International Judicial Monitor
Published by the International judicial Academy of the International Law Institute, Washington, D.C.
with circulation assistance from the American Society of International Law

Fall 2017 Issue

100 Ways


International Law: One Hundred Ways It Shapes Our Lives

100 WaysBeing able to choose from a greater variety of wines from Australia, Chile, and other countries.

By: James G. Apple, Editor-in-Chief, International Judicial Monitor

(In celebration of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the American Society of International Law in 2006, the Society published a pamphlet titled International Law: One Hundred Ways It Shapes Our Lives. The introduction gives an explanation for its conception: an affirmation that: “international law not only exists, but also penetrates much more deeply and broadly into everyday life than the people it affects may generally appreciate.” This column seeks to elucidate and elaborate on many of the 100 ways briefly presented in the ASIL pamphlet.)

Any resident of the United States who drinks a lot of wine, or even an occasional glass, to such an extent that a trip to the local wine or grocery store is periodically required could not fail to notice that the number of types of wine, as well as their places of origin has increased rapidly in recent years. In fact there has been a dramatic increase in the types and origins of wine available to the consumer since 2002. The reason for this increase is the signing by all major wine producing countries of the Agreement on Mutual Acceptance of Oenological Practices which limits wine importing constraints to health and safety considerations.

This agreement had its origins in the formation of a group of wine-producing nations known as the World Wine Trade Group,  founded in 1998. It was made possible by the provisions of the Marrakesh Agreement of 1994, which was the agreement under which the World Trade Organization (WTO) was created.


This agreement was signed by a group of wine exporting and importing countries in December, 2001, and entered into force on December 2, 2002.

The countries that have entered into this agreement are the United States, Canada, Australia, Chile, Argentina, New Zealand, and Georgia. South Africa has signed the agreement with reservations to certain provisions.

The idea for the agreement was the “desire to facilitate international trade and to avoid application of obstacles to trade in wine.” There was an interest in wine growing countries to regulate wine produced as well as consumed in the respective territories of the nations signing the agreement. This was because there was a recognition that import restrictions on oenological (wine growing} practices had been used in the past as obstructions to international trade.

The agreement is limited to wine. There is nothing in the agreement preventing any party from taking measures for the “protection of human health and safety.”

Oversight for the Agreement is provided by the Council of the Parties. Each party is entitled to one representative on the Council. Each party must prepare a Schedule containing information about the oenological practices of the party. Each party must update the Schedule to reflect any changes.

The agreement provides for a dispute settlement procedure. Parties to a dispute must try to settle the dispute by consultation. If consultation fails, then the matter is referred to a Committee of Experts, consisting of three experts who are included in a roster of experts kept by the Council. Each party may select four experts to be included in the roster.

Amendments to the agreement may be made. Any party may withdraw from the agreement with proper notice.

ASIl & International Judicial AcademyInternational Judicial Monitor
© 2017 – The International Judicial Academy
with assistance from the American Society of International Law.

Editor: James G. Apple.
IJM welcomes comments, suggestions, and submissions.
Please contact the IJM editor at