Open and Powerful External Support 80 1.2.1.6.1.3.5.4. Summary 82 1.2.6.2. Note of Caution: The Limits of the Self-Transformative Autonomy of Autonomous Courts 83 1.2.6.2.1. The External Environment as a Constraint to Some Courts' Autonomy to Self-Transform 84 1.2.6.2.2. Collegiality as an Internal Constraint 86 1.2.6.2.3. Courts'Self-Observation as a Constraint 90 1.2.6.2.4. Courts Cannot Bring Cases 90 1.2.7. Some Courts' Influence over External Autonomous Systems 91 1.3. Conclusions of Chapter I 93 CHAPTER II. The Self-Transformative Autonomy of Some National and International Courts in Light of Luhmann's Theory of Autonomous Systems ILL The United States Supreme Court as an Autonomous System and Its Autonomy to Self-Transform 98 II. 1.1. Features of the U.S. Supreme Court as an Autonomous System. 100 II. 1.1.1. The Identity of the U.S. Supreme Court 100 II. 1.1.2. Self-Observation and Self-Reference in the Operation of the U.S. Supreme Court 103 II. 1.1.3. The Recursive Operation of the U.S. Supreme Court 106 II. 1.1.4. The U.S. Supreme Court and the External Environment 106 II.1.1.5. The U.S. Supreme Court and Luhmann's Requirements for the Existence of Its Autonomy to Self-Transform 111 II. 1.1.5.1. The U.S Supreme Court Adopts Decisions Regarding Itself 112 II. 1.1.5.2. The U.S. Supreme Court Has a Set of Possible Alternatives to Choose From When Deciding Cases, Including Those In Which a Self-Transformation Is at Issue 114 II.1.1.5.3. The U.S. Supreme Court's Steering of Its Autonomy to Self-Transform by Its Ability to Select the Timing, Scope and Justification of Its Self- Transformations 116 11.1.1.5.3.1. The Collegial Decision-Making Process in the First Decades of the U.S. Supreme Court 118 11.1.1.5.3.2. The Collegial Decision-Making Process of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Twentieth Century 120 11.1.1.5.3.3. The U.S. Supreme Court's Selection of the Time, Scope, and Justification of Self-Transformations 127 11.1.1.5.3.4. The Self-Transformation of the U.S. Supreme Court: The US Supreme Court as a Powerful Institutional Actor 132 11.1.1.5.3.4.1. Marbury v. Madison and the Judicial Review of Federal Legislation 134 II.1.1.5.3.4.2. The U.S. Supreme Court and the Judicial Review of State Legislation 138 II. 1.1.5.4. Restrictions on the U.S. Supreme Court's Self Transformative Autonomy 141 II. 1.1.6. The U.S. Supreme Court's Influence over External Autonomous Systems and in Particular the U.S. Federal State 146 II. 1.1.6.1. The U.S. Supreme Court and Its Role in Strengthening the Powers of Congress 146 II. 1.1.6.1.1. The U.S. Supreme Court Allows Congress to Create Federal Institutions 147 II.1.1.6.1.2. The U.S. Supreme Court's Ample Interpretation of the Commerce Clause 148 II. 1.1.6.2. The U.S.