 |
|
Canada‘s Export and Import Permits Act as stipulated on its Export Control List. (Canadian Justice Justice Laws website)
|
Revelation reveals Japan’s discriminatory trade policies specifically target S. Korea
The Japanese government has cited the lack of provisions serving as a basis for “catch-all” measures on conventional weapons in South Korean laws on managing exports of strategic goods to justify its push to remove South Korea from its “white list” of countries receiving preferential treatment in export reviews. However, there is no reference to catch-all regulations on conventional weapons in related laws in Canada, another country on Japan’s white list. This suggests that Japan is pushing to intensify discriminatory regulations solely against South Korea. Indeed, South Korea does have de facto catch-all regulations for conventional weapons. In an examination of Canada’s Export and Import Permits Act (EIPA) and its Export Control List (ECL) for strategic goods based on that act, the Hankyoreh found that Canada, like South Korea and Japan, has catch-all regulations in place to supplement its controls on strategic goods. A catch-all system applies export controls in cases of items that are not strategic goods included on a country’s export control list to prevent weapon proliferation, but are confirmed or suspected based on final users and usage to be potentially diverted into weapons production and development. The Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) is going through procedures to amend its Export Trade Control Order to remove South Korea from its white list on the grounds that its catch-all laws apply only to exports to goods with potential diversion into weapons of mass destruction (biological, chemical, and nuclear) and missile, without being applied to conventional weapons. In a July 22 meeting with South Korean reporters, a METI official said, “In our view, the scope of South Korea’s [catch-all] regulations is too narrow.” “The South Korean government claims that it has regulations serving as a basis for a catch-all system on conventional weapons with Article 19 of its Foreign Trade Act and Article 50 of its Public Notice on Trade of Strategic Items, but our view is that in terms of items subject to controls [according to the provision in question], it is written only in relation to weapons of mass destruction and the like.” By the same logic, Canada would also be subject to intensified export regulations from Japan, as its catch-all regulations do not explicitly include any reference to conventional weapons. Canada’s control system for strategic goods is addressed through its EIPA, which is similar to South Korea’s Foreign Trade Act. Like South Korea’s Public Notice on Trade of Strategic Items, it stipulates more concrete legal bases in an Export Control List based on that act. The catch-all provision on that list is found in Item 5505, which states that approval from the Foreign Minister must be received in cases of goods and technology where “any information made known to the exporter by any intermediary or final consignee or from any other source would lead a reasonable person to suspect that they will be used in the development [. . .] of chemical or biological weapons [or] nuclear explosive or radiological dispersal devices.” A South Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) official said Canada and South Korea’s “systems of export control laws are quite similar.” “Canada does not explicitly mention conventional weapons in its law or on its list, but it has allowed for export controls to operate on conventional weapons through other legal provisions with its regional control list,” the official added. “In South Korea’s case, the Minister of Trade, Industry, and Energy is specified as holding permit authority for conventional weapon catch-all regulations through Item 5 of its Public Notice (on the individual possessing authority to grant export permits) and an attached annex (on controlled goods),” the official explained. Actual results were also verified, with MOTIE reporting 40% of self-determinations (independent decisions by exporters on items subject to export controls), 19.4% of expert determinations (by the Korea Strategic Trade Institute among others), and 41.9% of government export permit applications based on catch-all regulations between 2013 and February 2019 to involve exports related to conventional weapons. Despite this situation, Japan has pushed ahead with its discriminatory intensification of regulations, adopting a partial and superficial reading of the South Korean legal regulations without sufficient dialogue or discussions. One of the basic guidelines stated in the Wassenaar Arrangement – a multilateral control regime to prevent the proliferation of conventional weapons, which both South Korea and Japan are party to – is that export control systems must not target specific countries or their militaries and should be operated in such a way as not to inhibit well-intentioned private transactions. By Choi Ha-yan, staff reporter Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]
