‘Import ban’ legal basis weakens
Japan’s WTO complaint continues
Pressure to open domestic market will increase
It is pointed out that if the government tolerates Japan’s discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the logic of regulating imports of marine products from Fukushima may weaken. There are observations that Japan will discharge contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant from next month at the earliest.
In April 2019, the government was judged by the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to ban the import of seafood from Fukushima. It was an exceptional victory overturning the results of the first trial.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, the government banned the import of marine products from eight regions around Fukushima after the leak of radioactive water from the nuclear power plant in 2013. The WTO Dispute Settlement Body, equivalent to the first trial, sided with Japan. At the time, Japan won the case by arguing that there was no significant difference between the radioactive concentrations of seafood from the eight prefectures and that of Korean seafood.
The WTO Appellate Body, which is the final judgment, overturned the result by accepting Korea’s logic that ‘the Japanese sea environment is different from the Korean sea environment’. It cited the argument that import restrictions were necessary because the marine environment in Japan was endangered due to the contaminated water leakage accident, not because the Fukushima seafood was unsafe.
The problem is that the decision to win the WTO is not permanently maintained. On the 26th, international trade lawyer Song Ki-ho said, “Korea’s import restrictions are provisional measures under the WTO agreement.” However, there is no formal analysis to support the provisional measures.”
In addition, if the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is investigating the appropriateness of the treatment of contaminated water before discharge, evaluates that the sea is safe even after the discharge of contaminated water, the main argument for import regulation may be shaken. If Japan’s logic that the risk of marine ecology is being controlled is accepted, it will not be easy to restrict imports saying that the marine environment is not safe.
Jang Ma-ri, a Greenpeace campaigner, said, “If the discharge of contaminated water is tolerated, there is a high possibility that we will not be able to maintain regulations on seafood imports.”
