Democratizing the WTO

Abstract

As the WTO accretes power, challenges to its authority will only increase. The phrase "democracy deficit" has been used in different literatures, as applied to different institutions, to express a structural isolation from popular input. It is often, though not always, used as a critique. The WTO is afflicted with at least three forms of "democracy deficit:" 1. Supranationalism. The WTO receives no direct democratic input; rather WTO policies and authority are determined, through various means, by its member states. 2. Judicial lawmaking. Much WTO lawmaking occurs in the context of dispute resolution. Dispute panelists, like judges, are isolated from ordinary politics. The WTO Dispute Settlement Body enjoys a form of judicial supremacy that is democratically suspect, particularly since there is no legislative check on Dispute Settlement Body activism. 3. Political capture. Foreign relations generally, and especially international trade policy, are more subject to capture by special interests than is domestic policy. This undercuts the likelihood that national governments will adequately transmit the concerns and values of their people. Institutions such as Fast Track suspend ordinary democratic processes in the international trade area.