La science judiciaire à l’OMC ou les opinions du'juge Faustroll autour des OGM et de la viande de bovins traités aux hormones

The article explores the complex relationship between science and law in the jurisprudence of the World Trade Organization (WTO), focusing particularly on disputes concerning genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and hormone-treated beef. It refers playfully to the figure of 'Judge Faustroll' - borrowed from Alfred Jarry - to underline the sometimes surreal or paradoxical nature of judicial reasoning when science and law intersect at the WTO. The article examines how the WTO’s Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) has compelled WTO panels and the Appellate Body to grapple intensively with scientific evidence when assessing the legality of trade restrictions. It highlights the opacity and contradictions in WTO reasoning, where the pursuit of objective scientific criteria often conceals inconsistent reasoning and selective reliance on expert testimony. The article underscores the tensions and compromises that emerge when precautionary approaches collide with trade liberalization imperatives. Ultimately, the study argues for simplifying the 'scientistic grammar' of WTO case law - or the dense, overly technical use of scientific concepts and jargon by WTO adjudicators - so that legal reasoning can be more transparent, comprehensible, and less dependent on convoluted scientific rhetoric, pointing to the decisive role of experts in shaping judicial outcomes and raising questions about transparency, legitimacy, and fairness in global trade governance.