WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/44
12 February 2001
(01-0642)
GENERAL COUNCIL
Annual Report (2000)
The present report has been prepared in pursuance of the Procedures for an Annual Overview
of WTO Activities and for Reporting under the WTO (WT/L/105), and sets out the actions taken by
the General Council in the period since its previous annual report.1
In carrying out its tasks, the General Council has held 8 meetings and 2 Special Sessions on
Implementation since the period covered by the previous report.  The minutes of these meetings andSpecial Sessions, which remain the record of the General Council's work, are contained in documents
WT/GC/M/52 and Corr.1 and Add.1, 53, 54 and Add.1-2, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 and 61 and Add.1.
The following subjects are included in the report:
Page
1. Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference ...................................................................4
2. Other aspects of the WTO work programme ........................................................................5
3. Negotiations on agriculture and services ................................................................................6
(a) Negotiations on agriculture and services under Article 20 of the Agreement on
Agriculture and Article XIX of the Gene ral Agreement on Trad e in Services ..........................6
(b) Reports of the Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture  and of the Council
for Trade in Services ......................................................................................................... .........7
4. Participation of acceding countries as observers in the mandated negotiations on
agriculture, on services and on other elements of the built-in agenda ................................8
5. Implementation and transition periods ..................................................................................8
(a) Impleme ntatio n ............................................................................................................. .............8
(b) Transiti on Periods ......................................................................................................... .............9
6. Internal transparency and effect ive participation of Members .........................................10
7. External transparency ....................................................................................................... ....11
8. Special Sessions on implementation ......................................................................................12
(a) Programme and cal endar of work ............................................................................................1 2
                                                     
1 The annual report of the General Council for 1999 was circulated as WT/GC/28 and Add.1.  The
minutes of the Special Session of the General Council in  preparation for the Third Ministerial Conference held
on 23 November 1999, after the adoption of the 1999 Annual Report of the General Council, were circulated as
WT/GC/M/51.WT/GC/44
Page 2
(b) Discussion of impl ementation i ssues .......................................................................................1 2
(c) Activities under way in the WTO that may be of relevance to addressing
implementatio n issues ......................................................................................................... .....13
(d) Report on co nsultations .................................................................................................... .......13
9. Committee on Balance-of -Payments Restrictions................................................................14
(a) Consulta tions .............................................................................................................. .............14
(b) Notes on meetings .......................................................................................................... ..........14
10. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration ...........................................................14
(a) Reports .................................................................................................................... .................14
11. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement..............................................................16
(a) Harmonize d System........................................................................................................... .......16
(i) Nicaragua, Sri Lanka ....................................................................................................... ........16
(b) Renegotiation of Schedule ................................................................................................... .....16
(i) Zambia ..................................................................................................................... ................16
(c) Decision on the introduction of the Harmonized System changes into WTO Schedules
of tariff concessions on 1 January 1996 ...................................................................................17
(d) Uruguay – Derogation on minimum values..............................................................................17
(e) EC/France – Trading arrang ements with Morocco ..................................................................18
(f) EC – Autonomous preferential treatment to the countries of the Western Balkans ................18
(g) Turkey – Preferential treatmen t for Bosnia-Herzegovina ........................................................18
(h) Review of waivers pursuant to Ar ticle IX:4 of the WTO Agreement .....................................18
(i) Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 14 October 1996 until 31 December 2006 .......................18(ii) Cuba – Article XV:6, granted on 14 October 1996 until 31 December 2001 ..........................18
(iii) Hungary – Agricultural export subsidies, granted on 22 October 1997 until
31 December 2001 .............................................................................................................. .....18
(iv) United States – Andean Trade Preference Act, granted on 14 October 1996 until 4
December 2001.................................................................................................................. .......18
(v) United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 15 November
1995 until 31 December 2005 ..................................................................................................1 9
(vi) United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, granted on 14 October
1996 until 31 December 2006 ..................................................................................................1 9
12. Accession matters........................................................................................................... .........19
(a) Albania .................................................................................................................... .................19
(b) Azerbaijan ................................................................................................................. ...............19
(c) Bhutan ..................................................................................................................... .................20
(d) Cape Verde ................................................................................................................. .............20
(e) Croat ia .................................................................................................................... ..................20
(f) Georgia .................................................................................................................... .................21WT/GC/44
Page 3
(g) Jordan ..................................................................................................................... ..................21
(h) Lithuania .................................................................................................................. ................22
(i) Oman ....................................................................................................................... .................22
(j) Russian Federa tion ......................................................................................................... ..........22
(k) Ukraine .................................................................................................................... .................23
(l) Yemen ...................................................................................................................... ................23
(m) Accessions to  the WTO ...................................................................................................... .....24
13. Measures in favour of leas t-developed countries ................................................................24
14. Integrated framework for trade-related technical assistance to least-developed
countries (IF) ................................................................................................................ ..........24
15. Capacity-building through technical coop eration ..............................................................25
16. High-Level international intergovernmental  event on financing for development ..........25
17. Matters of relevance to the work and functioning of the WTO .........................................26
18. Trade facilitation – status report on wo rk carried out by the Council for Trade
in Goods under Paragraph 21 of the Singapore Ministerial Declaration .........................26
19. Report on the implementation of Article 10.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture .............26
20. Global electr onic co mmerce ................................................................................................. .27
21. Five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT
1994 .......................................................................................................................... ...............28
22. Proposal to amend certain provisions of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes Pursuant to Article X of the
Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization ...............................29
23. Proposal for addition of an item to the General Council Agenda: "Reports of the
Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture and of the Council for Trade
in Services, and of the TRIPS Counc il on the mandated negotiations on
Agriculture, Services and Ge ographical Indications" ........................................................30
24. Communication from the Appellate Bo dy to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body on "European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and
Asbestos-Containing Products" ............................................................................................30
25. Consultations on implementation .........................................................................................30
26. Request for a waiver for the new ACP/EC partnership agreement ..................................31
27. Review of procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO documents ............31
28. Revision of guidelines for th e scheduling of WT O meetin gs ..............................................32
29. Accreditation of Permanent Re presentatives to the WTO .................................................32
30. Outcome of the APEC meeting in Brunei Darussalam ......................................................33
31. Arrangements for effective cooperation with other intergovernmental
organizations .................................................................................................................. .........33
(a) International Telecommuni cations Uni on (ITU) .....................................................................33
(b) World Customs Organization (WCO) ......................................................................................33WT/GC/44
Page 4
32. International Trade Centre UNCT AD/WTO.......................................................................34
(a) Report of the Jo int Advisory Group.......................................................................................... 34
33. Administrati ve ma tters...................................................................................................... .....34
(a) Procedures for the appointment  of the Director-General .........................................................34
(b) WTO Secretariat and senior  management structure ................................................................35
(c) WTO Pension Plan............................................................................................................ ........35
(i) Annual Report of the Manage ment Board for 1999 .................................................................35
(ii) Transfer Agreement with the United  Nations Joint Staf f Pension Fund ..................................35
(iii) Managemen t Board ......................................................................................................... .........36
34. Observer status ............................................................................................................. ..........36
(a) Gover nments................................................................................................................. ............36
(i) Bahamas .................................................................................................................... ...............36
(ii) Libe ria ................................................................................................................... ...................36
(b) International intergover nmental organi zations ........................................................................37
35. Date and venue of the Fourth Session of the Ministerial Conference ...............................37
36. Appointment of office rs to WTO bodies ..............................................................................39
37. Election of Chairperson .................................................................................................... .....41
38. Review of WTO activities ................................................................................................... ...41
1. Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference (WT/GC/M/52, and Corr. 1 and Add. 1,
53)
At the General Council meeting on 17 December 1999, the Chairman proposed that
consideration of this item be postponed in order to allow delegations time for consultations.
The representatives of Pakistan, Panama, Mexico, European Communities, Switzerland,
Brazil, Mexico, United States, Canada, Dominican Republic, Morocco, India, Egypt, Peru, Norway,
Hungary, Cuba, Ecuador, Singapore and Uganda, and the Chairman spoke.
Following the discussion, the Chairman read out the following statement:
"As I have proposed, this meeting of the General Council will be adjourned and
resumed as early as possible next year to take up item 3 of the Agenda.  It is my
understanding that the question raised by a number of delegations concerning the provisionswhich lapse and deadlines, which expire on 31 December of this year will be part of the
consultations to be continued.  The General Council will therefore revert to these matters
when it resumes early next year.
"It is understood that all Members will exercise restraint on the matters under
consultation so as not to prejudice further fruitful discussion and decisions on these matters,
or the position of other Members.WT/GC/44
Page 5
"Members have made it clear that informal consultations are necessary on a wide
variety of issues, including the issue of deadlines.  Many Members urged understanding by all
Members in those consultations, and they urged due restraint on the part of Members.  This
approach would be without prejudice to the position on rights and obligations of Members."
The General Council agreed to postpone consideration of this item to allow further
consultations thereon, took note of the statements and adjourned.2
At the General Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the Chairman proposed that this
item and the item on "Other aspects of the WTO work programme" be taken up together.  Theproceedings of the discussion are reflected under item 2 of this report.
2. Other aspects of the WTO work programme (WT/GC/M/53
3)
At the General Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the Director-General reported, on
his own responsibility, on consultations he had been holding in regard to other aspects of the WTO
work programme.  He indicated, inter alia , that in his contacts with Members, undertaken in close co-
operation with the Chairman and with the assistance of his deputies, he had sought to get a sense of
the immediate priorities for attention beyond the mandated negotiations, and that the consultations
had shown considerable convergence on several points which were widely seen as immediate
priorities.  These of course did not exclude any further action that Members might decide to take in
due course on other areas of interest and concern.  He went on to provide further details on the fourissues that delegations had stressed in his consultations as being matters of immediate priority:
measures in favour of LDCs;  technical co-opera tion;  transition periods and other implementation
issues;  and internal transparency and effective participation of all Members.
In addressing both this item and that on "Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference", the
representatives of Bangladesh, Dominican Republic, Brazil, Bolivia, India, Morocco (on behalf of the
African Group), Egypt, Singapore, European Co mmunities, Indonesia, Pakistan, Korea, Uganda,
Mexico, Jamaica, Ecuador, Poland (on behalf of  the CEFTA Members and Turkey), Madagascar,
Malaysia, United States, Chile, Japan, Canada, Switzerland, Cuba, Panama, Thailand, Trinidad and
Tobago, Costa Rica, Burundi, Barbados, Israel, Mauritius, Venezuela, Argentina, Saint Lucia,
Honduras, Côte d'Ivoire and Hungary spoke.
The Chairman noted that the issues identified by the Director-General in his report had been
widely considered to be priorities for further consultation.  He also noted the high importance
Members had placed on addressing the range of implementation issues in an effective way, and
suggested that implementation should be an item on the agenda of the next meeting of the General
Council.  In this light, and bearing in mind the points made by delegations, he proposed that furtherconsultations be held by the Chairman of the General Council and the Director-General.
The General Council took note of the Director-G eneral's statement and of other statements,
and agreed to the Chairman's proposal.
                                                     
2 This meeting was subsequently closed.  The item was taken up again at the General Council meeting
of 7 and 8 February 2000.
3 As indicated under item 1 above, at the Chairman's suggestion, the matters under items 1 and 2 were
taken up together at the meeting on 7 and 8 February, an d the discussion is reflected accordingly in the minutes
of the meeting and in this report.WT/GC/44
Page 6
3. Negotiations on agriculture and services
(a) Negotiations on agriculture and services under Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture
and Article XIX of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (WT/GC/M/53)
At the General Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the Chairman said that in
conformity with the time-frame set out in Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture and in
Article XIX of the GATS, namely 1 January 2000, the mandated negotiations in these two areas were
now on.  However, a number of procedural matters remained to be settled before the work could start
in practice.  In this regard, and in the light of wide and intensive consultations, he proposed that as
regards Agriculture the negotiations on agriculture be conducted in the Committee on Agriculture
meeting in Special Sessions.  Progress in the negotiations would be reported directly to the General
Council on a regular basis.  The first Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture would be
scheduled back-to-back with the next regular meeting of the Committee on 23-24 March 2000.  TheChair of the Agriculture Committee would chair the Special Sessions, and exceptionally a Vice-Chair
of the Committee would be appointed to conduct the regular work of the Committee.
As to services, negotiations on services would be conducted in Special Sessions of the
Council for Trade in Services.  The Services Coun cil would report on a regular basis to the General
Council.  The first Special Session of the Services Council would be held in the week beginning
21 February, back-to-back with the regular meeting of the Services Council.  The Chair of the
Services Council would chair the Special Sessions, and the Services Council would consider whether
any further procedural questions needed to be addressed including the possible appointment of a Vice-
Chairman.
In his consultations, the Chairman also noted the importance Members attached to other
elements of the built-in agenda, including the mandated reviews and the negotiations foreseen under
the TRIPS Council in respect of geographical indications.  To some Members the mandated reviews
should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects ofdeveloping countries.  He said that while these reviews and negotiations might not pose the same
immediate practical questions as the services and agriculture negotiations, insofar as they were subject
to existing procedures, this did not in any way detract from the need to make serious progress on
them.
The representatives of Argentina (on behalf of the MERCOSUR Members), Australia,
Bangladesh, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, India, Japan, Malaysia, Mauritius,Mexico, Morocco (on behalf of the African Group) , Pakistan, Panama, Poland (on behalf of the
CEFTA Members and Turkey), Philippines (also on behalf of Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia,
Malaysia, Myanmar and Thailand), Singapore, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda
and United States, and the Chairman spoke.
The Chairman expressed satisfaction at consensus on his proposals on the organizational
aspects of the agriculture and services negotiations.  Action at the present meeting should also reflect
the collective recognition and commitment that th e mandated reviews should address the impact of
the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing countries.  He
understood that Members also wished to keep in mind the possibility of appointing vice-chairs whereappropriate for these mandated reviews.
The General Council took note of the Chairman's statements and of other statements, and
agreed to the proposals by the Chairman.  The General Council also agreed that the mandated reviews
should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects ofdeveloping countries.WT/GC/44
Page 7
(b) Reports of the Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture  and of the Council for Trade
in Services (WT/GC/M/55, 57, 58, 61)
At its meeting in February 2000, the General Council had agreed that Committee on
Agriculture and the Council for Trade in Services would report to the General Council on a regular
basis on the negotiations on agriculture and services respectively.
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman drew attention to the
reports on the first Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture (G/AG/NG/1, G/AG/NG/R/1)
and of the Council for Trade in Services (S/CSS/M/1).
The representatives of Argentina, Mexico, Uruguay and Brazil, and the Chairman of the first
Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services and the Chairman of the first Special Session ofthe Committee on Agriculture spoke.
The Chairman proposed that the reports of the first Special Sessions of the Committee on
Agriculture and the Council for Trade in Services be taken up at the July meeting of the General
Council.  Subsequently, and for the duration of the mandated negotiations in question, the reports onthem would be a standing item on the General Council's agenda.
The General Council agreed to the Chairman's proposal and took note of the statements.At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on
Agriculture and the Chairman of the General Counc il (on behalf of the Chairman of the Council for
Trade in Services) introduced the reports on th e Special Sessions of the respective bodies.
The representatives of Brazil (on behalf of  the MERCOSUR Members) and Bulgaria spoke.
The General Council took note of the reports of the Special Sessions of the Committee on
Agriculture and of the Council for Trade in Services, and of the statements.
At the General Council meeting on 10 October 2000, the Chairman of the General Council
(on behalf of the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Services and of the Chairman of the
Committee on Agriculture) introduced the reports on the Special Sessions of the respective bodies.
The representatives of Uruguay, Argentina,  Brazil, Switzerland, Mexico, Bulgaria, Czech
Republic, Turkey, India, Bolivia, European Communities, Mauritius, Argentina, United States,
Democratic Republic of Congo, New Zealand and Chil e, and the Secretary of the General Council and
the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the reports and of the statements and agreed to revert to this
item at its next meeting.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman of the
Committee on Agriculture and the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Services introduced the
reports on the Special Sessions of the respective bodies.
The representatives of Uruguay, Argentina, Canada, European Communities, Australia,
Brazil, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Mexico, Bolivia and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the reports and of the statements.  The General Council
agreed that its Chairman consult with the Chairm en of the two relevant bodies on how to proceed on
this matter and then to decide as to whether broader consultations were needed.WT/GC/44
Page 8
4. Participation of acceding countries as observers in the mandated negotiations on
agriculture, on services and on other elements of the built-in agenda (WT/GC/M/54 and
Add. 2, 55)
At the General Council meeting on 13 March 2000, the Chairman recalled that a number of
acceding countries had expressed interest in participating as observers in the informal process related
to the mandated negotiations on agriculture, on services and on other elements of the built-in-agenda,
as well as in negotiations in these areas.  He also recalled that in 1999 the General Council had
agreed to the participation of acceding countries in the informal General Council preparatory process
for the 1999 Ministerial Conference.4  He finally recalled that in the final stage of the preparatory
process for Seattle there had been a general understanding that future negotiations should be opened
to acceding countries.
The representatives of Panama, United States, Mexico and European Communities, and the
Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and adjourned.5
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman proposed for adoption a
text (Job No.2814/Rev.1) concerning participation of acceding countries in the mandated negotiations
on agriculture, on services and on other relevant elements of the built-in agenda.
The Chairman noted for the record that the reference in the third paragraph of the draft text to
"any rights" included the notion of negotiating rights.
The General Council took note of the Chairman's statement and agreed to the text.6
5. Implementation and transition periods7
(a) Implementation (WT/GC/M/55)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Director-General reported on the
results of his consultations on the overall implementation issues.  On this basis a draft text had been
circulated to Members setting out the elements of a possible decision to establish a review mechanism
on implementation.
The Chairman, in proposing to Members a draft text for decision on the overall
implementation issues, made the following points:  First, it was understood that this decision was
without prejudice to Members' rights and obligations under the WTO.  Second, it was also understood
that the General Council would carry out its work in this area in full respect of its normal practice of
consensus.  Third, a number of implementation-related issues and concerns had been raised by anumber of delegations as needing urgent action.  He  suggested that these proposals be discussed by
the General Council at its first Special Session.  He  further suggested that the first Special Session
also draw up a programme and calendar for its work in the coming months.  Fourth, it should be
understood that this decision was without prejudice to Members' positions on any possible further
                                                     
4 See WT/GC/M/45, item 10.
5 This meeting was subsequently closed.  The item was taken up again at the General Council meeting
of 3 and 8 May 2000.
6 Subsequently circulated as WT/L/355.
7 Some discussion relating to this matter is carried under items 1 and 2 – "Follow-up to the Seattle
Ministerial Conference" and "Other aspects of the WTO work programme".WT/GC/44
Page 9
multilateral trade negotiations.  Fifth, and finally, he emphasized that the purpose of the exercise that
Members would be embarking on following this de cision was to resolve the implementation issues
and concerns.  This was reflected in the last sentence of the second bullet point which stated:  "In
addressing these issues, the General Council will assess the existing difficulties, identify ways needed
to resolve them, and take decisions for appropriate action".
The representatives of Bangladesh (on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries), Brazil, Morocco (also on behalf of the African Group), Malaysia, United States, Poland
(on behalf of the CEFTA Members and Estonia and Latvia), Pakistan, Costa Rica, Bolivia, Honduras,
Singapore, Jamaica, Colombia, India, Cuba, Ba rbados, Egypt, Nigeria, Indonesia, Zimbabwe,
European Communities, Philippines, Saint Lucia, Sri Lanka and Hong Kong, China, and the Director-
General and the Chairman spoke.
The Chairman said that, having noted the statements made, he wished to re-emphasize that
this decision would in no way prejudice the positions of Members on any possible further multilateral
trade negotiations.  He then proposed that the General Council take note of the statements, and take
the decision to establish the implementation review mechanism as described in the proposed text. 8
The General Council so agreed.9
The representative of the Dominican Republic spoke.
The General Council took note of the statement.
(b) Transition Periods (WT/GC/M/55)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Director-General reported on the
results of his consultations on the transition period issue.  Among other things, he noted that a lot of
time and effort had been devoted over the past months both to identify areas of concern and to seek
viable multilateral solutions, and that issues in the TRIMs area had been the main focus of work on
transition periods in recent weeks.  In the customs valuation area the process of examination and
approval of requests for extensions of the transition period by developing countries had, in general,
been proceeding well in the Committee on Customs Valuation.  He added that the TRIMs and
Customs Valuation Agreements were not the only areas where developing countries might be facing
difficulties with transition periods, and that Members should remain committed to helping thesecountries overcome their difficulties in other areas through further consultations.  There was also
scope for the WTO to work in closer cooperation with other relevant international organizations to
establish programmes to help meet developing countries' needs in specific areas.
The Chairman said that he was prepared to consult further on transition period issues as
necessary.  The issue that related to the TRIMs Ag reement, however, was ripe for consideration and
action by the General Council at the present meeting as the result of intensive consultations thereon
conducted by the Chairman of the Goods Council.  Before submitting the text resulting from these
discussions for decision,
10 he emphasized, in regard to the Article 9 review of the TRIMs Agreement
referred to in bullet 5 of the text, that this mandated review would take into account thedevelopmental impact of the TRIMs Agreement.  It was understood that this decision was also
without prejudice to Members' rights and obligations under the WTO.
                                                     
8 Reproduced as Annex I of WT/GC/M/55.
9 The proceedings of the special sessions of the General Council on implementation, held in pursuance
of the decision on the overall implementation issues, are reflected below in item 8 – "Special Sessions onimplementation".
10 Reproduced as Annex II of WT/GC/M/55.WT/GC/44
Page 10
The representatives of Brazil and Morocco (on behalf of the African Group) spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to the text proposed by the
Chairman.
6. Internal transparency and effective participation of Members11 (WT/GC/M/55, 57, 5812,
61)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman recalled that at the
General Council meeting on 7-8 February the issue of internal transparency and effective participation
of Members had been identified as one of the priorities for further consultations.  At that meeting, the
Director-General had suggested that such consultations could be initiated on the basis of delegation'scontributions.  He went on to report on the outcome of the process that had been undertaken thus far
on the basis of contributions received from delegations as well as inputs from the Chairman and the
Secretariat based on those contributions.
The representatives of Pakistan, Mexico, Honduras (also on behalf of the Dominican
Republic), Costa Rica, Morocco (on behalf of the African Group), Canada, Panama, Turkey,
Paraguay, Bulgaria, United States, Jamaica, Saint Lucia, Philippines, Singapore, Czech Republic, the
Slovak Republic, Brazil, New Zealand, Barbados, Me xico and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman
spoke.
The Chairman said that he would pursue cons ultations on internal transparency with the
objective of finding common ground that would allow Members to eventually draw some conclusions.
He also said that several delegations had expressed an interest in addressing the issue of external
transparency at some stage, and in this respect the best way to proceed on this matter would be to
engage initially in a discussion on the modalities and procedures for such a debate.  Such a gradualapproach, which had enabled Members to make progress on the issue of internal transparency, would
ensure that all delegations felt comfortable addressing the issue of external transparency.  It was
therefore his intention to engage Members in a discussion on these modalities in coming weeks.
The representative of Mexico spoke.The Chairman said it was clear that Members needed to reflect further on this subject and that
a substantive discussion at the present stage remained premature;  he expressed his intention to
conduct consultations to see if it would be possible to establish a procedure for a possible future
debate on external transparency.
The General Council took note of the statements.At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman recalled that, at the
discussion on internal transparency at informal meetings of the General Council in July he had
suggested that the various issues be grouped in three clusters:  (i) overriding questions;  (ii) the day-
to-day consultation process;  and (iii) the preparation and organization of Ministerial Conferences.Discussions had thus far focused on the first two clusters, as well as on practices Members had tried to
follow for consultations during the past few months.  With regard to the third cluster, Members had
agreed to have a substantive discussion thereon well in advance of the next Ministerial Conference.
In that respect, he informed the General Council th at these consultations would start in the autumn.
                                                     
11 Some discussion relating to this matter is carried under item 2 – "Other aspects of the WTO work
programme".
12 Carried in General Council minutes as "Discussion paper on the functioning of the WTO system".WT/GC/44
Page 11
The representatives of Brazil, Bulgaria, New Zealand, Nigeria, Paraguay, El Salvador (on
behalf of the Paradisus Group13 and Venezuela and Cuba), Saint Lucia, Panama, Mexico, Singapore
(on behalf of the ASEAN Members), Mauritius (on behalf of the African Group), Colombia, Jamaica,
Korea, Hungary, Bolivia, Uganda, Egypt, Unite d States, Barbados, India, Pakistan, European
Communities, Turkey, Canada and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the issue of internal
transparency in the autumn.
At the General Council meeting on 10 October 2000, the representative of the European
Communities introduced the Community's discussion paper on improving the functioning of the WTO
system (WT/GC/W/412).
The General Council took note of the statement.At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman recalled
that at his November informal consultations on the preparation and organization of Ministerial
Conferences, Members had addressed, inter alia, the conduct of the preparatory process, the format of
Ministerial Declarations, advance decision on Chairs and negotiation structure, the role of the host
country, and the role of the Director-General and the Secretariat.
The representatives of Poland (on behalf of the CEFTA Members, Estonia and Latvia),
Bulgaria, Singapore (on behalf of the ASEAN Me mbers), India, Egypt and European Communities,
and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
7. External transparency (WT/GC/M/57, 5814)
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman recalled that a number
of delegations had expressed the wish to discuss the issue of external transparency, and that at the
General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May he had indicated his intention to consult informally on the
procedures to be followed for such a discussion.  In the light of these consultations, he proposed that
Members draw on some of the procedures used for the discussions on internal transparency.  Inparticular, written contributions on external transparency could be useful so as to familiarize
delegations with this issue.  Some Members had already included proposals on external transparency
in their contributions on internal transparency.  He proposed that Members engage in a series of
informal consultations in the autumn to discuss such contributions, as well as any other issue they
wished to raise in the context of external transparency.
The representatives of Mexico, India, United States, Cuba, Canada, Uruguay, Philippines,
European Communities and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.At the General Council meeting on 10 October 2000, the representative of the United States
introduced her delegation's discussion paper on external transparency (WT/GC/W/413).
The General Council took note of the statement.
                                                     
13 The Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama.
14 Carried in the General Council minutes as "Submission on external transparency".WT/GC/44
Page 12
8. Special Sessions on implementation
At the General Council meeting in May 2000,15 Members had agreed that the General
Council, meeting in special sessions, would addres s outstanding implementation issues and concerns,
particularly those raised during the preparations for the Third Session of the Ministerial Conference.
The first special session should be held no later than June 2000, and the process should be completednot later than the Fourth Session of the Ministeria l Conference.  In addressing these issues, the
General Council would assess the existing difficulties, identify ways needed to resolve them, and take
decisions for appropriate action.
(a) Programme and calendar of work (WT/GC/M/56)
At its Special Session on 22 June and 3 July 2000, the General Council agreed to a
programme and calendar of work as proposed by the Chairman.16  In proposing this text, the
Chairman emphasized that this was definitely an action and result-oriented process.  He recalled that
the General Council decision of 3 May, which was quoted in the preamble to the draft schedule of
work, committed Members to assess the existing difficulties, identify ways needed to resolve them,
and take decisions for appropriate action.  These objectives governed the whole programme of work,
and delegations should read the draft text in this light.
The representatives of Morocco (on behalf of the African Group), European Communities,
Japan, Brazil, Poland (also on behalf of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovak Republic), United
States, Dominican Republic (also on behalf of Bo livia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua
and Panama), Canada, Pakistan, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Korea, Cuba, Egypt, Djibouti, Costa Rica,New Zealand, Switzerland, Norway, Malaysia, Ph ilippines, Indonesia, Argentina, Singapore,
Thailand, Mauritius and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
(b) Discussion of implementa tion issues (WT/GC/M/56, 59)
At its Special Session on 22 June and 3 July 2000, the General Council held an agreement-by-
agreement discussion of implementation-related issues, focusing in particular on the issues reflected
in paragraph 21 of the draft Ministerial text of 19 October 1999 (Job(99)/5868/Rev.1).
The representatives of India, Malaysia, Saint Lucia, Hungary, Philippines (also on behalf of
the ASEAN Members), European Communities, United States, Japan, Pakistan, Mauritius, Cuba,
Honduras, Bolivia, Egypt, Bangladesh, Argentina, Côte d'Ivoire, Norway, Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand,
Jamaica, Canada, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Sri Lanka, Uruguay, Kenya, Mexico, Colombia,
Chile, Singapore, Morocco, Switzerland, El Salvador, Venezuela, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Peru,
Turkey and Hong Kong, China (also on behalf of members of the ITCB that were also Members and
Observers of the WTO), and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements, and invited the Chairman and the Director-
General to hold consultations, in a transparent ma nner, with a view to identifying ways needed to
resolve these issues in accordance with the decision of 3 May on implementation-related issues, and
to report to Members sufficiently in advance of the next Special Session.
At its Special Session on 18 October 2000, the General Council addressed other
implementation-related issues, especially those reflected in paragraph 22 of the draft Ministerial text
of 19 October 1999 (Job(99)/5868/Rev.1) as well as others in the compilation of proposals in
document Job(99)/4797/Rev.3 of 18 November 1999.
                                                     
15 See under sub-item (5) (a)  –  "Implementation".
16 Circulated as Job No. 3859, dated 22 June 2000.WT/GC/44
Page 13
The representatives of India, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, United States, Bolivia, Paraguay,
Venezuela and European Communities, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and invited the Chairman and the Director-
General to hold consultations on these issues, in a transparent manner, with a view to identifying waysneeded to resolve them in accordance with the decision of 3 May, and to report to Members in
advance of the next Special Session in December.
(c) Activities under way in the WTO that may be of relevance to addressing implementation
issues (WT/GC/M/56)
At the Special Session of the General Council on 22 June and 3 July 2000, the Chairman
introduced a report on "Activities under way in the WTO that may be of relevance to addressing
implementation issues" (Job (00)/4217).
The General Council took note of the statement and of the report.
(d) Report on consultations (WT/GC/M/56)
At its Special Session on 18 October 2000, the General Council considered a report by the
Chairman and Director-General on their consultations on implementation-related issues and concerns,
especially those reflected in paragraph 21 of the draft Ministerial text of 19 October 1999
(Job(99)/5868/Rev.1).
The representatives of Canada, Mauritius (on behalf of the African Group), European
Communities, Paraguay, Indonesia, Zambia, Israel, Thailand, Kenya, Japan, Korea, Argentina,
Switzerland, Hong Kong, China, New Zealand, Venezu ela, Brazil, Chile, Bulgaria, India, Turkey,
Pakistan, Cuba, United States, Singapore, Hungary,  Panama, Slovak Republic, Costa Rica, Colombia,
Uganda, Dominican Republic, Nigeria, Czech Republ ic, Egypt, El Salvador, Honduras, Bolivia,
Ghana, Sri Lanka, Australia and Philippines, and the Chairman spoke.
The Chairman, noting that the delegation that had expressed a reservation on referring the
proposal in Tiret 1 of the Customs Valuation proposals to the Committee on Customs Valuation for
consideration of the technical aspects could now support this course of action, proposed that the report
by himself and the Director-General be adjusted accordi ngly, and that this item also be referred to the
Committee and the Chairman of the Committee be requested to report on the outcome of thatconsideration to the General Council before its Special Session in December.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the report by the Chairman and the
Director-General, and referred to the relevant WTO bodies the issues identified in that report, as
adjusted, as being appropriate for their action, with the mandates and time-frames suggested therein.The General Council then invited the Chairman and the Director-General to continue their
consultations on the issues reflected in paragraph 21 of the draft Ministerial text of 19 October 1999,
in a transparent manner, with a view to identify ing ways needed to resolve them in accordance with
the decision of 3 May, and to report to Members in advance of the next Special Session in December.WT/GC/44
Page 14
9. Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions
(a) Consultations (WT/GC/M/57, 61)
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on
Balance-of-Payments Restrictions introduced the Committee's reports on its consultations with
Bangladesh (WT/BOP/R/50) a nd Pakistan (WT/BOP/R/51).
The representatives of the United States and Pakistan spoke.The General Council took note of the statemen ts and adopted the reports in WT/BOP/R/50
and WT/BOP/R/51.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman of the
Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions introduced the Committee's reports on its
consultations with the Slovak Republic (WT/BO P/R/52 and Corr.1) and Ro mania (WT/BOP/R/53 and
Corr.1).
The General Council took note of the statement and adopted the reports in WT/BOP/R/52 and
Corr.1 and WT/BOP/R/53 and Corr.1.
(b) Notes on meetings (WT/GC/M/57, 61)
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on
Balance-of-Payments Restrictions drew attention to the Committee's discussion of its ongoing
business reported in WT/BOP/R/49.
The General Council took note of the statemen t and of the information in WT/BOP/R/49.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman of the
Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions drew  attention to the Committee's discussion of its
ongoing business reported in WT/BOP/R/54.
The General Council took note of the statemen t and of the information in WT/BOP/R/54.
10. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
(a) Reports (WT/GC/M/52 and Corr.1, 53, 55, 57, 58, 61)
At the General Council meeting on 17 December 1999, the Chairperson of the Committee on
Budget, Finance and Administration introduced the Committee's recommendations in WT/BFA/44.
The representatives of the United States and Pakistan spoke.The General Council took note of the statements, approved the Committee's specific
recommendations in paragraphs 2 through 7 of its report in WT/BFA/44, and also approved the draft
Resolution referred to in the recommendation of paragraph 6.  The General Council then adopted the
Budget Committee's report in WT/BFA /44, including the Resolution on the revised expenditure of the
WTO in 2000 and the ways and means to meet that expenditure.
At the General Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the Chairperson of the Committee
on Budget, Finance and Administration introd uced the Committee's report in WT/BFA/45.WT/GC/44
Page 15
The General Council took note of the statement and adopted the report of the Committee on
Budget, Finance and Administration in WT/BFA/45.
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on
Budget, Finance and Administration introduced the Committee's report in WT/BFA/46.
The General Council took note of the statement, approved the Budget Committee's specific
recommendation in paragraph 9 of its report in WT/BFA/46 and adopted the report.
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on
Budget, Finance and Administration introduced the Committee's reports in WT/BFA/47 and 48.
The representatives of Bulgaria and Egypt spoke.The General Council took note of the statements, approved the Budget Committee's specific
recommendations in paragraphs 8, 19 and 23 of its report in WT/BFA/47 and in paragraph 4 of itsreport in WT/BFA/48, and adopted the reports.
At the General Council meeting on 10 October 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on
Budget, Finance and Administration drew Members' attention to the worrisome cash situation of the
WTO.  He said that unless contributions in arrears were paid in the near future, the Secretariat wouldhave to seek authorization to resort to a bank loan in order to meet obligations that could not be
postponed.  He then introduced the Committee's report in WT/BFA/49.
The representative of Jamaica spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements, approved the Budget Committee's specific
recommendation in paragraph 9 of its report in WT/BFA/49 and adopted the report.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, Mr. Chabert, Director of
the Finance and General Service Division, on behalf of the Chairman of the Committee on Budget,
Finance and Administration introduced the Committee's report in WT/BFA/51.
The General Council took note of the statement, approved the Budget recommendations in
paragraphs 6, 7, 19, 20, 27, 32, 37 to 40 of its report in WT/BFA/51 and also approved the draft
Resolution referred to in the recommendation in paragraph 20. The General Council then adopted the
Budget Committee's report in WT/BFA /51, including the Resolution on the revised expenditure of the
WTO in 2001 and the ways and means to meet that expenditure.
The representatives of the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Pakistan, Norway, Switzerland,
Chile, India, Brazil, Malaysia, Denmark, Hungary, United States, Japan, Germany, Philippines,
Ecuador, European Communities, Venezuela, Egypt, Czech Republic, Jamaica, Uganda, Cuba,
Mexico and Hong Kong, China spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.WT/GC/44
Page 16
11. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement
(a) Harmonized System
(i) Nicaragua, Sri Lanka (WT/GC/M/55, 61)
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the General Council considered requests by Nicaragua
(G/L/351) and Sri Lanka (G/L/350) for extensions of waivers previously granted in connection with
their implementation of the Harmonized System, and draft decisions to this effect (Nicaragua -
G/C/W/189;  Sri La nka - G/C/W/188).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of these
requests by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decisions (Nicaragua – WT/L/353;  Sri Lanka – WT/L/352).
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered requests by
Nicaragua (G/L/394) and Sri Lanka (G/L/391) for extensions of waivers previously granted in
connection with their implementation of the Harmonized System, and draft decisions to this effect
(Nicaragua - G/C/W/227;  Sri Lanka - G/C/W/225).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of these
requests by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decisions (Nicaragua – WT/L/376;  Sri Lanka – WT/L/377).
(b) Renegotiation of Schedule
(i) Zambia (WT/GC/M/55, 61)
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the General Council considered a request by Zambia
(G/L/352) for an extension of a waiver previously granted in connection with the renegotiation of its
schedule, and a draft decision to this effect (G/C/W/190).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this request
by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report, and in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/350).
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered a request
by Zambia (G/L/393) for an extension of a waiver previously granted in connection with the
renegotiation of its schedule, and a draft decision to this effect (G/C/W/226).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this request
by that Council.WT/GC/44
Page 17
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/378).
(c) Decision on the introduction of the Harmonized System changes into WTO Schedules of
tariff concessions on 1 January 1996 (WT/GC/M/55, 61)
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the General Council considered a draft decision
extending the time-limit of the Decision on the introduction of the Harmonized System changes into
WTO Schedules of tariff concessions on 1 January 1996 (G/C/W/200).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this matter
by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/351).
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered a draft
decision extending the time-limit of the Decision on the introduction of the Harmonized System
changes into WTO Schedules of tariff concessions on 1 January 1996 (G/C/W/228).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this request
by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/379).
(d) Uruguay – Derogation on minimum values17 (WT/GC/M/55)
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the General Council considered a request by Uruguay
(G/VAL/W/55) for a waiver regarding a derogation on minimum values under the Agreement on
Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, and a draft decision to this effect
(G/VAL/W/55/Add.1/Rev.1).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this matter
by that Council.
The representatives of India and Brazil spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the report and, in accordance with the
Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in
November 1995 (WT/L/93), adopted the draft decision (WT/L/354).
The representative of Jamaica spoke.The General Council took note of the statement.
                                                     
17 Carried in General Council minutes as "Customs Valuation Agreement:  Request by Uruguay for a
waiver under Article IX of the WTO Agreement for minimum values".WT/GC/44
Page 18
(e) EC/France – Trading arrangements with Morocco (WT/GC/M/57)
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council considered a request by
EC/France (G/L/357) for an extension of a waiv er previously granted for France's trading
arrangements with Morocco, and a draft decision to this effect (G/C/W/194).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this request
by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/361 and Corr.1).
(f) EC – Autonomous preferential treatment to the countries of the Western Balkans
(WT/GC/M/61)
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered a request
from the European Communities for a derogation from its obligations under paragraph 1 Article I of
the GATT 1994 until 31 December 2006 and a draft decision to this effect (G/C/W/178).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this request
by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/380 and Corr.1).
(g)  Turkey – Preferential treatment for Bosnia-Herzegovina (WT/GC/M/61)
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered a request
from Turkey for a derogation from its obligations under paragraph 1 Article I of the GATT 1994 until
31 December 2006 and a draft decision to this effect (G/C/W/217).
The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods reported on the consideration of this request
by that Council.
The General Council took note of the report and, in accordance with the Decision-Making
Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93),
adopted the draft decision (WT/L/381).
(h) Review of waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement (WT/GC/M/61)
(i) Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 14 October 1996 until 31 December 2006 (WT/L/365)
(ii) Cuba – Article XV:6, granted on 14 October 1996 until 31 December 2001 (WT/L/370)
(iii) Hungary – Agricultural export subsidies, granted on 22 October 1997 until 31 December
2001 (WT/L/369)
(iv) United States – Andean Trade Preference Act, granted on 14 October 1996 until 4 December
2001 (WT/L/372)WT/GC/44
Page 19
(v) United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 15 November 1995
until 31 December 2005 (WT/L/373)
(vi) United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, granted on 14 October 1996
until 31 December 2006 (WT/L/371)
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered reports on
the above six waivers.
The Chairman spoke.The General Council took note the Chairman's statement and of the reports in documents
WT/L/365 and WT/L/369 through 373.
12. Accession matters
(a) Albania (WT/GC/M/57)
In December 1992, the GATT 1947 CONTRACTI NG PARTIES had established a working
party to examine Albania's request for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.Subsequently, in pursuance of the decision regarding requests for WTO accession adopted by the
WTO General Council on 31 January 1995
18, the GATT 1947 Accession Working Party had been
transformed into a WTO Accession Working Party.
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council approved the text of the Protocol
of Accession (WT/ACC/ALB/53) and the text of th e draft Decision on the Accession of Albania and,
in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO
Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), a dopted the Decision on the Accession of Albania
(WT/ACC/ALB/52).  The General Council also adopted the Report of the Working Party
(WT/ACC/ALB/51 and Corr.1 and Add.1, 2 and Add.2/Corr.1).
The representatives of Albania (as an observer), Turkey, United States, European
Communities, Poland (on behalf of the CEFTA Members and Estonia and Latvia), Ecuador (on behalf
of GRULAC), India, Canada, Pakistan, Singapor e (on behalf of the ASEAN Members), Egypt and
Malta, and the Chairman of the Working Party and the Chairman (on behalf of the General Council)
spoke.  The representatives of Israel and Switzerland wished to be placed on record as welcoming and
supporting the accession of Albania.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support.
(b) Azerbaijan (WT/GC/M/55)
In July 1997, the General Council had established a working party to examine Azerbaijan's
request for accession to the WTO Agreement, and had authorized its Chairman to designate the
Chairperson of the Working Party in consultation with representatives of Members and with the
representative of Azerbaijan.
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman informed the General Council that
Mr. Lewalter (Germany) had agreed to chair the Working Party.
                                                     
18 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).WT/GC/44
Page 20
The General Council took note of this information.
(c) Bhutan (WT/GC/M/58)
In October 1999, the General Council had established a working party to examine Bhutan's
request for accession to the WTO Agreement, and had authorized its Chairman to designate theChairperson of the Working Party in consultation with representatives of Members and with the
representative of Bhutan.
At its meeting on 10 October 2000, the Chairman informed the General Council that
Mr. Kreid (Austria) had agreed to chair the Working Party.
The General Council took note of this information.
(d) Cape Verde (WT/GC/M/57)
It its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council considered a communication from
Cape Verde (WT/ACC/CPV/1) concerning its interest in acceding to the WTO Agreement pursuant to
Article XII.
The representatives of Cape Verde (as an observer), European Communities, Mozambique,
Mauritius (on behalf of the African Group) and Angola spoke.  The representatives of Bangladesh (on
behalf of the LDCs), Barbados, Canada, Chile, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Egypt,
El Salvador, Gabon, Ghana, Honduras, Hungary, I celand, India, Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Malta,
Morocco, Nigeria, Norway, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Singapore (on behalf of the ASEAN
Members), Slovak Republic, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Turkey, Uganda, United States
and Uruguay wished to be place on record as welcoming and supporting Cape Verde's request.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support and agreed
to establish a working party to examine the applicat ion of Cape Verde, and authorized its Chairman to
designate the Chairperson of the Working Party in consultation with representatives of Members and
with the representative of Cape Verde.
The Chairman invited Cape Verde, on behalf of the General Council, to attend meetings of
the General Council and, as appropriate, meetings of the other WTO bodies as an observer during the
period in which the Working Party was carrying out its work.
(e) Croatia (WT/GC/M/57)
In October 1993, the GATT 1947 Council had established a working party to examine
Croatia's request for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.  Subsequently, in
pursuance of the decision regarding requests for WTO accession adopted by the WTO GeneralCouncil on 31 January 1995
19, the GATT 1947 Accession Working Party had been transformed into a
WTO Accession Working Party.
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council approved the text of the Protocol
of Accession (WT/ACC/HRV/ 61) and the text of the draft Decision on the Accession of Croatia and,
in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO
Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), a dopted the Decision on the Accession of Croatia
(WT/ACC/HRV/60).  The General Council also adopted the Report of the Working Party
(WT/ACC/HRV/59 and Add.1, 2 and Add.2/Corr.1 and 2).
                                                     
19 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).WT/GC/44
Page 21
The representatives of Croatia (as an observer), Turkey, European Communities, United
States, Slovenia, Japan, Ecuador (on behalf of GRUL AC), Canada, India, Singapore (on behalf of the
ASEAN Members), Pakistan, Hungary and Poland (o n behalf of the CEFTA Members and Estonia
and Latvia), and the Chairman of the Working Party and the Chairman (on behalf of the General
Council) spoke.  The representatives of Australia, Bolivia, Egypt, Iceland, Israel, Malta, andSwitzerland wished to be placed on record as welcoming and supporting the accession of Croatia.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support.
(f) Georgia (WT/GC/M/54)
In October 1999, the General Council had adopted a Decision (WT/ACC/GEO/32)
authorizing Georgia to accede to the WTO Agreement under terms set out in its Protocol of Accession(WT/ACC/GEO/33).  As set out in its paragraph 7, the Protocol was open for acceptance by Georgia
until 1 March 2000.
At its meeting on 13 March 2000, the General Council considered a communication from
Georgia requesting that the time-limit for acceptance in paragraph 7 of its Protocol of Accession be
changed to 15 May 2000 (WT/L/345), and a draft decision to this effect (WT/GC/W/398), and in
accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement
agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), adopted the draft decision extending the time-limit
(WT/L/346).
(g) Jordan (WT/GC/M/52)
In January 1994, the GATT 1947 CONTRACTING PARTIES had established a working
party to examine Jordan's request for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
Subsequently, in pursuance of the decision regarding requests for WTO accession adopted by the
WTO General Council on 31 January 199520, the GATT 1947 Accession Working Party had been
transformed into a WTO Accession Working Party.
At its meeting on 17 December 1999, the General Council approved the text of the Protocol
of Accession (WT/ACC/JOR/35) and the text of th e draft decision on the Accession of Jordan and, in
accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement
agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), adopte d the Decision on the Accession of Jordan
(WT/ACC/JOR/34).  The General Council also adopted the report of the Working Party(WT/ACC/JOR/33 and Corr.1 and Add.1 and 2).
The representatives of Jordan (as an observer), United States, Bolivia (on behalf of
GRULAC), European Communities, Turkey, Israel, Malaysia (on behalf of the ASEAN Members),
Egypt (on behalf of the Group of Arab countries Members of the WTO), and the Chairman of theWorking Party spoke.  The representatives of Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Cuba, Cyprus, Djibouti,
Hungary (on behalf of the CEFTA Members and Es tonia and Latvia), Iceland, India, Japan, Korea,
Kuwait, Madagascar, Morocco, Pakistan, Panama, Qatar, Senegal, South Africa, Switzerland, Tunisia,
Uganda, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe wished to be placed on record as welcoming and
supporting the accession of Jordan.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support.
                                                     
20 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).WT/GC/44
Page 22
(h) Lithuania (WT/GC/M/61)
In February 1994, the GATT 1947 Council had established a working party to examine
Lithuania's request for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.  Subsequently, in
pursuance of the decision regarding requests for WTO accession adopted by the WTO General
Council on 31 January 199521, the GATT 1947 Accession Working Party had been transformed into a
WTO Accession Working Party.
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council approved the text of
the Protocol of Accession (WT/AC C/LTU/54) and the text of the draft decision on the Accession of
Oman and, in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the
WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), adopted the Decision on the Accession of
Oman (WT/ACC/LT53).  The General Council also adopted the report of the Working Party(WT/ACC/LTU/52 and Add.1 and Add.1/Corr.1 and Add.2).
The representative of Lithuania (as an observer), H.E. Mr. Valdas Adamkus, President of
Lithuania, the representatives of Estonia, Latvia, European Communities, United States, Poland (on
behalf of the CEFTA Members), El Salvador (on behalf of GRULAC), Canada, Norway, Croatia,Singapore (on behalf of the ASE AN Members), Lesotho, Switzerland, Egypt (on behalf of the Arab
Members), Nigeria, Georgia and Iceland, and the Chairman of the Working Party and the Chairman
(on behalf of the General Council) spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support.
(i) Oman (WT/GC/M/58)
In June 1996, the General Council had established a working party to examine Oman's request
for accession to the WTO Agreement.
At its meeting on 10 October 2000, the General Council approved the text of the Protocol of
Accession (WT/ACC/OMN/28) and the text of the draft decision on the Accession of Oman and, in
accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement
agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), adopte d the Decision on the Accession of Oman
(WT/ACC/OMN/27).  The General Council also adopted the report of the Working Party
(WT/ACC/OMN/26 and Add.1 and 2).
The representatives of Pakistan, Oman (as an observer), Tunisia, European Communities,
Morocco, United States, India, Ecuador (on behalf  of GRULAC), Tanzania, Egypt, Singapore (on
behalf of the ASEAN Members), Bangladesh, Kuwait (also on behalf of Bahrain, Qatar and the
United Arab Emirates), Poland (on behalf of the CEFTA Members and Estonia and Latvia) and
Turkey, and the Chairman of the Working Party and the Chairman (on behalf of the General Council)spoke.  The representatives of Bangladesh, Cyprus, Japan, Jordan, Kenya and Nigeria wished to be
placed on record as welcoming and supporting the accession of Oman.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support.
(j) Russian Federation (WT/GC/M/57)
In June 1993, the GATT 1947 Council had established a working party to examine the request
of the Russian Federation for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.  In
October 1993, the GATT 1947 Council had taken note that Mr. Rossier (Switzerland) had agreed to
                                                     
21 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).WT/GC/44
Page 23
serve as Chairman of the Working Party. Subsequently, in pursuance of the decision regarding
requests for WTO accession adopted by the WTO General Council on 31 January 199522, the GATT
1947 Accession Working Party had been transformed into a WTO Accession Working Party.
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman said that on the basis
of consultations that had been held he had accepted, subject to Members' approval, the invitation to
chair the Working Party on the Accession of the Russian Federation following the departure of the
former Chairman Mr. Rossier (Switzerland).
The General Council took note of this information and so agreed.
(k) Ukraine (WT/GC/M/55)
In December 1993, the GATT 1947 Council had established a working party to examine
Ukraine's request for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Subsequently, in
pursuance of the decision regarding requests for WTO accession adopted by the WTO General
Council on 31 January 199523, the GATT 1947 Accession Working Party had been transformed into a
WTO Accession Working Party.
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman informed the General Council that
Mr. Marchi (Canada) had agreed to chair the Working Party on the Accession of Ukraine.
The General Council took note of this information.
(l) Yemen (WT/GC/M/57)
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council considered a communication
form Yemen (WT/ACC/YEM/1) concerning its interest in acceding to the WTO Agreement pursuant
to Article XII.
The representatives of Yemen (as an observer), Egypt, Turkey, Tunisia, Kuwait and Morocco
spoke.  The representatives of Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh (on behalf of the LDCs), Barbados,
Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador,
European Communities, Ghana, Guinea, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Japan, Kenya, Korea,
Madagascar, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines,
Qatar, Senegal, Singapore (on behalf of the ASEAN Members), Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South
Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Switzerland, Tanzania, Uganda, United States and Macau, China wished to
be placed on record as welcoming and supporting Yemen's request.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the expressions of support, agreed to
establish a working party to examine the application of Yemen, and authorized its Chairman todesignate the Chairperson of the Working Party in consultation with representatives of Members and
with the representative of Yemen.
The Chairman invited Yemen, on behalf of the General Council, to attend meetings of the
General Council and, as appropriate, meetings of the other WTO bodies as an observer during theperiod in which the Working Party was carrying out its work.
                                                     
22 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).
23 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).WT/GC/44
Page 24
(m) Accessions to the WTO (WT/GC/M/55, 61)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the representative of Poland (on behalf
of the CEFTA Members and Estonia and Latvia) pointed out some of the difficulties acceding
countries had to deal with in their accession process.
The representatives of the European Communities, United States, Brazil, Croatia (as an
observer), Lithuania (as an observer), Moldova (as an observer) and the Russian Federation (as an
observer) spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the representative of
Egypt (on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing Countries) underlined the numerous
difficulties faced by acceding countries in their accession process.
The representatives of the United States, European Communities, India, Cuba, Estonia, Israel,
Turkey, Albania, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia and Egypt, and the Chairman spoke
The General Council took note of the statements.
13. Measures in favour of least-developed countries (WT/GC/M/55)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman recalled that the issue of
measures in favour of least-developed countries wa s one of four elements identified at the February
General Council meeting as a priority for immediate attention.24
The Director-General reported on the results of his consultations thus far on this issue.
The representatives of Bangladesh (on behalf of the least-developed country Members),
Zambia, European Communities, Japan, Korea, Morocco (on behalf of the African Group), Haiti,
Switzerland, Mauritius, Slovak Republic, Iceland, Czech Republic, Norway, Hungary, Poland, New
Zealand, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Pakistan, Cuba, Canada, Zimbabwe, United States, Argentina (on behalf
of the MERCOSUR Members), Chile, Guinea, India, Egypt, Venezuela, Australia, Turkey, Burundi,
Uganda and Bolivia, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the report by the Director-General.
14. Integrated framework for trade-related technical assistance to least-developed countries
(IF) (WT/GC/M/57)
Pursuant to the mandate contained in WT/LDC/HL/1/Rev.1 endorsed by Members at the
High-Level Meeting for Least-Developed Countries in 1997, heads and representatives of the six core
international agencies25 for the IF, had met on 6 July 2000 to consider the results of the IF review.26
                                                     
24 See item 2 – "Other aspects of the WTO work programme".
25 IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, World Bank and the WTO.
26 The review was conducted in accordance with the decision by the Inter-Agency Working Group on
24 November 1999 (WT/COMTD/LDC/6).WT/GC/44
Page 25
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Director-General made a report
on progress made on the IF review.
The representatives of Bangladesh (on behalf of the LDCs), Uganda, Haiti, Guinea, Egypt,
European Communities, Japan, Lesotho, Switzerland, Mauritius (on behalf of the African Group),Canada, Norway, Mauritania, Madagascar, Tanzania, United States and Zambia spoke.
The General Council took note of the report of the Director-General and of the statements.
15. Capacity-building through tech nical cooperation (WT/GC/M/55)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman recalled that the issue of
capacity-building through technical cooperation was one of four elements identified at the February
General Council meeting as a priority for immediate attention.27
The Director-General reported on the results of his consultations thus far on this issue.
The representatives of Morocco (on behalf of the African Group), Bangladesh, Japan, United
States, Cuba, European Communities, Turkey, Haiti, Egypt, Switzerland, Jamaica, Norway, Kenya,
Venezuela, Canada, New Zealand, Lesotho, Australia, Djibouti and Hong Kong, China, and the
Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the report by the Director-General.
16. High-Level international intergovernmental  event on financing for development
(WT/GC/M/55, 5728)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman referred to a
communication from the Co-Chairmen of the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee for the High-
Level International Intergovernmental Event on Financing for Development.  As indicated in the
response which he had circulated to Members on 12 April 2000, he had invited members of the
Bureau to an informal meeting to discuss with WTO permanent representatives in Geneva and senior
officials of the WTO Secretariat the possible contribution of the WTO to this event.  This meeting
was scheduled for 19 May and delegations interested  in participating in this informal meeting were
invited to inform him accordingly.
The General Council took note of this information.The representative of Bolivia and the Chairman spoke.The General Council took note of the statements.At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman said that at the 19 May
meeting, the Bureau of the UN Preparatory Committee had presented proposals for a closer dialogue
and cooperation with the WTO for the preparation of the High-Level Event scheduled for 2001, and
had expressed a strong wish to receive a political input from the WTO membership.  He therefore
proposed that the contact point for such input be the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD)
                                                     
27 See item 2 – "Other aspects of the WTO work programme".
28 Carried in General Council minutes as "Possible WTO contribution to the High-Level Event on
Financing for Development".WT/GC/44
Page 26
and that its Chairman be in contact with the Preparatory Committee.  Issues that might be raised in the
context of the preparations for the High-Level Event would be discussed in the CTD.
The representative of the United States and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to the Chairman's proposal.
17. Matters of relevance to the work a nd functioning of the WTO (WT/GC/M/5729, 6130)
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Director-General reported on a
number of recent initiatives of relevance to the work and functioning of the WTO.
The General Council took note of the statement.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Director-General
reported on several matters related to recent developments of relevance to the WTO.
The General Council took note of the statement.
18. Trade facilitation – status report on work ca rried out by the Council for Trade in Goods
under Paragraph 21 of the Singapore Ministerial Declaration (WT/GC/M/61)
Paragraph 21 of the Singapore Ministerial Declaration directed the Council for Trade in
Goods to undertake exploratory and analytical work, drawing on the work of other relevant
organizations, on the simplification of trade procedures in order to assess the scope for WTO rules in
this area.
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council heard a status report
on the work carried out by the Council for Trade in Goods under Paragraph 21 of the Singapore
Ministerial Declaration.
The General Council took note of the status report (G/L/425).
19. Report on the implementation of Article 10.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture
(WT/GC/M/61)
At its Special Session on 18 October 2000, the General Council had referred the question of
the implementation of Article 10.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture to the Committee on Agriculture
which had been invited to report back on its progress on this issue to the General Council at its lastregular meeting of this year.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Vice-Chairman of the
Committee on Agriculture introduced the report on the implementation of Article 10.2 of the
Agreement on Agriculture (G/AG/6).
The representative of Brazil spoke.
                                                     
29 Carried in General Council minutes as " Statement by the Director-General on recent initiatives".
30 Carried in General Council minutes as " Statement on several matters related to recent developments
of relevance to the WTO".WT/GC/44
Page 27
The General Council took note of the statements and of the report of the Committee on
Agriculture in G/AG/6.
20. Global electronic commerce31 (WT/GC/M/55, 57, 58, 61)
In September 1998, the General Council had established a Work Programme on Electronic
Commerce (WT/L/274).  In October 1999, the General Council had considered the reports of the
relevant WTO bodies charged with implementing the Work Programme and had agreed to forward
those reports to Ministers at the Third Ministerial Conference and to revert to the matter of
e-commerce as early as possible in the year 2000.
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman reported that this matter
had been discussed at an informal meeting of the General Council as well as in consultations, and had
suggested that he hold further consultations and that the substantive discussion in the formal General
Council be taken up in at the July meeting.
The representatives of Pakistan, Japan, Mexico, Korea, Venezuela, United States, Singapore,
Switzerland, Canada, Ecuador, Panama, India, New Zealand, European Communities, Czech
Republic, Uruguay, Argentina, Australia, Hungary, Turkey, Israel, Saint Lucia and Hong Kong, China
spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements, agreed that the Chairman would conduct
consultations on the way to proceed with this issue and agreed to revert to this matter at its next
meeting.
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman said that on the basis
of consultations and informal discussions in the General Council, he proposed that the approach to the
work on e-commerce comprised the following three elements:  (i) to agree to reinvigorate the work in
the WTO on e-commerce on a practical basis, which was understood to be without prejudice to any
delegation's position on the status of the 1998 Declaration;  (ii) to invite the four subsidiary bodies,
i.e. the Goods, Services and TRIPS Councils and the Committee on Trade and Development, to pick
up where they had left off in their work on e-commerce within their respective spheres of competence,
identify cross-sectoral issues, and report back to the General Council at its regular meeting in
December 2000;  and (iii) to agree to consider how best to organize the General Council's work one-commerce in light of the reinvigorated work of the subsidiary bodies, including the question of an
ad hoc task force to assist in consideration of subsidiary body reports and cross-sectoral issues.
The representatives of Pakistan, Australia, Ja pan, New Zealand, India, Cuba, Singapore (on
behalf of the ASEAN Members), Mauritius (on behalf of the African Group), Brazil, Ecuador,
Venezuela, Korea, Canada, European Communities, Uganda, Chile, Israel, Czech Republic, Mexico,
Switzerland, Norway, Guatemala, Uruguay, Unite d States, Turkey, Panama, Dominican Republic,
Jamaica, Costa Rica, Colombia, Slovak Republic, H ungary, Honduras and Hong Kong, China, and the
Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to proceed with the work on
e-commerce in line with the three points contained in the Chairman's proposal.
At its meeting on 10 October 2000, the General Council considered this matter.
                                                     
31 In the relevant minutes the item is called "Work programme on electronic commerce".WT/GC/44
Page 28
The representatives of Venezuela, Singapore, United States, Japan, Korea, Switzerland,
European Communities, Chile, Norway, Canada, Brazil, Indonesia, India, Australia, Nigeria,
Hungary, New Zealand, Panama, Jamaica, Philippines, Mauritius, Pakistan, Malaysia, Argentina,
Jordan, Uganda, Dominican Republic, Barbados and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman drew
attention to the progress reports of the relevant WTO bodies on their work on e-commerce within
their respective spheres of competence and said that  (i) the subsidiary bodies had not had enough
time to substantially deepen their work;  (ii) the work to date in the subsidiary bodies had
demonstrated that electronic commerce fell within the scope of the existing WTO agreements;  (iii)Members were all aware of the tremendous potential of e-commerce and the internet to contribute to
infrastructure capacity building and market access;  (iv) he intended to pursue consultations on the
possibility of setting up an ad hoc task force in the WTO or any other procedure to organize the work
of the General Council on electronic commerce in order to prepare for the next Ministerial
Conference.
The representatives of Colombia, Singapore, Thailand, United States, Brazil, Cuba, European
Communities, Costa Rica, Japan, Argentina, Hungary, India, Albania, Australia, Malaysia, Norway,
Sri Lanka, Korea, Canada, Slovak Republic, Ne w Zealand, Nigeria, Panama, Egypt, Pakistan,
Venezuela, Jordan, Jamaica, Uganda, Philippines, Lesotho, Morocco, Mauritius, Bolivia, UnitedStates, Indonesia, Uruguay, Switzerland, Czech Republic and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman
spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
21. Five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994
(WT/GC/M/53, 55, 57, 61)
In July 1999, the General Council had considered a communication from the United States
(WT/GC/W/228) concerning the five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the
GATT 1994.  The General Council had also considered this matter at its October and November 1999
meetings.
At its meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the General Council considered this matter.
The representatives of Japan, European Communities, Australia, United States, Panama and
Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next
meeting.
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the General Council again considered this matter.
The representatives of Japan, European Communities, Australia, New Zealand, Canada,
Panama, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, United States and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman
spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to authorize the Chairman to
conduct consultations and to revert to this matter at a future meeting.WT/GC/44
Page 29
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council again considered this matter.
The representatives of Japan, the European Communities, Panama, the United States and the
Dominican Republic, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to it at a future meeting.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman recalled
that the General Council had initiated that review  in July 1999 and had continued to consider this
matters in October and November 1999, February, May and July 2000 and had agreed to revert to it.
No conclusions could be reached during these discussions.  Furthermore, he had been made aware that
one Member did not consider the review to have taken place.  In accordance with the provisions ofparagraph (b) of the GATT 1994, this examination w ould have to be reviewed again in 2001 and the
matter would be on the agenda of the General Council  for that purpose.
The representatives of the European Communities, Japan, Panama, Australia and United
States, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter in the
context of the review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 to be
conducted in 2001.
The representative of Panama and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
22. Proposal to amend certain provisions of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes Pu rsuant to Article X of the Marrakesh
Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WT/GC/M/58, 61)
At its meeting on 10 October 2000, the General Council examined the proposal submitted by
Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Japan, Ko rea, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Switzerland and
Venezuela (WTGC/W/410)32.
The representatives of Japan (on behalf of the co-sponsors of the proposal), European
Communities, Thailand, Korea, Brazil, New Zealand, Canada, Jamaica, Switzerland, Norway, Czech
Republic, Argentina, United States, Uruguay, Panama, Chile, Kenya, Ecuador, Turkey, Venezuela,
Guatemala, Australia, Colombia, Hungary, India, Malaysia, Cuba, Pakistan, Saint Lucia, Mexico,
Bulgaria, Philippines, Egypt and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the proposal in WT/GC/W/410 and of the statements,
agreed that the Chairman would conduct informal  consultations on how best to forward on this
proposal and agreed to revert to this matter at its next meeting in December.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman said that he
had held consultations on this matter with the co-sponsors but had nothing to report at this stage.
The representatives of Japan, European Communities, Bulgaria, Bolivia, Hungary, Thailand,
Ecuador, United States, Argentina, Czech Republic, Brazil, Turkey and Malaysia spoke.
                                                     
32 Subsequently Chile became a co-sponsor of the proposal (WT/GC/W/410/Add.1).WT/GC/44
Page 30
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter in 2001.
23. Proposal for addition of an item to the Ge neral Council Agenda: "Reports of the Special
Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture and of the Council for Trade in Services, andof the TRIPS Council on the mandated negotiations on Agriculture, Services and
Geographical Indications" (WT/GC/M/61)
At the General Council on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman drew attention to a
communication by Switzerland on the proposal by Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Egypt, Hungary,
Iceland, India, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Mauritius, Pakistan, Slovenia, Sri Lanka, Switzerland and
Turkey (WT/GC/W/425).
The representatives of Switzerland, New Zealand, European Communities, Egypt, Australia,
Chile, Czech Republic, Canada, United States, Argent ina, Turkey, Bulgaria, Hungary, Uruguay, India,
Slovenia, Mexico, Iceland, Mauritius and Honduras, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
24. Communication from the Appellate Body to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement
Body on "European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-
Containing Products" (WT/GC/M/60, 6133)
At the General Council special meeting on 22 November 2000, the Chairman said that this
item was on the Agenda at the request of Egypt on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries in order to discuss the communication fr om the Appellate Body to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body on "European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-
Containing Products" (WT/DS135/9).
The representatives of Uruguay, Egypt (on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries, India, Brazil, Colombia, Zimbabwe, Si ngapore, Switzerland, Norway, Pakistan, Costa
Rica, Canada, United States, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Turkey, Hungary, Korea, New Zealand, Jamaica,
Argentina, European Communities, Cuba, Chile, Panama Australia, Tanzania, Japan, Egypt, Mexico,
Colombia, and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman reported on
the follow-up to the special m eeting of the General Council on amicus  briefs.
The General Council took note of the statement.
25. Consultations on implementation (WTGC/M/57)
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the representative of Panama
expressed concern about the fact that there seemed to be consultations on implementation with limited
participation.
                                                     
33 Carried in the General Council minutes as "Announcement on the follow-up to the special meeting of
the General Council on amicus  briefs".WT/GC/44
Page 31
The representatives of Honduras and Bolivia, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
26. Request for a waiver for the new ACP/EC partnership agreement (WT/GC/M/57)
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman of the Council for
Trade in Goods made a statement on his own respons ibility on the state-of-play regarding the waiver
requested for the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement.
The General Council took note of the statement.
27. Review of procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO documents
(WT/GC/M/55, 5734)
Pursuant to paragraph 7 of the Procedures for the Circulation and Derestriction of WTO
documents adopted by the General Council in July 1996 (WT/L/160/Rev.1), the General Council hadinitiated the review of the procedures in February 1998.  The General Council had also considered this
matter in 1998 and 1999.
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman informed the General Council that due to
the intensive consultations on issues identified at the February General Council meeting35,
Mr. Rodriguez, Deputy-Director-Gener al had not been able to resume consultations on the circulation
and derestriction of WTO documents as requested at the informal meeting of the General Council on
29 February 2000.
The General Council agreed to revert to this matter at its next meeting.The representatives of the United States and Mexico, and the Chairman spoke.The General Council took note of the statements.At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, Mr. Rodriguez, Deputy Director-
General, reported on his consultations on this matter.
The representatives of Mexico, United States, New Zealand, Singapore (on behalf of the
ASEAN Members), Japan, India, Ca nada, Panama, Mexico, Argentina, Czech Republic, Barbados,
Bolivia and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed that the Deputy Director-General
continues his consultations on this matter.
                                                     
34 This item and item 24 - "Revision of guidelines for the scheduling of WTO meetings" were taken up
together at this meeting.
35 See item 2 – "Other aspects of the WTO work programme".WT/GC/44
Page 32
28. Revision of guidelines for the scheduling of WTO meetings (WT/GC/M/55, 5736)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman drew attention to a
document prepared by the Secretariat on Frequency of Meetings (Job No.2005 dated 30 March 2000).
He recalled that this matter was among those included in the discussion paper on Internal
Transparency and the Effective Participation of all Members (Job(00)/2551 dated 26 April 2000).
The representatives of Mexico, Slovenia, Panama, India and Pakistan, and the Chairman
spoke.
The Chairman proposed that Mr. Rodriguez hold consultations on this issue while he was
consulting on the derestriction issue, since both related to Secretariat practices in implementing
guidelines.  He also proposed that the General Council revert to this issue at its next meeting.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to the Chairman's proposals.At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, Mr. Rodriguez, Deputy Director-
General, reported on his consultations on this matter.
The representatives of Mexico, United States, New Zealand, Singapore (on behalf of the
ASEAN Members), Japan, India, Ca nada, Panama, Mexico, Argentina, Czech Republic, Barbados,
Bolivia and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements, agreed that the Deputy Director-General
continue his consultations on this matter and also agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.
29. Accreditation of Permanent Representatives to the WTO (WT/GC/M/55, 57)
In 1997, the General Council had considered the issue of accreditation of permanent
representatives to the WTO.  The General Council had also considered this matter in 1998 and 1999.
At its meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman informed the General Council that a few
delegations needed more time to consider this matter and proposed that the General Council revert to
it at its next meeting.
The General Council took note of the statement and so agreed.
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman read out the following
statement:
"As Members will recall, Ambassador Lafer in 1997 in his capacity as the then
Chairman of the General Council raised the issue of accreditation of permanent
representatives to the WTO.  Since the WTO was no longer legally associated with the United
Nations system, Ambassador Lafer proposed that Members agree to send separate notes of
accreditation of their permanent representatives in Geneva to the WTO, and no longercontinue the practice of sending to the WTO a copy of the letter of accreditation addressed to
the United Nations in Geneva.
                                                     
36 This item and item 23 - "Review of the procedures on circulation and derestriction of WTO
documents" were taken up together at this meeting.WT/GC/44
Page 33
"Following informal consultations with a number of delegations I am pleased to
inform you that most missions now appear to  be following the practice of addressing a
separate note of accreditation of their permanent representatives to the Director-General of
the WTO.  I therefore propose that Members agree to continue the application of such
procedures in future."
The representative of Pakistan spoke.The General Council took note of the statements.
30. Outcome of the APEC meeting in Brunei Darussalam (WT/GC/M/61)
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the representative of
Brunei Darussalam reported on the outcome of the APEC  Meeting held in Brunei Darussalam from 12
to 16 November 2000.
The General Council took note of the statement.
31. Arrangements for effective cooperation wi th other intergovernmental organizations
(a) International Telecommunications Union (ITU) (WT/GC/M/58)
At the General Council meeting on 10 October 2000, the Chairman recalled that the text of
the Agreement between the ITU and the WTO (S/C/11) had been adopted by the Council for Trade in
Services on 26 May.  Subsequently, the ITU Council had approved the Agreement at its annual
session in July.  The Agreement was now submitted to the General Council for approval.
The representatives of Pakistan, Egypt, Bulgaria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Brazil and
the United States, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statemen ts, approved the Agreement between the ITU
and the WTO (S/C/11) and consequently authorized the WTO Director-General to sign this
Agreement.  The General Council invited the Director-General to inform Members and consult with
them regularly as to matters relating to the implementation of this Agreement.
(b) World Customs Organization (WCO) (WT/GC/M/5737)
At an informal meeting of the General Council in February 2000, a first draft text of a
Memorandum of Understanding between the WTO and the WCO had been circulated to Members.
At the Chairman's request, the Secretariat carried out consultations on this text both with Members
and the WCO.
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman said that following his
consultations on this matter, it had appeared that the best way to proceed would be to continue
cooperating with the WCO under the present informal  arrangements.  He therefore proposed that the
idea of a formal Memorandum of Understanding not be pursued at this stage.
The representative of Japan spoke.
                                                     
37 Carried in General Council minutes as "Proposed memorandum of understanding between the WTO
and the WCO".WT/GC/44
Page 34
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to the Chairman's proposal.
32. International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO
(a) Report of the Joint Advisory Group (WT/GC/M/57)
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council considered the report of the Joint
Advisory Group of the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO on its Thirty-Third Session
(ITC/AG/XXXIII)/181.
The Chairman said that the Committee on Trade and Development had examined the report at
its meeting in June 2000 and had forwarded it to the General Council for adoption.
The General Council took note of the statement and adopted the report.
33. Administrative matters
(a) Procedures for the appointment of th e Director-General (WT/GC/M/57, 61)
In July 1999, the General Council adopted a decision on the appointment of the next Director-
General (WT/L/308) which provided that "in order to improve and strengthen the current rules and
procedures [for appointments of Directors-General], a complete set of rules and procedures for such
appointments shall be elaborated and adopted by the end of September 2000".
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman proposed to start the
process of consultations in the autumn and in this regard read out the following questions for
Members' consideration:
"(i) should there be established qualification criteria for the Director-General?;
(ii) how long should the terms of office be and what should be specified with respect to
renewals of appointment?;  (iii) should governments be invited to make nominations, or
should candidates be identified through a selection process?;  (iv) should a selection
committee be established and, if so, how should it be composed?;  (v) should the selection
committee have established guidelines (geographical or other), or a high degree of
flexibility?;  (vi) how long should the selection process take?  should there be fixed
deadlines?;  (vii) should there be a specia l decision mechanism for forcing matters if
consensus proves impossible?;  (viii) is it desirable to have specific rules for the role of
Deputy Directors-General in the transition period?"
The General Council took note of the statemen t, agreed that the Chairman would conduct
consultations on this matter and agreed to revert to it at its next meeting in October.
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council considered the matter.
The representatives of Singapore (of behalf of the ASEAN Members), Bulgaria, Canada,
Egypt, Norway, Colombia, India, Australia, Uruguay, United States, European Communities andHong Kong, China, and the Director-General and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.WT/GC/44
Page 35
(b) WTO Secretariat and senior management structure (WT/GC/M/57)
In October 1999, the General Council had agreed that the review of the WTO Secretariat and
senior management structure would be carried out in conjunction with the review of the current rules
and procedures for appointment of Directors-General38. It was understood that this review would be
carried out in the light of the earlier discussions held in the General Council on this matter in 1997and 1998 and on the basis of the Decision on WTO Secretariat and Senior Management Structure
(WT/L/207).
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman announced his
intention to hold consultations thereon in due time.
The General Council took note of the statemen t, agreed that the Chairman would conduct
consultations on this matter and agreed to revert to it at a future meeting.
(c) WTO Pension Plan
(i) Annual Report of the Management  Board for 1999 (WT/GC/M/61)
Article 5(d) of the Regulations of the Pension Plan39 provided for the submission by the
Management Board  of an annual report to the General Council and to the Plan participants.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 10 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman of the
Management Board introduced the Annual Report of the Management Board for 1999 in
WT/GC/W/426.
The General Council took note of the Annual Report of the Management Board for 1999 in
WT/GC/W/426.
(ii) Transfer Agreement with the United Natio ns Joint Staff Pension Fund (WT/GC/M/61)
Article 10 of the Regulations of the WTO Pension Plan40 provided for the conclusion of
transfer agreements with Member governments and with intergovernmental organizations in order to
secure the continuity of pension rights for participants in the Pension Plan.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 10 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman of the
Management Board introduced the document on the Agreement on the transfer of Pension Rights of
Participants in the WTO Pension Plan (WTOPP) and in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fundin WT/GC/W/420.
The General Council concurred with the Transfer Agreement (WTL/383).
                                                     
38 See WT/GC/28, item 23(b).
39 WT/L/282.
40 WT/L/282.WT/GC/44
Page 36
(iii) Management Board (WT/GC/M/5441, 6142)
Pursuant to Article 4 of the Regulations of the WTO Pension Plan43 which provided for a
Management Board comprising, inter alia , a Chairman, four members and four alternates, the General
Council had elected in March 1999 nine individuals to the Management Board, each for a term of
office of three years (WT/L/297).
At its meeting on 13 March 2000, the Chairman informed the General Council that the
Chairman, a member and an alternate were no longer able to serve the Board.  Following
consultations, he had circulated a proposal to elect replacements for these individuals to hold office
during the remainder of the three-year term (WT/GC/W/399).
The representative of France (also on behalf of Germany) spoke.The General Council took note of the statements and agreed on the election of the individuals
proposed (WT/L/347).
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman informed the General
Council that two alternates were no longer able to  serve the Board.  Following consultations, he had
circulated a proposal to elect replacements for these individuals to hold office during the remainder of
the three-year term (WT/GC/W/424).
The General Council agreed on the election of the individuals proposed (WT/L/382).
34. Observer status
(a) Governments
(i) Bahamas (WT/GC/M/57)
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council considered a request from the
Bahamas (WT/L/349) for observer status in the General Council and its subsidiary bodies, and agreed
to grant the request.
The representatives of Barbados, Canada, Cuba, Egypt, India, Jamaica, Saint Lucia and the
Bahamas (as an observer), and the Chairman (on behalf of the General Council) spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
(ii) Liberia (WT/GC/M/57)
At its meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the General Council considered a request from Liberia
(WT/L/357) for observer status in the General Council and its subsidiary bodies.
The representative of the United States spoke.
                                                     
41 Carried in the General Council minutes as "Election of a Chairman, member and alternate to the
Management Board of the WTO Pension Plan".
42 Carried in the General Council minutes as "Election of two alternates to the Management Board of
the WTO Pension Plan".
43 WT/L/282.WT/GC/44
Page 37
The Chairman proposed that the General Council agree to defer consideration of this item.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to the Chairman's proposal.
(b) International intergovernmental organizations (WT/GC/M/55, 57, 61)
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman recalled that the issue of
requests for observer status by several international organizations was one of the important pending
issues before the General Council and that there seemed to be a general wish among Members to
resolve this matter.  Therefore, he would resume consultations on it as soon as possible.  He also
recalled that this matter had been discussed at the July 1999 General Council meeting, at which time a
solution was quite close, and he hoped that Members could move quickly on it.
The General Council took note of the statement.
At the General Council meeting on 17 and 19 July 2000, the Chairman reported on his
consultations on this matter.
The representatives of the United States, Turkey, Egypt, Mauritius (on behalf of the African
Group), Hungary, Pakistan, Israel and Cuba spoke.
The Chairman said that he would continue consultations on this matter in the autumn.
The General Council took note of the statements.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman said that
there had been further consultations on this issue but no progress had been made.  Given the
importance of the issue, he urged Members to reconsider their positions on the question of observerstatus for international intergovernmental organizations so that a solution could be found as soon as
possible in 2001.
The representatives of the United States, Egypt, Hungary, Pakistan, European Communities,
Czech Republic, Venezuela, Brazil, Canada, Norway, Israel, Tunisia, Jamaica, Chile and Colombia,
and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to the matter in 2001.
35. Date and venue of the Fourth Session of the Ministerial Conference (WT/GC/M/58, 61
and Add.1)
At the General Council meeting on 10 October 2000, the Chairman said that in accordance
with the provisions of Article IV of the WTO Agreement, a Ministerial Conference should be
convened in 2001.  In order for the General Council to take a decision on the date and venue of the
Fourth Session of the Ministerial Conference he proposed the following:44
"(a) the General Council agree to take a decision on the date and venue of the next
Ministerial Conference at its end-of-year meeting on 7 and 8 December 2000;
                                                     
44 Subsequently issued as document WT/GC/34.WT/GC/44
Page 38
(b) the General Council take note with appreciation of the invitation of the
Government of Qatar to host the Conference45, and invite any other Member Government
wishing to host the Conference to so inform the General Council in time for a final decision in
December;  and
(c) the General Council invite the Secretariat to prepare a factual report to the
General Council on the conference facilities which are available in each proposed venue.
These reports, which should provide a detailed factual description of the facilities and
logistics available for the organization of the event, would serve as a basis for a final decision
on the venue."
The representatives of Qatar, Pakistan, European Communities, Brazil, Venezuela, United
States and Uruguay, and the Director-General and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements , agreed to the Chairman's proposal and also
agreed to revert to this item at its meeting in December.
At the General Council meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the Chairman drew
attention to the communications of Qatar in WT/GC/33/Rev.1 and Chile in WT/GC/39.
On 8 December, the Chairman informed the General Council that in his communication in
WT/GC/39, Chile had indicated that it was seriously considering submitting the candidacy of
Santiago as host for the Fourth Ministerial Conference and would confirm this candidacy in the
second week of December, before the 14 December.  He therefore proposed to adjourn discussion ofthis item and return to it at the resumed meeting on 15 December.
The representatives of Australia, Cuba and Chile spoke.The General Council  took note of the statements  and adjourned consideration of this matter.
On 15 December, the  representative of Chile informed the General Council that his
authorities were still assessing the financial aspects involved by the Ministerial Conference  and were
therefore not able to give a final answer on this issue at the present meeting.
The representatives of Qatar, Pakistan, Canada, United States, Egypt, Kuwait (also on behalf
of Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Oman and Jordan), Brazil, European Communities and Cuba, and
the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements and adjourned.At the resumed meeting on 30 January 2001, the Chairman reported to the General Council
on his informal consultations of 23 and 30 January on this issue.
The representatives of the European Communities, Bulgaria, Egypt, Malaysia (on behalf of
the ASEAM Members), United States, Japan, Cuba, Pakistan, Paraguay (on behalf of the
MERCOSUR Members), Canada, Mauritius (on behalf of the African Group), Chile, Kenya, Mexico,
Romania, Turkey, Korea, Senegal, Gabon, Venezuela (on behalf of the GRULAC), Sri Lanka, India,
Morocco, Nigeria, Israel, Bangladesh, Bulgaria and Kuwait, and the Chairman spoke.
                                                     
45 See document WT/GC/33.WT/GC/44
Page 39
The General Council agreed to accept the offer from Qatar to host the Fourth Session of
Ministerial Conference in Doha and also agreed that its Chairman hold consultations on the precise
date of the Conference.  The General Council  also authorized its Chairman in cooperation with the
Director-General to start consultations on both organizational and substantive matters related to the
preparation of the Fourth Ministerial Conference and to report back to the General Council onprogress made.  The General Council then took note of the statements and adjourned.
At the resumed meeting on 8 February 2001, the Chairman proposed that the General Council
agree on the dates of 9-13 November 2001 for the Fourth Session of the Ministerial Conference.
The General Council took note of the statement and agreed on the dates proposed.
36. Appointment of officers to WTO bodies (WT/GC/M/53, 5446 and Add.147 and 248, 5549)
At the General Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the Chairman said that in
accordance with the guidelines for appointment of officers to WTO bodies approved by the General
Council in January 1995 (WT/L/31), he had held informal consultations on this matter, on the basis ofwhich he considered that there was a consensus on the following slate of names.
General Council Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway)
Dispute Settlement Body Mr. Stuart Harbinson (Hong Kong, China)
Trade Policy Review Body Mr. Ifte khar Ahmed Chowdhury (Bangladesh)
Council for Trade in Goods Mr. Carl os Pérez del Castillo (Uruguay)
Council for Trade in Services Mr. Sergio Marchi (Canada)
Committee on Trade and Environment Mrs. Yolande Biké (Gabon)
Committee on Trade and Development Mr. Ransford Smith (Jamaica)Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions Mr. Milan Hovorka (Czech Republic)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Mr. Edsel T. Custodio (Philippines)
Committee on Budget, Finance and
  AdministrationMr. Hakki Akil (Turkey)
Working Group on the Relationship between
  Trade and InvestmentMr. Man Soon Chang (Korea)
Working Group on the Interaction between Trade
  and Competition PolicyMr. Frederic Jenny (France)
Working Group on Transparency in Government
  ProcurementMr. Ronald Saborío Soto (Costa Rica)
The Chairman said that he would conduct further consultations on the appointment of the
Chairperson for the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights taking into
                                                     
46 At this meeting the item was called "Appointment of the Chairperson of the Council for Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and of the Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies of the Councilfor Trade in Goods".
47 See footnote 40.
48 See footnote 40.
49 See footnote 40.WT/GC/44
Page 40
account the overall balance of the remaining chairpersons to be appointed by the Council for Trade in
Goods for its subsidiary bodies.
The General Council took note of the statement and of the consensus on the above slate of
names.
Prior to adoption of the agenda on 13 March 2000, the General Council agreed that given the
fact that the Council for Trade in Goods would meet only later in April, it would exceptionally agree
to the Chairmanship appointments proposed in the slate of names for subsidiary bodies of the Council
for Trade in Goods at the same time that it agreed  to the proposed name for the Chairmanship of the
Council for TRIPS.
The representatives Mexico and the European Communities, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.At its meeting on 13 March 2000, the General Council agreed to defer consideration of this
item until resumption of the present meeting, pending the results of consultations being carried out by
the outgoing Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods and the consensus-building on the proposed
slate of names.
At the resumed meeting of the General Council on 23 March 2000, the Chairman said that
given the need for a chairman for the Special Se ssion of the Committee on Agriculture that was to
take place later that day and after extensive consultations, he proposed that, as an interim
arrangement, the Chairman of the CTG chair the first Special Session.50  That arrangement would be
without prejudice to the decision on the Chairperson and the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee.
The representatives of Mexico, India, Egypt, Chile, European Communities, Australia, United
States, Uruguay, Canada, Bolivia, Switzerla nd, Poland (on behalf of the CEFTA Members and
Estonia and Latvia), Venezuela, Dominican Re public and Hong Kong, China, and the Chairman
spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements, agreed to the Chairman's proposal and
adjourned.51
At the General Council meeting on 3 and 8 May 2000, the Chairman proposed that Mr. Chak
Mun See (Singapore) be appointed as the Chairman of the Council for TRIPS.
The General Council so agreed.The former Chairman of the Council for Trad e in Goods proposed the following slate of
names for the chairmanships of the subsidiary bodies of that Council:
                                                     
50  This proposal was based on Rule 14 of the rules of procedure of the Committee on Agriculture.
51 This meeting was subsequently closed.   The item was taken up at the General Council meeting of
3 May 2000.WT/GC/44
Page 41
Committee on Agriculture
Chair:
Vice-ChairMr. Jorge Voto-Bernales (Peru)
Mr. Yoichi Suzuki (Japan)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices Mr. Yair Shiran (Israel)
Committee on Customs Valuation Mr. Remo Moretta (Australia)
Committee on Import Licensing Mr. Albert Wright (Denmark)Committee on Market Access Mr. Christophe Kiener (Switzerland)
Committee on Rules of Origin Mr. Sándor Simon (Hungary)
Committee on Safeguards Mr. Joshua Phoho Setipa (Lesotho)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary
  MeasuresMr. Shishir Priyadarshi (India)
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing
  MeasuresMrs. Usha Dwarka-Canabady (Mauritius)
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Mr. John Adank (New Zealand)
Committee on Trade-Related Investment
  MeasuresMr. Oscar Hernández (Venezuela)
Working Party on State Trading Enterprises Mr. Breffini Carpenter (Ireland)
The General Council agreed to the above slate of names.
The representatives of Brazil and Mexico, and the Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
37. Election of Chairperson (WT/GC/M/53)
At the General Council meeting on 7 and 8 February 2000, the Chairman, as the outgoing
presiding officer of the General Council, made a statement (WT/GC(00)/ST/1).
The General Council then unanimously elected Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway) to the Chair.
38. Review of WTO activities (WT/GC/M/61)
At its meeting on 7, 8, 11 and 15 December 2000, the General Council conducted a review of
WTO activities in pursuance of the Decision concerning procedures for the overview of WTO
activities and for reporting under the WTO (WT/L/105).  In so doing, the General Council considered
annual reports for 2000 from WTO bodies.
Chairpersons of various WTO bodies presented the annual reports submitted by those bodies.The General Council agreed to a proposal by the Director-General that the Chairman of the
TMB, Mr. Szepesi, be reappointed for a further period of three years as of 1 January 2001.
The General Council adopted the report of the Committee on Trade and Development
(WT/COMTD/28), took note of the reports from the other WTO bodies, including the reports from theWT/GC/44
Page 42
bodies under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements , in documents WT/DSB/21 and Add.1, WT/TPR/86,
G/L/419 and Corr.1, S/ C/12, IP/C/22, WT/BOP/R/55, WT/B FA/50, WT/REG/9, WT/CTE/5,
WT/WGTI/4, WT/WGTCP/4, WT/WGTGP/4, WT/L/374 and GPA/44, and took note of the
introductory statements by Chairpersons.
The General Council then adopted the report of the General Council on the understanding that
the Secretariat would make the necessary adjustments to the draft report in WT/GC/W/421 so as to
include matters discussed at this meeting.
The representatives of Brazil (also on behalf of the MERCOSUR Members), Australia,
Hungary, United States, Iceland (on behalf of  the EFTA Members), India, Chile, European
Communities, New Zealand, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Philippines, Bulgaria and Hong Kong, China, andthe Chairman spoke.
The General Council took note of the statements.
__________