The World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong from a Human Rights Perspective
| Published date | 01 March 2006 |
| Date | 01 March 2006 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/016934410602400101 |
| Subject Matter | Column |
THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION MINISTERIAL
CONFERENCE IN HONG KONG FROM A HUMAN
RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE*
The Sixth Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) was held
in Hong Kong from 13 to 18 December 2005. Since the previous WTO Conference
in Cancu
´n, Mexico (2003) collapsed into chaos, consensus in Hong Kong was vital to
save the Doha Round of trade negotiations. This was extremely important for
developing countries because the Doha Round brings their needs and interests to
the foreground. The Doha Round followed after major criticism from developing
countries that only rich countries profited from the ‘increased opportunities and
welfare gains that the multilateral trading system generates’
1
and that there had
been too little attention for development issues within the WTO. Therefore, success
in Hong Kong would be significant for the creation of conditions in which a range of
human rights in developing countries can be (more effectively) realised. Among
these conditions are: improved access to markets, giving developing countries
greater economic growth potential, increasing the capacity to defeat poverty and
creating the human capital which is needed to make commercial enterprises
flourish. After six days of negotiations in Hong Kong, ministers from the WTO’s 149
member Governments approved a declaration that the WTO itself describes as
‘significant progress in the Doha Round’.
The aim of this column is to assess whether the Hong Kong Agreement can be
considered a success from a human rights perspective. In order to get to this point a
few words should be devoted to potential conflicts between the process of trade
liberalisation and human rights.
The first example is the so-called ‘social clause’-debate. This debate already
featured in the Uruguay Round relating to negotiations on a range of trade policy
issues (1986-1994), with regard to the issue of whether or not the organisation
should permit States to establish a trade bar for products manufactured in violation
of human rights norms (such as forced and child labour, and the denial of such
rights as the right to organise trade unions and the right to strike).
However, because of its contentious nature, this issue was never again seriously
discussed within the WTO, nor did it reach any of the subsequent Ministerial
Declarations after the Uruguay Round.
The agricultural trade regime can be brought forward as another good example
of how the process of liberalisation can come into conflict with human rights, such
as the right to adequate food. The agricultural sector plays a pivotal role in the
economies of most developing countries. Moreover, agriculture has always been one
of the most controversial issues in international trade negotiations. Soon after the
conclusion of the Uruguay Round, developing countries became dissatisfied with
the Agreement reached in this particular area. Although the Agreement on
COLUMN
Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, Vol. 24/1, 3-5, 2006.
#Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM), Printed in the Netherlands. 3
* J.P. Denkers, LL.M, Prof.dr. W.J.M. van Genugten and dr. N.M.C.P. Ja
¨gers LL.M, Department of
International and European Law, Tilburg University, the Netherlands.
1
WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, 20 November 2001.
To continue reading
Request your trial