The label does not restrict methods harmful to non-dolphin marine life. Fish Biol. The ban on tuna being exported from intermediary nations was entirely policy-based, versus product-based. In the early 1990’s the U.S. government created labeling standards for dolphin safe labels and many other governments have also followed suit. shown by the reduction in mortality of dolphins incidental to AIDCP dolphin safe The "dolphin-safe tuna" designation given in the certificate is granted only where no dolphins were reported injured or killed when the tuna was caught. For Article XI, the panel agreed that the United States embargoes on yellowfin tuna and yellowfin tuna products were in fact "prohibitions or restrictions," not "duties, taxes, or other charges." Complaints concerned the USA embargo on yellowfin tuna and yellowfin tuna product imports that used purse-seine fishing methods and the labeling there of. INTRODUCTION The dolphin-tuna issue is once more a matter of public debate as Con-gress passed RR. serious injury to the dolphins. The complaints were taken to General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) committee and it's 1995 successor; the World Trade Organization (WTO). The tuna-dolphin controversy. When NMFS appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit, the court affirmed the district court's decision, maintaining that the requirement for the agency was to "reach a definitive answer, not a "default finding" based on the lack of evidence. The fear being that this will create an imposition of environmental, technological and other qualitative standards with high thresholds set by industrialized countries thus creating a technical disadvantage for developing countries. The EEC and the Netherlands argued that domestic measure only applied to limiting incidental dolphin mortality, but did not regulate the sale of tuna; whereas, in the case of intermediary nations, the border measure outright banned the importation of tuna if they could not certify that they had not, during the previous six months, imported yellowfin tuna or yellowfin tuna products subject to the primary nation embargo. fishing. For an intermediary nation, the MMPA requires its government to "…certify and provide reasonable proof to the Secretary of Commerce that it has not imported, within the previous six months, any yellowfin tuna or yellowfin tuna products that are subject to a direct ban on importation to the United States. 50 CFR 216 Subpart H: Dolphin-Safe Tuna Labeling. The panel also agreed with this interpretation, and felt, once again, that banning yellowfin tuna and tuna products was not a measure that was necessary to protect dolphins; the only way to protect dolphins would be for intermediary nations to change their policies and practices, which was not within the original purpose of the GATT to regulate. The United States also claimed that its embargo measures were in fact taken in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production and consumption, and that they met the requirement of the preamble to Article XX. The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) places countries involved in the importation of yellowfin tuna or yellowfin tuna products into the United States, into two separate categories: primary nations and intermediary nations.[4]. Press release regarding the This Agreement and its predecessor, the 1992 La Jolla Agreement, For Article 2.4, however, the panel did agree with Mexico that the United States dolphin-safe labeling measures were more trade restrictive than necessary to achieve their objectives. The MMPA requires a general prohibition on "taking" and importation into the United States of marine mammals including (harassment, hunting, killing, capture, or any attempts thereof) unless explicitly authorized. [3] Mexico argued that the US MMPA product ban on tuna imports was inconsistent with the provisions of GATT. Under section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C 45)[when?] Tuna Starting 2008, Mexico raised complaints with the World Trade Organization's (WTO) about United States import restrictions and use of dolphin safe labeling on Tuna products. [12], The United States and Mexico both appealed. Two reports were issued on the discriminatory aspects of the US legislation regarding dolphin-safe labels.