{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.00979706088173548, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.559633027522936, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Transparency of the Trade Dispute Settlement Process

The objective of this paper is to assess the claim that the WTO dispute settlement system should improve the transparency of its proceedings to people by opening panel and Appellate Body meetings as well as accepting and reflecting unsolicited amicus curiae briefs. This paper argues that the claim's exclusive focus on WTO dispute settlement proceedings blinds it to the multiplicity of the process of international trade dispute settlement. That is, the process involves multiple stages, beginning with domestic discourse between the government and the interested private parties, then proceeding to international fora, including WTO dispute settlement proceedings, and ending with the internalization of a dispute solution within the respondent state. Ensuring transparency to people at one of the stages may be onerous and without benefit, while ensuring the same at another stage may produce benefits that outweigh potential costs and risks. My argument is that the transparency of each stage of the process the appropriate degrees of which differ can collectively ensure the transparency of the whole process of international trade dispute settlement to people. More specifically, the alleged lack of transparency in WTO dispute settlement proceedings may and should be complemented by transparency at other stages of the international trade dispute settlement process.