Why did the WTO rule against the US measure for protecting an endangered species?
Many have failed to recognise the importance of the Appellate Body s ruling in the so-called shrimp/turtle case. The ruling recognised that under WTO rules governments have every right to protect human, animal or plant life and health and to take measures to conserve exhaustible resources. Again, the US lost the case because it discriminated. It provided countries in the western hemisphere mainly in the Caribbean technical and financial assistance and longer transition periods for their fishermen to start using turtle-excluder devices (TEDs). It did not give the same advantages, however, to the four Southeast Asian countries (India, Malaysia, Pakistan and Thailand) that filed the complaint with the WTO. This was a violation of the most-favoured nation principle treating one s trading partners equally.
