By Shannon Togawa Mercer
The WTO Appellate Body
recently supplied us with a new development in the ever-interesting string of U.S.-Tuna
trade decisions. After the appellate body’s 2012 ruling against a U.S. measure,
in what is affectionately known as U.S. – Tuna II (Mexico), the U.S. was tasked with bringing its measure
into conformity with WTO obligations. The Appellate Body recently reviewed U.S.
revisions and found them lacking. Some background: In 2009, Mexico challenged a U.S. “dolphin
safe” labeling scheme before the WTO. The U.S. measure only allowed the “dolphin
safe” label to be placed on canned tuna sold in the United States that was not the
product of a suspect tuna fishing method called “setting on dolphins.” That
said, the regulation only required certification of dolphin safety in the
Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP) region, functionally allowing all tuna caught by
outside of the ETP to carry the dolphin safe label. The Appellate Body took issue with the regulation under the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)
agreement Article 2.1: First, the labeling measure had “a detrimental impact on
the competitive opportunities of Mexican tuna products in the U.S. market”
given that the majority of Mexican fishermen fished in the ETP; secondly, the
regulation did not “even-handedly” address the risks to dolphins “arising from
different fishing techniques in different areas of the ocean.” After this
decision, the U.S. revised the US Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act and
implementation regulations with a new substantive requirement that other tuna
products outside of the ETP get captain certification that “no dolphins were
killed or seriously injured.” Vessels in the ETP are still required to provide
higher levels of certification and more cumbersome documentation. The WTO found
that the amended measures continue to violate the non-discrimination
requirements of the TBT agreement.
0 comments:
Post a Comment