Brussels, 23/05/2014 (Agence Europe) - On 23 May, the WTO's appellate body upheld the ruling of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body in the case pitting Canada and Norway against the EU on the EU's ban on seal products (DS 400 and DS 401). At the end of 2013, this verdict ruled against the two complainants and stated that the European ban was justified on grounds of animal welfare.
After a hearing last March, the WTO's appellate body thus repeated the decision of the special panel, which decided on 25 November that the European embargo breaches fair trade but that it can be justified on “moral grounds” related to animal welfare.
The EU ban, adopted in 2010, is based on the inhumane and cruel nature of seal culling. The EU challenges the use of a metal hook-tipped club, the hakapik, to bludgeon the seals before killing them. The law which is not to the liking of Ottawa and Oslo is Regulation 1007/2009/EC, which since 2010 has imposed a ban on the import or marketing of seal-based products. The only derogation to this regulation is the marketing of seal products from traditional hunting practices by indigenous communities for subsistence purposes.
On Thursday, “the WTO's appellate body upheld the panel's findings that the seal regime is necessary to protect public morals”, says the report on the decision, which runs to over 200 pages. This decision is now final.
“Overall, the Commission welcomes the decision which upholds the ban imposed in response to real concerns from EU citizens”, the European Commission immediately responded. “The WTO confirmed the EU's right to ban seal products on moral grounds related to animal welfare and the way the seals are killed. It did, however, criticise the way the exception for Inuit hunts has been designed and implemented”, the Commission added, saying that it will examine the findings on these exceptions to the ban and will consider options for their implementation.
The Canadian government criticised the arguments as political. “The EU embargo on seal products is only a political decision which is not founded on the facts and scientific data”, Canada's trade and fisheries ministers, Ed Fast and Gail Shea respectively, responded. “For Canada, seal hunting is a humane, sustainable and well-regulated activity that constitutes an important source of food and income for coastal and Inuit communities”, they added. The Norwegian government seemed to overlook the real significance of the decision. “We are satisfied that the appellate body has found that the EU decisions on trade in seal-derived products violate the fundamental WTO principles on non-discrimination”, said Norway's foreign minister, Boerge Brende, conceding that Norway had not won on all points (our translation).
The EU ban provides for exceptions on products hunted by indigenous peoples - the Inuits and Inuvialuits in Canada, the Kalaallits in Greenland, and the Inupiat and Yupik in Alaska and Russia. Canada and Norway criticised this exception as discrimination between indigenous and non-indigenous hunters, but the WTO refuses to comment on this point.
Canada and Norway also criticised the authorisation to sell products from hunting practised by Sweden, Finland and Estonia as part of their regulation programme for marine resources. On this issue, the WTO believed there was a breach of trade rules, but noted that these exceptions were being reformed by the EU. (EH)