|
Archives | (October 2002)
Printer Friendly
DRUG RESEARCH A CORPORATE CON PART TWO (cont.)
------------------------------------------------------------------ Page 4 of 4 One of the most important elements of the WTO Agreement was the so-called “harmonization” rule. This rule required that all of the signatory nations revise their regulations so that they were in agreement or “harmonized.” If a country fails to comply with the “harmonization” rule it can be taken before the WTO Dispute Resolution Panel and forced to do so! If this all seems a little hard to believe, consider the following: The United States passed a law banning the importation of tuna that was caught in nets that also trapped dolphins. Mexican fishing companies that didn’t want to spend the money on new nets complained to the WTO and the matter went to a Dispute Resolution Panel – which ruled against the United States. The law was overturned. When the U.S. passed another rule aimed at protecting endangered sea turtles, Asian fishing firms complained to the WTO. Like their Mexican counterparts, they didn’t want to spend the money to upgrade their nets so sea turtles wouldn’t be accidentally snagged. Again, a Dispute Resolution Panel overturned the U.S. rule. In a third instance, foreign oil refiners complained to the WTO that they couldn’t comply with U.S. rules concerning air pollution rules that applied to gasoline. As with the other two cases, the Dispute Resolution Panel overturned the regulation, allowing foreign refiners to sell gasoline in the U.S. that polluted the air! And these are just a few examples! But that’s not all. The WTO Dispute Resolution Panels operate in complete secrecy – they are not open to the public or to attendance by interested third parties – and there is no appeal from their rulings! Also WTO rules require that neither the complaining nation nor the nation against which the complaint has been lodged have a representative on the tribunal deciding the case. In fact, the complaining nations have no role in the panel’s selection. Rather, the judges are selected by the WTO’s unelected bureaucrats in Geneva! With the potential for an outright ban facing the industry, you might think that even the huge multinational pharmaceutical firms might be concerned. After all, they manufacture around 60% of all vitamins sold. But as usual, surface appearances can be misleading. Although it is true that these giant companies manufacture the majority of all vitamins in terms of absolute volume, the overwhelming majority of their production goes to bulk sales to food processors and for animal feeds. The reason this distinction is important is that the proposed regulations include an exemption for vitamins used to fortify foods to meet government requirements. For example, virtually all flour has vitamins added to “enrich” it, and most salt has iodine added. So Big Pharma gets to have its cake and eat it. It will still be legally able to sell its bulk vitamins even as it is putting the “little guy” out of business! |
|
