THE PRACTICE OF WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MECHANISM BETWEEN EUROPEAN UNION AND INDONESIA DISPUTE ON EUROPEAN UNION ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON BIODIESEL (2014-2018)

Abstract

Lower price of Indonesian palm oil based biodiesel in the European Union (EU) market compared to EU’s own produced rapeseed methyl ester biodiesel had led Indonesia to be alleged of dumping doing, resulted in the imposing of anti-dumping duty valued between 8.8% and 20.5% per tonne on its biodiesel. Indonesia claimed that this whole imposing of anti-dumping duty had violated the Anti-Dumping Agreement, Marrakesh Agreement, and GATT 1994 all at once due to EU’s miscalculation of its losses and Indonesian biodiesel’s dumping margin. As the continuation, Indonesia did several bilateral efforts to solve this issue but the anti-dumping duty kept on being imposed. World Trade Organization (WTO) played a huge role in this trade dispute through its dispute settlement mechanism practiced by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) after Indonesia initiated to bring this issue up to the table of WTO. This study utilized the theory of Neoliberal Institutionalism and the concept of International Organizations to analyze the role WTO DSB practiced in settling the biodiesel trade dispute between EU and Indonesia. This research analyzed meeting minutes between WTO, EU, and Indonesia during the stages in their dispute settlement mechanism as well as the report issued by the Panel. This study found out that the WTO, through DSB, had implemented its function and authority to settle disputes between WTO member states effectively, fairly, objectively, and successfully, resulted in the EU repeal of anti-dumping duty on Indonesian biodiesel after a thorough Panel proceeding. This study also proved the idea of Neoliberal Institutionalism about how institution, through the execution of its functions, is needed in order to enforce better cooperation even though there is non-compliance of states towards cooperation.