Along with two colleagues, Canadian jurists Joanna Langille and Katie Sykes, I have filed an amicus curiae brief with the panel in the Seal Products dispute. While some of it may be familiar from my Yale article with Jo Langille, in our brief the Canadian submission to the panel is addressed in detail (but not repeating what the EU has to say in its own first submission).
Canada's attempt to suggest that there cannot be a legitimate distinction between traditional indigenous economic activity and other economic activity is, as I have suggested before on this blog, at odds with Canada's own constitution and other laws. Canada's argument that the EU can achieve its goals by a labeling or certification scheme is equally vacant. Even if assuring that humane killing methods are used were feasible at all (which is not the case given geographic and weather conditions, etc.), the EU would still be at the mercy of Canada's laws to inspect that the animals are in fact being killed humanely: observing the hunt closely requires Canada's permission. That's just one reason why there isn't an effective humane alternative to a ban.
Anyhow, the brief is now available on the site that hosts this blog: http://www.worldtradelaw.net/amicus/howsesealsamicus.pdf
I'll be heading to Geneva for the hearings in the dispute next week, and will report in due couse.
Rob
