Wheat board on trial in Geneva

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Published: September 18, 2003

The Canadian Wheat Board has gone on trial before a world trade panel, a process that could result in an order that the board change how it does business.

But in the view of a CWB official who attended the hearings in Geneva last week, it’s a trial that’s lacking one crucial element – evidence.

“Based on what we’ve seen to date, there are no factual allegations being brought by the United States,” said wheat board lawyer Jim McLandress. “It seems to be more of the same empty rhetoric.”

Read Also

Alex Wood exhibits a bull at the Ag in Motion 2025 junior cattle show.

First annual Ag in Motion Junior Cattle Show kicks off with a bang

Ag in Motion 2025 had its first annual junior cattle show on July 15. The show hosted more than 20…

A dispute resolution panel set up by the World Trade Organization is dealing with a two-pronged complaint filed against Canada by the U.S. government in December 2002.

The U.S. is alleging that the CWB violates world trade rules that require state trading enterprises to conduct business in a commercial and non-discriminatory manner.

It also says that rules governing the Canadian grain handling and transportation system discriminate against the importation and shipment of U.S. and other foreign grain.

Lawyers representing the American and Canadian governments made presentations and answered questions during three days of hearings before the WTO panel Sept. 8-10. The panel also heard from several third parties, including the European Union, which supported the U.S. claim, and Australia, which sided with Canada.

The WTO dispute resolution system is a legalistic, fact-based process, which requires specific proof to back up any allegations, but McLandress said the U.S. hasn’t presented any factual evidence of wrongdoing by the board.

“All they’re doing is arguing that the wheat board could do something or might do something, but at no point do they actually say we do anything that would be in violation of our obligations,” he said.

“Essentially their case is that the CWB is genetically incapable of acting commercially. That’s really what it boils down to.”

Over the next few weeks Canada and the U.S. will file more submissions responding to points raised by the other side and answering questions from the panel.

A decision in the case is slated to be handed down Feb. 6, 2004. If it is adopted by the full WTO membership, it will become binding. The decision can be appealed.

About the author

Adrian Ewins

Saskatoon newsroom

explore

Stories from our other publications