Safety
concerns are built into the WTO agreements
Key
clauses in the agreements (such as GATT Art. 20) specifically allow
governments to take actions to protect human, animal or plant life or
health. But these actions are disciplined, for example to prevent them
being used as an excuse for protecting domestic producers —
protectionism in disguise.
Some
of the agreements deal in greater detail with product standards, and
with health and safety for food and other products made from animals
and plants. The purpose is to defend governments’ rights to ensure
the safety of their citizens.
As
an example, a WTO dispute ruling justified a ban on asbestos products
on the grounds that WTO agreements do give priority to health and
safety over trade.
At
the same time, the agreements are also designed to prevent governments
setting regulations arbitrarily in a way that discriminates against
foreign goods and services. Safety regulations must not be
protectionism in disguise.
They
must be based on scientific evidence or on internationally recognized
standards.
Again,
the WTO does not set the standards itself. In some cases other
international agreements are identified in the WTO’s agreements. One
example is Codex Alimentarius, which sets recommended standards for
food safety and comes under the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
and World Health Organization (WHO).
But
there is no compulsion to comply even with internationally negotiated
standards such as those of Codex Alimentarius. Governments are free to
set their own standards provided they are consistent in the way they
try to avoid risks over the full range of products, are not arbitrary,
and do not discriminate.
< Previous
10
Misunderstandings menu
Next >
|
