Reconciling Trade And Environment Within GATT’s Article XX

Anjitha Unnithan, LLM, Christ Deemed To Be University, Bangalore

ABSTRACT

The relation between trade and environment has stood as an important challenge in global economic governance for decades. Analysing how the World Trade Organization handles conflicts between the objectives of trade liberalization and environmental protection makes this problem particularly clear. Article XX of the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, 1994, is a crucial legal instrument that has been essential in helping to unravel this puzzle. The broad exclusions from member countries' trade commitments are covered under Article XX. But finding a balance between trade- and non- trade-related concerns is frequently difficult. The scenario emerging from an assessment of the GATT jurisprudence demonstrates the inclination of the DSB and Appellate Body towards deviations from the general GATT obligations of members as long as they justify their inconsistent measures under GATT Article XX. It suggests that governments should work to enact laws that are not only consistent with their legal policies but also arbitrarily non-discriminatory in the eyes of world trade. Environmental sustainability and protection is one such policy issue that has been at the centre of discussion and dialogue in GATT law and is addressed in paragraphs (b) and (g) of Article XX, which concentrate on the health of people, plants, and animals and exhaustible natural resources, respectively. States must take GATT-incompatible measures if they are essential to safeguard the health of people, plants, and animals, according to Article XX (b). As opposed to this, Article XX (g) only requires member countries to demonstrate that their GATT-inconsistent practices are only "related" to the conservation of finite natural resources. These standards are in place to give member states a legitimate basis for temporary justification, preventing them from unilaterally waiving their trade duties under the pretence of environmental preservation. Given this, there is a rising pattern in which the distinction between appropriate actions and protectionist ones is muddled. This tendency is largely made feasible by the ambiguity in the "necessity" and "reliability" requirements under Paragraphs (b) and (g), respectively. Furthermore, it is unclear if these exclusions genuinely embody the spirit of environmental sustainability given the ambiguity and variation in the standard of evidence. This research is being done to determine if the two tests are enough to strike a balance between environment and trade in light of such gaps and uncertainty. This paper analysis the effectiveness of these two provisions of law in addressing environmental concerns within the framework of the GATT, 1994.

Keywords: Free Trade, Environmental Protection, Trade And Environment Divide.