The analysis of the European Union (‘EU’) law on genetically modified organisms (‘GMOs’) and its applicability to genome edited plants under the law of the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’) and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (‘CETA’) between Canada and the EU has shown the complexity of multi-level governance of genome edited plants. It is characterised by the tense relationship of different protection goals. While the EU GMO law aims at food safety, environmental and health protection, WTO law and CETA are characterised by the aim of trade liberalisation. They only allow for environmental and health protection in specific narrowly defined cases. Therefore, the Cartagena Protocol is considered a more adequate international treaty to deal with the transboundary movement of GMOs. Also, the Cartagena Protocol is said to be more favourable towards the EU’s precautionary approach, one of the key principles of EU GMO law. But in the WTO forum, WTO law takes precedence over the Cartagena Protocol since not all WTO Members are state parties to the Protocol. Whether the precautionary principle is reflected in WTO law and CETA is frequently questioned by scholars and States. In this regard, the present analysis could find that the precautionary principle as applied in EU law is reflected in WTO law. It seems as if the EU has adapted its precautionary action to the requirements laid down in the WTO agreement as can be seen from the EU Commission’s communication on the precautionary principle.