u.s- eu world trade organization case- emanuel baisire
DESCRIPTION
Plaintiffs are eligible for monetary compensation due to EU regulations (U.S.: $ 300 million) A decision against E.U will affect its regulatory system which will limit E.U.’s power to apply a precautionary approach Panel’s decision will serve as a precedent for future WTO rulings on food safety, public health and environment health U.S. is likely to file another case against E.U ‘s directive “2001/18” on Labeling and Traceability of GMOsTRANSCRIPT
11
WTO Case
March 2004, DSB formed three Panelist to rule on the case
Due to the nature of the case, dispute panel decided to seek expert
advice on technical and scientific issues
Panel report was originally expected in September 2004 but has
been repeatedly delayed to August 5th 2005 , October,2005
Panel Postponed the date for issuing its preliminary ruling to
January, 2006
Dispute settling Body Process
22
Possible Panel Decision…Possible Panel Decision…
Panel rule against EU:
EU violation of the SPS rule against “Undue delay” within the approval procedure of the SPS agreement
E.U’s failure to publish risk assessment of the harmfulness of biotech Products (Article 5.1)
EU’s alleged moratoria is in place without scientific evidence (Article 2.2.)
33
Possible Panel DecisionPossible Panel Decision
E.U’s violation of Article 5.5: application of SPS measures without discrimination to domestic and imported products (i.e. genetically engineered seeds VS processing agents)
Panel’s Rule against U.S.:
The panel might order U.S. to strengthen its approval and control procedures
of biotech companies (Mosanto case: Corn fed to rats changed kidney size )
44
ProposalsProposals
GMO and other biotech products must meet internationally acceptable scientific standards
The panel should limit the extent to which parties can rely on
International law norms not covered under WTO provisions
Labeling and traceability of GM products should not be used as a tool to limit GMO imports
55
Plaintiffs are eligible for monetary compensation due to EU regulations
(U.S.: $ 300 million)
A decision against E.U will affect its regulatory system which will limit E.U.’s power to apply a precautionary approach
Panel’s decision will serve as a precedent for future WTO rulings on food safety, public health and environment health
U.S. is likely to file another case against E.U ‘s directive “2001/18” on Labeling and Traceability of GMOs
Implication of the RulingImplication of the Ruling
66
ConclusionConclusion
GMO ruling will demonstrate WTO’s readiness to deal with precautionary principle related to trade, health and environment issues