20India's request for review of the Interim Report, para. 8. 21United States' comments on India's request for review of the Interim Report, para. 8. 22India's request for review of the Interim Report, para. 15. 23India's request for review of the Interim Report, para. 17.
WT/DS456/R - 24 - adequate reserve of domestic manufacturing capacity for solar cells and modules in case there is a disruption in supply of foreign solar cells and modules, and that India refers to this as an "emergency reserve". We also explain that the DCR measures seek to ensure that "a continuous and affordable supply of the solar cells and modules" can be accessed by Indian SPDs. In its comment, India reiterates its argument on why the development of manufacturing capacity of solar cells and modules is essential but does not explain precisely what changes it is requesting. We consider that paragraph 7.189 adequately distils the multiple elements of India's argumentation on why the development of manufacturing capacity of solar cells and modules is essential. However, with a view to accommodating India's comment, we have added a citation to India's submissions where there is wording similar to the formulation we use in paragraph 7.189. Whether the DCR measures involve "the acquisition or distribution of products in general or local short supply" 6.32. The United States suggests that in paragraph 7.202, where Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties are first expressly mentioned, the Panel could add a reference to the relevant Articles of the DSU that constitute the basis for applying these rules of interpretation. The United States also notes that panel reports frequently contain a section in which the panel sets out its approach to interpretation of the covered agreements (as well as the standard of review and burden of proof), and that for clarity, the Panel may wish to consider inserting such a section at the outset of its findings, in which it would set out its approach to these issues and which would apply generally to the various provisions it reviews. India did not comment on the United States' request. 6.33. We consider that it is well established that Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties are "customary rules of interpretation of public international law" within the meaning of Article 3.2 of the DSU. We have nonetheless sought to accommodate the United States request by noting, in paragraph 7.202, that Article 3.2 of the DSU directs us to interpret this provision in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law. In light of this addition, we do not see the value in adding a new section, at the beginning of our findings, reciting the well-established rules on treaty interpretation, standard of review, and burden of proof.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 140 pages?
- Fall '18
- Julie Summers
- Photovoltaics, Solar cell