TRADE-US: Environmentalists to Sit on Trade Panels

By Jim Lobe Reprint | | Print |

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Nov 10 1999 (IPS) - Environmentalists scored a big legal victory this week when a US federal court judge ordered the government to include at least one representative from the environmental activist community on the two panels that advise it on international trade policy.

The judge, Barbara Rothstein, found Tuesday that the administration was violating the Federal Advisory Council Act by limiting two panels appointed to advise the US Trade Representative (USTR) on US policy on trade and forest products at the upcoming World Trade Organisation (WTO) to industry representatives.

She ruled that, as presently constituted, the membership of the two committees did not provide a “fair balance of viewpoints,” as required by the law.

Noting the “highly charged nature and the stakes” involved in the debate over free trade and environment as it affected timer sales, Rothstein found that “matters affecting the wood and paper products sector are dramatically and inextricably intertwined with the environmental health and protection of this nation.”

“The forest ISACs (Industry Sector Advisory Committees) offer advice on diverse and far-reaching issues that affect others, especially those who promote forest conservation. The composition of the forest product ISACS, thus, violates (the law’s) requirement to be fairly balance in terms of viewpoints to be represented,” she wrote in a 25-page opinion.

The ruling was issued in response to a lawsuit filed in Seattle – the site of the WTO ministerial meeting which begins at the end of this month – by a half dozen environmental groups, including the Northwestern Ecosystem Alliance, the Pacific Environment and Resources Center, the Sierra Club, and the International Forum on Globalisation.

“Finally, a long-existing wrong is slowly being righted,” said Patti Goldman, an attorney at the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, who argued the case before Rothstein’s court in Seattle.

“It is both unfair and illegal to load up these panels with industry representatives and not allow a single representative of the environment to participate,” she said.

The “fair balance” rule has been used in the past to change the composition of other federal advisory committees, but Tuesday’s ruling marks the first time it has been invoked with respect to trade issues.

The USTR generally has confined ISACs to companies and trade associations in the specific sector involved. ISACs normally meet regularly with the USTR to prepare Washington’s strategy in various trade negotiations, including the upcoming WTO ministerial in Seattle.

There are currently about two dozen ISACs advising the USTR on US negotiating strategy at the WTO on everything from wood products and paper to chemicals and energy. To date, none of them has included anyone from the environmental community here.

Meetings are usually carried out secretly, and information shared between the industry and the USTR is, with the exception of brief summaries of subjects discussed, not publicly released.

This has angered environmentalists and other activists who have long charged that trade agreements too often have been worked out behind closed doors with no public oversight or participation. Yet their environmental consequences can be enormous.

The two ISACs affected by Tuesday’s ruling – one on lumber and wood products and the other on paper products – have long urged the administration to work at the WTO and other fora for the complete elimination of tariffs on forest products in light of the economic comparative advantage enjoyed by the relevant US companies.

But that position has been strenuously opposed by environmentalists who are concerned that the freeing up global trade in those sectors without strict environmental safeguards would have a devastating impact on forests worldwide.

Among the 15 members of the ISAC on wood and lumber products are top executives of the Hardwood Plywood Manufacturers Association; The Weyerhaueser Company; Southern Forest Products Assocation; the American Forest and Paper Association; and the International Paper Company – all companies and industry associations.

The same goes for the paper-product ISAC. It includes executives from the Mea Corporation; the Printing Industries of America, Inc; the Georgia-Pacific Corporation, and the American Forest and Paper Assocation.

In her opinion, Rothstein, a veteran judge whose rulings almost always have been upheld by appeals courts, noted that the two provided advice on policy matters ranging from global warming, the International Tropical Timber Agreement, and the UN International Forum on Forests, to invasive species safeguards and the expansion of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to include Chile, according to a summary of closed-door ISAC meetings over the last two years.

“Plaintiffs have shown that their interests are undermined by the exclusion of any environmental representation on the forest product ISACS; members of the ISACs are privy to information and advice that directly impacts the plaintiffs and which plaintiffs cannot access without participating on the ISACs,” she wrote.

“This decision vindicates the conservation community’s views that trade sectors like forestry are dominated by industry and that international trade rules cannot even begin to be corrected until the playing field is balanced for all citizens in society,” said Bill Snape, legal director for Defenders of Wildlife, one of the plaintiffs.

Dan Seligman, who directs the Sierra Club’s Responsible Trade campaign, argued that the ruling exposed the hypocrisy of the President Bill Clinton’s trade policy. “The President says he wants the WTO to become more democratic, yet here at home the government has shut the public out of the crucial trade advisory committees,” he said.

“If the US Trade Representative is going to make global environmental policy, then the public – not just private industry – must sit at the table.”

The USTR’s office said it was studying Rothstein’s opinion.