EU Statements as delivered at the DSB meeting, 24 July 2026

AGENDA POINT 1 : SURVEILLANCE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB

1.2. UNITED STATES - SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS160/24/ADD.247)

• We thank the United States for its status report and its statement today.
• We refer to our previous statements. We would like to resolve this case as soon as possible.

AGENDA POINT 1 : SURVEILLANCE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB

1.3. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - MEASURES AFFECTING THE APPROVAL AND MARKETING OF BIOTECH PRODUCTS: STATUS REPORT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION (WT/DS291/37/ADD.210)

• We recall that the EU approval system is not covered by the DSB's recommendations and rulings.

• On 2 June 2026, the European Commission adopted a decision authorising the placing on the market of GM soybean MON 94637.

• On 2 June 2026, the European Commission presented four draft decisions for a vote to the Appeal Committee. The decisions included one authorisation decision for the placing on the market of a GM maize and its sub-combination (), two decisions renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market of a GM soybean () and a GM maize (). The vote taken during the meeting for the authorisation and renewal decisions resulted in 'no opinion'. The Commission decisions have been adopted on 29 June 2026.

• On 10 June 2026, the European Commission presented three draft decisions for a vote to the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed. These decisions included authorising the placing on the market of two GM soybeans () and renewing one authorisation for GM maize (). The votes taken during the meeting resulted in 'no opinion.' The draft decisions were presented to the Appeal Committee on 15 July 2026. The vote taken during the meeting for the authorisations and renewal decisions resulted in 'no opinion'. The Commission will proceed with the next steps for regulatory approval.

AGENDA POINT 1 : SURVEILLANCE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB

1.7 EUROPEAN UNION AND CERTAIN MEMBER STATES - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING PALM OIL AND OIL PALM CROP-BASED BIOFUELS: STATUS REPORT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION (WT/DS600/12/ADD.9)

• The European Union refers to the status report that it provided for this meeting.
• As indicated previously to the DSB, on 10 April 2026, the European Commission adopted amendments to Commission Delegated Regulation 2019/807.
• On 8 July 2026, the European Parliament exercised its right under the applicable legislative procedure to object to the amendments to the Delegated Regulation. As a result, the amendments to the Delegated Regulation will not enter into force by early September, as envisaged.
• The European Union is carefully assessing the implications of this development and is considering the appropriate way forward.
• In that context, the European Union remains ready to engage with Malaysia on the next steps.

AGENDA POINT 1 : SURVEILLANCE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB

1.8 EUROPEAN UNION - CERTAIN MEASURES CONCERNING PALM OIL AND OIL PALM CROP-BASED BIOFUELS: STATUS REPORT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION (WT/DS593/19/ADD.4)

• The European Union refers to the status report that it provided for this meeting.
• As indicated previously to the DSB, on 10 April 2026, the European Commission adopted amendments to Commission Delegated Regulation 2019/807.
• On 8 July 2026, the European Parliament exercised its right under the applicable legislative procedure to object to the amendments to the Delegated Regulation. As a result, the amendments to the Delegated Regulation will not enter into force by early September, as envisaged.
• The European Union is carefully assessing the implications of this development and is considering the appropriate way forward.
• In that context, the European Union remains ready to engage with Indonesia on the next steps.

AGENDA POINT 2: EUROPEAN UNION AND ITS MEMBER STATES: CARBON BORDER ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM

2.1 Request for the Establishment of a Panel by the Russian Federation (WT/DS639/3)

• The EU reiterates its resolute condemnation of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, which constitutes a manifest violation of the UN Charter, and reaffirms its continued and unwavering support for Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders.
• It also reconfirms the European Union's unwavering commitment to providing continued political, financial, economic, humanitarian, military and diplomatic support to Ukraine and its people.
• We underscore the need to reach, as soon as possible, a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine, in full respect of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
• Against this background, the EU would like to underline the extraordinary circumstances of Russia bringing a dispute under international law while it continues to wage its war of aggression against Ukraine, in violation of the most fundamental rules of international law.
• It is in those extraordinary circumstances that the EU declined Russia's request to enter into consultations in this dispute (WT/DS639/2). In particular, we took the view that the consultations requested by the Russian Federation cannot be fruitful and cannot lead to a mutually satisfactory solution of the matter at hand.
• The EU also recalls that the purpose of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism is to secure positive solutions to trade disputes. However, Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine has had a profound impact on the trading relationship between the EU and Russia, including because of the trade restrictive measures that the EU has had to take to protect its essential security interests.
• Let us be very clear. As long as Russia is waging its war of aggression against Ukraine, it cannot expect to be able to rely on WTO rules for improved access for its exports to the EU market. In that regard, the EU refers in particular to the Joint Statement on Aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine with the support of Belarus, dated 14 March 2022 (WT/GC/244). As indicated therein, to protect its essential security interests, the EU has effectively suspended its concessions or other obligations with respect to the Russian Federation under the WTO rules.
• It was against this background, that the EU had previously suspended its offensive case against Russia (DS604) and not further pursued another case after having launched consultations (DS608). Russia on its side had also suspended and let the authority of the panel lapse in its dispute against the EU (DS521).
• The EU appreciates that the measure concerned by the present agenda item may also be of interest to other Members. However, in the context of an agenda item requested by Russia, the EU does not find it appropriate to elaborate on this measure. Nevertheless, the EU would like to reassure those other Members that CBAM is a climate-oriented, environmental policy tool that is designed in a non-discriminatory and even-handed manner to comply with WTO rules.
• The European Union objects to Russia's request for the establishment of a panel.

AGENDA POINT 4: APPELLATE BODY APPOINTMENTS

• The European Union refers to its previous statements on this issue and thanks all Members that have co-sponsored this proposal.

• Since 11 December 2019, the WTO no longer guarantees access to a binding, two-tier, independent and impartial resolution of trade disputes.

• A fully functioning WTO dispute settlement system is crucial to support rule-based international trade and a key priority. The present agenda item as well as the large number of Members co-sponsoring the present proposal remind us of that every month.

• The EU remains committed to reforming the dispute settlement system so that it meets the interests of all Members and supports rules-based trade. We welcome the statements of other Members to that effect.

• That said, despite the substantial work done by Members in dispute settlement reform discussions since MC12, it has now been more than six years that the system is not functioning fully. That work should resume when the conditions are ripe.

• Against this backdrop, the MPIA is ever more important.

• In that respect, we refer to the ministerial statement issued by the MPIA participants in Yaoundé (WT/MIN(26)/30), highlighting the role of the MPIA in supporting the rules-based multilateral trading system, welcoming new Members and encouraging other WTO Members to join the MPIA.

• Today, we wish to reiterate that call and we encourage other WTO Members to join the MPIA, pending the establishment of a fully and well-functioning WTO dispute settlement system.

AGENDA POINT 5: UPDATE BY THE DSB CHAIR REGARDING DS REFORM CONSULTATIONS

• Chair, thank you very much for your very detailed report. As stated under the previous agenda point, for the European Union, dispute settlement reform remains a matter of fundamental importance for the proper functioning of the rules-based multilateral trading system.
• The EU remains ready to engage constructively, building on the substantial progress achieved in the discussions following MC14.
• However, as you recalled in your report, it was established in consultations with Members prior to MC14 that the conditions were not right to resume this process at this stage. I refer to the DSB Chair report to the General Council in December 2025 (JOB/GC/472). The then DSB Chair reported that many Members recognised the current difficult context surrounding DS Reform and supported the resumption of work after MC14 only once the time was right and all Members were ready. On that basis, the DSB Chair updated the Ministers in Yaoundé that work would be advanced after the Conference, when the conditions are ripe and all are ready to engage.
• And indeed, it seems to us that the conditions have not changed in the meantime.

• We also take note of the proposal to hold information sessions on dispute settlement reform. While we do not see a particular need for information sessions at this stage, we would be open to them if other Members consider them useful, on the clear understanding that they remain purely informational.

• We thank you for clarifying that this will be the object of the information sessions.

  ______

1. ([1]) DP202216 x NK603 x DAS-40278-9 and its sub-combinations DP202216 x NK603, DP202216 x DAS-40278-9
2. ([2]) MON 87705
3. ([3]) NK603 x T25
4. ([4]) GM soybeans MON 94313 and GMB151 x DAS-44406- 6.
5. ([5]) GM maize MON 87460.

6. MC14 Chairperson's summary, (WT/MIN(26)/35, para 1.6).