The World Trade Organization stated: there is no evidence that the use of genetically modified food is dangerous to health; The restrictions ha

Precedent ruling: States are not allowed to limit the import of genetically modified food

concentration of sources

In a precedent ruling with worldwide implications, the World Trade Organization (WTO) accepted the position of the USA, Canada and Argentina, and determined that the restrictions imposed by the European Union on the import of genetically modified crops are illegal. The ruling was delivered to the parties and has not yet been officially published, but its content has been leaked. The organization, which regulates international trade, stated that there is no scientific evidence that the use of these products involves health risks, and that the restrictions are a discriminatory treatment.

The ruling refers to strict bans on the import of genetically modified food that were in force in the Union in 1998-2004; and on additional bans imposed by some of his countries, including Germany, France and Greece. In 2004, the Union replaced the import ban with the obligation to indicate on the product that it includes genetically modified crops. However, the US will be able to use the ruling to prevent other countries that limit the import of genetically modified products, such as India, Japan, Russia and third world countries, from defending themselves against the import of such products. The tribunals of the World Trade Organization operate in secret, and there is no appeal against them. A country that does not comply with them risks economic sanctions. Since it was established about a decade ago, the organization has provoked sharp criticism, that it is not democratic, and that it violates the sovereignty of the countries and the protection of the rights of their residents, workers and their environment for the interests of the corporations.

In Europe, it seems that the ruling will not force the Union to cancel the reporting obligation, but it may force Europe to ease the approval procedures for genetically modified products. Since the ban was lifted in 2004, only a few such products have come into use in Europe. According to the European Commission, it has already approved more than 30 products for marketing throughout the Union, but some governments limit the marketing of approved products in their field.

In Europe, they are calling for a reduction in the use of genetically modified seeds

European governments such as Germany and France, and environmental organizations such as Greenpeace International are calling for a reduction in the use of genetically modified seeds, arguing that the modified plants are dangerous to health and the environment, and the effects of their use cannot be predicted. The genetic changes these plants undergo are designed to protect them from pests, parasites and drought, features that should help farmers obtain stable grain. The US is responsible for about 55% of the use of genetically engineered seeds. In the European Union, they brought international conventions to which the Union is a signatory (but not the USA), which state that genetically modified food involves risk. The Union claimed that the protection of its citizens was not only its right, but its duty.

In the Union we noted that in any case the public opposition in Europe to genetically modified products resulted in a very limited use of these products. According to a survey conducted by the Union, more than half of the 450 million consumers in the European Union see a risk in using such food products. The US agricultural sector claims that the European restrictions caused the American corn exporters alone losses of hundreds of millions of dollars.

In the US, the reports on the ruling of the World Trade Organization were defined as a positive development. A senior member of the European Union claimed, on the other hand, that there was no boycott by the Union on the import of genetically modified products. "We are not talking about appealing the decision yet," said the senior, "it is only an interim report."