The Use of Public Morals Exception for Animal Welfare in the WTO: EC-Seal Products
Article Sidebar
Published:
Jun 28, 2017
Keywords:
World Trade Organization (WTO) Animal Welfare Public Morals EC-Seal Products
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article focuses on the interpretation and application of the GATT public morals exception to reconcile the conflict between trade and animal welfare. By examining public morals jurisprudence of the WTO, it aims to study the WTO’s evolving interpretation of Article XX, general exceptions, to accommodate animal welfare concerns. The recent EC-Seal Products decision will be comprehensively analyzed to assess the progress and possible implications for the future. Also, this article argues that neither trade nor animal welfare should be disregarded. The outcome of the decision shows that the WTO is ready to recognize a new value under public morals exception, but sovereign regulatory autonomy may be restricted through the chapeau interpretation. Therefore, it is the work of the dispute settlement body to appropriately balance these competing interests although it was established to resolve trade disputes.
Article Details
How to Cite
Sutthent, Phakanadh. “The Use of Public Morals Exception for Animal Welfare in the WTO: EC-Seal Products”. Naresuan University Law Journal 10, no. 1 (June 28, 2017): 97–114. Accessed November 23, 2024. https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/lawnujournal/article/view/98672.
Section
Academic Articles
References
Bossche, Peter Van Den, and Werner Zdouc. The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization: Text, Cases and Materials. 3rd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
CBC News. “Eu Seal Products Ban Upheld in Wto Appeal.” Last modified May 22, 2014. Accessed January 20, 2015. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/eu-seal-product-ban-upheld-in-wto-appeal-1.2650791.
Conconi, Paola, and Tana Voon. “Ec-Seal Products: The Tension between Public Morals and International Trade Agreement.” World Trade Review 15, no. 2 (2016): 211, 217.
Cook, Kate, and David Bowles. “Growing Pains: The Developing Relationship of Animal Welfare Standards and the World Trade Rules.” Last modified 2012, Accessed April 1, 2015. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/november/tradoc_ 150113.pdf.
Feddersen, Christoph T. “Ec Environmental Legislation and Wto Rules.” European Environmental Law Review 7, no. 6 (1998): 207, 210.
Fitzgerald, Peter L. “Morality May Not Be Enough to Justify the Eu Seal Products Ban: Animal Welfare Meets International Trade Law.” Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 14, no. 85 (2011): 89-90.
Howse, Robert, and Joanna Langille. “Permitting Pluralism: The Seal Products Dispute Ad Why the Wto Should Accept Trade Restriction Justified by Noninstrumental Moral Values.” Yale Journal of International Law 37, no. 2 (2012): 367, 380.
Howse, Robert, Joanna Langille, and Katie Sykes. “Pluralism in Practice: Moral Legislation and the Law of the Wto after Seal Products.” George Washington International Law Review 48 (2015): 81, 109.
International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). “WTO Appellate Body Deems Eu Seal Ban ‘Justified’, Implementation Flawed.” Last modified May 27, 2014. Accessed March 15, 2015.
https://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/biores/news/wto-appellate-body-deems-eu-seal-ban-%E2%80%9Cjustified% E2%80%9D-implementation-flawed.
Jakobsson, Katarina. “The Dilemma of Moral Exception in the WTO.” Independent Thesis Advanced Level Master’s thesis, Stockholm University, 2013.
Mavroidis, Petros C. “Sealed with a Doubt: Eu, Seal and the WTO.” European Journal of Risk Regulation 6, no. 3 (2015): 388.
Qin, Julia Y. “Accommodating Divergent Policy Objectives under WTO Law: Reflections on Ec-Seal Products.” American Society of International Law (2015). Last modified June 25, 2015. Accessed April, 20, 2015. https://www.asil.org/blogs/accommodating- divergent-policy-objectives-under-wto-law-reflections-ec%E2%80%94seal-products.
Shaffer, Gregory, and David Pabian. “The WTO Seal Products Decision: Animal Welfare, Indigenous Communities and Trade.” American Journal of International Law 190 (2015): 154, 156.
Sykes, Katie. “Sealing Animal Welfare into the Gatt Exceptions: The International Dimension of Animal Welfare in WTO Disputes.” World Trade Review 13, no. 3 (2014): 471, 475.
Vedder, Anton. The WTO and Concerns Regarding Animals and Nature. Edited by Anton Vedder. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2003.
Wagman, Bruce A., and Matthew Liebman. A Worldview of Animal Law. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2011.
Wilkins, David B. Animal Welfare in Europe: European Legislation and Concerns. London: Kluwer Law International, 1997.
Wu, Mark. “Free Trade and the Protection of Public Morals: An Analysis of the Newly Emerging Public Morals Clause Doctrine.” Yale Journal of International Law 33, no. 6 (2008): 215, 235.
CBC News. “Eu Seal Products Ban Upheld in Wto Appeal.” Last modified May 22, 2014. Accessed January 20, 2015. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/eu-seal-product-ban-upheld-in-wto-appeal-1.2650791.
Conconi, Paola, and Tana Voon. “Ec-Seal Products: The Tension between Public Morals and International Trade Agreement.” World Trade Review 15, no. 2 (2016): 211, 217.
Cook, Kate, and David Bowles. “Growing Pains: The Developing Relationship of Animal Welfare Standards and the World Trade Rules.” Last modified 2012, Accessed April 1, 2015. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/november/tradoc_ 150113.pdf.
Feddersen, Christoph T. “Ec Environmental Legislation and Wto Rules.” European Environmental Law Review 7, no. 6 (1998): 207, 210.
Fitzgerald, Peter L. “Morality May Not Be Enough to Justify the Eu Seal Products Ban: Animal Welfare Meets International Trade Law.” Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 14, no. 85 (2011): 89-90.
Howse, Robert, and Joanna Langille. “Permitting Pluralism: The Seal Products Dispute Ad Why the Wto Should Accept Trade Restriction Justified by Noninstrumental Moral Values.” Yale Journal of International Law 37, no. 2 (2012): 367, 380.
Howse, Robert, Joanna Langille, and Katie Sykes. “Pluralism in Practice: Moral Legislation and the Law of the Wto after Seal Products.” George Washington International Law Review 48 (2015): 81, 109.
International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). “WTO Appellate Body Deems Eu Seal Ban ‘Justified’, Implementation Flawed.” Last modified May 27, 2014. Accessed March 15, 2015.
https://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/biores/news/wto-appellate-body-deems-eu-seal-ban-%E2%80%9Cjustified% E2%80%9D-implementation-flawed.
Jakobsson, Katarina. “The Dilemma of Moral Exception in the WTO.” Independent Thesis Advanced Level Master’s thesis, Stockholm University, 2013.
Mavroidis, Petros C. “Sealed with a Doubt: Eu, Seal and the WTO.” European Journal of Risk Regulation 6, no. 3 (2015): 388.
Qin, Julia Y. “Accommodating Divergent Policy Objectives under WTO Law: Reflections on Ec-Seal Products.” American Society of International Law (2015). Last modified June 25, 2015. Accessed April, 20, 2015. https://www.asil.org/blogs/accommodating- divergent-policy-objectives-under-wto-law-reflections-ec%E2%80%94seal-products.
Shaffer, Gregory, and David Pabian. “The WTO Seal Products Decision: Animal Welfare, Indigenous Communities and Trade.” American Journal of International Law 190 (2015): 154, 156.
Sykes, Katie. “Sealing Animal Welfare into the Gatt Exceptions: The International Dimension of Animal Welfare in WTO Disputes.” World Trade Review 13, no. 3 (2014): 471, 475.
Vedder, Anton. The WTO and Concerns Regarding Animals and Nature. Edited by Anton Vedder. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2003.
Wagman, Bruce A., and Matthew Liebman. A Worldview of Animal Law. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2011.
Wilkins, David B. Animal Welfare in Europe: European Legislation and Concerns. London: Kluwer Law International, 1997.
Wu, Mark. “Free Trade and the Protection of Public Morals: An Analysis of the Newly Emerging Public Morals Clause Doctrine.” Yale Journal of International Law 33, no. 6 (2008): 215, 235.