United States V.India-measures Concerning The Importation Of Certain Agricultural Products Under The WTO Framework

With develop rapidly of the world economy,global trade relations have become increasingly close,and the health risks caused by international trade have also intensified.The sanitary and phytosanitary measures(SPS measures)implemented by countries in order to protect the health of the country achieve the goal of health protection on the one hand and advocate the liberalization of international trade on the other hand,and it has a great negative impact on international agricultural trade.In particular,to protect the domestic agricultural market for animal and plant products,some countries use sanitary and phytosanitary inspection and quarantine systems,which are highly concealed non-tariff barriers to block foreign animal and plant products and has become a new means of trade protection.In this way,the contradiction between the idea of trade liberalization and SPS measures is an impediment to international trade,whose aim is to seek a balance between the national sovereign interest of the health protection of WTO members and the benefits of international trade under open systems.In general,to protect the health and safety of their people and domestic animals and plants,WTO Members' governments will set up quarantine requirements for animals' and plants' products and food.Traditionally,importing countries carry out risk analysis by exporting countries as a single geographical unit,and on this basis,SPS measures are implemented.We all know that the occurrence and transmission of pests and diseases is determined by the ecological and geographical environment,but not completely consistent with the territorial boundaries or administrative division of the country.The practice of the importing country is extremely unfavorable to countries that are vast and ecologically diverse(such as China),since an epidemic may break out only in parts of a country,but the importer has banned the import of food or related animal and plant products from all parts of the country.The SPS Agreement under the WTO Agreement is a multilateral agreement that specifically regulates SPS measures that impede the development of international trade,aimed at balancing the national interests of the State under the health protection of WTO members with the trade interests under the open system.Article 6 of the SPS Agreement "Adaptation to regional conditions,including pest-or disease-free areas and areas of low pest or disease prevalence” is intended to restrict the abuse of sanitary and phytosanitary measures by WTO Member States(hereinafter referred to as SPS measures)to damage to other Member States' interests,whose core ideas are to require the Member ensure that their SPS measures are adapted to the sanitary or phytosanitary characteristics of the area from which the product originated and to which the product is destined.This is a concrete manifestation of the "regional" management ideology in quarantine.This article uses an empirical analysis method to study the logical relationship between the three paragraphs of Article 6 of the SPS Agreement and the conclusions of the Panel and the Appeal Body on the article from the US v.India-Measures concerning the importation of certain agricultural products under the WTO agreement.And through the "regionalization" of the management thinking,combined with the status of regional management in China,to explore what methods and means that China can take in the same trade resistance to safeguard their legitimate trade interests.This article is divided into four chapters.The background of the case involving agricultural products in India,the dispute development process of the case,the focus of the disputes between the two parties,and the decision of the dispute resolution agency on this case can be found in the first part of the paper.The second part focuses on the Panel's process and conclusions of the case,including whether the AI measures in India are SPS measures and whether the AI measures adapted in India comply with Article 6.1 and Article 6.2 of the SPS Agreement.The third part is a comprehensive demonstration of the case by the Appellate Body and a review of the Panel's report.The fourth part mainly involves the revelation and coping strategies of China,such as building an accredited system for animal and plant diseases and opening the accreditation application in China,as well as establishing bilateral pest and disease mutual recognition systems with other WTO member countries.