. /.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/AHG/W/107
7 March 2001
(01-1096)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Ad Hoc Group on Implementation
LIST OF QUESTIONS POSED BY MEMBERS ON THE APPLICATION OF THE
LESSER DUTY RULE AND CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC INTEREST
Note by the Secretariat
At its last meeting, the Ad Hoc Group on Implementation directed the Secretariat to compile
and circulate a list of questions posed by Members in  the discussions concerning the application of the
lesser duty rule and consideration of public intere st.  Based on the written submissions of Members,
and the discussions at the last meeting, the Secretariat has compiled the following list:
1. Are industrial users and consumer organizations given the right to review and copy the non-
confidential versions of all documents submitted by the parties to the investigation?  (This is relevant
only to Members who do not maintain a full public file of all documents relating to the investigation.)
2. At what stage of the investigation do the Members provide opportunities for industrial users
and consumer organizations to provide information?  Do they have a right to be heard as well as to
submit written information?
3. Are there Members who maintain a verification procedure for verifying the factual
information submitted by these parties?
4. Do those Members who do not include a public interest clause in their anti-dumping regimes
provide an opportunity for industrial users and consumer organizations to provide information?  If so,
what effect, if any, do their views have on the determinations made by the Authorities?
5. To what extent do those Members who do include a public interest clause in their anti-
dumping regimes consider the information and comments received from the industrial users and
consumer organizations in their final determinations?  It may be useful to provide specific examples
of cases where those comments actually had an impact on the final determination.
6. Do Members affording opportunities for industrial users to comment also include the
suppliers of the raw material as parties who may provide relevant information to the investigating
authorities?
7. Is there any distinction drawn between the pre liminary and final determination with respect to
the relevance of information provided by users or consumers?
8. How do Members take into account the “relevancy” of submissions from consumers and
downstream users?
9. Are competition authorities allowed and/or required to provide input on behalf of consumers
and downstream industries?G/ADP/AHG/W/107
Page 2
10. Can representations from these groups result in the reduction of anti-dumping duties?
11. Is not "public interest" a sovereign judgement?
12. May not the public interest lie in enforcement of Anti-dumping laws?
13. Can not a sovereign determine that its economy is best served by enforcement of Anti-
dumping laws?
14. Does consideration of public interest testimony allow for testimony of producers and
employees of the industries subject to alleged dumping?
15. To what extent is a public interest evaluation affected by the fact that the duty is less than the
margin of dumping?
16. In the context of lesser duty calculations, to what extent, if any, are competition authorities
allowed in the process?
17. To what extent, if any, are importers in the investigation allowed to represent the downstream
consumer?
__________