Skip to main content
×
×
Home

European Communities – Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products

  • ROBERT L. HOWSE (a1) and HENRIK HORN (a2)
Abstract
Abstract

The EC-Biotech dispute exposed the WTO dispute settlement system to a more challenging test than any previous dispute. Not only did the Panel have to take a stand on the limits of science, or technocratic regulatory controls, to protect against objective risk, but in this regard faced more complex issues than ever addressed before by an adjudicating body. The dispute also concerned an extremely charged political issue, partly because of inherent ethical sensitivities with regard to foodstuffs, partly due to public skepticism about the role of science, and partly due to a common public perception of the complaint as being driven by the interests of an untrustworthy industry. Because of these and other challenges, the Panel faced an almost impossible task. This paper discusses how the Panel addressed some of these issues. The recently (after our report was drafted) decided appeal in EC–Hormones Suspension is likely to reduce the significance for WTO jurisprudence of some of the Panel's findings in EC–Biotech, given the apparently different approach of the AB to fundamental interpretative issues under SPS concerning the meaning of risk assessment and precaution.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Bail Christoph, Falkner Robert, and Marquard Helen (eds.) (2002), The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Reconciling Trade in Biotechnology with Environment and Development? London: RIIA/Earthscan.
Breyer Stephen (1993), Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Crawford-Brown Douglas, Pauwelyn Joost, and Smith Kelly (2004), ‘Environmental Risk, Precaution, and Scientific Rationality in the Context of WTO/NAFTA Trade Rules’, Risk Analysis, 24(2): 461469.
Eliason Antonia (2008), ‘Science versus Law in the WTO Jurisprudence – The (Mis)interpretation of the Scientific Process and the (In)sufficiency of Scientific Evidence in EC–Biotech’, unpublished manuscript, World Trade Institute, Berne.
Horn Henrik and Mavroidis Petros C. (2004), ‘Still Hazy After All These Years: The Interpretation of National Treatment in the GATT/WTO Case-law on Tax Discrimination’, European Journal of International Law, 15(1): 3969.
Horn Henrik and Weiler Joseph H. H. (2003), ‘European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products’, in Horn Henrik and Mavroidis Petros C. (eds.) The WTO Case Law of 2001 – The American Law Institute Reporters' Studies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Howse Robert L. (2000), ‘Democracy, Science, and Free Trade: Risk Regulation on Trial at the World Trade Organization’, University of Michigan Law Review, 98(7): 23292357.
Howse Robert L. (2008), ‘The Use and Abuse of International Law in WTO Trade/Environment Litigation’, in Janow Merit E.(eds.) The WTO: Governance, Dispute Settlement and Developing Countries, Geneva/Huntington, NY: World Trade Organization/Juris Publishing, pp. 635670.
Howse Robert L. and Regan Donald H. (2000), ‘The Product/Process Distinction: An Illusory Basis for Disciplining “Unilateralism” in Trade Policy’, European Journal of International Law, 11(2): 249289.
Howse Robert L. and Türk Elisabeth (2006), ‘The WTO Impact on Internal Regulations: A Case Study of the Canada–EC Asbestos Dispute’, in Bermann George A. and Mavroidis Petros C. (eds.) Trade and Human Health and Safety, Columbia Studies in WTO Law and Policy, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 77117; reprint of previously published work.
Pauwelyn Joost (2003), Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Regan Donald H. (2006), ‘Regulatory Purpose and “Like Products” in Article III:4 of the GATT (with Additional Remarks on Article III:2)’, in Bermann George A. and Mavroidis Petros C. (eds.) Trade and Human Health and Safety, Columbia Studies in WTO Law and Policy, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 190223.
Trebilcock Michael J. and Howse Robert L. (2005), The Regulation of International Trade, London: Routledge, 1995; second edition, 1999; third edition, 2005.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

World Trade Review
  • ISSN: 1474-7456
  • EISSN: 1475-3138
  • URL: /core/journals/world-trade-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 8
Total number of PDF views: 42 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 382 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 15th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.