The experience to date in the WTO suggests that the plurilingual nature of the WTO Agreements does not make treaty interpretation significantly more difficult than it would be with a text authentic in one language only. The terms of a plurilingual treaty are presumed to have the same meaning in each authentic text, which means that a treaty interpreter need not compare the authentic texts as a routine matter as a matter of law.

The ‘new NAFTA’ agreement between Canada, Mexico and the United States maintained the system for binational panel judicial review of antidumping and countervailing duty determinations of domestic government agencies. In US-Mexico disputes, this hybrid system brings together Spanish and English-speaking lawyers from the civil and the common law to solve legal disputes applying domestic law. These panels raise issues regarding potential bicultural, bilingual and bijural (mis)understandings in legal reasoning.

For a multilateral system to be sustainable, it is important to have several escape clauses which can allow countries to protect their national security concerns. However, when these escape windows are too wide or ambiguous, defining their ambit and scope becomes challenging yet crucial to ensure that they are not open to misuse. The recent Panel Ruling in Russia — Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit is the very first attempt by the WTO to clarify the scope and ambit of National Security Exception.

The ‘new NAFTA’ agreement between Canada, Mexico and the United States maintained the previous system for binational panel judicial review. This system provides for ad hoc tribunals composed of three panelists from one country and two from the other. The tribunal reviews the antidumping and countervailing duty determinations of domestic government agencies. In US-Mexico disputes, this hybrid system brings together mainly Spanish and English speaking lawyers from the civil law and the common law to solve domestic legal disputes applying domestic law.