11:07 AM Sep 12, 1996

WTO BANANA PANEL EJECTS LAWYERS FOR CARIBBEANS

Geneva Sep 10 (TWN) -- The WTO dispute settlement panel hearing the banana dispute brought by the US against the EU ejected Tuesday from its hearings members of two exporting countries from the Caribbean on the ground they were not government members, but lawyers.

The Chairman of the panel, Mr. Stuart Harbinson, from Hong Kong acted after objections from the United States, supported by the Latin American consultants, that attendance at panel hearings are limited to permanent government officials of the countries and the advisors for St. Lucia and St. Vincent were lawyers.

The old GATT had set rules that attendance at panel hearings is to be confined to government representatives.

The WTO and its dispute settlement mechanism follows these rules -- even though many of the rules that are to be judged have become very technical and complicated even for lawyers, and even though cases for tribunals are in fact prepared by lawyers.

But the major entities (like the US, EU, Canada or Japan) have highly qualified trade lawyers in their governments or at the missions who represent the countries before the panels.

Most of the developing countries have to get lawyers to prepare their briefs, and their ambassadors go to the panel and present their case.

The two tiny Caribbean isles, who are 'observers' at the panel hearings, were represented by EU-based trade lawyers. The two WTO members have small diplomatic missions in the EU which service the WTO, and have no permanent offices here.

In a press release, the Caribbean Banana Exporters Association (CBEA) quoted Amb. Edwin Laurent, Permanent Representative of St. Lucia to the WTO, as saying that it had been essential to appoint legal advisors to his delegation, because it was simply not possible for small countries lie St. Lucia or St. Vincent and the Grenadines to employ the necessary expertise on a permanent basis.

"This decision (to expel legal advisors)," Laurent said, "would place such countries in a continuing disadvantage in disputes in the WTO. It also raises questions about the discretion of sovereign states to determine who should represent them at international meetings.

"The long-term implications of this expulsion is that small countries will have no legal representation before hearings capable of advising them on legal issues which arise.

"In the present dispute, they have already been handicapped by the refusal of the WTO to accord Caribbean countries full participation in the proceedings even though it is export preferences which are under attack."