“Circumvention” is a growing challenge to the effectiveness of international law as the incentive to circumvent laws grows as the “legalization” of international society continues. This analysis on the anti-circumvention provisions within the WTO Agreement reveals a lack of clarity and coherence in the existing disciplines. Ongoing negotiations to modify trade rules also do not fully address these concerns. Therefore, this article proposes that there is a need for a comprehensive approach consisting of amendment, coherent interpretation, use of general principles, and functional reallocation for the WTO Agreement to address circumvention more effectively. In particular, to establish an efficient legal framework for economic integration in East Asia, this article notes that the priority in improving and clarifying anti-circumvention disciplines is to strike multidimensional balances between legitimate interests, including those between sovereign liberty and the effectiveness of international agreements, and those between the predictability of obligations and the effectiveness thereof.

These draft “Rules of Procedure” is to implement the draft Agreement on the Establishment of the Asia-Pacific Regional Mediation Organization (the ARMO Agreement). In order to have a friendly, swift and peaceful settlement of dispute under the ARMO, the mediation rules are of critical importance. These draft “Rules of Procedure” were prepared to show the possible real operation of the ARMO State-to-State (or Economy-to-Economy) mediation. These draft “Rules of Procedures” include articles addressing the governing rules of the ARMO mediation, the request for mediation, merger of mediation, appointment and replacement of mediators, conflict of interest and disqualification, competence of mediator, venue of mediation, representation and assistance of parties, mediator's role and duties, mediation schedule and meeting, parties' participation and cooperation, parties' written submissions, offer of settlement, confidentiality of information and proceedings, time limit for the completion of mediation, settlement agreement, fees and costs, and conclusion of the proceedings. The rules are flexible enough to accommodate different needs of the parties. Hence, parties still hold the ultimate decision to shape their procedure. But the rules also provide comprehensive basis for the parties and mediators to effectively conduct their proceedings. Hence, the parties can alternatively rely more on the mediators to shape the procedure.