Dr. Manuel Sánchez Miranda
I am an international economic lawyer and scholar with expertise in international trade law, national and international security, and evidence & proof in international adjudication. My research has been published in top-tier peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of International Economic Law (JIEL) and the Journal of World Trade. I recently defended my Ph.D. thesis, titled Rules of Evidence in Public International Law: A Case Study of WTO Dispute Settlement, earning a magna cum laude distinction. I hold a Master of Laws from Georgetown University and a Bachelor of Laws from the Mexico Autonomous Institute of Technology (ITAM). Currently, I am a postdoctoral fellow at the Geneva Graduate Institute and have served as a peer reviewer for the Asian Journal of International Law and the Yearbook on International Investment Law and Policy, both published by Oxford University Press. Additionally, I host The Hearsay Evidence Podcast, a legal podcast dedicated to the evidentiary law and practice of international courts and tribunals.
Ph.D. thesis dissertation
"Rules of Evidence in Public International Law: A Case Study of WTO Dispute Settlement" (2022)
Peter Van Den Bossche
Professor of International Economic Law @ University of Bern & President of the Society of International Economic Law (SIEL)
"An impressive, comprehensive, detailed and thought-provoking analysis of a complex subject. This PhD thesis is a goldmine of information for scholars as well as practitioners, and by no means only for scholars focusing on and practitioners active in WTO dispute settlement. The thesis makes an important contribution to the development of the rules of evidence in international adjudication in general."
Joost Pauwelyn
Professor of International Law @ The Geneva Graduate Institute & Murase Visiting Professor of Law at Georgetown Law Center
"This is impressive work, with the main contribution most likely teasing apart the various issues involved: breaking up “route of evidence”, stages, different questions raised; differentiating e.g. between admissibility and weight, material and personal evidence, holistic v. atomistic assessment of evidence, burden v. standard of proof. In sum, bringing some of the rigor of evidence in domestic law also to international law"
Marcelo Kohen
Professor of International Law @ The Geneva Graduate Institute & Titular Member of the Institut de Droit International
"The topic chosen by Mr. Sánchez Miranda for his PhD thesis addresses one of the most difficult aspects of international litigation, both in theory and in practice. The candidate has largely overcome this challenge. We are in presence of an excellent thesis demonstrating the appropriate research capacity of its author."
Main academic interests
Evidence and proof in international adjudication
All aspects governing the treatment of evidence before international courts and tribunals, including WTO panels and Appellate Body, the ICJ, international criminal courts, and international arbitral tribunals
International economic law
All aspects relating to the World Trade Organization's (WTO) law and policy, international investment law, economic and regional integration, and the governance of international economic organizations
Artificial intelligence and frontier technologies
Regulatory frameworks and theories governing the technologies of the fourth industrial revolution, with a particular emphasis on artificial intelligence, social networks and deepfake evidence
Sustainable development
The intersection between international economic law and the sustainable development goals, as well as the use of soft law mechanisms (mainly, governance indicators) to advance inclusive and sustainable development
Podcast appearances
Selected publications
With 146 decisions delivered since 1995, the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) stands as one of the world's most prolific and accomplished international courts. However, the Appellate Body finds itself currently embroiled in a crisis that has crippled it. This article delves into the reasons that may account for this state of affairs. We examine a sample of Appellate Body decisions, that, on the one hand, had significant policy and systemic implications for WTO dispute settlement, but on the other hand, are beset with notable flaws. While it is human to err, and there is no reason why this old adage should not be applicable to international tribunals, by developing an overly dogmatic jurisprudential tradition that has the potential to perpetuate even the most deficient rationale, the Appellate Body invited at least some of the criticism that escalated into political maneuvering that rendered it inoperative. Our aspiration is that this crisis can serve as a source of valuable lessons regarding how to mitigate the risks that international adjudicators must inevitably bear when interpreting international treaties. In an effort to trigger a scholarly discussion on how to make the work of the Appellate Body more sustainable, we outline a possible blueprint to resolve the current deadlock.
This article argues that, similar to the World Bank and other global economic affairs institutions, the time has come for the WTO) to devise governance indicators to advance economic development. This would change the topography of global trade governance in such a way that it would shift the responsibility on Members to design policies that can enable them reap more benefits from trade, as well as to adopt truly inclusive trade policies. Not only could this help silence the serious criticism, particularly from the developed world, that has called into question the role of trade as a tool for advancing development, but it would also be consistent with the treaty-based development goals that are enshrined in the WTO treaty. In parallel, through the use of indicators, the WTO would be able to address the negative effects of automation and disruptive technologies, by providing a measurement of the extent to which such externalities are offsetting the benefits that should otherwise be attributed to trade liberalization. The WTO has already given signals of its openness to create indicators and that its Secretariat counts with the technical capacity to build complex soft law mechanisms even if the necessary data to build the same implies stepping out of the WTO system.
This article seeks to provide a general legal framework for the study of electricity measures, including those that relate to renewable energy, as they pertain to international trade. To this end, two issues are discussed. First, the three-pillared structure that governs global electricity trade, i.e. a combination of multilateral, regional and sectoral agreements, as well as the complex relationship between these separate legal regimes. Secondly, it analyses World Trade Organization (WTO) law as it applies to the trade in electrical energy and electricity services, and expounds how the three-pillared structure identified adapts to electricity trade. While primarily an electricity-related manuscript, this article covers issues of relevance not only to trade in electricity but to international trade law in general, particularly in connection with industries where international sectoral agreements coexist with multilateral and regional trade rules, discussing issues that range from conflict of norms to fragmentation and legal convergence.
Manuel Sánchez Miranda & Chanya Punyakumpol, New Evidence and Bayesian Probabilities: Predicting Factual Determinations in WTO Dispute Settlement (upcoming).
This article introduces an empirical legal research method for the study of evidence and proof in the World Trade Organization (WTO): Bayesian probabilities. We argue that, by employing Bayes’ theorem and Bayesian nets, one can estimate the probabilities that a WTO trier of facts will reach certain factual determinations. We illustrate this by calculating Bayesian probabilities for a
practical case study based on the adopted panel report in Russia – Traffic in Transit. Our calculation confirms that, based on the knowledge of previous cases, there was a 80+ % probability that the panel in Russia – Traffic in Transit would confirm, as it ultimately did, that an “emergency in international relations” within the meaning of Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) existed. As illustrated by this case study, by using Bayesian probabilities, WTO panels can strengthen their confidence in their factual findings and indirectly assist lawyers in defining cost-effective factual strategies. Crucially, the Bayes’ theorem could also provide a tool to estimate the actual standard of proof in WTO litigation.
Interested in working together?
The Hearsay Evidence Podcast
Let's connect
Email me
Feel free to contact me with any academic, professional, or business inquiries. I look forward to hearing from you!
Book an appointment