PRESS
RELEASE OF 17th OCTOBER 1996
Commenting
on the government of India's
decision to challenge the US
government ban on import of
trawled shrimp, which threatens
the already endangered Olive
Ridley turtles, India's leading
science and environmental NGO,
the Centre for Science and
Environment said, "This is
not a case in which either side
has come out clean. While the
Indian government has once again
proved itself to be morally
bankrupt in implementing its own
environmental laws, USA, too, has
once again shown itself to be a
power-mongering nation which
refuses to accept international
rules. The decision by the United
States of America to ban the
import of trawled shrimps from
India has sparked off a debate
between two leading environmental
NGOs of India and USA -- the
Delhi-based Centre for Science
and Environment (CSE), and the
US-based Earth Island Institute
(EII). When India's premier
science and environment
newsmagazine, Down To Earth
(DTE), carried a report by
CSE’s trade and environment
campaigner, Raksha Khushalani,
that the ban order would be
challenged on procedural grounds
in the World Trade Organisation
(WTO), the EII accused CSE of
taking the side of the Indian
government in damning the US ban
and, thus, neglecting the issue
of endangered species. The ban
had been put in place after the
New York-based US Court of
International Trade ruled, on a
petition filed by EII, that
import of shrimp should be banned
from countries which do not
impose the use of turtle excluder
devices (TEDs) in shrimp
trawlers. From May onwards, the
ban came into force. EII also
accused CSE of not being true to
its mandate as an environmental
NGO. CSE
agrees with the general
interpretation of the General
Agreement on Trade and Tariffs
(GATT)/WTO, that a country can
impose a product standard, or a
product-related process standard,
and in some circumstances, use
trade restrictive measures to
ensure that these standards are
met so that the health of its
people and its environment is
protected. If, however, some
environmental damage is being
caused in the country of
production, but this does not get
reflected in the final product
that is exported, the importing
country cannot impose a trade
restrictive measure. Candace
Batycki of EII's, Sea Turtle
Restoration Project, saying,
"We are confused by the
pro-government bias in the story
(Down To Earth, Vol 5, No 7)
which seems to champion so called
'free trade' over the interests
of endangered species and coastal
fisheries." The EII protest
further stated, "The US
Endangered Species Act is one of
the strongest pieces of
environmental legislation in the
world. If it is successfully
challenged at the WTO, not only
will the sea turtles be the
losers, but also hundreds of
endangered species in the US and
around the world as well as
artisanal and subsistence
fisherfolk who rely on a healthy
ocean eco-system." CSE has
argued back, saying that the US
Endangered Species Act may be one
of the strongest pieces of
environmental legislation in the
world, but it is a US law and
cannot be imposed on the rest of
the world. Even to expect this
would be extremely unfair and
undemocratic and amounts to naked
power-mongering. It is highly
deplorable for an US NGO to push
a legislation which is a product
of domestic concerns and
pressures, as a global solution.
CSE’s main contention is
that if the US is going to
dictate environmental policies to
other countries, then EII, as an
environmental NGO, should also
fight for an international law
that allows Indians and
Bangladeshis to force Americans
out of their cars and, thus,
reduce the threat of global
warming. But this obviously
cannot be done, because US
political, economic and military
power would not allow such a
reverse coercion to take place.
Besides, India and Bangladesh do
not have the trading powers to
discipline US, says CSE.
Therefore, CSE
does not agree that using trade
measures is a fair tool for
disciplining errant nations, as
only economically powerful
nations use such a tool against
the economically weak nations.
CSE has further argued that it is
by no stretch of imagination a
pro-government NGO, and that it
does not support the Indian
government's inaction to protect
endangered turtles, branding the
Indian government as a bad
manager of the environment. CSE
insists that the government
should have done everything
possible under its own laws to
protect the turtles from shrimp
trawlers, but it has shown
consistent disrespect towards its
own biodiversity resources. In
fact, there seems to be no
coordination between the various
government departments, leading
to environmental devastation. It
is known that in the case of
shrimp-trawling versus turtle
protection, the ministry of
environment and forests had asked
the ministries of commerce and
food processing industries to
ensure that TEDs be installed in
trawlers. The ministry of food
processing industries is the
nodal agency for issuing permits
for trawlers, but none of the two
ministries did anything about
this. CSE further states that as
an NGO and a representative of
the civil society in the US, EII
should have first approached NGOs
in India, to campaign the Indian
government to take measures to
save turtles. "It is for the
Indian civil society to
discipline its government and we
welcome alliances with members of
the civil society of other parts
of the world. If there are any
information gaps in our
government and you are in a
position to provide this
information or point out where
our government is going wrong, we
will lobby our government on
these issues."
|
