Implications of WTO Law for Plain Packaging of Tobacco Products (original) (raw)
Related papers
The FCTC and its role in WTO law: Some remarks on the WTO plain packaging report
European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2018
The objective of this paper is to provide a concise summary of the most important findings of the WTO panel in the plain packaging dispute and to offer some initial comments on one specific problem, ie the approach of the panel to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and its guidelines. In this context, the paper discusses two interrelated issues that were dealt with by the panel: (i) the possibility of classifying the FCTC guidelines as international standards; and (ii) the broader relevance of the FCTC and its guidelines in the context of WTO law.
A. Ziegler, P. Hilpold, P. Mavroidis, S. Schneider (eds.), Reflections on the Constitutionalisation of International Economic Law - Liber Amicorum Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2014
This chapter is structured as follows: the first section briefly introduces the current regulatory practice in tobacco control. The second section turns to WTO rules and analyses their impact on domestic measures addressing the problem of tobacco use. This discussion refers to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). This section also identifies some tensions that may exist between antitobacco policies and international trade obligations. The last section makes some tentative observations on how to reconcile the free trade paradigm embodied in the WTO with the need to ensure regulatory space for Members when adopting tobacco-related measures.
Melbourne Journal of International Law, 2013
In the Tokyo Round of the 1970s, as industrialised countries started to eliminate tariffs, negotiators began to focus on the barriers that would emerge after tariffs were gone. The concern was that barriers to trade caused by the use of behind-the-border regulations could offset, or at least significantly undermine, the market access gained from negotiated tariff reductions. To tackle the problems of protectionist non-tariff barriers, they negotiated the plurilateral Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade ('TBT Agreement' or 'TBT'). The Uruguay Round later refined the text of the TBT Agreement and incorporated it in a World Trade Organization agreement that would be binding on and enforceable against all WTO members.
The TBT Agreement and Tobacco Control Regulations
Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy, 2013
The article analyses reports issued by the panel and the Appellate Body in the US – Measures Affecting the Productions and Sale of Clove Cigarettes dispute and attempts to assess their broader consequences for national tobacco control policies. Both reports are particularly important because they clarify the limits existing under WTO law, in particular the TBT Agreement, in this policy space. In this context, the article investigates whether the WTO dispute settlement bodies interpreted relevant rules of the TBT Agreement in a manner that provides countries with sufficient regulatory autonomy while ensuring at the same time that their technical measures do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade. It also examines the potential impact of standards established in these reports on other tobacco control measures that are either currently discussed in the TBT Committee (e.g., Canadian and Brazilian restrictions on the content of cigarettes) or already challenged in the formal WTO dispute settlement process (i.e. Australian plain packaging law).
WTO Case Law on TBT and SPS: It Is Time to Review Some Concepts
2018
Import tariffs are at the lowest level in history. Consequently, nontariff measures to trade are on the rise, and many of them have been pointed out as “protectionist measures in disguise” for promoting nontrade interests such as human, animal, or plant life and/or health and the environment, which makes them a very effective tool for creating regulatory barriers to trade. First, we will address the basic concepts enshrined in the WTO agreements on TBT and SPS that have been examined by the Panel and the Appellate Body on the MFN and national treatment principles. Second, we will review the WTO case law on the test of necessity, process and production methods (PPMs), and the concept of when measures are obstacles to international trade. Finally, we will address the work of the WTO committees on TBT and SPS agreements, which have become an important forum to discuss such measures between Members, having relevant conciliatory activity, which impacts the number of disputes in the WTO.
Entangled Relationship between Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement and Certain Other WTO Provisions
Article 2.1 (only the part containing the national treatment obligation) of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) has been interpreted and applied for the first time in three recent TBT disputes since the establishment of the World Trade Organization. This article will illustrate that the interpretive approach adopted by the Appellate Body, however, created a complicated relationship between TBT Article 2.1 and other WTO provisions. It created an irreconcilable interpretive conflict between TBT Article 2.1 and GATT Article III:4. It also introduced one same key test in the analysis of TBT Article 2.1 and 2.2 under a certain condition while they contain two different obligations. Finally, it sent out a confusing message concerning the applicability of GATT Article XX to TBT Article 2.1. * Associate Professor,
World Trade Review, 2013
Following years of silence, the WTO Appellate Body (AB) issued almost simultaneously three reports dealing with issues coming under the aegis of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). The three Panel reports were hard to reconcile, and this feature in and of itself made the task of the AB quite onerous. Some progress has been made and some clarifications have been introduced, but overall the AB has yet to come to grips with a coherent approach regarding the understanding of the TBT Agreement. The main argument in this paper is that the AB, in designing its test for consistency with the TBT Agreement, did not do any different than it would have done had no TBT Agreement existed. It is, nevertheless, response to the question ‘what has the TBT added to the pre-existing legislative arsenal’ that should point to the elements that must be included in developing a test of consistency against which disputes coming under the aegis of the TBT Agreement should be discussed. Th...
Tobacco and international trade: recent activities of the FCTC Conference of the Parties
Journal of World Trade, 2015
The article analyzes three recent proposals made by the State-Parties to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which appears to be relevant for determining the relationship between trade and health rules in the area of tobacco control. In this context, it attempts to answer the following questions: (i) what is the legal status of decisions made by the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the FCTC?; (ii) how does a COP decision (or any applicable provision of the FCTC) affect the mandate of WTO dispute settlement bodies to hear and decide WTO cases?; and (iii) to what extent can a COP decision (or any applicable provision of the Convention) require FCTC State-Parties to exclude tobacco and tobacco products from their future preferential trade agreements (PTAs). The article comes to the conclusion that COP decisions lack of any binding character, while provisions of the Convention do not affect the jurisdiction of WTO panels to hear complaints concerning potential violations of WTO law nor require carving out tobacco products from PTAs.