Introduction

I will start from the two basic points I made last year when I was awarded, together with a well known human rights (HR) activist Desmond Tutu, a doctorat honoris cause from Geneva University : contrary to what used to be conventional wisdom, trade and human rights go hand in hand, although progress still needs to be made to ensure better coherence between principles and realities.

  

1 Trade and HR go hand in hand

This is true whether one looks at the matter in theory or in practice (i.e. if one looks at the underlying normative principles and and goals, or at the practical implications of each system) as recognized by the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of HR, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and more precisely by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Political Rights (ratified by 116/153 WTO members). DICCP Rights ICESPR.

“normative” approach ( principles)

• similar principles: trade implies human interaction, respect and understanding. HR & trade rules are based on the same values : individual freedom and responsibility, non discrimination, transparency, welfare.

• international law: international obligations subscribed to by countries must be simultaneously respected, whether in trade or HR (Vienna Convention).

• general recognition in trade law : objective of WTO = raise standards of living, ensure full employment and sustainable development 5PREAMLE° + various exceptions to WTO members general obligations (art XX GATT, TBT, SPS).

• in order to ensure right to health, cf also 2005 amendments TRIPS for access to low cost medicines for poor countries.

• confirmed by case law DSM WTO (WTO agreements not to be interpreted in “clinical isolation” from international law).

• purpose of DDA is to rebalance some of existing rules in a “pro development way” thus heading to better recognition of “right to development”.

The practical perspective ( realities)

• trade opening leads to growth, development, poverty reduction, hence trade ensures concrete realisation of HR (cf speech UNGA A/s MDGs).

• ex right to food : proper balance between availability and affordability, between benefits of open trade and specificities of agricultural production. Right to food is neither self-sufficiency, nor unfettered global competition between different modes of production (importance of protection) livelihood farming / link with women's rights. Bangladesh needs more international ag trade to help reduce poverty.

• WTO system has contained protectionist pressures during the crisis helps shelter poorer populations. So, in a way, trade can be transmission belt between HR principles and practice. HR theory and HR reality.

Does not mean that no tension / automatic. What remains true is an “enforcement imbalance” = WTO obligations enforcement system is strong (non-compliance can lead to painful trade sanctions). Much less in HR. But issue lies with coherence, of sovereign states in the international system.

2 How can coherence between principles and realities of HR be improved ?

Clear that gap remains between principles and realities. Many still have no real access to HR in practice. How to do better ?

part of the answer lies in the international system

• build more explicit legal bridges between specialised fora — Declustering and avoiding clinical isolation of systems : experience debate in WTO on core labour standards (social rights). Disagreement : WTO deals with trade, ILO with social standards.

• more cooperation between IOs : WTO/ILO, UNEP, FAO, WHO, WIPO, WB. Ex A4T. Limits without explicit mandate which members have only recognised for WTO with B Woods IFIs. Transparency relates to. HR related issues growing in WTO annual public forum.

• better surveillance / monitoring / reviews of countries obligations : TPRs, Universal periodic review, HR Council reviews. Mixing ? very sensitive with our members. Crossed observerships.

• if no multilateral agreement : bilateral . Ex US/EU/CND/NORW GSPs with HR conditionalities, hence premiums (preferences) which can be removed (Myanmar, Belarus, Sri Lanka, Sudan). Not raised as such yet in DSM.

most part of the answer remains with domestic systems/ politics

• coherence starts at home. In the hands of sovereign countries. Policy coherence in their domestic system. Trade & economic openness do not contradict necessity to regulate or redistribute.

• main issue : relevant “coherence accountability fora”.

  • international (cf + haut=)

  • national : NGOs trade union, political parties

 

Conclusion

Relationship between HR and trade is a clear case where global responsibility (“responsible sovereignty”) has to be subject to accountability, which is a well known issue in global governance.