Liberalization of electronic commerce in mainland China and Hong Kong under the WTO-CEPA regime

Abstract

Liberalization of electronic commerce is a key leading indicator in the commercial world. A robust system realizing full liberalization is vital to the further development of electronic commerce. The World Trade Organization (WTO) is one of the most prominent and appropriate bodies to investigate the issue of liberalization. The changes made in implementing international standards through the legal and regulatory framework set by the WTO, will be key determinants of the future structure of electronic commerce. Mainland China and Hong Kong, both as members of the WTO, certainly are required to be in compliance with their own commitments. On the other hand, the CEPA is a regional trade agreement concluded between mainland China and Hong Kong as two separate members of the WTO. The sensible decision to follow the international standards through legal and regulatory structure set by the CEPA will no doubt lead the way towards betterment of both sides in developing electronic commerce, whose benefits will in turn extend beyond the economic arena.

Notes

1 D A Downing, M A Covington and M M Covington Dictionary of Computer and Internet Terms 7th edn, Barron's, Hauppauge, NY, 2000, p 153.

2 D Kosiur Understanding Electronic Commerce, Microsoft Press, Redmond, Washington, 1997, p 4.

3 J Rifkin ‘The age of access: the new culture of hypercapitalism’, in J P Tarcher (ed) Where All of Life is a Paid-for Experience, Putnam, New York, 2000, p 240.

4 T Melville-Ross ‘The changing face of business’, in T Nash (ed) Electronic Commerce: Directors and Opportunities for Electronic Business, Kogan Page, London, 1998, p 5.

5 The Global Market Forecast for Internet Usage and Commerce, International Data Corporation, June 1999. See R Holleyman The Impact on Intellectual Property: Jurisdiction, Enforcement and Dispute Resolution, International Conference on Electronic Commerce and Intellectual Property, Geneva, 14–16 September 1999.

6 K W Grewlich Governance in ‘Cyberspace’: Access and Public Interest in Global Communications, pp 49–50, Kluwer, The Hague, London, Boston, 1999; H D Thoreau Civil Disobedience and Other Essays, p 1, Dover Publishing House, Dover, Mineola, NY, 1993.

7 L J Gibbons ‘No regulation, government regulation, or self-regulation’, Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy Vol 6, p 475, 1997.

8 V Mayer-Schonberger ‘The shape of governance: analyzing the world of Internet regulation’, Virginia Journal of International Law Vol 43, pp 631–632, 2003; H H Perritt, Jr ‘Economic and other barriers to electronic commerce’, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law Vol 21, p 563, 2000; M Friedman Capitalism and Freedom, p 13, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1982.

9 An integrated, more viable and durable multilateral trade system is the final goal for China. For the benefits of such a system, see further J H Jackson ‘GATT and recent international trade problems’, Maryland Journal of International Law & Trade Vol. 11, p 8, 1987.

10 The Internet should remain a ‘regulation-free’ zone. See further D R Johnson and D G Post ‘And how shall the net be governed? A mediation on the relative virtues of decentralized, emergent law’, in B Kahin and J H Keller (eds) Coordinating the Internet, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1997, pp 62–91; D G Post ‘Governing cyberspace’, Wayne Law Review Vol 43, p 157, 1996; R E Litan and W. Niskanen Going Digital!, Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC, 1998, pp 67–81.

11 M J McCloskey Bibliography of Internet Self-Regulation. Available at: http://www.ilpf.org/selfreg/bis4_15.htm (accessed 15 September 2003).

12 E G Thornburg ‘Going private: technology, due process, and internet dispute resolution’, University of California Davis Law Review Vol 34, p 156, 2000.

13 S J Ware, ‘Default rules from mandatory rules: privatizing law through arbitration’, Minnesota Law Review Vol 83, pp 703–704, 1999; L S Mullenix ‘Resolving aggregate mass tort litigation: the new private law dispute resolution paradigm’, Valparaiso University of Law Review Vol 33, p 413, 1999.

14 M A Lemley ‘The law & economics of Internet norms’, Chicago-Kent Law Review Vol 73, p 1257, 1998.

15 L Lessig ‘The law of the horse: what cyberlaw might teach’, Harvard Law Review Vol 113, p 549, 1999.

16 A Lukas ‘Center for trade policy studies’, Little Need for Government in E-Commerce Vol 113, pp 7–14. Available at: http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/articles/al-11-23-98.html (accessed 13 March 2003).

17 S S Malawer ‘National governments should defer to the private sector and avoid undue restrictions on electronic commerce’, Legal Times 8 February, 1999.

18 K L Bergemann ‘A digital free trade zone and necessarily-regulated self-governance for electronic commerce: the World Trade Organization, international law, and classical liberalism in cyberspace’, John Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law Vol 20, pp 625–626, 2002.

19 ‘Electronic commerce: work continues on issues needing clarification’. Available at: http://www.wto.org (accessed 22 June 2004).

20 For general analysis of the CEPA, please see further A Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce Report, Mainland China/Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement: Business Assessment, November 2003. The present article also makes reference to the data in the report.

21 T Standage The Victorian Internet: The Remarkable Story of the Telegraph and the Nineteenth Century's On-line Pioneer, 211–213, Berkeley Books, New York, 1999.

22 S A Baker, P Lichtenbaum, M D Shenk and M S Yeo, ‘E-products and the WTO’, International Lawyer Vol 35, p 6, 2001.

23 J Nielson and R Morris ‘E-commerce and trade: resolving dilemmas’, OECD Observer Vol 11, 1 January, 2001.

24 L Schuknecht et al. ‘World Trade Organization, economic research and analysis division, a quantitative assessment of electronic commerce’, staff working paper ERAD-99-01, September 1999.

25 ‘Brief note on status regarding Information Technology Agreement (ITA-II)’. Available at: http://commerce.nic.in/wtoit_2.htm (accessed 22 June 2004).

26 B Lindsey, D T Griswold, M A Groombridge and A Lukas Seattle and Beyond: A WTO Agenda for the New Millennium, pp 26–27, Center for Trade Policy Studies, Washington DC, 1999.

27 M Hart and R Chaitoo ‘Electronic commerce and the rules of the World Trade Organization’, a discussion paper prepared for the Electronic Commerce Task Force at Industry Canada, at p 10.

28 ‘ITA Committee approves work program on non-tariff measures’, Press/198, 17 November, 2000. Available at: http://www.wto.org (Accessed 23 June 2004).

29 For general introduction to the GATS regime for telecommunications services, see Y Zhao ‘The commercial use of telecommunications under the framework of GATS’, Air & Space Law Vol 24(6), pp 304–328, 1999.

30 Or to be more accurate, there are 15 general obligations and disciplines plus three corollary principles: MFN; transparency; disclosure of confidential information; increasing participation of developing countries; economic integration agreements and a corollary on labour market integration domestic regulation; mutual recognition of standards or criteria for he authorization, certification and licensing of service suppliers; monopolies and exclusive service providers; business practices; emergency safeguard measures; payments and transfers; restrictions to safeguard the balance of payments; government procurement; general exceptions; national security exceptions; and subsidies.

31 J du Pre Gauntt The Internet an International Trade Policy. Available at: http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/iicompol/papers/gauntt.html (accessed 2 March 2001).

32 See further G C Hufbauer and E Wada (eds) Unfinished Business: Telecommunications after the Uruguay Round, p 31, Institute for International Economics, Washington DC, 1997.

33 A Mattoo ‘National treatment in the GATS, corner-stone or Pandora's box?’, Journal of World Trade Vol 31(1), p 109, 1997.

34 See further Article 4 of the Annex on Telecommunications.

35 See further Fourth Protocol to the General Agreement on Trade in Services, WTO/S/L/20, 30 April, 1996.

36 H Hauser and S Wunsch-Vincent ‘A call for a WTO e-commerce initiative’, International Journal of Communications Law & Policy Vol 6, 18, 2000/2001.

37 See reference paper to the Fourth Protocol to the General Agreement on Trade in Services, 30 April, 1996, 36 I.L.M.

38 See further communication from the United States: Market Access in Telecommunications and Complementary Services: The WTO's Role in Accelerating the Development of a Globally Networked Economy, WTO S/CSS/W/30, 18 December, 2000 (00-5517), Council for Trade in Services, Special Session.

39 WTO-reference paper for telecommunications services. Available at: http://www.union-network.org (accessed 12 October 2004).

40 R Frid ‘The telecommunications pact under the GATS’, Legal Issues of European Integration 24(2), p 81, 1997.

41 Policy paper: Future Negotiations on Telecommunications Services in the WTO, a Submission to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade by the Canadian Council for International Business (CCIB), Ottawa, Ontario, 18 June, 1999.

42 S Peng, ‘Universal telecommunications services in China: trade liberalization, subsidy, and technology in the making of information equality in the broadband era’, Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal Vol 4, p 2, 2003.

43 For discussion on China's commitments under the WTO, see further Y Zhao ‘China's regime governing telecommunications services and the WTO’, Journal of Chinese and Comparative Law Vol 6(2), pp 169–187, 2003.

44 The concessions were obtained in the space of three months between June and September 2003.

45 Y Xu ‘A special WTO zone for telecommunications?’. Available at: http://www.bm.ust.hk (accessed 21 July 2003).

46 ‘China's telecom market, legislation undergoing changes as country readies for global trade’. Available at: http://pulse.tiaonline.org (accessed 27 November 2002).

47 M P Ryan ‘The function-specific and linkage-bargain diplomacy of international intellectual property lawmaking’, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law Vol 19, p 576, 1998.

48 M E Antezana ‘The European Union Internet Copyright Directive as even more than it envisions: toward a supra-EU harmonization of copyright policy and theory’, Boston College International & Comparative Law Review Vol 26, p 438, 2003.

49 F M Abbott ‘Distributed governance at the WTO-WIPO: an evolving model for open-architecture integrated governance’, Journal of International Economic Law Vol 3, pp 69–70, 2000.

50 See M Hart ‘A multilateral agreement on foreign direct investment: why now?’, in P Sauve and D Schwanen (eds) Investment Rules for the Global Economy, C D Howe Institute, Toronto, 1996, pp 36–99.

51 Formulation of new rules, regulatory transparency could be relevant issues under this category. See for example, S Ostry ‘China and the WTO: the transparency issues’, University of California Los Angeles Journal of International Law & Foreign Affairs Vol 3, p 11, 1998.

52 R B Chong and W Chow ‘Financing telecommunications project in Asia: a promising regulatory perspective’, Federal Communications Law Journal Vol 52, p 14, 1999.

53 See reference paper, §2.