U.S., Canada and Argentina ask for WTO dispute settlement over EU's GMO policy

Food & Drink Weekly, August 25, 2003

The United States, along with Canada and Argentina, will secure the establishment of World Trade Organization dispute panels on August 29 in order to determine whether the European Union is violating global trade rules by blocking market authorization of biotech foods. The second request from the three countries for three separate panels has been inscribed on the agenda for a meeting of the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) scheduled for that day.

The first requests from the three were blocked at a DSB meeting on August 18; under WTO rules, the second requests must automatically be accepted unless all countries in attendance--including the complaining countries--block the move. The three countries complain that, since October 1998, the EU has imposed a de facto ban on the approval of biotech products, suspending consideration of applications for, or granting of, market authorization of biotech products under the EU approval system.

The three also complain that individual EU member states, in particular Austria, France, Greece, and Italy, have prohibited the importation and marketing of GM products, even though those products have already been approved for sale in the EU.

Also on the agenda for the Aug. 29 meeting are first requests from the United States and Australia for the establishment of WTO panels to rule on EU regulations for the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for food products. The two countries complain that Brussels discriminates between EU members and other countries in the protection of geographical indications and fails to provide sufficient protection to pre-existing trademarks that are similar or identical to a geographical indication.

Washington has hit out against provisions denying protection to geographical indications to countries that do not offer the same level of protection for such indications as that provided by the EU. The United States says the effect of this illegal "reciprocity" requirement is that well-known U.S. geographical names such as Idaho Potatoes and Florida Oranges are denied protection in the EU.

The complaints are seen as an effort by Washington and Canberra to embarrass Brussels, which has been pushing for talks on expanded global protection of geographical indications for food products as part of the current Doha Round negotiations. The United States and Australia strongly oppose the initiative, which is expected to mainly benefit the EU, which has an extensive list of food products currently offered protection under its geographical indication system.