RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONGPA/M/19
3 February 2003
(03-0674)
Committee on Government Procurement
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 8 OCTOBER 2002
Chairman:  Mr. Jan Peter Mout (the Netherlands)
1. The following agenda was adopted:
A. Election of Chairman for the Remainder of 2002
B. Modifications to the Appendices to the Agreement
C. Accessions:
(i) Applications:
-E s t o n i a- Latvia
- Chinese Taipei
- Panama- Bulgaria- Slovenia- Albania-M o l d o v a
- Jordan
- Kyrgyz Republic-G e o r g i a- Lithuania
(ii) Other newly acceded WTO Members
(iii) Streamlining of the accession process
D. Review of National Implementing LegislationE. Negotiations under Article XXIV:7GPA/M/19
Page 2
F. Other Business:
(i) Revision of the Decision on Procedures  for Circulation and Derestriction of 
Documents
(ii) Response to the letter received from the Chairman of the Committee on Trade
and Development
(iii) Letter from the Chairman of the Committee to WTO Members with observer 
status in the Committee
(iv) Letter from the Chairman of the Committee to WTO Members
G. Annual ReportH. Date of the next meeting
A. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN FOR THE REMAINDER OF 2002
2. Following the resignation of the Chairman for 2002, Mr. Martin Loken, with effect from
2 August 2002, the Committee elected Mr. Jan-Peter Mout of the Netherlands as Chairman for the
remainder of 2002.
B. MODIFICATIONS TO THE APPENDICES TO THE AGREEMENT
(i) Modifications by Japan to Annex 3 of Appendix I
3. The Chairman said that the proposed modifications to Annex 3 of Appendix I by Japan in
GPA/W/196 had become effective on 27 June 2002.  The document containing the certification of the
modifications had been circulated as WT/Let/425.  That document had subsequently been revised and
circulated as WT/Let/425/Rev.1 to indicate a technical error related to the effective date of the
modifications.
(ii) Modifications by Singapore to Appendices I, II, III and IV
4. The Chairman said that the proposed modifications to Appendices I, II, III and IV by
Singapore in GPA/W/200 had become ef fective on 11 August 2002 (WT/Let/429).
(iii) Proposed modifications by the United States to Annex 2 of Appendix I
5. The Chairman said that the United States had proposed modifications to Annex 2 of
Appendix I which had been circulated in document GPA/W/208, dated 16 September 2002.1
(iv) Proposed modifications by Canada to Annex 1 of Appendix I
6. The Chairman said that Canada had sent a communication proposing modifications to Annex
1 of Appendix I, dated 12 September 2002 (GPA/W /203).  In a communication dated 7 October 2002,
                                                     
1 These modifications became effective on 16 October 2002 (WT/Let/431).GPA/M/19
Page 3
Hong Kong, China had sought clarification and further information regarding the proposed
modifications (GPA/W/218).2
(v) Proposed modifications by Korea to Annex 3 of Appendix I
7. The Chairman said that Korea had proposed modifications to Annex 3 of Appendix I, dated
11 September 2002, to withdraw Korea Telecom (KT) from Annex 3 of Appendix I, on the grounds
that the Korean Government's control or influence over KT had effectively been eliminated
(GPA/W/207).  The United States, the European  Community and Canada had sent communications
objecting to the entry into effect of the proposed modifications and requesting additional time to study
and to seek clarification regarding the proposed changes (GPA/W/210, GPA/W/214 and GPA/W/217,
respectively).
8. The representative of Korea said that, in August 2002, KT had announced the completion of
the privatization of KT that had been carried out since 1993.  KT was no longer a government
invested entity, and its rights and obligations as a government invested entity had expired.  With the
sale of its remaining government shares in May 2002, no Korean Government or Korean
Government-owned institutions held shares in KT.  KT was now owned completely by the private
sector, and was thus fully private from both a legal and practical point of view.  KT was therefore
entitled to conduct its procurement solely on commercial considerations.  As a company operatedpurely by its private shareholders, of which 49 per cent were foreign investors, KT was not subject to
any government control or influence, both in legal and practical terms.  Before privatization, KT had
been subject to both the Commercial Act and the Pr ivatization Act.  However, with the completion of
the sale of its remaining government shares, KT had been transformed into a fully private company
excluded from coverage of the Privatization Act, and only subject to the Commercial Act.  Korea hadrecently held bilateral consultations with the United States and the European Community and was
ready to further consult with them in order to e xpedite the modification process.  Those Parties who
continued to object to the proposed modifications should specify their concerns or questions in
writing as soon as possible.
9. Concerning the confirmation requested by Cana da (GPA/W/217) regarding the application of
national treatment and MFN obligations of the GATT and the GATS to "any measures taken by the
Government of Korea pertaining to purchases by KT", the representative of Korea reiterated that since
it was completely privatized earlier this year, KT was free from any government control or influence
in making its business decisions including purchasing decisions.  The Korean Government
accordingly did not have any legal or other means to intervene in KT's purchasing decisions, and it
did not envisage taking any measure pertaining to purchases by KT because KT was free to make it
purchasing decisions solely in accordance with commercial considerations.
3
10. The representative of the United States noted that her delegation had had extensive bilateral
discussions with Korea, and that Korea had provided a considerable amount of information.  The
United States, however, expected to have a few remaining questions to put to Korea.  The
representative of the European Community said that his delegation had had bilateral discussions with
Korea, and that it would be submitting further questions to Korea as soon as possible.4
11. The representative of Korea said that the situation in which a private entity was subjected to
the procedural requirements of the Agreement was not justified.  The Agreement was not intended to
discipline the purchasing decisions of private entities which made business decisions solely in
accordance with commercial considerations and tota lly free from the control and influence of the
government.
                                                     
2 Canada's replies to questions from Hong Kong, China were subsequently circulated in GPA/W/229.
3 Response subsequently circulated in writing in document GPA/W/222.
4 Subsequently circulated in document GPA/W/244.GPA/M/19
Page 4
(vi) Japan's proposed modifications relating to NTT
12. With respect to the proposed modification by Japan to its Annex 3 of Appendix I notified in
GPA/W/91, the Chairman recalled that consultations had been held between Japan and the delegations
of the United States, the European Community and Canada on the basis of the questions put to Japanby these delegations (GPA/W/97, GPA/W/99, GPA/W/100 and GPA/W/100/Add.1) and Japan's
answers thereto (GPA/W/104, GPA/W/104/Add.1, GPA/W/107 and GPA/W/108).  Japan's responses
to the additional questions from Canada had been circulated in document GPAW/199.  The United
States had withdrawn its objection to the modifications proposed by Japan on 19 October 2001
(GPA/W/166), and Canada on 1 October 2002 (GPAW/211).
13. The representative of Canada said that Canada had withdrawn its objection based on the
particular circumstances relating to NTT Communications and without prejudice to Canada's views in
any other circumstances (GPA/W/213).
14. The representative of Japan said the European Community was now the only Party objecting
to the withdrawal of the proposed modifications.  Japan had requested the European Community to
forward written comments before this meeting but that the European Community had been unable to
do so due to their own internal consultations.  The European Community would not lose any trade
benefits accruing to it under the Agreement by the withdrawal of NTT Communications fromAnnex 3 of Japan's Appendix I because there was no discriminatory treatment against European
Community goods and services or suppliers in actual procurement operations by NTT
Communications.  NTT Communications remained committed to a policy of open, fair and non-
discriminatory procurement and in practice had procured telecommunications products from a number
of foreign suppliers in various countries including the countries in the European Community.  Shetherefore hoped that the European Community would withdraw its objection to the proposed
modifications.
15. The representative of the European Comm unity said that the European Community
maintained its objection to the withdrawal of NTT Communications for the time being and would
provide written confirmation of its position to Japan in the near future.
(vii) Japan's proposed modifications relating to railway companies
16. The Chairman said that, with respect to the proposed modification by the delegation of Japan
to its Annex 3 of Appendix I in documents GPA/W/144, 145 and 146, dated 29 August 2001,
communications had been received from the delegations of the United States, Canada and the
European Community (GPA/W/151, GPA/W/155 and GPA/W/156, respectively) seeking clarification
and objecting to the proposed withdrawal of the three Japanese railway companies, namely East Japan
Railway Company, Central Japan Railway Company and West Japan Railway Company from thecoverage of the Agreement.  Communications receiv ed from Japan providing clarifications regarding
the proposed modifications had been circulated in GPA/W/152 and Corr.1 and GPA/W/179.
Additional questions had been received from the European Community and the United States in 2001
(GPA/W/164 and GPA/W/165, respectively).  Japan's responses to these questions were contained in
GPA/W/180 and GPA/W/181, respectively.  In 2002, the delegations of the United States and theEuropean Community had submitted further questions, circulated in GPA/W/204 and GPA/W/205,
respectively.
5  An additional question received from Canada relating to Central Japan Railway
Company and West Japan Railway Company had been circulated in GPA/W/212.6
                                                     
5 Japan's responses thereto were subsequently circulated in documents GPA/W/233 and GPA/W/234,
respectively.
6 Japan's responses thereto were subsequently circulated in document GPA/W/235.GPA/M/19
Page 5
17. The representative of Japan said that her delegation had held a series of bilateral meetings
with the delegations of Canada, the European Community and the United States which had involved
an extensive exchange of questions and answers.  Japan believed that the three objecting Parties had
come to an adequate assessment of the proposal.  Her delegation hoped that Japan could reach a
mutual understanding as soon as possible with the three Parties concerned regarding its proposedwithdrawal of the three railway companies in acco rdance with Article XXIV:6(b) of the Agreement.
Japan requested the three objecting Parties to proceed with the matter expeditiously.
18. The representative of the European Community said that the responses received from Japan
were being reviewed by his delegation and that it hoped to proceed with the matter in an expeditious
manner.7
19. The representative of the United States said that her delegation would examine closely Japan's
responses to its questions.  Meanwhile, the United States maintained its objection.
20. The representative of Canada said that in a communication, dated 1 October 2002, Canada
had withdrawn its objection to the modification to Appendix I of the Agreement related to the East
Japan Railway Company (GPA/W/211).  Canada had been holding consultations with Japan with
regard to West Japan Railway Company and Central Japan Railway Company respectively.
(viii) Proposed modification by the United States to reflect recent changes in the
administrative structure of its Federal Government
21. The Chairman said that, with respect to the proposed modifications to Appendix I by the
United States in GPA/W/153, dated 25 September 2001, the delegations of Canada, the
European Community and Japan had made communications seeking further information from the
United States with respect to the notification in GPA/W/153 and objecting to the proposedmodifications going into effect at the end of the 30-day period (circulated in GPA/W/167,
GPA/W/163 and GPA/W/162, respectively).  The responses by the United States to the questions
raised by the three Parties had been circulated in GPA/W/183-185, respectively.  Further questions
had been put by Japan (GPA/W/195) a nd the European Community (GPA/W/216).
8
22. The Chairman said that the Committee would revert to this matter at its next meeting.
C. ACCESSIONS
(i) Applications:
-E s t o n i a
23. The Chairman said that the questions raised by the United States regarding replies from
Estonia in GPA/W/190/Rev.1 had been circulated in GPA/W/202, dated 22 August 2002.  Estonia's
replies thereto had been circulated in GPA/W/215.  As agreed at the May 2002 meeting, further
plurilateral consultations had been held between interested Parties and Estonia on 8 October 2002.  At
these consultations, the Parties had been informed that Estonia needed additional time to assess the
impact on its accession of the forthcoming legislative changes.  There also appeared to be a number of
issues outstanding in their bilateral co nsultations with the European Community.
                                                     
7 Follow-up questions received from the European Community have been subsequently circulated in
document GPA/W/245.
8 The replies of the United States to the questions submitted by the European Community have been
subsequently circulated in GPA/W/243.GPA/M/19
Page 6
24. The representative of Estonia said that, since the May 2002 meeting, Estonia had had bilateral
consultations with the European Community and an exchange of information with Canada.
- Latvia
25. The Chairman said that, as agreed at the May 2002 meeting, further plurilateral consultations
had been held between interested Parties and Latvia on 8 October 2002.  At these consultations, the
Committee had been informed that Latvia would make  certain adjustments to its legislation and also
that its bilateral consultations with the European Community had been continuing.
26. The representative of Latvia said that Latvia had had bilateral consultations with the European
Community during which several issues had been raised relating to the adjustments in the national
legislation both in the basic law and in the secondary legislation.  Because of the recent elections in
Latvia, it was very difficult to give any sp ecific time-frame for the legislative changes.
- Chinese Taipei
27. The Chairman said that the former Chairman ha d held informal consultations with interested
Parties in mid-July 2002 to review the status of their bilateral consultations with the delegation of
Chinese Taipei regarding the outstanding points on both substance and presentational matters relatedto the offer of Chinese Taipei.
28. The representative of Chinese Taipei said that  bilateral consultations had been concluded with
the European Community and Japan.  Bilateral consultations with Israel and Singapore were
continuing.  His delegation hoped that, through greater flexibility, Chinese Taipei's accession process
could be expedited.
29. The representative of the European Community confirmed that his delegation had concluded
negotiations on issues of substance, and hoped that the accession of Chinese Taipei could take place
in the near future.
30. The representative of Singapore said that his delegation was pursuing the bilateral
consultations with the delegation of Chinese Taipei.  Singapore also wished to see the early accession
of Chinese Taipei to the Agreement.  At the same time, however, Parties would recognize that the
concerns and considerations of different Parties also needed to be addressed in the accession process.
He confirmed that there remained a couple of outsta nding issues that needed to be further clarified.
Singapore looked forward to a positive response from Chinese Taipei in resolving the outstanding
issues.
31. The representative of Japan confirmed that Japan had finalized the bilateral consultations with
Chinese Taipei on 7 October 2002.  Japan hoped that Chinese Taipei would soon become a Party to
the Agreement following resolution of any remaining issues with other Parties.
32. The representative of Israel said that the conclusion of bilateral negotiations between Chinese
Taipei and Japan and the European Community was a positive development.  In general, Israel
considered the accession of new Parties to the Agreement as essential for the Agreement and as an
important step for the newly acceded WTO Members.  In October 2002, Israel had had substantivebilateral consultations with Chinese Taipei which could move towards a mutual agreement in the near
future.  He hoped that this would be an agreement that could be accepted by Israel's authorities and
industries, and at the same time be supported by the Parties to the Agreement.GPA/M/19
Page 7
33. Concluding this sub-item, the Chairman noted that Parties were making good progress in their
consultations with Chinese Taipei and that, though some further work needed to be done, he hoped
that Chinese Taipei's accession process would be concluded shortly.  He encouraged delegations
which still had outstanding issues to try to make as  much progress as possible in their consultations
with the delegation of Chinese Taipei.  He was available to consult and offer his good offices tofacilitate the process.
- Panama
34. The Chairman recalled that the Committee had agreed at the May 2002 meeting to seek
plurilateral consultations with Panama before the present meeting.  The Secretariat had been informed
by the delegation of Panama that it should not be included in the plurilateral consultations that were
scheduled for 8 October 2002.
- Bulgaria
35. The representative of Bulgaria said her delegation expected to be able to provide additional
detailed information shortly regarding amendments to the national public procurement legislation.  At
the February 2002 plurilateral meeting held on Bulgaria's accession to the Agreement, her delegationhad made a request that Parties provided information pertaining to export opportunities in their
markets so as to enable Bulgaria to assess its existing and potential export capabilities.  This request
had been made pursuant to the Marrakesh Decision on Accession to the Agreement on Government
Procurement of 1994 and the Protocol  of Accession of Bulgaria to the WTO.  Since then, it had been
reiterated in the Committee on Government Procurem ent, in bilateral contacts with Parties to the
Agreement, in the Workshop on Accession to the Agreement on Government Procurement, and also
in the context of the preparation of the Technical Assistance Plan of the Secretariat for 2003.  So far,
no such information had been provided by Parties.  Bulgaria continued to expect the provision of this
information, which would facilitate its accession to the Agreement.  Her delegation was ready to work
with Parties towards that objective.
36. The representative of Canada said that her delegation had one further follow-up question for
Bulgaria.9  The representative of the United States said it had a couple of further questions which
would be submitted shortly.
- Slovenia
37. The representative of Slovenia said that his Government considered it important that the
legislative amendments be adopted by the Parliament before Slovenia submitted its offer.  Among
other things, the amendments would involve the defi nition of the entities in Slovenia.  This would
contribute to a clear understanding of the entities that would be listed in Slovenia's offer.
- Albania
38. The Chairman said that Albania had received questions from the European Community;
Hong Kong, China;  Switzerland;  Canada;  and the United States (GPA/SPEC/26, GPA/W/169,
GPA/W/174, GPA/W/178 and GPA/W/209, respectively).10
                                                     
9 Subsequently circulated in document GPA/W/219.
10 Albania's replies to the questions put by the European Community;  Hong Kong, China;
Switzerland;  and Canada have been subsequently circulated in documents GPA/W/238-241, respectively.GPA/M/19
Page 8
-M o l d o v a
39. The Chairman said that the questions received from Hong Kong, China had been circulated in
GPA/W/206.
- Jordan
40. The representative of Jordan said that a study assessing the impact of Jordan's accession to the
Agreement and using statistical data for the years 1997-2000 had been finalized in August 2002.
Concurrently, the Engineers Association and the Contractors Association, both private sector
institutions, had also submitted an impact assessment study, as related to their respective sectors.
Both studies had been reviewed and analysed by a national committee consisting of members from
both the private and public sectors.  The national committee would be responsible for preparing theinitial entity offer after coordination with different stakeholders.  After its completion, the initial
entity offer would be presented to the Prime Minister's office for final approval.  Concerning
modernization of procurement system, he said that the proposed public procurement legislation was to
take the form of a bye-law;  that the Government Tenders Directorate and the General Supplies
Department would remain independent entities;  an d that a high-level procurement committee, linked
to the Prime Minister's office, would be established.
41. The representatives of the United States, Israel
, Canada , and the European Community , noted
the good progress being made by Jordan in its accession process, and said they looked forward to
receiving Jordan's initial entity offer before the end of 2002.
- Kyrgyz Republic
42. The Chairman said that the replies to the Checklist of Issues had been circulated in
GPA/W/197, dated 10 June 2002.  Further questions rais ed by the delegation of the United States had
been circulated in GPA/W/201.  The representative of the European Community said that his
delegation would be submitting questions to the Kyrgyz Republic in the near future.
-G e o r g i a
43. The Chairman said that no developments had taken place with regard to Georgia's accession
since the May 2002 meeting.11  The representative of Canada said that her delegation would submit
questions to Georgia in the near future.12
- Lithuania
44. The Chairman said no developments had taken place with respect to the accession of
Lithuania since the May 2002 meeting.
(ii) Other newly acceded WTO Members
- Oman
45. The Chairman said no developments had been reported in respect of Oman's accession to the
Agreement since the February 2002 meeting.
                                                     
11 In a communication dated 8 October 2002,  Georgia applied for accession (GPA/71).
12 Subsequently communicated in GPA/W/220, dated 6 November 2002.GPA/M/19
Page 9
- Croatia
46. The Chairman said that no developments had been reported in respect of Croatia's accession
to the Agreement since the February 2002 meeting.
- China
47. The representative of China said that new legislation on government procurement had been
adopted in June 2002 and would be enacted on 1 January 2003.
- Mongolia
48. The Chairman said that no developments had been reported regarding the accession of
Mongolia since the September 2001 meeting.
(iii) Streamlining of accession process
49. The Chairman said that, as agreed at the May 2002 meeting, the Committee had held informal
consultations on streamlining the accession process at which Parties had an exchange of views on how
to improve and accelerate the procedures for acceding countries, including those with economies in
transition and developing countries.  It had been agreed to revert to a number of suggestions made in
this context at the next Committee meeting.  The issu es raised at the informal meeting could form the
basis of further discussions on this matter.
50. The Committee agreed to revert to the matter of accessions at its next meeting.
D. REVIEW OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION
51. The Chairman said that Iceland had recently notified its implementing legislation (GPA/69).
In accordance with the procedures agreed for the review of implementing legislation, the Committee
agreed that delegations that wished to put quest ions to Iceland should do so by 16 December 200213,
and that Iceland should provide its answers by 16 February 2003.
52. The Chairman recalled that at the May 2002 meeting, the delegation of the Kingdom of
Netherlands with respect to Aruba had been invited to submit its notification of the implementing
legislation in accordance with the requirements in GPA/1/Add.1.  The representative of theNetherlands said that he had been informed by the Aruban authorities that no progress had been made
in this respect.
E. NEGOTIATIONS UNDER ARTICLE XXIV :7
53. The Chairman reported on the informal meeting held on the Article XXIV:7 negotiations on
7 October 2002.  The Group had pursued the Article-by-Article review of the Agreement on the basis
of the proposals by various delegations compiled in the Secretariat note "Suggested Drafting Changes
to the 1994 Agreement", dated 23 September 2002 (Job No. 7423).  Delegations also had available tothem a non-paper by Korea relating to amendment to Article XXIV:6(b) (Job No. 5669);  a non-paper
by Japan proposing amendments to a number of Articles (Job No. 6846);  a non-paper by Chinese
Taipei suggesting drafting changes to selected Articles of the Agreement (Job No. 7872);  a non-paper
by Norway on amendments to Article VII (Job No. 7935 );  an explanatory note by Japan relating to its
proposal on Article XXIV:6(b) circulated earlier in Job No. 6846 (Job No. 7823);  and an explanatorynote by Japan relating to its proposal on Article I:2 concerning BOT or equivalent contracts also
circulated earlier in Job No. 6846 (Job No. 7790).  Furthermore, the informal Group had before it a
                                                     
13 No questions had been put to Iceland as of the date of issue of this document.GPA/M/19
Page 10
note by the Secretariat summarizing the discussion of the issues in relation to basket 1 of the work
programme (Job No. 7496);  an annotated agenda relating to basket 2 issues (Job No. 7478);  and
annotated agenda relating to basket 3 issues (Job No. 7448).  The Group had a focused discussion on
basket 2 issues, relating to tendering procedures, t echnical specifications and related definitions, and
basket 3 issues relating to information and review as regards obligations of entities, information andreview as regards obligations of Parties, enforcement, institutions, and statistical reporting.  It also had
reverted briefly to basket 1 issues relating to basic principles, scope and coverage and related
definitions, exceptions, developing countries and accessions.  The Group had also considered
elements 2 and 3 of its work programme, relating to expansion of coverage and elimination of
discriminatory measures.  It had been informed by the delegations of Canada and Japan that they
expected shortly to be in a position to table ideas on possible approaches regarding the negotiations in
these areas, as envisaged in the decision on timetable and work programme of February 2002.
14  As
regards documentation regarding the work done at th is meeting, the Chairman had suggested that the
Secretariat be requested, once more to update th e two-column text, namely "Suggested Drafting
Changes to the 1994 Agreement", in the light of the proposals recently submitted and the detailed
comments made and clarifications sought at the present meeting15;  update the note on the discussion
of the issues in relation to basket 1 of the work programme;  and prepare notes on the discussion ofthe issues in relation to baskets 2 and 3, based on the responses given by delegations at the present
meeting to the issues raised in the annotate d agendas relating to each of these baskets.
16  The work
programme encouraged the tabling of all proposals rela ting to the review of the text of the Agreement
no later than 1 September 2002.  The delegation of Norway had foreshadowed tabling, in the near
future, a non-paper relating to the note in the Agreement on tied aid and Japan on electronicprocurement.  A number of delegations had reserved the right to come forward with further proposals
or respond to future proposals.  Regarding the ne xt steps, the Chairman recalled that the Committee
had agreed at the February 2002 meeting that it would hold four informal meetings in 2002 and
suggested the week of 9 December 2002 for the fourth informal meeting in 2002.
17  As regards the
work on the text of the Agreement, the Chairman recalled that it had been envisaged at the Februarymeeting that work would start at the fourth meetin g of 2002 on the basis of a text by the Chairman.
However, a number of delegations had indicated that it would be their intention to work intensively
together in the coming weeks on issues in baskets 1 and 2 in order to seek to narrow differences.
Given the very large number of proposals still on the table and the many outstanding differences,
some more important than others, the Chairman had encouraged such work.  It was important that
delegations were in a position to share the fruits of this further work in good time before the next
meeting in order to make that meeting productive.  With regard to basket 3, the Chairman had saidthan it was his plan to seek to prepare a text for the consideration of the Group on all the elements
other than that concerning Article XXIV:6, where further discussion was clearly necessary.  With
regard to elements 2 and 3 of the work programme the Chairman had said that in addition to the
papers that the delegations of Canada and Japan had already foreshadowed, he encouraged other
delegations to put forward, before the next meeting, their ideas on possible approaches to thenegotiations in these areas.  Finally, as regards the meeting schedule for 2003, the Chairman had
suggested that it would be necessary to step up the intensity of activity and to use different formats in
addition to the informal Group if the Committee was to have provisional agreement on the text by the
Cancun Ministerial Conference next September, as the Committee had previously agreed.  He had
said delegations would have to be ready to make themselves available at relatively short notice and, attimes, for extended consultations.  Nonetheless, he had considered it useful if the Secretariat were to
pencil in at least three meetings for the Committee prior to Cancun, to be coordinated as usual with
meetings of the Working Group on Transparency in Government Procurement, and had suggested that
the Committee reverted to this matter at the next meeting.
                                                     
14 The submission by Japan was subsequently circulated as Job No. 8223.
15 Subsequently circulated as Job No. 8957.
16 Subsequently circulated as Job Nos. 7496/Rev.1, 9018 and 9034, respectively.
17 This meeting was subsequently postponed to February 2003.GPA/M/19
Page 11
54. The representative of Korea said his delegation had no objection in principle to working
intensively on the issues in baskets 1 and 2 in orde r to seek to narrow differences and to help to
expedite work.  With regard to basket 3, he sought clarification as to whether there was any plan to
actually discuss Article XXIV:6 in the 2003 meetings, since further discussion on this article was
clearly necessary.  The Chairman said that he believed it was important that the next meeting should
focus on baskets 1 and 2, as otherwise there was the risk that discussions would develop too broadly.
He noted that some progress had been made at this informal meeting on the issue of Article XXIV:6,
with papers tabled, for instance, by the delegations of Korea and Japan (Job Nos. 5669 and 7823,
respectively).  Noting that this was one of the difficult issues, he encouraged delegations to continue
to work on it and to revert to it in 2003.
55. The Chairman said that at the next meeting the Group should try to put together a list of the
more substantive issues that would require further discussion.  He encouraged delegations to give due
consideration to the issues that might appear on that list.
56. The Committee agreed to proceed as suggested by the Chairman.
F. OTHER BUSINESS
(i) Revision of the Decision on Procedures for Circulation and Derestriction of
Documents
57. The Chairman said that at the May 2002 meeting, it was agreed that the Committee would
update its Decision on Circulation and Derestriction of Documents (GPA/1/Add.2) in order to reflect
the WTO procedures adopted on 14 May 2002 (WT/L/452).  After a brief discussion, the Committee
adopted the revised Decision on the basis of a draft text circulated by the Secretariat (GPA/72).
(ii) Response to the letter received from the Chairman of the Committee on Trade and
Development
58. The Chairman drew attention to his response, on behalf of the Committee, to a letter that he
had received from the Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) requesting that
the CTD be kept informed of discussions or de velopments relating to special and differential
treatment taking place in the Committee on Government Procurement.
(iii) Letter from the Chairman of the Committee to WTO Members with observer status in
the Committee
59. The Chairman said that, as agreed by the Committee at the May 2002 meeting, he had written
a letter, on behalf of the Committee, to the WTO Members with observer status in the Committee
inviting them to make written contributions on how the relevant provisions and decisions on
developing countries and accessions could be improved.
(iv) Letter from the Chairman of the Committee to WTO Members
60. The representative of Israel, supported by the representative of the European Community ,
suggested that the Chairman send a letter to  all WTO Members informing them about the
Article XXIV:7 negotiations and encouraging them to  become observers to the Committee.  Since the
beginning of the review, the atmosphere had changed in the WTO because of the Doha Development
Round and there might be more interest by other WTO Members to join in this process.GPA/M/19
Page 12
61. After a brief discussion, the Committee agreed that the Chairman would write a letter to all
WTO Members, with a view to bringing them up to  date on the Article XXIV:7 negotiations and
inviting any contributions they might have with respect to this process.
G. ANNUAL REPORT
62. The Committee considered its report to the General Council on the basis of a draft text
prepared by the Secretariat which was revised in light of comments by delegations and subsequently
adopted (GPA/73).
H. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING
63. The Committee agreed to hold its next meeting in early 2003.18
________
                                                     
18 Subsequently scheduled for 6 February 2003.