This Agreement defines the scope, tasks and structure of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The agreements previously negotiated under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and those concluded in the Uruguay Round have been incorporated as integral parts of the Marrakesh Agreement and are contained in its annexes. These agreements are now considered WTO agreements. It is to be hoped that this book will achieve its objective of explaining why there are criticisms of the WTO from a human rights point of view, and that many, if not all, of these complaints are in fact justified. The WTO is not the demonic organization that some of its most vocal critics describe.66 In some areas, such as agricultural protection in the North, the WTO is perhaps less culpable than the international financial institutions for promoting unfair rules,67 although it can rightly be criticized for not doing much to remedy this injustice. Some of its rules can sometimes contribute to the enjoyment of human rights.68 Finally, some trade issues lead to complex human rights issues which, admittedly, are not easy to resolve. For example, the strict interpretation of the SPS agreement has been criticized for hindering the ability of states to protect the health of their populations, as demonstrated by the beef hormone dispute. However, overly stringent SPS standards, perhaps embodied by the EU standard for aflatoxins in nuts and grains, can have devastating effects on the livelihoods of some of the world`s poorest people.69 (42) The death of the neoliberal “Washington Consensus” has been proclaimed by many since the onset of the global financial crisis in late 2008. On April 2, 2009, at the end of the G20 summit, the then British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, declared that the “old Washington consensus was over”: see 〈www.number10.gov.uk/Page18934〉 recovered on April 22, 2009. Of course, it remains to be seen whether such proclamations are premature.
In this article, I have tried to show that the question of whether GATT should have direct effect is very complex. Gatt is a constitutional agreement like the Treaty. However, it pursues economic objectives other than those of the Treaty. Gatt is also an international agreement. However, it creates a regulatory structure different from that laid down in the Community`s other international agreements. Similarly, Armin Paasch, Senior Advisor on Agriculture and Trade at the German NGO FIAN, noted how possible negative links between trade rules and food security were ignored at major intergovernmental meetings convened in the wake of the 2007-2008 global food crisis, including those of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the G8.13 All these meetings called for a swift conclusion. of the Doha Round, including full liberalization of agriculture.14 As noted in Chapter 6, liberalization of (p.289) is desirable, but should be done with caution in order to avoid consequences for the right to food: further liberalization by much of the South is likely to harm small farmers. who make up about half of the world`s population of hungry people, exacerbating the problems of the right to food.