Canada鈥檚 recent modern slavery reporting initiative highlights a wider gap between ethical trade commitments and meaningful forced labour enforcement.
Introduction
Ottawa鈥檚 newest moral gesture, a co-authored with the United Kingdom and Australia, promotes its dedication to ethical trade. Yet, it also exposes Canada鈥檚 deeper unwillingness to operationalize its own moral commitments within international trade law, particularly on forced labour. Instead of taking decisive action, Canada tends to rely on symbolic participation in the multilateral system and seeks refuge in its "rules-based international order." This tactic enables Canada to avoid the very unilateral action that has allowed other states to turn human rights norms into enforceable trade rules.
What is Canada doing now?
In July 2020, Canada prohibited the importation of goods mined or manufactured by forced labour under the , which was further expanded with Bill S-211, the . However, as of June 2025, only into the country. Such inaction undermines both the credibility of its domestic laws and its claim to be a defender of human rights.
A Comparative Analysis
If we look to the European Union (EU), the newly approved provides stricter prohibitions and guidelines toward due diligence. Products made with forced labour will be banned from entering or being exported from the EU. This applies to all sectors and origins, covering every stage of the supply chain, including manufacture, harvesting, and processing. The scope is therefore much larger than that of Canada鈥檚 current regime, which relies primarily on disclosure-only reporting under S-211 and a shipment-specific import prohibition under the Customs Tariff.
The United States (US) is similar to the EU in terms of the assertiveness of its policies, notably through Section 307 of the Tariff Act, and more recently, the (2022). The latter creates a rebuttable presumption that all imports from China鈥檚 Xinjiang region and other listed entities are made with forced labour. Customs subsequently detain goods automatically unless importers can provide proof to the contrary. This strict enforcement has , demonstrating how weak enforcement turns Canada into not only a backdoor for goods rejected by stricter jurisdictions but also a weak player in the ethical trade world.
In with the New, Out with the WTO
The cases of the EU and the US exemplify an emerging model of trade law: reconstructive unilateralism. This approach (WTO) rules of predictability and non-discrimination, while acknowledging the need to move beyond the confines of its paralysis. The Appellate Body affirmed the right of state members to push back on their WTO obligations to 鈥�.鈥� As such, Canada could enforce stronger policies on forced labour in its international trade framework without contravening WTO agreements.
For instance, Canada could still rely on the exceptions for trade restrictions outlined in Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). In this light, reconstructive unilateralism poses no threat to the international order.
Critics may argue that reconstructive unilateralism . However, these additional measures do not outweigh the need to eradicate forced labour, let alone justify ignoring human rights violations. Where the problem arises is when states invoke the public morals exception, for instance, under GATT Article XX, as disguised protectionism. That risk, however, cannot become an excuse for inaction when the WTO has effectively collapsed. Regardless, this masquerade can occur with or without the WTO.
Canada鈥檚 Moment of Choice
As a result, Canada must respond quickly to the rapidly evolving global landscape, particularly with the return of Trump-era protectionism. Prime Minister Carney has already redirected the country鈥檚 attention to the EU to seek stronger alliances with partners who share Canada鈥檚 fundamental values.
As such, following the EU鈥檚 lead in reconstructive unilateralism in forced labour issues is an opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to human rights and our allies. A dormant WTO can no longer excuse Canada鈥檚 lack of enforcement of ethical trade law.
Conclusion
Ottawa must move beyond its cautious ethical trade regulations and apply real pressure on the abolition of forced labour. Canada can look to its neighbour or to the EU for inspiration on unilateral action to strengthen its laws on forced labour, all while remaining aligned with the WTO. Canada鈥檚 influence as a middle power depends on its ability to lead by example. Turning its principles into strong policy is Canada鈥檚 opportunity to redefine 鈥渞ules-based鈥� trade in a fractured world.