From last week's DSB meeting, where the panel for Norway's complaint was established:
Norway said it was of the firm view that the EU seal regime was inconsistent with WTO rules.
The EU believed that the WTO was not an appropriate forum to discuss Norway’s concerns and added that the seal regulation fell within the scope of the European Economic Area agreement. The EU said that Norway provided no meaningful explanation regarding why the EU’s measures were inconsistent with WTO rules. The EU said it was strongly convinced of the strength of its case and stood ready to defend its measures.
Canada said it had long made efforts to ensure that the seal hunt was humane, well managed and sustainable and hoped that the dispute would cast meaningful light on a measure it considered being unjust and unnecessary.
Namibia stated that the exploitation of seals along its coast dated back to the 17th century. Namibia said that there were 25 colonies of seals along its coast and that their harvest was done according to the Marine Resources Act of 2000 and in the presence of a fishery inspector. Namibia noted that the seal industry was very important in terms of employment and GDP contribution to its economy.
Iceland said that this dispute was not just about seal products but was also related to the sustainable utilization of all living marine resources and the right to market the products coming from such legitimate practices. Iceland added that there were no justifiable grounds for the EU’s ban.
