The Study Of Application Of Article XX Of The GATT 1994 In The Case Of "EC-seal Products "

The case of “EC-seal products”, which is a trade dispute caused by animal measures taken by EU, has attracted more and more attention due to the non-trade concerns related to animal welfare and application of Article XX of GATT 1994. In recent years, the public of EU and some animal welfare protection organizations strongly condemned the seal hunting by inhuman means, and also called for a ban on inhumanly killing seal. As the respondent of the case, The EU established a legal regime for seal products trade, generally banning the import and sale of seal product except for three narrow exceptions, in response to the EU public’s concern to seal welfare. As the complainant in the case, Canada and Norway argued the EU Seal Regime violated Article 1.1 and Article 3.4 of GATT 1994.The EU justified the measure under Article XX(a) and Article XX(b) of GATT 1994. The panel and the Appellate Body found the measure taken by the EU violate Article 1.1 and Article 3.4 of GATT 1994, so it is key for the EU to victory or defeat that whether animal welfare measure taken by the EU is justified under Article XX of GATT 1944, and it also may have an important impact on the policy choice of the other members’ animal welfare measures.This article aims to analysis of the case of “EC-Seal Products”, combined with previous WTO cases related to animal welfare, investigating Whether animal welfare measures taken by the EU meets the requirements of Article XX of GATT 1994. On the basis, studying the standards and rules of evidence of Article XX of GATT 1994 by Appellate Body, we hope that it could provide for reference for China in WTO trade disputes. This article includes five parts: The first part briefly reviews the main course of the seal-products dispute, the panel and Appellate Body’s ruling and a brief analysis of the focus of controversy in this case, in order to pave the way for the following analysis about application of Article XX of GATT 1994; The second part analyze whether the challenged measures are in line with the requirements of Article XX(a) of GATT 1994, and concerns the definition of "public morals" and the necessity for the protection of public morals issue of EU measures; The third part focuses on whether the challenged measure meets the requirements of Article XX(b) of GATT 1994, and discusses the Article XX of GATT 1994 of extraterritorial jurisdictional issues; the fourth part concerns primarily whether the challenged measures meet preface of Article XX of GATT 1994, mainly focusing on the "arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination"; and finally, the fifth part of the article make a few suggestion about how to make better use of the GATT 1994 to fight for the best interests of our country in international trade.