Introduction

Abstract

In the autumn of 2006, a long-awaited verdict of the Dispute Panel at the World Trade Organization (WTO) was published. It concerned the divergent regulatory treatment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products thereof by the US and the EU. According to some analysts, the ruling constituted a resounding victory for the US and its allies because it found against the Europeans on all major issues and condemned their failure to conform to the 1995 WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. The Panel criticised the EU’s undue delay in approving genetically modified (GM) varieties (for import or cultivation) and the proliferation of national safeguard measures based on inadequate scientific risk assessments. Commentators also noted, however, that the Panel steered clear of the most controversial areas — such as the question of physical safety and the legality of labelling requirements — by focusing on procedural aspects and producing a relatively narrow legal opinion (Cheyne 2008). In many ways, the outcome thus mirrored a similar ruling in 1998 against the EU with regard to its ban on the use of beef hormones (rBST).