RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/PER/13
G/SCM/Q1/PER/13
11 April 2001
(01-1855)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES
Regarding the Notification of PERU1
The following communication, dated 9 April 2001, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
1. In making the “domestic producer” determination under Article 5 of the Amended
Regulations, does Peru not intend to consider whether the producers are related to importers , as well
as exporters of the allegedly dumped or subsidized product, in keeping with Article 4.1(i) of the AD
Agreement?  Does Peru plan to identify precis ely the “relevant provisions” referred to in this
provision?
2. New Article 22 bis provides that parties must submit all evidence within six months of the
date the initiation was published; however, at the Commission’s discretion, this deadline may be
extended up to three months.  What standard does the Commission intend to apply in deciding to
extend the deadline for filing evidence?
3. The amendment to Article 23 of the Regulations (the section which discusses the use of Facts
Available), authorizes the Commission to impose a fine on parties who 1) obstruct the taking of
evidence, 2) use the proceedings for unlawful or fraudulent purposes, or 3) “in any way hinder or
obstruct the normal conduct of the investigation procedure, in accordance with the applicable rules on
the subject, including the supplementary rules of administrative law contained in Articles 110 et seq.of the Code of Civil Procedure.”
(a) Do the Peruvian authorities draw adverse assumptions about the information missing
from the record when a party has failed to cooperate?  Would a party also be subject
to fines in such a situation?  Under what circumstances would the authorities impose
fines in addition to using facts available?
(b) What will the Peruvian authorities construe to be “obstruction,” “hindering,” “normal
conduct,” and “unlawful or fraudulent purposes?”  Are these terms defined in the
relevant sections of the Code of Civil Procedure, or is the determination of any
transgression left to the discretion of the Commission?  By what standard will the
                                                     
1 G/ADP/N/1/PER/1 + Suppl.1, Corr.1, Suppl.2, Corr .1; G/SCM/N/1/PER/1 + Suppl.1, Corr.1, Suppl.2,
Corr.1G/ADP/Q1/PER/13
G/SCM/Q1/PER/13
Page 2
Peruvian authorities determine whether a change in the situation has been
“significant” enough to warrant a review?
4. Amended Article 27 provides that all non-confidential evidence shall be made available to
interested parties and that the Commission may send copies of the proceedings “to anyone who sorequests and shows proof of a legitimate interest.”  What is the distinction between “evidence” and
“copies of the proceedings?”  Does the latter include the former, or does “proceedings” refer only to
official determinations, such as provisional determinations, made by the Commission?  What do the
Peruvian authorities consider to be a “legitimate interest,” and how does a non-party prove such an
interest?
5. The Amendment to Article 29 provides an opportunity to cure defective claims for
confidential treatment.  Where the confidentiality of information is in dispute, do the Peruvianauthorities intend to treat the disputed information as confidential until the issue is resolved?  Will the
authorities provide reasons for the rejection of a claim for confidential treatment?
6. Under Article 30, Peruvian authorities may retain information claimed to be confidential
notwithstanding failure to show good cause for the claim, to provide a public summary or to withdraw
the request for confidentiality if it is demonstrated  to be correct using “convincing evidence from an
appropriate source.”  Will such information be treated as confidential information?  If so, how will
interested parties be informed of it under Article 6.9 of the AD Agreement?  What would constitute an
“appropriate source” within the meaning of this provision?
7. Under Article 31, are hearings to be open to the public?  If so, will the authorities grant a
closed session to a party, upon request, to facilitate the presentation of arguments regardingconfidential matters?  Are the hearings to be conducted on the record, with a formal transcript made
and available for inspection by the parties?
8. The text and subject of Article 33 as contained in the May 16, 1997
2 notification of Supreme
Decree No. 043-97-EF, does not appear to bear an y relationship to the text and subject of the
amendment contained in the current notification.  Have there been other amendments to Article 33?Would the Peruvian government explain the relatio nship between the two texts?  For example, how
does the “form and amount of provisional measures” addressed by previously notified Article 33
relate to the translation requirements for do cuments in another language addressed by the
amendment?
9. Please explain the reference to criminal and civil liability contained in amended Article 33.
10. By what standard will the Peruvian authorities determine whether a change in the situation
has been “significant” enough to warrant a review under amended Article 47?
11. The second paragraph of new Article 14(II) of Supreme Decree No. 043-97-EF states that the
Peru Dumping and Subsidies Commission (Commission) may take into account in its analysis of the
impact on the domestic industry of dumped or subsidized imports “the origin and characteristics of the
inputs incorporated in the like product by the domestic producers in the production process” if they
are deemed relevant.
                                                     
2 See WTO document G/ADP/N/1/PER/1/Suppl.2, dated 28 August 1997.G/ADP/Q1/PER/13
G/SCM/Q1/PER/13
Page 3
(a) Could Peru indicate in what circumstances the Commission is likely to deem this
factor to be relevant to its impact anal ysis?  In such circumstances, how is the
Commission likely to take this factor into account?
(b) Does the Commission also take the origin and characteristics of the inputs into the
like product into account in defining the like product or the domestic industry?
__________