After concluding Section 609, which prohibited imports from countries not meeting certain policy conditions, constituted a violation of Article Ⅺ:1, the Panel considered the U.S. Article ⅩⅩ defense.
Ⅶ. FINDINGS
…
E. ARTICLE XXGATT 1994
1. Preliminary remarks
7.24 The United States claims that the measures at issue adopted pursuant to Section 609, which were found to be inconsistent with Articles Ⅺ:1GATT 1994, are justified under Article ⅩⅩ（b） and （g） of GATT 1994. India, Pakistan and Thailand argue that Article ⅩⅩ（b） and （g） cannot be invoked to justify a measure which applies to animals not within the jurisdiction of the Member enacting the measure. Malaysia contends that, since Section 609 allows the United States to take actions unilaterally to conserve a shared natural resource, it is therefore in breach of the sovereignty principle under international law. The United States responds that Article ⅩⅩ（b） and （g） contain no jurisdictional limitations, nor limitations on the location of the animals or natural resources to be protected and conserved and that, under general principles of international law relating to sovereignty, States have the right to regulate imports within their jurisdiction.