诚然，WTo法治面临的挑战主要还是来自多边贸易体制本身，其中既有实质性领域的法治议题，也有程序性的法治考量，还有体制本身的运作方式。在一系列法治问题上，WTO需要作出果断的抉择：是继续坚持现行组织框架，还是基本保持，但作适当调整？是增强WTO的规则取向，还是加强其政治或外交动力，抑或二者并进？是继续维持协商一致的决策方式，还是补充加权表决制度？是坚守现有阵地并对其进行加固和提高，还是适当拓展至其他贸易有关的领域？是限制区域协定的迅猛发展势头，任其对最惠国待遇基石的侵蚀，还是适当限制并加强对区贸协定的监督，最大限度地维护最惠国待遇原则的空间效力？是对发展中国家继续涂脂抹粉，还是助其健体强身？
无论WTO法治的挑战有多大、多复杂、多敏感，也不论这些挑战来自何方，应对这些挑战和促进WTO法治的进一步完善必须坚持三项最基本的指导原则：一是“成员驱动”，二是“发展主导”，三是“合作共赢”。在“成员驱动”原则下，WTO法治改革和完善的任何举措，一方面必须以WTO成员的整体利益为根本目的，另一方面必须在所有WTO成员的参与和同意下进行，坚决摈弃“强国”或“富国俱乐部”或所谓的“核心集团”驱动WTO的各项改革议程。在“发展主导”原则下，不仅正在行进的多哈回合必须始终紧扣“发展”这个主题，WTO的各项法治改革也必须以“发展”为中心；任何偏离“发展”的措施将不仅损害广大发展中国家的利益，而且也会损害发达国家的利益，可谓是“一荣俱荣、一损俱损”。在“合作共赢”原则下， WTO的所有成员，不论大小、强弱、贫富，都应本着求同存异、平等互利、彼此包容的精神，在充分协商的前提下应对WTO法治所面临的各项挑战。最后，必须强调的是，WTO法治的挑战是长期的，而其改革必然是持久的，不可能一蹴而就，亦不可能一劳永逸；当务之急是汇聚各种智慧和力量，力促多哈回合尽早拉下帷幕，实现多边贸易体制法治进步的阶段突破。
【作者简介】
曾令良，单位为武汉大学。
【注释】See Report of the First Warwick Commission, The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way Forward? University of Warwick, UK, 2007，para. 129.
See ibid, Report of the First Warwick Commission, para. 139.
See Ministerial Conference, Singapore Ministerial Declaration, adopted on 13 December 1996, WT/MIN （96）/DEC, dated 18 December1996, para. 20.
See ibid, para. 21.
See Peter Van den Bossche, The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organizations, Text, Cases and Materials, Cambridge University Press,2005，p. 705.
See ibid.
See Singapore Ministerial Declaration, para. 4.
See Richard, N. Haass, Former Ambassador and Director of Policy Planning Staff, US Department of State, “Sovereignty: Existing Rights, E-volving Responsibilities”，Remarks at the School of Foreign Service and the Mortara Center for International Studies, Georgetown University, at 2 （Jan.14, 2003）．
See ibid.
Kofi Annan, Annual Report to the General Assembly, September 1999, as quoted in “State, Sovereignty, and International Governance”（Gerald Kreijen et al eds.，2002），p. 19.
See The Future of the WTO: Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, para. 143.
See Peter Van den Bossche 2005，p. 694.
See Committee on Trade and Development, Implementation of Special and Differential Treatment Provisions in WTO Agreements and Decisions,Note by the WTO Secretariat, WT/COMTD/W/77/Rev. 1，dated 21 September 2001， para. 3.
http://www. wto. org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/dev_special_differential_provisions_e. htm, visited on 11 August 2010.
Paragraph 44 of WT/MIN（01）/DEC/1.
Annex C of JOB （03） /150/Rev. 2.
Annex F of WT/MIN （05） /DEC.
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION, TN/CTD/25, 22 March 2010, Report by the Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development to theTrade Negotiations Committee for the Purpose of the TNC Stocktaking Exercise.
http://www. wto. org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/a4t_e/aid4trade_e. htm, visited on 11 August 2010.
http://www. wto. org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e. htm, visited on 13 August 2010.
参见曾令良：《区域贸易协定的最新发展趋势及其对多哈发展议程的负面影响》，载《法学研究》2004年第5期。
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, para. 60.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General paras. 81-87.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General , paras. 94-101.
http://www. wto. org/enghsh/tratop_e/region_ e/regcom_e. him, visited on 13 August 2010.
TNRI/24, Negotiating Group on Rules，Report by the Chairman to the Trade Negotiations Committee for the purpose of the TNC stocktakingexercise, 22 March 2010, para. 18.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, para. 270.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General para. 313.
Action Aid Aliance, WTO Democracy and Reform,
http://www>. Actionaid. org, visited on 30 September 2010.
See Report by the COnsultative Board ,paras.274-276.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General paras. 288-289.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, paras. 317 -32-
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, paras. 321-327.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, paras. 332 and 336.
Debra P. Steger, The Future of the WTO: The Case for Institutional Reform, Journal of International Economic Law 12（4），2009, pp. 803833.
Claus-Dieter Ehlermann and Lothar Ehring, Decision-Making in the World Trade Organization: Is the Consensus Practice of the World TradeOrganization Adequate for Making, Revising and Implementing Rules on International Trade? （2005） 8 JIEL 51；Debra P Steger, The Struggle for Legiti-macy in the WTO in Peace Through Trade: Building the WTO（Cameron May Ltd, London 2004）；Marco CEJ Bronckers, Better Rules for a New Millen-nium: A Warning Against Undemocratic Developments in the WTO （1999） 2 JIEL 547.
Thomas Cottier and Satoko Takenoshita, Decision-Making and the Balance of Powers in WTO Negotiations: Towards Supplementary WeightedVoting in Stefan Griller （ed），At the Crossroads: The World Trading System and the Doha Round （vol 8 Springer, Vienna 2008） 181.
Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Inconsistency Between Diagnosis and Treatment （2005） 8 JIEL 291，296
Warwick Report, pp. 29-32.
See Report by the Consultative Board, para. 213.
http://www. wto. org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e. htm, visited on 15 August 2010.
TN/DS/24, 22 March 2010, SPECIAL SESSION OF THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BODY, Report by the Chairman to the Trade NegotiationsCommittee for the Purpose of the TNC Stocktaking Exercise.
See ibid note 2, Report by the Consultative Board, para. 254.
James Backus, Open Doors for Open Trade: Shining Light on WTO Dispute Settlement, Remarks to the National Foreign Trade Council, May-flower Hotel, Washington D. C.，January 29，2004，p. 2. http：//www. worldtradelaw. net/articles/bacchusopendoors. pdf, visited on 28 April 2005.
See Report by the Consultative Board, paras. 261-262.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General para. 263.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General paras. 237-238.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, para. 240.
See Report by the Consultative Board to Director-General, paras. 242-243.
Sub-Sahara African countries alone or together with others have submitted five proposals with more than twenty issues, see Amin Alavi, AfricanCountries and the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism, 25（1）Development Policy Review, pp. 25-42, footnote 15 （2007）．
See Amin Alavi, especially pp.31-38.
See TN/DS/W/29, No. 1，and TN/DS/W/57，No. 1 （both submitted by China）.
Amin Alavi 2007，p. 34.
Amin Alavi 2007, p. 34.
Amin Alavi 2007，p. 35.
See TN/DS/W/1.
Amin Alavi 2007，p. 36.
Amin Alavi 2007, p. 36.
