Ask an Expert: World Trade Organization

The WTO recognizes Codex, IPPC, and OIE for standard setting with respect to food safety, and plant and animal health. The subject matters and responsibilities covered by these processes or organizations has some overlaps with the scope of Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. In that regard, how does the WTO consider standards developed and adopted by multilateral environmental agreements such as the Protocol on Biosafety?  Would you recommend harmonised biosafety standards across these global conventions to facilitate national and regional biosafety issues?

The SPS Agreement, which explictly recognizes the standards of the Codex for food safety, OIE for animal health and zoonoses, and IPPC for plant protection, was negotiated between 1988 and 1994.  This was well prior to the existence of the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol. 

In addition to identifying the Codex, IPPC and OIE as relevant international standard setting bodies, the SPS Agreement states:
"for matters not covered by the above organizations, appropriate standards, guidelines and recommendations promulated by other relevant international organizations open for membership to all Members, as identified by the Committee".  (Paragraph 3(d), Annex A)
However, to date no WTO Member has suggested in the SPS Committee that there is a need to identify another international organization as relevant for this purpose.  In addition, only "countries" may be members of many international organizations, unlike the WTO whose Members include some customs territories that are not recognized as "states" by the United Nations.

In the GMO dispute case, the WTO dispute settlement panel examined the applicability of the Cartagena Protocol.  According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a treaty (such as the WTO agreements) can be interpreted only in the light of other rules of international law which are applicable to all the parties in the treaty being interpreted.  Since the US was not a signatory to the Biosafety Protocol, the GMO Panel could choose to take it into consideration in interpreting the SPS Agreement, but was not required to do so.

What is probably most important is to ensure that the standards and recommendations developed by Codex, IPPC and OIE do not contradict the work being done under the Biosafety Protocol, and if possible, complement this work.  That already seems to be the case, especially in terms of the close liaison between the IPPC and the CBD on living modified plant species, the most common types of LMOs.  This collaborative relationship could be strengthened if WTO Members would agree to invite the CBD secretariat as an observer status to the SPS Committee, which unfortunately has not yet been the case.