The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), in 1947, was a simple agreement designed to reduce and bind (not increase) customs tariffs (border taxes). In the four decades that followed, the GATT became the spearhead for international trade liberalization, through its negotiations to reduce tariffs. Today the scope of the GATT has expanded dramatically, bringing in agriculture and services for the first time, and - finally - creating the new and powerful World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995. The WTO is the successor to GATT. While the WTO is still young, the multilateral trading system that was originally set up under GATT, is already 50 years old.

WTO agreements, for example SPS, TRIPS and TBT, allow members to be part of a non-discriminatory trading system, which guarantees that exports will be treated fairly and consistently in other countries' markets. In return, each country must promise to do the same for imports into its own market. If a country thinks their rights under WTO are being abused, the WTO encourages differences to be settled though negotiations. However, if no settlement can be made, issues are brought to a panel of specially appointed independent experts who base conclusions on interpretations of the agreements and individual countries' commitments

Today the WTO is comprised of 140 member countries. The WTO's top-level decision-making body is the Ministerial Conference, which meets at least once every two years. Below this is the General Council (normally ambassadors and heads of delegation in Geneva, but sometimes officials sent from members' capitals), which meets several times a year in the Geneva headquarters. The WTO is very influential in world affairs. Unfortunately, it has been suggested that several of the agreements concluded during the Uruguay Round show bias towards developed countries and multinational companies. Therefore, small net-exporting countries need to, first, be aware of developing WTO agreements, and second, know how to protest or support agreements in order to avoid losing essential buyers in the world market.

Why had an agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures not been discussed before under GATT?

In fact, since 1948, national food safety, animal and plant health measures which affect trade were subject to GATT rules. Article I of the GATT, the most-favored nation clause, required non-discriminatory treatment of imported products from different foreign suppliers, and Article III required that such products be treated no less favorably than domestically produced goods with respect to any laws or requirements affecting their sale. This provision allowed countries to take measures "necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health," as long as these did not unjustifiably discriminate between countries where the same conditions prevailed and were not used disguise to restrict trade.

Later in 1979, under a an Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), sanitary and phytosanitary measures were covered under the technical requirements resulting from food safety and animal and plant health measures, including pesticide residue limits, inspection requirements and labeling. The TBT also laid out the guidelines for settling trade disputes arising form the use of food safety and other technical restrictions.

If there were already provision about sanitary and phytosanitary measures why was there a need for a specific Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures?

Basically, the SPS agreement sets clearer, more detailed rights and obligations for food safety and animal and plant health measures which affect trade. The agreement gives more flexibility to individual countries to set and enforce safety requirements that are crucial to protecting human, animal or plant health, on the basis of scientific information. In addition, the agreement requires an obligation from every nation for non-discrimination, advance notification of proposed measures and the creation of information offices ("Enquiry Points"). It is with the hope that these measures would promote transparency in international food and commodities trade.

How has the SPS Agreement affected Thailand to date?

Tuna in the Middle East

• Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries, including Saudi Arabia, prohibit all GM foods. Therefore, they are prohibiting Thai canned tuna imports with soybean oil because of their belief that the oil is made from genetically modified beans. Thailand has protested this claim and urged these nations to accept certificates from Thai producers asserting that their food products are GM-free. However, to date Egypt refuses to change their ban in imports of Thai tuna. Thailand has requested WTO talks with Egypt on September 22, 2000. Saudi Arabia is not a member of the WTO and is not subject to its dispute settlement proceedings.

Rice in Mexico

• Thailand welcomed the recent change in Mexico's restrictions on Thai rice. In 1994 Mexico placed a ban on Thai rice after they claimed of finding a form of beetle in rice imports from Thailand. Thailand, however, appealed against the ban to the WTO. Under WTO discussions, Mexico admitted that there was no beetle found in Thai rice. However, Mexico claimed that instead of the beetle, Thai rice was, in fact, contaminated with fungus. After some time, Mexico once again admitted that fungus was a false claim. However, Thailand questions why certain conditions still seem to discriminate against Thai rice, for example, certification and fumigation at port of entry).

Durians in Australia

• After discovering "durian seed borers", Australia placed a ban under the SPS agreement on all durian imports originating from Thailand. In 2000 Australia lifted the ban, however, restrictions still apply to durian imports. Durian from Thailand may only be imported between the months of April to December because during these are the months in which the pest will not survive in Australia. Furthermore, the imported Durian may only originate from the eastern region of Thailand. Thailand has stated its disapproval of the restraint, however, there have been no changes to the import terms as to date.

For questions or comments contact us or Ask Sally