WTO Members Consider Canadian request for
Panel Review of Chinese Canola Seed Measures
·
DS589:
China — Measures Concerning the Importation of Canola Seed from Canada
·
DS217, 234:
United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (CDSOA)
·
DS316:
European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures affecting trade in
large civil aircraft: Implementation of the recommendations adopted by the DSB
·
Appellate
Body appointments
·
Surveillance
of implementation
At
a meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) on 28 June, WTO members considered
a request from Canada for the establishment of a WTO dispute panel to examine measures
in China affecting the import of canola seed from Canada.
Canada
submitted its first request for the establishment of a dispute panel to examine
two sets of measures affecting the importation of canola seed from Canada: measures
suspending the importation of canola seed from two Canadian companies; and measures
applying enhanced inspections to canola seed imports from other Canadian companies. Canada requested consultations with China on the
matter in September 2019; Canada said that the consultations took place on 28 October
2019 but failed to settle the dispute.
Canada
said China alleges repeated detection of quarantine pests in shipments from the
two Canadian companies as the basis for the suspensions. It noted that Canada is
the only country that has seen the imposition of suspensions and enhanced import
procedures for canola seed on its exporters. Canada has been seeking to work with
China to restore full market access for Canadian canola seed and to determine the
scientific basis for China’s measures. These efforts, which included many letters
to the responsible Chinese customs authority and discussions held at various levels,
have failed to produce any meaningful results, Canada said. As China is an important
export market for Canadian canola seed, China’s restrictive measures continue to
have a serious, negative impact on Canadian producers.
China
said it regrets Canada's request and said it was not in a position to accept the
establishment of a panel. The measures were
imposed to the extent necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health
and in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner, China said. China has kept in
close contact with relevant Canadian authorities on the matter and has responded
to requests for information both during and after the consultations. China said
it believes it is premature to establish a panel for this dispute and that it is
willing to continue engagement with Canada on the matter.
The DSB
agreed to revert to the matter at a future meeting if requested by a member.
The European
Union reiterated its request that the United States cease transferring anti-dumping
and countervailing duties to the US domestic industry, arguing that every such disbursement
was a clear act of non-compliance with the rulings on this matter. For the item
to be considered resolved and removed from DSB surveillance, the United States must
stop fully transferring collected duties, the EU said.
The United
States said it has taken all actions necessary to implement the ruling and that,
once a member has said it has complied with a ruling, that member should no longer
be required to submit status reports on implementation. The US said the EU was not asking other WTO members
to submit status reports where these members have said they achieved compliance
with the rulings in question.
The EU
countered that the cases cited by the US were different from the CDSOA dispute,
where the US was continuing to make disbursements of duties collected to US firms
and where the WTO has authorized the EU and other members to impose retaliatory
measures against the US for its non-compliance with the ruling.
Canada
thanked the EU for continuing to put this item on the DSB agenda, arguing that as
long as the US continues to make such disbursements, the US will be in breach of
its WTO commitments.
The United
States said it placed this item on the agenda of the DSB meeting to highlight that
the EU has once again not provided WTO members with a status report concerning the
dispute.
The United
States noted that on 15 June, the US and the EU reached an “Understanding
on a cooperative framework for Large Civil Aircraft” which,
among other things, suspends the retaliatory tariffs related to this dispute for
five years, sets clear principles that any financing for the production or development
of large civil aircraft will be on market terms, and commits the two sides to joint
collaboration to address non-market practices in this sector. As part of this significant effort to enhance
cooperation, the United States said it intends to discuss its concerns relating
to outstanding EU support measures with the EU bilaterally. Given this, the US said it was therefore puzzled
to see the European Union inscribe the preceding agenda item regarding the CDSOA
dispute and call for a US status report while not submitting an EU status report
for DS316.
The European
Union said it welcomed the fact that the parties in this dispute have now reached
an understanding on a cooperative framework for large civil aircraft, and that this
has allowed the parties to suspend their respective retaliation measures.
Regarding
the legal debate the two sides are having about the proper interpretation of rules
related to the submission of implementation status reports, the EU said it continued
to believe that whether a party has an obligation to provide a status support or
not depends on which stage the proceedings are in; in the case of DS316, the EU
has filed an appeal against a compliance panel ruling on its implementation efforts,
and that appeal is still pending. Whether
or not the matter is resolved is the very subject matter of this ongoing litigation;
thus, the EU considers that in these circumstances it is not required to submit
an implementation status report to the DSB.
The EU
said it hopes that the understanding on a cooperative framework for large civil
aircraft will allow the parties to resolve their disagreements, including in relation
to the provision of status reports to the DSB.
Mexico,
speaking on behalf of 121 members, once again introduced the group's proposal to
start the selection processes for filling vacancies on the Appellate Body. The extensive number of members submitting the
proposal reflects a common concern over the current situation in the Appellate Body
that is seriously affecting the overall WTO dispute settlement system against the
best interest of members, Mexico said for the group.
Nearly
20 members took the floor to reiterate the importance of resolving the impasse over
the appointment of new members as soon as possible and re-establishing a functioning
Appellate Body. Many of the delegations described
a two-tier dispute settlement system, with a panel and appeals stage, as a core
part of the multilateral trading system. Several pointed to the WTO's upcoming 12th Ministerial Conference as an
opportunity for progress on the issue.
The United
States said it was not in a position to support the proposed decision. The US continues to have systemic concerns with
the Appellate Body, which it has explained and raised over the past 16 years and
across multiple administrations. The US said
it believes that WTO members must undertake fundamental reform if the system is
to remain viable and credible, and that it looked forward to further discussions
with members on those concerns and to constructive engagement at the appropriate
time.
For the
121 members, Mexico came back to say that the fact a member may have concerns about
certain aspects of the functioning of the Appellate Body cannot serve as pretext
to impair and disrupt the work of dispute settlement. It said there was no legal
justification for the current blocking of the selection processes, which is causing
concrete nullification and impairment of rights for many members.
The chair
of the DSB, Ambassador Didier Chambovey of Switzerland,
concluded by noting that the situation of the Appellate Body requires political
commitment on behalf of all members of the WTO. He expressed hope that members will be able to
find a solution to this matter as soon as possible.
The United
States presented status reports with regard to DS184, "US
— Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan", DS160, "United
States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act", DS464, "United
States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from
Korea", and DS471,"United
States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings
Involving China."
The European
Union presented a status report with regard to DS291, "EC
— Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products."
Indonesia
presented its status reports in DS477 and
DS478, "Indonesia
— Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal Products."