RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE WT/GC/M/28
8May1998
ORGANIZATION(98-1860)
General Council
24April 1998
MINUTES OFMEETING
Held intheCentre William Rappard
on24April 1998
Chairman: Mr.J.Weekes (Canada)
Subjects discussed: Page
1. Conditions ofservice ofWTO staff................................2
2. Bhutan -Request forobserver status ...............................6
3. Committee onBudget, Finance andAdministration ......................7
- Report oftheCommittee .................................7
4. Committee onBalance-of-Payments Restrictions ........................8
- Consultation withNigeria .................................8
5. Waivers under Article IXoftheWTO Agreement ......................9
(a) Harmonized System -Requests forextensions ofwaivers .............9
(i) Bangladesh .....................................9
(ii) Nicaragua ......................................9
(iii) SriLanka ......................................9
(b) Zambia -Renegotiation ofSchedule LXXVIII ....................10
- Request forextension ofwaiver ........................10
(c) Decision ontheintroduction ofHarmonized System changes intoWTO
schedules oftariff concessions on1January 1996 ..................10
- Extension ofthetime-limit ...........................10
6. WTO Secretariat andSenior Management Structure .....................10
- Statement bytheChairman ................................10
7. Tariff standstill forelectronic commerce .............................11
- Proposal byCanada ....................................11
8. Preparations forthe1998Ministerial Conference andthecommemoration ofthe50th
Anniversary ofthemultilateral trading system .........................18
(a) Organizational matters ...................................18
(b) Report bytheDirector-General .............................18
(c) Progress reports bytheChairpersons ofWTO bodies ...............19
(d) Addendum tothereport oftheGeneral Council ..................29WT/GC/M/28
Page2
9. Transparency andderestriction ...................................30
10. Premature disclosure ofdispute settlement panel reports ...................30
11. Accession ofAzerbaijan .......................................33
- Chairmanship oftheWorking Party ..........................33
12. Accession ofLaos ..........................................34
- Chairmanship oftheWorking Party ..........................34
13. Daily Bulletin .............................................34
1. Conditions ofservice ofWTO staff
TheChairman recalled thatdespite intensive efforts inlate1997 byallMembers concerned,
ithadnotbeenpossible totakeadecision onthequestion ofconditions ofservice ofWTO staff. Since
then,consultations hadcontinued withaviewtoovercoming thedifficulties thathadprevented certain
Members fromjoining theemerging consensus onthisissue. Asaresult oftheseconsultations, anew
draftdecision hadbeenprepared andcirculated toMembers (WT/GC/W/83). Asthenewdraftcame
aftermore thanfouryears ofprotracted anddifficult discussions, itrepresented adelicate compromise
andagenuine effort toachieve thelong-awaited breakthrough onthequestion ofconditions ofservice.
Before proceeding totheadoption ofthedraftdecision, hereadthefollowing statement fortherecord:
"Inthecourse oftheconsultations which Ihaveheldonthedraftdecision onConditions
ofService Applicable totheStaffoftheWTO Secretariat, anumber ofMembers haveraised
questions withrespect totheintention ofcertain partsofthedecision. Thefollowing statement
isintended toclarify those intentions. Inadopting thedecision indocument WT/GC/W/83
WTO Members willtakethedecision today toestablish apermanent WTO Secretariat with
itsownregulations andrules. Thisisanextremely important step,building ontheMarrakesh
Ministerial Decision, and,Iknow, hasonlybeenpossible because ofthehardwork ofmany
representatives andofficials bothinGeneva andincapitals. Inadopting thisdecision today,
theGeneralCouncilwillstress,inthePreamble,theneedforefficiencygains,improvedpriority-
setting andother savings toensure cost-neutrality intheWTO budget. Inthatrespect, we
mustremember thattheWTO budget reflects therequirements thatMembers place upon the
organization, including insuchessential areas astechnical assistance, translation, dispute
settlement andaccession ofnewmembers, allareas inwhich thepressure forwork has
consistently beenincreasing sincetheestablishment oftheWTO. Wearealsoputting increasing
demands ontheDirector-General andtheSecretariat withrespect tothefollow-up oftheHigh
Level Meeting fortheLeast Developed Countries. Moreover, various Members haveput
forward ideas onimplementation andfuture activities oftheWTO inthecontext ofthe
preparation oftheMayMinisterial Conference, which maywellplace further strains onthe
resources oftheSecretariat. Inthislight, Iwould remind Members thatthedecision weshall
adopt today isadecision ontheconditions ofservice applicable tothestaffoftheWTO
Secretariat. Itisnot,inanyway,adecision onthebudget oftheorganization infuture years.
Decisions onthebudget oftheWTO will,ofcourse, betaken eachyearinaccordance with
established procedures; Iknow thatallMembers would expect thecurrent highlevelofservice
oftheSecretariat tobemaintained.
"Insetting 1January 1999 asthetarget datefortheestablishment oftheWTO
Secretariat, itisimportant torecall thatthisissuehasnowbeenonthetableforoverfouryears.
Every effort should bemade toavoid anyfurther postponement oftheestablishment ofthe
Secretariat beyond 1January 1999. Inother words, 1January 1999 should beseenastheWT/GC/M/28
Page3
deadline. Thedecision weadopt today willrequire serious efforts from allofusinorder to
establish thepermanent WTO Secretariat by1January 1999. First, theWorking Group on
Conditions ofService Applicable totheStaff oftheWTO Secretariat must draftadetailed
proposal thatmeets thecriteria specified inthisdecision. Second, itwillbesubject toactuarial
review. Third, theGeneral Council willhavetoadopt theproposal andauthorize theDirector-
General toinform theUnited Nations JointStaffPension Fund thattheICITO wishes toapply
fortermination ofitsmembership intheFund. Inorder thatwemaybegin thisprocess as
soonaspossible andmeet ourdeadline of1January 1999, Ihaveheldconsultations onthe
appointment ofanewChairman oftheWorking Group. Withyouragreement, Ipropose that
Mr.R.Farrell (New Zealand) takeonthisChairmanship.1Iexpect thatyouwillallreceive
acommunication veryshortly fromtheChairman astothedateonwhich theWorking Group
willresume itswork.
"ThedecisionprovidesguidancetotheWorkingGroupontheparametersoftheproposal
itistodevelop. Paragraph oneoftheAnnex provides thatattheoutset theproposal must
notprovide salary andbenefit levels thatintheaggregate exceed salary andbenefit levels in
theUNCommon System, itbeing understood thattheonlymeaningful wayofmeasuring those
levels willbeincostterms. However, within those parameters, theproposal mayprovide
forredistribution ofbenefits, including within theproposed pension plan, provided thatthey
aretargeted atspecifically defined problems. While attheoutset theUNCommon System
willserve asaceiling withrespect tosalary andbenefit levels, itwillalsoserve asafloor.
Nothing intheDecision ortheAnnex willworsen thesalary andbenefit levels thatpresent
staffmembers oftheWTO Secretariat enjoy. Pursuant toparagraph twooftheAnnex, the
proposal mustcontain aprojection showing thatproposed salary andbenefit levels, including
administrative andother related costs, willbecostneutral overthenextfivetoseven years.
Inother words, itmustbeestablished thattheprojected costsoftheproposed system willnot
exceed theprojected costsoftheUNCommon System during thistimeframe. Byremaining
within these parameters, theproposal thatwewilladopt willbecostneutral ascompared with
theUNCommon System. Inconclusion, Iwould liketopropose thatthedraftdecision in
WT/GC/W/83 nowbeadopted inthelightofthisstatement."
TheGeneral Council adopted thedraft decision inthelight oftheChairman 'sstatement
(WT/L/269).
Therepresentative ofGermany saidthathisGovernment accepted theDecision justadopted
asabasis forthework ofestablishing theconditions ofservice applicable tothestaffoftheWTO
Secretariat, andwished todeclare thefollowing: (i)Germany understood theDecision insuchaway
thatintheaggregate thesalary andbenefit level oftheUNCommon System were accepted asthe
absolute ceiling forthesalary andbenefit levels ofWTO; itwould monitor theproposal oftheWorking
Group carefully inthisrespect andreserved itsfinalpositions; (ii)Germany would insist aswellin
thefuture ontheprinciple thatintheaggregate thesalary andbenefits leveloftheWTO should not
exceed thecomparable salary andbenefit levels intheUNCommon System; and(iii)Germany would
notaccept anysupplementary budgetary guarantee forthepayment ofpensions incasetheWorking
Group opted foranindependent WTO pension scheme. Anindependent WTO scheme would therefore
havetobeacontribution-defined system.
Therepresentative oftheUnited Kingdom saidthathisdelegation wasgladtoassociate itself
withtheDecision justtaken ontheconditions ofservice tobeapplied tothestaffoftheSecretariat,
ofwhom hisdelegation thought highly. TheDecision provided fortheestablishment oftheSecretariat
withitsownrulesandregulations by1January 1999provided certain clearconditions weremet. This
1TheGeneral Council agreed totheproposal.WT/GC/M/28
Page4
Decision hadbeencarefully drafted, andhisdelegation attached great importance totheconditions
itcontained. Having listened carefully tothestatement made bytheChairman onhisownauthority,
hewished tostress thatfortheUnited Kingdom theDecision wasunambiguous anddidnotrequire
anyinterpretative gloss. FortheUnited Kingdom, thedecision would betheauthoritative textinthe
event ofanyfuture difference ofopinion onwhathadbeenagreed toatthepresent meeting. Referring
tothedisruptionofdelegates'parkingwhichhadtakenplace,hesaidthathisdelegationhadbeentempted
tomake itsassent totheDecision conditional uponanassurance fromtheStaffCouncil thattheywould
putastoptothisdisruption forthwith. However, ithadbelieved thatthismight betomake thesame
mistake asthose thathadinflicted thisinconvenience ondelegations. Instead, heappealed tothestaff
torecognize thatalienating delegates wasnotthebestwayofachieving theirobjectives.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthatMembers hadtaken adecision totakethefirst
steptowards anindependent WTO compensation andpersonnel system. Thisissue hadbeenunder
consideration fortwoandahalfyears. TheUnited States hadconsistently voiced itscommitment to
theestablishment ofanindependent WTO andtotheconsideration oftheeventual establishment of
acompensation andpersonnel planindependent fromtheUNCommon System. IntheDecision just
taken, animportant principle oftheproposed independent WTO system ofsalaries andpensions was
thatthesystem should bedemonstrably cost-neutral ascompared withwhatwould bethecaseifthe
UNCommon System werestillapplied defactototheSecretariat. Thenewsystem, inother words,
should nothaveaninitial orprojected impact ontheWTO 'sbudget. While thisinformation should
notcome asasurprise toanyMember, shewasnevertheless obliged tostatefortherecord thatitwas
theposition oftheUnited States thatthefuture annual budgets oftheWTO should reflect nogrowth,
expressed innominal terms. IntheirDecision, Members hadaffirmed thelongstanding practice of
making decisions onbudgetary andadministrative matters byconsensus. Itwastheintent oftheUnited
States towithhold consensus onanyproposed WTO budget which didnotreflect thephilosophy of
zeronominal growth.
TherepresentativeofFranceexpressedfullsupportfortheDecision,whichwasclearandprecise
andsetouttheconditions onwhich anindependent Secretariat could beestablished. Itwasonthe
basisofthisDecision thatherdelegation would participate actively inthework oftheWorking Group
thatwasgoing tobeestablished. Herdelegation wasfullyconfident thattheSecretariat oftheWTO
would beestablished by1January 1999.
Therepresentative ofVenezuela, speaking onbehalf oftheLatin American andCaribbean
Group(GRULAC),supportedtheDecisionthathadbeenadopted.TheDecisionwasabalancedresponse
tothesituation, metthelegitimate expectations ofWTO stafftoimprove theirworking conditions,
andcreated anindependent Secretariat fortheorganization withtherequired autonomy. Thiswould
benefit allWTO Members, asthemain users oftheWTO. TheDecision, however, should nothave
abudgetary impact ontheorganization. Hereiterated thereadiness ofGRULAC countries tocooperate
inaconstructive manner inthework oftheWorking Group which stillhadtodealwithanumber of
issues.
TherepresentativeofEgyptwishedtoreconfirmhisdelegation'sunderstandingthattheDecision
would neither affect budgetary allocations fortechnical assistance norresult inanyincrease in
contributions. Egypt, inparticular, hadbeenpaying ahigher contribution thanitshould havebeen,
andthiswasamatter hisdelegation would raiseinother fora.
Therepresentative ofNorway expressed hisdelegation 'ssatisfaction attheDecision justtaken
becauseitfinallyhonouredthecommitmentmadebyMembersatMarrakesh.HehopedthattheDecision
would contribute toMembers 'credibility, especially vis-à-vis those whoworked intheSecretariat.
Thepolitical signal oftheDecision wastherefore paramount. However, there werecertain formulas
intheDecision anditsAnnex withwhich Norway wasnothappy. Inparticular, inparagraph 2of
theAnnex, reference wasmade toafivetoseven yeartimespan. Hisdelegation 'sinterpretation ofWT/GC/M/28
Page5
thisformula wasthatitwasaforecast andnotastrict, legally binding formula. Ifthiswasnotacorrect
interpretation, hebelieved thatMembers would, bytheverywords ofparagraph 2oftheAnnex, in
reality neutralize byonehandthedecision made bytheother toestablish theWTO asasuigeneris
organization outside theUNsystem. Norway hadserious concerns onthisissue, buttheywere not
ofanature thatwould leadittoblock aconsensus, because Members hadnowtotakeoperational
decisions astheyhadjustdone.
Therepresentative ofHong Kong, China saidthatitwould beunfortunate iftherecord showed
apreponderance ofcomments from oneperspective onthisimportant proposal. Intheview ofhis
delegation, amajority ofMembers fullysupported afirmdecision nowonestablishing theSecretariat
asaseparate body assoon aspossible andonterms thatwere fairtothestaff. TheChairman 's
statement, inhisview, accurately reflected theviews ofmany Members, including Hong Kong, China.
Inparticular, heagreed withtheChairman thattheDecision wasnotinanysense oneonthebudget
oftheWTO infuture years, because thisbudget would havemany demands placed onit.Healso
agreed withtheChairman thatnoefforts should bespared toavoid anyfurther postponement ofthe
establishment oftheSecretariat beyond 1January 1999, andthattheproposal tobedeveloped needed
onlytoprovide that,attheoutset, aggregate salary andbenefit levels would notexceed those inthe
UNCommon System.
Therepresentative ofKorea welcomed theadoption oftheDecision, aswellastheChairman 's
statement withregard thereto. However, inthelightofKorea 'sposition infavour ofanearlysettlement
ofthismatter, itwasregrettable thatMembers could notestablish thesecretariat ofthissuigeneris
organization earlier than1January 1999. Thatbeing said,hisdelegation welcomed theresumption
ofthework oftheWorking Group, andwould participate closely initsproceedings. Korea hoped
there would benofurther delays inestablishing anindependent WTO Secretariat beyond 1January
1999.
TherepresentativeofBruneiDarussalam,speakingonbehalfoftheASEANMembers,expressed
support fortheDecision, andhoped thatMembers would proceed smoothly totheestablishment of
apermanent WTO Secretariat.
Therepresentative ofBangladesh saidhisdelegation wished toechoEgypt 'sview thatthe
arrangements regarding conditions ofservice should notinanywayadversely affect thequantity of
technical assistance, particularly totheleast-developed countries. Also, thearrangements should not
inanywayresult inincreased contributions bydeveloping countries, andparticularly theleast-developed
amongst them.
Therepresentative oftheNetherlands saidthatherGovernment joined theconsensus inthe
adoption ofthisDecision asabasis forthework ofestablishing theconditions ofservice applicable
tothestaffoftheWTO Secretariat. Indoing so,itdeclared thefollowing: (i)theNetherlands fully
agreed withtheChairman thatthepresent Decision wasoneonconditions ofservice, andnotonthe
budget oftheorganization infuture years. While theWTO, asanyorganization, must continue to
strive foramaximum ofcostefficiency, theNetherlands believed thatnothing intheDecision could
beconstrued soastodenytheorganization themeans itwould needforanadequate fulfilment ofits
tasksinfuture; (ii)theNetherlands would continue toparticipate constructively intheWorking Group
thatwould havetobegin itswork assoonaspossible. Herdelegation would beguided inthatprocess
bytwomain principles: First, thecontinuing concern about thepossible negative repercussions that
anindependent WTO system could haveontheUNCommon System andthepossibility ofitsreform
and,second, asherdelegation hadoftenstated inearlier Working Group discussions, herGovernment 's
viewthatanypension scheme should beself-financing onthebasisofcontributions. Within theWTO,
herGovernment could notaccept thatMembers would ultimately havetoguarantee pension benefits.
Thishadbeen theconsistent policy oftheNetherlands bothinthenational context andinother
international organizations.WT/GC/M/28
Page6
TheDirector-General expressed satisfaction thatMembers hadbeenabletoadopt theDecision
toestablish apermanent WTO Secretariat withitsownregulations andrules. Allagreed thatthiswas
anextremely important stepthathadtobeseeninthecontext ofthegrowing tasksandresponsibilities
which Members themselves wereassigning totheorganization andtoitsstaff. Members likedtorecall,
rightly, thattheWTO wasaMember-driven organization. Forthisreason, intaking thedecision to
establish anindependent Secretariat, Members wereincreasing theirdirect responsibility foritsproper
functioning. Alsoforthisreason, inhiscapacity asDirector-General, hewished tounderline that
theChairman'sstatementmeantthat,inrespectofallaspectsoftheWTObudget,nothingintheDecision
thathadbeen taken could limit therights andobligations ofMembers intheexercise oftheir
responsibilities inaccordance withestablished procedures. AsMembers wereaware, theSecretariat
stafffelttheneedtomove forward inorder toguarantee thenormal activity ofthisorganization, but
thestrong sense ofresponsibility thattheyhaddemonstrated didnotmean theyfeltthattheirexpectations
hadbeenadequately addressed. Thestaffhoped thatintheWorking Group there would beanew
constructive spirit andawillingness toimplement alltheagreements reached inthemostfavourable
andpositive light. Headded thathefullyshared thestaff'spoint ofview.
TheGeneral Council takenoteofthestatements.
2. Bhutan -Request forobserver status (WT/L/262)
TheChairman drew attention tothecommunication from Bhutan requesting observer status
intheGeneral Council anditssubsidiary bodies (WT/L/262), inwhich Bhutan hadindicated itsintention
toapply foraccession totheWTO Agreement andhadprovided abriefdescription ofitseconomy
andforeign trade regime, inaccordance withtheguidelines forobserver status forgovernments in
theWTO (WT/L/161, Annex 2).Heproposed thatBhutan 'srequest begranted.
TheGeneral Council soagreed.
TherepresentativesofIndia,Bangladesh,BruneionbehalfoftheASEANMembersandPakistan
welcomed andsupported thegranting ofobserver status toBhutan, which would enable ittobecome
better acquainted with WTO 'swork andfacilitate itsaccession totheWTO Agreement. The
representatives ofIndia andPakistan underlined theimportance oftheirclose relations withBhutan,
andassured Bhutan oftheirsupport andcooperation initsaccession process.
Therepresentative ofIndia saidthatBhutan wasrichinnatural reserves andresources. India
hadhadtheprivilege ofbeing theprincipal participant inBhutan 'sdevelopment efforts, especially
intheinfrastructure andhydro-power sectors. Inthisendeavour, India hadtaken particular careto
fullyappreciate andrespect Bhutan 'sviews andconcerns regarding itseconomic development andthe
preservation ofitsextraordinary social, cultural andenvironmental heritage.
TherepresentativeofBangladeshnotedthatBhutanwasamemberoftheSouthAsianAssociation
forRegional Cooperation (SAARC) andbelieved thatitspresence would strengthen theWTO andwould
bebeneficial tothemultilateral trading system.
TheChairman, onbehalf oftheGeneral Council, welcomed Bhutan asanobserver andassured
itofMembers 'cooperation initsfuture accession negotiations.
TherepresentativeofBhutan,speakingasanobserver,expressedgratitudetotheGeneralCouncil
forhaving granted hisgovernment observer status andtoMembers fortheirexpressions ofsupport
andcooperation. Bhutan intended tomake fulluseofitsobserver status tostudy therole,functions
andwork oftheWTO. Hisdelegation looked forward tothevaluable support andguidance fromWT/GC/M/28
Page7
Members andtheSecretariat asBhutan engaged actively intheprocess oflearning andpreparation
toward aspeedy accession.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements.
3. Committee onBudget, Finance andAdministration
- Report oftheCommittee (WT/BFA/35)
Mr.Meier (Switzerland), Chairman oftheCommittee onBudget, Finance andAdministration,
introducing theCommittee 'sreport onitsmeeting of12March (WT/BFA/35), saidthattheCommittee
hadcontinued itsdiscussions withregard totheuseofthebalance ofthe1996 surplus onthebasis
ofadraftresolution prepared byhispredecessor. Thevastmajority ofdelegations hadindicated that
theycould support thedraftresolution eventhough some would havepreferred toseethefunds allocated
toother purposes. Onedelegation, however, hadindicated thatitcould notsupport theprovision of
funds fromthesurplus fortheWTO programme fortechnical assistance orforaugmenting resources
toassist developing countries requesting theservices ofalegalexpert under Article 27.2oftheDispute
Settlement Understanding. Ultimately, theCommittee hadnoted thatnoconsensus could bereached
ontheutilization ofthebalance ofthe1996 surplus andthatdiscussions thereon should continue.
Withregard toUN/WTO cooperation withregard toITCbudgetary arrangements, herecalled
thatin1997, theInternational Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO hadpresented itsbudget incompliance
withtherequirement ofboththeUNandtheWTO, which hadcreated considerable technical difficulties
andhadresulted inaninefficient useofresources. Hispredecessor andofficials from theWTO and
ITChaddiscussed thismatter inNewYork withtheUN.Ithadbeenagreed thattheSecretariat would
prepare afactual noteonthequestion ofbudgetary aspects ofcooperation between theUNandthe
WTO concerning theITC,andthatitwould beuseful tohavecontacts when theAdvisory Committee
onAdministrative andBudgetary Questions (ACABQ) metinGeneva inJune. These contacts were
presently scheduled forearly Juneandthematter would befollowed upintheCommittee 'smid-June
meeting.
Withrespect toMembers inCategory IVoftheWTO Administrative Measures, andpursuant
tothedecision ofthePreparatory Committee oftheWTO thatatthebeginning oftheyeartheCommittee
should report totheGeneral Council onMembers withthreeormoreyears ofoutstanding contributions,
theCommittee recommended thattheMembers listed inparagraph 16ofthereport beurged toliquidate
theirarrears.
Among matters tobedealtwithin1998, theCommittee would undertake areview ofthenew
system forthecalculation ofassessments totheWTO budget which hadbeeninplace nowforthree
years. TheCommittee hadagreed inNovember 1997 toalsoexamine thelevel oftheminimum
contribution inthecontext ofidentifying possible measures infavour ofleast-developed countries.
TheCommittee hadalsoagreed toestablish aworking group toreview thesystem ofassessments but
hadconsidered thatthequestion oftheminimum contribution should bedealtwithintheCommittee
itself. TheWorking Group, which would bechaired byMr.Sándor Simon (Hungary), would hold
itsfirstmeeting soon.
WithregardtoarequestfromaMemberinCategoryIVwhichwasnotaleast-developedcountry
tohaveaccess totechnical assistance andtraining, theCommittee haddiscussed theissue andhad
identified asolution (paragraphs 23-26 ofthereport). Based onthediscussions, consultations had
begun withaviewtoattempting toidentify ageneric approach tothequestion.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatement, approved theBudget Committee 'sspecific
recommendation inparagraph 16ofitsreport inWT/BFA/35, andadopted thereport.WT/GC/M/28
Page8
4. Committee onBalance-of-Payments Restrictions
- Consultation withNigeria (WT/BOP/R/41)
Mr.Jenkins(UnitedKingdom),ChairmanoftheCommittee,saidthatattheresumedconsultation
with Nigeria on11-12 February, theCommittee hadhadbefore itaproposal from Nigeria
(WT/BOP/N/32/Add.1) fortheelimination ofoutstanding import prohibitions justified under
Article XVIII:B overafive-year period. TheCommittee hadbeenunable tocome toaconsensus on
thisproposed time-schedule, ortoagree onspecific proposals forrecommendations bytheGeneral
Council. Accordingly, thereport before theGeneral Council recorded thedifferent views expressed
intheCommittee, asrequired byparagraph 13oftheUnderstanding ontheBalance-of-Payments
Provisions oftheGATT 1994.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidherGovernment wasdisappointed thatNigeria
hadignored theconcerns ofthelargemajority ofCommittee members thatitshould promptly eliminate
certain import measures justified under Article XVIII:B. TheCommittee hadindicated toNigeria on
fourseparate occasions thatthese measures wereinconsistent withitsWTO obligations. YetNigeria
hadchosen inresponse tocontinue tomaintain theseWTO-inconsistent import measures forfourmore
years until2002. TheUnited States hoped thatNigeria would takestepsassoonaspossible tobring
itsmeasures intoconformity withtheWTO Agreement. Ifthemeasures could notbeeliminated
immediately, Nigeria should explore agreement withMembers ontheirelimination assoonaspossible
within aprecise timetable andseekawaiver under Article IXoftheWTO Agreement toprovide legal
cover during theperiod inwhich theywere being eliminated. TheUnited States wasinterested in
continuing informal consultations withNigeria andother interested Members tothisendwiththehope
thatthismatter could besatisfactorily resolved intheGeneral Council inthenearfuture. Inthe
meantime, Nigeria should keeptheGeneral Council informed infuture meetings ofprogress towards
eliminating these measures untilsuchanagreement hadbeenreached among Members.
Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities expressed regret thattheCommittee hadbeen
unable toagree toconclusions toconsultations onNigeria 'simport restrictions under Article XVIII.
Hisdelegation wished todrawattention totwoimportant elements asregards theserestrictions. Already
before theresumption ofconsultations on11-12 February, theCommittee haddetermined thatNigeria
couldnotjustifyitsimportrestrictionsunderBOPprovisionsandhadthereforetheobligationtoeliminate
itsmeasures under Article XVIII:B. Even ifNigeria 'sBOPsituation hadbeensuchasforeseen in
Article XVIII:B, themodalities oftheimport restrictions werenotinconformity withtherequirements
thereof, andshould beremoved inaccordance withparagraph 11ofthatArticle. Before theconsultations
inFebruary, Nigeria hadhadasignificant period oftimetoeliminate thesemeasures. TheCommittee
hadsuspended consultations fourtimes intwoyears toallow Nigeria tobring itsmeasures into
conformity. Thetimeduring which Nigeria hadcontinued toapply GATT incompatible import
restrictions gaverisetomuch concern among Members. TheEuropean Communities attached high
priority tothecorrect application oftheBOPprovisions, soastoensure thattheywereusedbyMembers
facing aBOPcrisis requiring temporary measures, andonlybyMembers insuchconditions. The
fullrespect ofArticles XIIandXVIII oftheGATT aswellastheUnderstanding ontheBOPProvisions
ofGATT 1994 wasofgreat importance, andinrecent years many Members haddisinvoked Article
XVIII astheirBOPposition hadimproved. TheEuropean Communities urged Nigeria toeliminate
itsremaining import restrictions without further delay soastobring itsmeasures intoconformity with
WTO rules.
Therepresentative ofCanada expressed regret thatithadnotbeenpossible toreach agreed
conclusions attheFebruary meeting oftheCommittee. Atthatmeeting, Canada hadnoted thatNigeria
hadmade efforts torevise itsphase-out plantoremove itsimport restrictions by2002, buthad
underscored thatthephase-out planwasstilltoolongandthiscontinued tobehisdelegation 'sview.
AnydelaysinthephaseoutwouldundermineprogressinNigeria'sreformprogrammeandtheconfidenceWT/GC/M/28
Page9
ofdomestic andforeign investors. Moreover, Canada considered thatNigeria could notjustify these
measures under BOPprovisions andtherefore urged Nigeria tobring itsmeasures intoconformity.
Therepresentative ofAustralia shared theconcern anddisappointment expressed byprevious
speakers. There wasoverwhelming evidence thatNigeria 'smeasures were notinconformity with
theBOPprovisions oftheWTO. Thishadbeenconfirmed bytheCommittee. While Nigeria had
recently removed some products from itslistofimport restrictions, there wasnoWTO justification
forBOP restrictions ontheremaining fouritems. Australia wasdisappointed thatdespite the
Committee 'sefforts overthepasttwoyears, Nigeria hadbeenunable topropose anacceptable phase-out
planfortheelimination oftheserestrictions. Afive-year phase outwasunacceptable. Australia called
onNigeria torecognize that,without anyBOP justification, these restrictions should beremoved
promptly. Australia would welcome information fromNigeria onitsintention regarding theremoval
ofthese restrictions andonitsplans toconform withitsWTO obligations.
Therepresentative ofNewZealand supported previous speakers 'statements. Itwasimportant
fortheWTO system thatthese measures beeliminated assoon aspossible, andthewayforward
suggested bytheUnited States wassensible. Asregards theBOPconsultations ingeneral, NewZealand
wished tounderline thatthese consultations should takeplace without unnecessary delays.
TherepresentativeofSwitzerlandexpressedseriousconcernregardingNigeria'simportmeasures
andregretted thatithadnotbeenpossible fortheCommittee toreach agreement. Ashisdelegation
hadstated onseveral occasions, themeasures applied byNigeria werenotcovered bytheBOPprovisions
oftheWTO andweretherefore notinconformity withWTO obligations. Itwastherefore urgent that
Nigeria dismantle these measures.
Therepresentative ofNorway saidthatifNigeria wasnotabletoeliminate these measures
immediately, anagreement withMembers onaprecise timetable fortheirelimination intheformof
awaiver should besought. Thisprocedure would begood forNigeria andfortheWTO.
Therepresentative ofNigeria saidthathisdelegation hadconveyed theCommittee 'sconclusions
tohisGovernment forinformation andappropriate follow-up action. Heassured theGeneral Council
thatNigeria would doeverything possible toensure aspeedy resolution totheproblem andwould
continue consultations withitstrading partners onthebestways toresolve theproblem asquickly as
possible.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements andadopted thereport ontheconsultation
withNigeria (WT/BOP/R/41).
5. Waivers under Article IXoftheWTO Agreement
(a) Harmonized System -Requests forextensions ofwaivers
(i) Bangladesh (G/L/227, G/C/W/107/Rev.1)
(ii) Nicaragua (G/L/230, G/C/W/110 andCorr.1)
(iii) SriLanka (G/L/229/Rev.1, G/C/W/109)
TheChairman drew attention totherequests byBangladesh (G/L/227), Nicaragua (G/L/230)
andSriLanka (G/L/229/Rev.1) forextensions ofwaivers previously granted inconnection withtheir
implementation oftheHarmonized System, andtotherelated draft decisions (Bangladesh
G/C/W/107/Rev.1, Nicaragua G/C/W/110 andCorr.1 andSriLanka G/C/W/109).WT/GC/M/28
Page10
Mr.Saborío Soto(Costa Rica), Chairman oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods, reporting on
theCouncil 'sconsideration ofthese requests, saidthattheCouncil hadagreed toforward thedraft
decisions totheGeneral Council foradoption.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthereport and,inaccordance withtheDecision-Making
Procedures under Articles IXandXIIoftheWTO Agreement agreed inNovember 1995(WT/L/93),
adoptedthedraftdecisions(Bangladesh-WT/L/264;Nicaragua-WT/L/265andSriLanka-WT/L/266).
(b) Zambia -Renegotiation ofSchedule LXXVIII
- Request forextension ofwaiver (G/L/228, G/C/W/108)
TheChairman drew attention totherequest from Zambia (G/L/228) foranextension ofthe
waiver previously granted inconnection withitsrenegotiation ofitsschedule, andtotherelated draft
decision (G/C/W/108).
Mr.Saborío Soto(Costa Rica), Chairman oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods, reporting on
theCouncil 'sconsideration ofthisrequest, saidthattheCouncil hadagreed toforward thedraftdecision
inG/C/W/108 totheGeneral Council foradoption.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthereport and,inaccordance withtheDecision-Making
Procedures under Articles IXandXIIoftheWTO Agreement agreed inNovember 1995(WT/L/93),
adopted thedraftdecision (WT/L/267).
(c) Decision ontheintroduction ofHarmonized System changes intoWTO schedules of
tariff concessions on1January 1996
- Extension ofthetime-limit (G/C/W/111)
TheChairman drew attention tothedraftdecision regarding theintroduction ofHarmonized
System changes intoWTO schedules oftariff concessions on1January 1996 inG/C/W/111.
Mr.Saborío Soto(Costa Rica), Chairman oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods, reporting on
theCouncil 'sconsideration ofthismatter, saidthattheCouncil hadagreed toforward thedraftdecision
inG/C/W/111 totheGeneral Council foradoption. Thedraftdecision listed initsannex thirty-six
Members which hadrequested thewaiver extension aswellasanadditional fourMembers which had
requested tobecovered byit.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthereport and,inaccordance withtheDecision-Making
Procedures under Articles IXandXIIoftheWTO Agreement agreed inNovember 1995(WT/L/93),
adopted thedraftdecision (WT/L/268).
6. WTO Secretariat andSenior Management Structure (WT/L/207)
- Statement bytheChairman
TheChairman recalled thatinApril 1997, theGeneral Council haddecided asfollows onthe
question oftheWTO Secretariat andsenior management structure: (i)torequest theDirector-General
tosubmit areport withhisrecommendations notlaterthanOctober 1997 onhowthefunctioning and
operational efficiency oftheSecretariat might beenhanced tomeetchallenges facing theorganization,
including through arationalization ofthesenior management structure inthelightofMembers 'intention
toreduce significantly thenumber ofDeputy Directors-General; and(ii)thatconsideration ofthematters
referred tointheprevious paragraph would beinitiated before theendof1997, sothatdecisions might
betaken before theappointment ofthenextDirector-General andreflected inthe1999 Budget ofthe
WTO.WT/GC/M/28
Page11
AsMembers wereaware, theDirector-General 'sreport hadbeencirculated todelegations in
October 1997(WT/GC/W/74), andhadbeendiscussed briefly atinformal consultations on2December.
Since then, hehadheldfurther consultations onthismatter on19and30March, andhadraised it
withdelegations ataninformal meeting on22April. Although delegations hadexpressed various
preferences onthenumber oftheDeputy Directors-General, allhadindicated theirreadiness toshow
acertain flexibility. Ithadalsoappeared, onthebasisoftheviews expressed, thatabalanced solution
fortheSenior Management Structure could bethe1+2option, i.e.,oneDirector-General andtwo
Deputy Directors-General. Ithadtherefore beenhisintention topropose thattheGeneral Council
agree atitspresent meeting thatthenumber ofposts ofDeputy Directors-General inthefuture senior
management structure oftheSecretariat bereduced totwo,andthatother aspects ofthereport remain
openforfurther consideration. However, onedelegation wasfirmly oftheviewthatagreement on
thisaspect ofthequestion should bereached onlyinconjunction withanunderstanding toundertake
afurther study onhowtheSecretariat should respond tothechallenges outlined intheDirector-General 's
report. Hetherefore proposed topostpone adecision onhisproposal toallow forfurther consultations.
GiventheimportanceoftakinganearlydecisiononthenumberofDeputy-DirectorsGeneral,heintended
toholdconsultations assoonaspossible andtoreturn tothismatter when theGeneral Council meeting
of2and14April would bereconvened inMay.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatement.
7. Tariff standstill forelectronic commerce
- Proposal byCanada (WT/GC/W/82)
TheChairman indicated thatthisitemwasontheAgenda attherequest ofCanada.
Therepresentative ofCanada saidthatarecent study bytheSecretariat andtheUSproposal
tocreate atariff-free zoneforelectronic commerce (WT/GC/W/78) hadraised several trade-policy
issues. Examples oftheseincluded: definitional issues suchastheclassification ofelectronic deliverables
aseither goods orservices ortheservice mode ofthedeliverable thatwasapplicable toelectronic
commerce; andtheapplication ofexisting trade agreements toelectronic commerce. These werenot
trivial issues, andcould notbelefttodispute settlement. Policy decisions byWTO Members were
required. Inthemeantime, aselectronic commerce continued toexpand rapidly, Members could send
animportantmessagetobusinessesandconsumersaroundtheworld,iftheymadeapoliticalcommitment
toatemporary standstill onanynewmeasures thatwould havetheeffect ofapplying customs duties
onelectronic deliverables. Thestandstill would betemporary andwithout prejudice tofuture decisions
taken inthecontext ofnegotiations, including onclassification asgoods orservices. Itwould apply
onlytonewmeasures andtocustoms duties, andnottotaxes ingeneral. Also, thestandstill would
apply onlytodeliverables transmitted electronically, andnottodeliverables ordered electronically but
delivered non-electronically. Furthermore, thestandstill would notapply todeliverables transmitted
electronically thatwere intrinsic toandrequired forthefunctioning ofagood delivered non-
electronically. Itwasquite possible thatWTO Members would conclude thatelectronic commerce
waslargely captured byexisting agreements andthatlittleadditional work wasrequired interms of
negotiating newagreements. Forexample, ontheapplication ofexisting tradeagreements toelectronic
commerce, itmight beargued thattheGATS Annex onTelecommunications wasthemostimportant
WTO document onelectronic commerce atpresent. Itprovided thateachMember should allow "access
toanduseofpublic telecommunications transport networks andservices" forthe"supply ofaservice
included initsSchedule". Itensured thatservice providers thatwished toprovide retailing, distribution,
banking, oranyother service forwhich aMember hadmade commitments, alsohadaccess tothe
telecommunications infrastructure todeliver those services.
IfMembers concluded thatelectronic transmissions should betreated asservices, thenthe
Annex 'sstraightforward language would seem toguarantee thatelectronic commerce beallowed toWT/GC/M/28
Page12
proceed inallMember territories, subject tothedisciplines oftheGATS applying totheservices for
which Members hadmade commitments. Theexample oftheGATS Annex onTelecommunications
demonstrated thatelectronic commerce wasnotentirely absent fromexisting trade disciplines; what
wasneeded nowwasamultilateral "understanding" onhowthese current trade disciplines applied to
electronic commerce andwhat additional coverage might bedesirable. Theappropriate process to
discuss theseissues intheWTO would needtobedetermined. Canada 'stariffstandstill proposal would
demonstrate thecommitment ofMembers toencouraging global electronic commerce, while atthe
sametimerecognizing thatthetariffissuemustbeconsidered aspartofthebroader international trade
policy agenda. There wasalotthatwasnotknown about electronic commerce byofficials responsible
fortrade policy. Moreover, governments generally, industry leaders involved inallaspects of
information technology, aswellasconsumers andusers, could onlyguess atthepotential ofthisnew
medium. However, Canada wasconvinced thatthismarket-driven, user-powered phenomenon needed
tobeencouraged andnurtured because ofwhatitcould offertoallcitizens andnations. Apolitical
commitment tocreate nonewtariff barriers andtoengage immediately inatrade work programme
would contribute totheresponsible development ofthisglobal resource.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States informed delegations about theactivities oftheUnited
States delegation withregard toelectronic commerce sincetheUSproposal wasmade atthe19February
meeting oftheGeneral Council. Numerous informal bilateral andplurilateral discussions hadbeen
held. Inaddition, USexperts hadvisited anumber ofWTO countries toexplain theproposal toofficials
incapitals. Onthewhole, shewasencouraged bytheoutcome ofthebilateral andplurilateral
consultations, astheyhadrevealed thatmany delegations weretremendously interested inelectronic
commerce. Thisinterest wasnotsurprising, given thepositive impact thatelectronic commerce could
haveoneconomic growth. Electronic commerce could helpdeveloped anddeveloping countries grow.
Inherconsultations withdeveloping countries, shehadbeentoldofhowelectronic commerce would
benefit development. Shehadalsolistened totheinterest inreceiving infrastructure andtechnical
assistance. Responding tothisinterest would require examining whatexactly could bedonewithin
theWTO 'scompetence, compared totheservices ofotherorganizations. WTO Members hadachieved
theInformation Technology Agreement (ITA) andtheAgreement onbasic telecommunications and
shehoped thatmore developing countries would involve themselves inthose WTO initiatives assuch
involvementcouldattractneededinvestment.InparalleltoinitiativesbytheUnitedStates,herdelegation
waswilling tolookatother contributions which theWTO could make intheareaofdevelopment,
sothatdeveloping countries would benefit fromthegrowth ofelectronic commerce. Herdelegation
reiterated thebelief thatallcountries would benefit fromthegrowth ofelectronic commerce. While
developing countries could notbeleftout,theWTO could notbeslowed down insending amessage
onelectronic transmissions. These efforts could beacted ontogether.
TheUSproposal hadbeenintended tosendastrong signal totheprivate sector, businesses,
andcitizens thattheWTO wasprepared tocontribute positively toefforts thatwould allow electronic
commerce togrow anddevelop. Inmaking theproposal, herdelegation hadnoted thattheUnited States
wasinterested intheviews ofothers andwaswilling towork cooperatively withthem infashioning
anapproach thatwasacceptable tothelargest number ofcountries. Herdelegation hadcarried this
spirit ofopenness intothediscussions ithadhadwithother delegations, andhadtaken intoaccount
various interests expressed. Shenoted thatCanada 'sproposal, while welcome, would putatimelimit
onmaintainingthestatusquoregardingthecustomsdutytreatmentofelectronictransmissions.However,
WTO Members could bemore ambitious thantosendamessage thatonlylasted 20months. Members
should sendamessage from theWTO thatwould bemeaningful overthelonger term. TheUnited
States supported those thathadcalled forafuture work programme tolookattheimpact thatelectronic
commerce might haveontheWTO anditsvarious bodies. Itwasinteresting toseethatthepaper
circulated bytheEuropean Communities andtheirmember States called forafuture work plan. She
questioned, however, ifittoowasambitious enough intheareaofsending ameaningful message.WT/GC/M/28
Page13
Inorder totakeintoaccount theproposal bytheEuropean Communities, shesuggested that
theGeneral Council, perhaps aspartofitspreparations forthe1999Ministerial Conference, consider
seeking theviews oftherelevant WTO councils andcommittees ondisciplines andontheroleof
electronic commerce instrengthening themultilateral system. TheCouncil could beguided inthis
work bythepaper produced bytheSecretariat. Sheemphasized thatwhatcould notbeputofftothe
futurewasanunderstandingthatMemberswouldcontinuetheircurrentpracticesofnotimposingcustoms
duties onelectronic transmissions. Thisought tobeagreed tointhenextfourweeks. Shereiterated
thatatpresent noWTO Member considered electronic transmissions asimportations forcustoms duty
purposes, thatsuchtransmissions werenotgiven aclassification intheHarmonized Tariff Schedule,
andthatnotasingle Member imposed customs duties onelectronic transmissions. There were no
customs duties ontelephone callsacross borders, noronfaxmessages. There were, furthermore, no
customs duties when computers accessed databases. Telephone calls, faxes andcomputers shared
acommon element; theyallrelied onelectronic transmissions thatmight travel beyond borders. She
therefore requested alldelegations tosupport acommitment nowthatwould continue current practices
andthatwould include afuture WTO work planonelectronic commerce.
Therepresentative ofJapan saidthatglobal electronic commerce, viatheInternet andother
means, would beoneofthemajor promoters ofworld economic growth intheyears tocome. Japan
believed thattheprivate sector should playaleading roleinpromoting electronic commerce andthat
governments should refrain from imposing undue restrictions onit.Asregards customs duties, he
saidthatthere were nocustoms duties onelectronic commerce atthepresent time. Inviewofthe
importance ofelectronic commerce, there wasaneedtoclosely examine therelationship between the
WTOAgreementsandelectroniccommerce.ItwouldbedesirableforMemberstostartacomprehensive
examination inWTO ofthetrade-related aspects ofelectronic commerce, bearing inmindthatelectronic
commerce related tovarious aspects oftheWTO Agreements, andtoaimtoreach aconclusion soon
onanynecessary stepstobetaken. Inthemeantime, andwithout prejudice tofuture decisions regarding
customs duties, Members should agree, asproposed byCanada, toapply nonewmeasures thatwould
result inapplication ofcustoms duties onelectronic commerce, andtoreview thisstandstill after1
January 2000.
TherepresentativeoftheEuropeanCommunitiessaidthathisdelegationwouldconsidercarefully
theproposals byCanada andtheUnited States, andnoted thatacommunication from theEuropean
Communities andtheir member States onelectronic commerce hadrecently been circulated
(WT/GC/W/85). Inresponse tothestatement bytheUnited States thattheproposal bytheCommunities
wasnotambitious enough, heindicated thatitwentfurther insuggesting thatallWTO related aspects
ofelectronic commerce betackled, including thestatus ofcustoms duties anditsdevelopment aspect.
Electronic commerce could onlydevelop inapredictable global framework agreed toonamultilateral
level. TheWTO hadacrucial roletoplayinthisregard. Theinitiatives presented bytheUS,Egypt,
Australia andCanada wereuseful. TheideasoftheEuropean Communities foracomprehensive WTO
initiativeonalltradeissuesaffectingelectroniccommerceincludeddiscussionsonthefollowingsubjects:
(i)thestatus ofelectronic commerce intheWTO inorder toidentify whatWTO provisions applied
ordidnotapply toit,aswellasconsidering thelegaltreatment ofelectronic transactions according
toWTO principles, inparticular theGATS; (ii)apossible agreement thatnoduties beimposed on
theimport ofon-line services (which would notinclude indirect taxes nortariffs ongoods ordered
electronically anddelivered physically); (iii)effective protection oftheprivacy ofindividuals inorder
toeaseelectronic trade, since theabsence ofdataprotection rules might become animpediment to
thedevelopment ofelectronic commerce; (iv)competition aspects ofelectronic commerce, inorder
toaddress issues suchasthemisuse orabuse ofinformation orunjustifiable restrictions fortheaccess
anduseofinformation suchastheInternet; and(v)electronic commerce aspects ofintellectual property,
governmentprocurement,tradefacilitationandtheAgreementonInformationTechnology.Heindicated
thattheWTO 'sconsideration ofon-line trade should alsorecognize theimperative needtoincrease
theparticipation ofdeveloping country Members inelectronic commerce. Heproposed thattheGeneral
Council launch adebate inWTO bodies onacomprehensive consideration byMembers ofelectronicWT/GC/M/28
Page14
commerce onalltheseissues. Thisshould leadtoclarifying theapplication ofWTO rulestoelectronic
commerce andrevising them where necessary byatarget dateofnolaterthanDecember 1998. This
wasanambitious target, butitonlyreflected theclarity andpredictability thatwasurgently needed
forthebenefit ofbothelectronic commerce providers andusers.
TherepresentativeofNorwayreiteratedhisdelegation'sinterestinelectroniccommerce.Noting
thatatleastfourdifferent documents werebeing considered, fromtheUS,Canada, Australia andthe
European Communities, hesaidthatamore coordinated waytohandle theissuewasrequired, onboth
procedure andsubstance. While hisdelegation wished toplayamore active roleonthisissue, itwas
unclear where itwasgoing tobeaddressed.
Therepresentative ofSwitzerland saidthathisdelegation wasinfavour ofretaining thesystem
thatcurrently governed theexchange ofelectronic dataandgoods thatwere traded onthebasis of
electronic commerce. Heindicated thatelectronic commerce haddeveloped tremendously inrecent
years, because Members hadnotobstructed it.Asnoted bytheUnited States, electronic commerce
tended toplace allpartners, whatever theirsizeandlevelofdevelopment, onanequal footing. This
ideahadprompted theSwiss government tosupport theideaofanInternet duty-free pact. Hisdelegation
wasinfavour ofsuchapactbecause, firstofall,electronic commerce wasandwould beacrucial
instrument forthedevelopment ofanyeconomy whether developed ordeveloping. Itwasessential
thatthrough electronic commerce, twotrack systems notbeestablished which would curb the
development ofsome economies andleadtothefragmentation ofthetrading system. Second, he
indicated thattheprocess initiated intheWTO mustbesimple, user-friendly andproductive. Itshould
identify thespecific parameters, andthevarious proposals thathadbeentabled wereanexcellent starting
point fordiscussions. Thiswork should avoid creating newbarriers totrade. Heexpressed his
delegation 'sinterest inthework thatwould beundertaken intheGeneral Council onthisissue and
itsconviction thatitwould beuseful.
Therepresentative ofNewZealand supported theideaofhaving thecurrent absence ofcustoms
duties onelectronic transmission affirmed bytheWTO. Suchamove would demonstrate inaforward-
looking manner thecommitment ofMembers toconsider thetradeimplications ofelectronic commerce
--arolewhich theWTO wasuniquely placed toassume. Discussion inanumber ofbodies hadalready
indicated thatthere were worthwhile contributions tobemade bytheWTO onvarious keyissues.
NewZealand'sbroadpolicyaimwasthatofachievingastableenvironmentwhichwouldallowelectronic
commerce toflourish. NewZealand believed thatsuchanenvironment required littlegovernment
intervention,butratherongoingcooperationwithprivatesectorinterests.Thevariousapproachesalready
advanced deserved further serious consideration byMembers, andNewZealand looked forward to
participating actively infuture discussions.
Therepresentative ofArgentina referred toCanada 'sproposal forcreating atariff-free zone
forelectronic commerce, andtotheSwiss proposal foraduty-free pact, andindicated thatneither
ofthese proposals, norindeed others werecovered byArticle VoftheGATS norbyArticle XXIV
ofGATT 1994. Aselectronic commerce wasnotpartofWTO Agreements, hedidnotunderstand
thecontext inwhich reference wasbeing made toadecision onelectronic commerce andtodisputes
initsregard. Thepaper bytheSecretariat, aswellasthepapers presented byCanada andothers,
stated thatelectronic commerce wasneither agoodnoraservice, andastheWTO onlyhaddisciplines
ongoods andservices, hedidnotknow howthisdilemma could beresolved. Ifapolitical compromise
weretobereached onastandstill anditwasbreached bysomeone, allthatcould besaidwasthatthat
Member haddeviated fromthestatus quo. Thiswasaserious issue forhisdelegation. Heindicated
hisdelegation 'ssupport foranyinitiative toliberalize tradeandsaidthathefound itstrange thatnobody
mentioned thattheInternet doubled itslistofclients every hundred days. Hewished thisfigure to
increase evenfaster, butindicated thathewasinterested inretaining stability andconfidence inWTO.
Hisdelegation needed timetostudy theimpact ofelectronic commerce ontrade flows andhowWTOWT/GC/M/28
Page15
disciplines could beadjusted withrespect toit.Hisdelegation would workon,aswellasfollow closely,
thisissue.
Therepresentative oftheCzech Republic welcomed theinitiative launched bytheUnited States,
Canada, theEuropean Communities andothers thattheWTO consider notintroducing customs duties
onelectronic commerce. Hisdelegation sympathized withthisproposal, especially since theCzech
Republic didnotapply customs duties toelectronic transmissions. Itwasevident, however, that
electronic commerce wasanissue which involved awidespectrum ofpolicy aspects which required
further consideration before anyaction ofalegally binding character could betaken. Hisdelegation
therefore preferred toembark onanin-depth discussion thatwould allow allMembers tounderstand
equally whatwasatstake andtoproceed onthisbasis toestablish aproper framework forthefurther
development ofelectronic commerce.
Therepresentative ofPakistan recognized thateconomic efficiency gains could flowfrom
electronic commerce, butthatitwasatthesametimeahighly complex subject which hadinter-sectoral
linkages andcould haveanimpact abroad range ofissues, suchasintellectual property, investment,
taxation, competition policy, andlegalregimes. These aspects would, therefore, needtobecarefully
studied priortomeaningful discussion. Inhisdelegation 'sview, UNCTAD wastheforum toundertake
suchananalysis, soastoprovide abasis forfuture work inWTO. Asfortheproposal relating to
atariff standstill, thematter wasnotassimple asitappeared. Fordeveloping countries, zerotariffs
could havefarreaching implications, andapartial approach ofthisnature would onlycomplicate the
issue. Notwithstanding thesepreliminary comments, heindicated thatPakistan would closely examine
theproposals made andrespond tothem ingreater detail atthenextmeeting.
Therepresentative ofBrunei Darussalam, speaking onbehalf oftheASEAN Members, said
thatelectronic commerce wasacomplex subject which required considerable study. Atthisstage,
theASEAN Members wished toreassure Canada, theEuropean Communities, USandAustralia that
theywould givetheirproposals dueconsideration. Theproposals would bestudied together, ina
comprehensive manner andwithanopenmind. Heenquired about howtheissuewould beaddressed,
especially intheshort term.
Therepresentative ofAustralia saidthatthenumber andrange ofcountries thathadparticipated
inthedebate onelectronic commerce indicated itsimportance foralltrading nations. Electronic
commerce hadenormous potential andpromised realbenefits forallcountries, regardless oftheirstage
ofdevelopment. Theimportant issuewashowtoharness thesebenefits, including through thecreation
oftheright policy settings and,where necessary, targeted technical assistance. Maintenance ofthe
current duty-free environment wasvitaltoensuring thefuture growth andaccessibility ofelectronic
commerce.Hiscountry'sPrimeMinisterhadalreadygivenaclearcommitmentthatelectroniccommerce
would remain dutyfreeinAustralia, apolicy thatwasclearly inAustralia 'snational interest. Australia
wastherefore inaposition togiveitsstrong support totheUSproposal thatWTO Members agree
nottoimposeanydutiesonelectroniccommerce.Giventheimportanceofduty-freeelectroniccommerce
inrealizing benefits fordeveloping anddeveloped countries alike, hequestioned thevalue ofCanada 's
suggestion tosetatimelimitonthestandstill fortheapplication ofduties onelectronic commerce.
Atimelimitseemed toconvey themessage thattheimposition oftariffs onelectronic transmissions
atsome stage inthefuture remained aviable option. Thisundermined thepredictability crucial for
business, asgovernments moved todevelop regulatory regimes forelectronic commerce. Knowing
thatduties would notbeimposed would provide animportant bedrock forbusiness planning now.
TheideaofpossiblefuturedutiesalsorancountertotheWTO'stradeliberalizationagendaandconflicted
withoneofthemajor outcomes fromtheUruguay Round, namely, increased certainty forinternational
tradeviathebinding oftariffs. ForAustralia, theissuewasnot,inanyevent, theviability ofapplying
duties toelectronic commerce, butthefundamental undesirability ofdoing so.There wererealbenefits
forallMembers inkeeping electronic commerce asaccessible aspossible. Forexample, from the
point ofviewofdeveloping countries 'aspirations fortechnological development, duties might mayWT/GC/M/28
Page16
actasadisincentive fortechnological upgrading andaccess tocurrent technological information.
Electronic commerce touched uponawiderange ofWTO Agreements, andAustralia strongly supported
aWTO work programme, withallappropriate issues being addressed bytherelevant WTO bodies.
Given theclose parallels between electronic commerce andexisting forms ofcommerce, aswellas
andthedifficulty ofdrawing asharp conceptual distinction between them, there wasadanger that
pursuingworkonelectroniccommerceindependentlyofexistingWTObodiescouldleadtofragmentation
orincoherence inrelation totheGATS, TRIPS orTelecommunications. Adecision needed tobetaken
onelectronic commerce inrelation toWTO obligations induecourse.
Therepresentative ofEgypt reaffirmed hisdelegation 'sinterest intheissue ofelectronic
commerce, andagreed withCanada thatmatters should notbelefttodispute settlement. Heindicated
thatnumerous questions required policy decisions. However, hedidnotshare Canada 'sconclusions
thatelectroniccommercewasalreadycoveredbyWTOAgreements.Egyptwasstilltryingtounderstand
thescope andimplications ofsome oftheissues fordeveloping countries. Canada 'spaper referred,
inparagraph 5,totwospecific areas where thestandstill would notapply. Thefirsthadtodowith
deliverables thatwereordered electronically, butweredelivered non-electronically. Thesecond had
todowithdeliverables transmitted electronically thatwereintrinsic toandrequired foragooddelivered
non-electronically. Thequestion thenbecame whether there would beanyother exceptions. Healso
indicated thatthedevelopment aspect ofelectronic commerce wasextremely important. Hisdelegation
believed thatelectronic commerce hadflourished because governments hadnotobstructed it.
Governments mustnotbegiven wrong signals tohavethem lookforways inwhich togaincustoms
revenues fromelectronic commerce. Hereferred toArgentina 'sstatement thatthequestion ofwhether
suchcommerce wasagoodoraservice remained unanswered. Healsoraised concerns withrespect
totheproposalbytheUnitedStatesaboutpossiblediscriminationbetween"like"productsandemphasized
thatfurther work onthisissue wasrequired prior todeveloping anylegally-binding commitments
intheWTO.
Therepresentative ofIndia saidthathisdelegation needed some timetostudy thefull
implications oftheCanadian proposal. Electronic commerce wasanimportant andcomplex issueand,
initsownexamination ofthissubject, India would takeintoaccount thevarious views expressed by
Members atthepresent meeting. Herecalled thatIndiahadintheCommittee onTrade andDevelopment
pleaded foradetailed, informed, andwide-ranging discussion ofthisissue, inorder todevelop an
equal understanding ofit.Thedevelopment aspect ofelectronic commerce, asmentioned bytheUnited
States, wasaveryimportant consideration forIndia initsexamination ofthismatter.
Therepresentative ofBrazil saidthatelectronic commerce wasarelatively newissueforBrazil,
andthatitwasstillconsidering itsrepercussions. Heindicated thatmore timewould beneeded to
consider theproposals thathadbeentabled.
Therepresentative ofChile saidthatelectronic commerce wasanissue which was followed
withgreatinterest byherdelegation andthatithadbeenaddressed inotherforasuchastheOrganization
forEconomic Cooperation andDevelopment (OECD) andtheWorld Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO), among others. Electronic commerce wasanissue which hadmany repercussions indifferent
areas andrequired different actions tobetaken. Sheindicated thatthiswasanitemwhich should be
tackled inaglobal andcomprehensive manner. Without being fullyaware oftheimpact ofelectronic
commerce, andhowitrelated toWTO provisions, decisions could notbemade.
Therepresentative ofKorea stated thathiscountry, likeothers, attached great importance to
thecontinued development ofelectronic commerce through theInternet. Heexpressed support forthe
creation ofaduty-free andlessrestrictive environment forglobal Internet transactions, which would
contribute tothedevelopment ofelectronic commerce andtothefacilitation ofinternational trade.
Given thatdemand forelectronic commerce wasexpanding atgreat speed, theroleoftheWTO in
thisareashould bedefined assoonaspossible. Also, since theexpansion ofelectronic commerceWT/GC/M/28
Page17
would greatly impact social, economic andcultural life,theissue needed tobeaddressed carefully.
Hisdelegation therefore supported suggestions foracomprehensive debate onthismatter intheWTO.
However, considering thatthere were technological andpractical difficulties inlevying duties on
transborder Internet transactions, andthatnocountry wasexpected tocreate suchasystem inthenear
future, Korea wasdoubtful thatadopting anagreement onorundertaking apolitical commitment to
astandstill wasspecifically needed atthisstage. Korea would carefully study theprocedural and
substantive matters inthevarious proposals submitted bytheUnited States, Canada, theEuropean
Communities, andAustralia, andwould actively participate infuture discussion onthissubject.
Therepresentative ofHong Kong, China saidthattheSecretariat paper contained much thought-
provoking information andthattheproposals putforward suggested somewaystotackle various aspects.
Electronic commerce might haveveryimportant implications fortherules under which trade was
conducted,andwasamultifacetedissue.Acomprehensiveanalysisneededtobeembarkeduponquickly,
butonethatallowed forfulldebate inappropriate fora. Inthemeantime, hisdelegation could see
advantage in,andcould support inprinciple, astandstill ontariffs withrespect toelectronic commerce.
Thiswould beaclearsignal thatWTO Members weredetermined nottoerectnewbarriers totrade.
Inconsidering astandstill, thought would needtobegiven topossible modalities andtiming inorder
tofindthebestformulation forgiving effect tothis. Hisdelegation looked forward toparticipating
infuture consultations onthissubject.
Therepresentative ofHungary expressed sympathy fortheinitiative bytheUnited States, and
welcomed other initiatives. There were twocommon elements toalltheproposals: (i)theideaof
acertain kindofstandstill, and(ii)asuggestion forcomprehensive analytical work intheWTO on
theimplicationsofelectronictrade.WhileHungarysupportedthesetwoelements,thedifferentproposals
contained different ideas ontiming, procedures, fora,etc.Hetherefore proposed thatallinterested
Members discuss together theseideasingreater detail inorder todevise acommon approach andarrive
atasolution.
Therepresentative ofIceland agreed withthegeneral thrust ofstatements made. Iceland fully
recognized theimportance ofelectronic commerce, andthatitwasinitsowninterest --andthatof
itsbusiness community --tomaintain anopen, liberal andpredictable environment within which
electronic commerce could thrive. However, thiswasahighly complex issuewhich needed thorough
analysis. Thesignificance andpotential ofelectronic commerce wassuchthattheWTO could not
butinitiate attheearliest possible dateacomprehensive debate onhowitshould betreated within the
multilateral trading system, taking intoaccount andbuilding onwork carried outinother relevant fora.
Therepresentative ofPoland saidthathisauthorities accorded great importance totheissue
ofelectronic commerce. Itwasimportant, indiscussing thisissue, totakeaccount ofwork inother
international organizations inthisfield. Astothemarket access aspects oftheissue, hisauthorities
were engaged intheexamination ofthevarious proposals thathadbeenputforward.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthatherdelegation hadstarted work onhowto
capture thepositive opinions onelectronic commerce thathademerged frombilateral andplurilateral
discussions and,asapartofthisprocess, hadproduced aninitial draftofhowtocapture these views.
Theintention wastosendamessage thatafter50years ofGATT liberalization andnowtheWTO,
thetradecommunity wasforward thinking. Thetradecommunity would acknowledge agrowing area
oftrade andthefactthatduties werenotimposed nowandthatitwould maintain thatenvironment.
Suchamessage would provide certainty. Thedraftprovided forastandstill without adatelimitation.
Such alimitation would notbemeaningful since itwasdifficult ifatallpossible toimpose duties.
Itwould alsocreate anevenmore uncertain environment inthatitraised thequestion ofwhatkinds
ofregulations would beimposed, andwhether ornotthestandstill wasadeadline untilawaycould
befound toimpose duties. Thedraftincluded flexibility inthestandstill withaviewtoincluding the
commitment intoschedules. Thiscould happen before orafterrecommendations emerged from theWT/GC/M/28
Page18
work programme. Thedraft included inthework programme theideathattheGeneral Council
coordinate andconsult withother relevant WTO bodies including theCommittee onTrade and
Development. Herdelegation believed thatitsoriginal proposal hadbeensimpler andlesscomplex,
butsome delegations hadwanted thework programme component included now. Shehoped thatafter
further informal consultations, herdelegation would beinaposition toshare thisdraftwithalarge
number ofother delegations, andthatthecirculated textwould reflect adequate input from others.
Therepresentative ofCanada saidthatthediscussion indicated aclearinterest toaddress the
tradepolicy aspects ofelectronic commerce aswellasitsdevelopment aspects. TheCanadian proposal
recognized this. Itproposed thatMembers agree toatariff standstill asthediscussion continued.
Canada wasnotproposing thatthestandstill betime-bound, butrather thatbased ondiscussions in
theWTO, Members might wishtoreview thestandstill after1January 2000.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements.
8. Preparations forthe1998 Ministerial Conference andthecommemoration ofthe50th
Anniversary ofthemultilateral trading system
(a) Organizational matters
(b) Report bytheDirector-General
(c) Progress reports bytheChairpersons ofWTO bodies
(d) Addendum tothereport oftheGeneral Council (WT/GC/W/81)
(a) Organizational matters
TheChairman recalled thatatitsmeetings on2and14April, theGeneral Council hadtaken
certain decisions regarding theorganization oftheMinisterial Conference andthe50thAnniversary
commemoration. Anadditional action thathadtobetaken concerned arequest forobserver status
attheMinisterial Conference received fromtheSouth Centre, anorganization notpresently anobserver
toanyWTO body. Herecalled thathehadraised thismatter withdelegations ataninformal meeting
on22April, andasked iftherequest could begranted.
TheGeneral agreed togrant therequest bytheSouth Centre.
TheChairman thenrecalled, with regard totheorganization ofthe50th Anniversary
commemoration, thattwoMembers hadconfirmed andannounced officially thattheywould be
represented attheHeadofStateorGovernment levelforthe50thAnniversary event on19May, namely,
Switzerland (President) andSingapore (Prime Minister). Anumber ofdelegations hadinformed the
General Council ofpositive reactions fromtheirrespective Heads ofStateorGovernment concerning
attendance atthe50thAnniversary event. Inaddition toSingapore 'sandSwitzerland 'sconfirmed
participation, uptotwelve other Members wereactively considering attending, some ofwhich were
inamore advanced stage. Hetherefore invited Members whointended toberepresented bytheir
Heads ofStateorGovernment tocommunicate details oftheirparticipation totheSecretariat assoon
aspossible, andinanycasenolaterthan1May1998.
Therepresentative ofNorway informed theGeneral Council thathiscountry 'sPrime Minister
would attend the50thAnniversary event.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements.WT/GC/M/28
Page19
(b) Report bytheDirector-General
TheDirector-General saidthat,asrequested bytheGeneral Council, hehadrecently submitted
toMembers afirstdraftofaMinisterial text(Job2174of20April) thatwould beadopted byMinisters
attheConference inMay. Inpreparing thistext,theguidelines thathadbeenagreed byMembers
hadbeenclosely followed, namely, thatthetextshould beshort, notcontain contentious language,
bebalanced between implementation andfuture activities, haveminimum specificity withregard to
themention ofsectors andnotprejudice theoutcome oftheprocess orMembers 'views. Members
alsodirected thatthetextshould contain apolitical message andanoperative part. Thedrafttexthad
beendrawn upbearing inmindtheseguidelines andtaking intoaccount Members 'views, andhehoped
itcould serve asabasis fordiscussions inthecoming weeks. Itwasclear thatstrong views of
delegations oneither sideofthespectrum could notbetaken onboard lesttheoverall balance beaffected.
However,delegationswouldhaveanopportunitytosubmitadditionalpointstobeconsideredandretained
ifconsensus existed. Separately, hewished toinform Members thatthepaper onthestatus of
implementation ofWTO Agreements andMinisterial Decisions, which hehadpromised atthe2April
meeting, wasatanadvanced stage ofpreparation andwould bemade available shortly.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteoftheDirector-General 'sreport.
(c) Progress reports bytheChairpersons ofWTO bodies
TheChairmanrecalledthatinDecember1997,theGeneralCouncilhadagreedthatChairpersons
ofsubsidiary bodies would beinvited toreport orally totheGeneral Council atitsfinalmeeting before
theMinisterial Conference onwork doneintheirrespective areas since December 1997. TheGeneral
Council hadalsonoted thattheinformation provided bytheChairpersons intheiroralreports would
bereflected intheupdate oftheGeneral Council 'sreport tobeprepared bytheSecretariat following
themeeting. Accordingly, hewould invite therespective Chairpersons ofthesubsidiary bodies of
theGeneral Council, aswellastheChairpersons oftheDSBandtheTPRB, toreport briefly onthe
progress ofwork inthose bodies. Itwashisunderstanding thattheChairman oftheBudget Committee
hadnothing further toreport atthisstage inaddition tohispresentation oftheCommittee 'sreport
considered under Item3ofthepresent meeting, andhewould not,accordingly, callonthelatter to
report under thisitem.
Mr.Morjane (Tunisia), Chairman oftheDispute Settlement Body, saidthatsincetheadoption
ofits1997 annual report, theDSBhadheldsixmeetings inthecourse ofwhich work hadcovered
thefollowing areas: (i)Establishment ofpanels: Fivenewpanels hadbeenestablished andonerequest
fortheestablishment ofapanel hadbeenwithdrawn; (ii)Adoption ofAppellate Body reports and
panel reports: Inthreedispute settlement cases, thepanel reports andtheAppellate Body reports which
hadmodified thepanels 'findings hadbeenadopted bytheDSB. Intwoofthese cases, inaccordance
withArticle 21oftheDSU, theparties tothedisputes hadalready indicated theirintentions toimplement
therecommendations adopted bytheDSB. Inaddition, inafourth caseapanel report hadbeenadopted
without recourse totheappeal procedure; (iii)Mutually agreed solutions: Attherequest ofdelegations
theSecretariat hadprovided information onthestatus ofnotifications ofmutually agreed solutions.
Aninformal notetothiseffect hadbeencirculated listing 21cases inwhich amutually agreed solution
hadbeennotified and36cases oversixmonths 'oldwhere nosolution hadbeennotified. Hewould
therefore encourage delegations tonotify theDSB ofsuchinformation fortransparency purposes.
Since December 1997, sixnotifications regarding mutually agreed solutions hadbeenreceived bythe
DSB; (iv)Indicative listofgovernmental andnon-governmental panelists: InDecember 1997 on
thebasis ofupdated curricula vitaeofpersons submitted bydelegations anewupdated indicative list
ofgovernmental andnon-governmental panelists hadbeen circulated (WT/DSB/12). New names
proposed byMembers were being approved bytheDSBonaregular basis; and(v)Review ofthe
DSU: AsMembers wereaware, inaccordance withtheMinisterial Decision ontheApplication and
Review oftheUnderstanding ontheRules andProcedures Governing theSettlement ofDisputes, aWT/GC/M/28
Page20
fullreview ofdispute settlement rules andprocedures under theWTO wasrequired tobecompleted
thisyear. Work inthisareahadalready beeninitiated andshould continue aftertheMayMinisterial
Conference.
Mr.Mchumo (Tanzania), Chairman oftheTrade Policy Review Body, saidthatsinceDecember
1997, theTPRB hadconducted threereview meetings, covering seven WTO Members, namely, Japan,
India andthemembers oftheSouthern African Customs Union (South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho,
Namibia andSwaziland). Thereview ofIndia hadgiven Members anoccasion toseekclarification
onIndia'sfuture trade policy stance; onitscommitment topursuing itsreform process initiated in
1991, which hadhadconsiderable success inpromoting itseconomic growth; andonspecific issues
ofconcern, ranging fromthephasing outofquantitative restrictions tobroader, development-related
issues insuchareas asagriculture andservices. Thereview oftheSACU member States hadbeen
notonlythefirstreview everofBotswana, Lesotho, Namibia andSwaziland, butalsothefirstreview
ofSouth Africa since itspolitical transformation. Ithadfocused ontheevolution ofSouth Africa 's
tradepolicies, which weremoving inthedirection ofgreater openness andpredictability; theireffects
ontheother SACU members viatheoperation ofthecommon external tariff, andplans forits
renegotiation; therelations ofSACU asagroup withother regional entities, including theSouthern
African Development Community, withEurope, andwithother MFN trading partners; andspecific
issues ofconcern toWTO Members. Hebelieved thatthese reviews continued tofulfil themandate
oftheTrade Policy Review Body asanengine fortransparency, non-confrontational discussions and
analysis ofmajor policy issues, andencouragement ofMembers, byothers, tofollow theprinciples
andprecepts oftheWTO. TheTPRB hadanambitious programme fortherestof1998 andwould
conduct 13more review meetings, covering 16WTO Members, withthreemore "grouped" meetings.
Intotal, 23Members would havebeenreviewed in1998ofwhich 17developing andsixleast-developed
Members. However, thenumber ofreviews wasnotthemain point atissue: rather, thatMembers
under review, andthemembership oftheWTO asawhole, should beabletoholdafree,friendly
andfrank discussion about theirrespective tradepolicies andthewayinwhich themultilateral trading
environment would affect, orwould beaffected bythese policies. Heexpressed appreciation forthe
willingparticipationofcolleagueswhovolunteeredasdiscussantsinthereviewprocess.Thediscussants'
rolewastofocus theminds ofMembers onmajor issues ineachreview. Hebelieved thatthecolleagues
whohadtaken onthisdifficult taskhadacquitted themselves withdistinction. Hefinally noted that
Annex 3oftheWTO Agreement provided foranappraisal oftheMechanism bytheTPRB notmore
thanfiveyears aftertheentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement. Therefore thisappraisal should be
completed during 1999, onthetenth anniversary oftheintroduction oftheTPRM under GATT. In
thisregard, hehoped tobegin consultations withdelegations leading uptothisappraisal, inthesecond
halfofthisyear.
Mr.Saborío Soto(Costa Rica), Chairman oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods, saidthatthe
Goods Council hadheldfivemeetings since December 1997, andthediscussions atthese meetings
hadlargely focused onthemajor review foreseen under Article 8oftheAgreement onTextiles and
Clothing (ATC) andontrade facilitation. Withrespect totextiles, herecalled thatinDecember 1997
theGeneral Council hadbeeninformed thattheGoods Council hadconducted themajor review of
theimplementation oftheATC overaseries ofsixmeetings between October andDecember, and
thatinspiteofdetermined efforts bymany delegations, ithadnotbeenpossible toarrive atsufficient
common ground onthesummary ofthediscussions andonaseries ofconclusions tothereview which
would attract consensus. InJanuary 1998, consultations hadtaken place withanumber ofdelegations
since ithadbeenapparent thatmany Members hadfeltthattheprogress achieved hadbeenquite
substantial andthematter should notremain without apositive conclusion. Asaresult ofthespirit
ofcompromise andflexibility demonstrated bytheMembers whohadparticipated actively insubsequent
informal consultations, ithadbeenpossible toreach substantive agreement onatextcontaining adetailed
summary ofthediscussions andconclusions. Thistexthadbeenadopted bytheGoods Council on
16February, andhadbeenreported totheGeneral Council on19February.WT/GC/M/28
Page21
Ontradefacilitation, herecalled thattheCouncil hadbeenmandated byMinisters inSingapore
to"undertake exploratory andanalytical work, drawing onthework ofother relevant international
organizations onthesimplification oftrade procedures inorder toassess thescope forWTO rulesin
thisarea". InMarch 1998, aTrade Facilitation Symposium hadbeenheldontheinitiative oftheCouncil
forTrade inGoods. Theobjective ofSymposium hadbeentohelpidentify themainareaswhere traders
faced obstacles when moving goods across borders. Twenty-seven speakers fromprivate enterprises
andindustry groups hadgiven anoverview ofanumber ofkeyissues inthisrespect. Speakers from
intergovernmental organizations (IMF, ITC,UNCTAD, UN/ECE, World Bank, andWorld Customs
Organization) hadreported ontheexperiences intheirwork ontrade facilitation. Attheconference
which hadlasted twodays, 350delegates from 75Members andmore than20observers hadbeen
present among which high-ranking capital based experts oncustoms andcommerce affairs, aswell
asinterested private sector representatives. TheSymposium hadbeenintended toassist WTO Members
tomove tothephase ofanalytical work ontrade facilitation, inorder toassess thescope forWTO
rulesinthisarea,assetoutintheSingapore Declaration. Themainconcerns traders hadvoiced during
theSymposium could besummarized under fiveheadings: excessive documentation requirements;
lackofautomation andinsignificant useofinformation-technology; lackoftransparency and,unclear
andunspecifiedimportandexportrequirements;inadequateprocedures,particularlyalackofaudit-based
controls andrisk-assessment techniques; and,lackofmodernization of,andcooperation among customs
andother government agencies, which thwarted efforts todealeffectively withincreased trade flows.
InMarch, theCouncil hadrequested theSecretariat toprepare assoonaspossible afactual report
ontheSymposium. Afirstpartofthereport, achecklist ofissues, hadbeendistributed, andinApril
theCouncil hadagreed thattheChairman should holdinformal consultations todetermine theprocess
totakethework forward.
With regard toother work ithadaccomplished, theCouncil hadapproved therequests for
extensions ofwaivers until31October 1998fromBangladesh, Nicaragua andSriLanka inthecontext
ofthetransposition oftheirschedules intotheHarmonized System, andthatofZambia inconnection
withtherenegotiation ofitsschedule. Ithadalsoapproved thedraftdecision granting anextension
ofwaivers tothirty-six Members andwaivers toanadditional fouruntil31October 1998, forthepurpose
ofintroducing Harmonized System 1996 changes totheirschedules ofconcessions. Ithadfurther
approved therevised questionnaire onstate-trading forwarded bytheWorking Party onStateTrading
Enterprises (G/STR/3). Ithadadopted theterms ofreference under which theCommittee onRegional
Trade Agreements wastoexamine anadditional eightFreeTrade Agreements, theaccession ofSlovenia
andRomania totheCentral European FreeTrade Agreement, andthecustoms union between the
European Community andthePrincipality ofAndorra. Ithadtaken noteofthestatus ofnotifications
under therelevant provisions ofAnnex 1AAgreements andthecompliance withnotification obligations
byMembers (G/L/223) and,oftheperiodic report bytheMarket Access Committee.
Withregard tothework oftheCommittee onAgriculture, aspartoftheCommittee 'son-going
review ofprogress intheimplementation ofcommitments negotiated under theUruguay Round reform
programme, more thanseventy notifications intheareasofmarket access, domestic support andexport
subsidies hadbeensubject tomultilateral review. Inaddition arange ofdistinct implementation matters
hadbeenraised under theprovisions ofArticle 18.6oftheAgreement orunder other business. At
eachofitsmeetings, theCommittee hadtaken noteoftheposition withregard tolatenotifications.
Interms ofitsNovember 1995decision inthisregard (G/AG/3) theCommittee wasrequired toreview
annually theWTO listofLeast-Developed andNetFood-Importing Developing Countries atitsregular
March meetings. However, since therehadbeenonthisoccasion norequests forinclusion inthelist,
ithadbeendecided thatthisreview would beheldoveruntiltheCommittee 'sMarch 1999 meeting.
InlinewiththerecommendationsadoptedbytheSingaporeMinisterialConferenceontheimplementation
oftheMarrakesh Ministerial Least-Developed andNetFood-Importing Developing Country Decision
asitrelated tofoodaidmatters, therenegotiation oftheFood AidConvention wascurrently underway
inaWorkingGroupestablishedbytheLondon-basedFoodAidCommittee/InternationalGrainsCouncil.
Progress inthese negotiations wastobereviewed inJunebytheFood AidCommittee, members ofWT/GC/M/28
Page22
which hadexpressed theirwishtomaintain, asappropriate, adialogue withfoodaidrecipients, potential
Food AidConvention members andrelevant international organizations. TheCommittee hadheld
twoinformal meetings, inJanuary andinMarch, tocontinue thework oftheprocess ofanalysis and
information exchange ("the AIEprocess") andtoconsider additional informal papers submitted by
members onthefollowing topics: special anddifferential treatment; direct payments under production-
limiting programmes; domestic support policy reform; export subsides; thespecial agricultural
safeguard; statetrading enterprises (single deskbuyers andsingle desksellers); andsectoral trade
liberalization. Additional background papers hadbeenprovided bytheSecretariat on:advalorem ,
specific andother tariffs; onspecial anddifferential treatment provisions relating totheAgreement
onAgriculture; andonstudies ontheimplementation andimpact oftheAgreement onAgriculture
ondeveloping countries. Further Secretariat background papers hadbeencommissioned onspecial
anddifferential treatment andissues ofinterest todeveloping countries, onGreen Boxpolicies and
onthespecial agricultural safeguard. Members hadalsobeeninvited tosubmit further informal papers,
including ontheirexperience intheimplementation andimpact oftheAgreement onAgriculture in
relevant areas.
Withregard totheCommittee onCustoms Valuation, ithadheldaninformal meeting inMarch
toreviewtheresponsestoits"RequestforInformationonTechnicalAssistanceActivities".ThisRequest
forInformation hadbeencirculated inthecontext oftheCommittee 'swork ontechnical assistance
designed tofacilitate andexpedite implementation oftheAgreement forthose developing country
Members which hadinvoked thefive-year delay period. Sixresponses hadbeenreceived andthe
Committee hadheard from twoadditional delegations thattheirresponses were forthcoming. The
SecretariathadcirculatedaninventoryoftechnicalassistanceactivitiestoassistMembersinunderstanding
whattypes ofactivities hadbeenconducted ineachofthecountries which hadinvoked thefive-year
delay period. TheSecretariat hadalsooutlined atechnical assistance programme oncustoms valuation
thatitwasorganizing forthese Members. Thisprogramme would make useofWTO expertise and
private expert consultants toconduct theactivities. TheCommittee hadagreed thatclosecoordination
between thisprogramme anditsowndiscussions ontechnical assistance would beessential.
Intheimport licensing area,additional notifications hadbeenreceived fromeleven Members
relating tolaws, regulations andadministrative procedures relevant toimport licensing, pursuant to
Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) oftheAgreement, aswellasunder Article 7.3which required allMembers
toprovide annually replies totheQuestionnaire onImport Licensing Procedures. Thisbrought the
totalnumber ofnotifications received under eachofthese provisions to49(counting theEuropean
Communities anditsmember States asoneMember). TheCommittee onImport Licensing hadalso
received, pursuant toArticle 5oftheAgreement, notifications relating totheinstitution ofnewimport
licensing procedures orchanges inexisting procedures from fouradditional Members.
Astomarket access, theCommittee onMarket Access hadmeton26March andhadtaken
noteofthesituation withrespect tothestatus ofwaivers related totheintroduction on1January 1996
oftheHarmonized System (HS)changes andtothetransposition ofpre-Uruguay Round schedules.
Todate,forty Members wereunder waivers inconnection withtheintroduction ofHS96 changes in
order tocarry outpossible consultations/negotiations inrelation tothesechanges. Fourother Members
hadrequested anextension oftheirwaivers forthetransposition oftheirpre-Uruguay Round schedules
intotheHarmonized System nomenclature. Thewaivers weretoexpire on31October 1998. Onthe
integrated database(IDB), theCommittee hadnoted thatsofaronlysometwenty Members hadprovided
therequired IDBdatasubmissions andtheneedfortheother Members tosupply IDBsubmissions
hadbeenstressed.DelegationshadsupportedtheSecretariat'splanstoestablishadatabaseusingInternet
technology. Members hadtaken noteofadocument outlining atechnical assistance programme for
theIDBandhadexchanged initial views onpractical matters concerning dissemination oftheIDB.
Onthepreparation ofconsolidated loose-leaf schedules ongoods, delegations hadsupported theidea,
onthebasis ofapaper prepared bytheSecretariat, ofestablishing adatabase ofMembers 'tariff
concessions which could beeventually incorporated intotheIDB. Ithadbeenagreed thattheSecretariatWT/GC/M/28
Page23
would carry outapilotproject fortheschedules oftwoMembers inorder toobtain anestimate of
theresources needed andother problems thatmight beencountered.
Intheareaofrules oforigin, theCommittee onRules ofOrigin hadcontinued tofocus on
thework programme fortheharmonization ofnon-preferential rules oforigin. Thedeadline for
completion ofthework programme was20July1998. Asthisdeadline approached, theCommittee
waspursuing, inatightschedule, itsexamination ofproduct-specific rules. Todate, Members had
reached consensus onabout 2,000 product-specific rules attheHSsubheading level. Since thetotal
number ofHSsubheadings was5,113, asimple calculation could indicate thattheCommittee haddone
two-fifths ofthetotalwork. Thiswould, however, disregard thefactthatsome ofthemostcontentious
andsensitive items wereonlynowentering thenegotiating stage. TheCommittee wascontinuing its
work inalmost continuous session, together withtheTechnical Committee onRules ofOrigin, with
theaimofcompleting theworkprogramme bythedeadline. Todate58Members hadmade notifications
ofnon-preferential rules oforigin and60Member hadnotified preferential rules oforigin.
Asregards theAgreement onInformation Technology, theCommittee ofParticipants on
Expansion ofTrade inInformation Technology Products hadfocused onthereview ofproduct coverage,
discussions onnon-tariff barriers, anddivergences inclassifying information technology products.
With respect tothereview ofproduct coverage, participants hadheldanumber ofmeetings and
consultations todiscuss theproducts thathadbeenproposed under thereview inorder totakeadecision
whether torevise theproduct coverage bythe30June1998deadline. Discussions onnon-tariff barriers
hadledtotheissuance ofasurvey onstandards-related matters forinformation technology products.
Inaddition, theCommittee hadreviewed thestatus ofimplementation andhadnoted theinterest of
governments thathadsought tobecome newparticipants.
Withregardtosanitaryandphytosanitarymeasures,theSPSCommitteehaddiscussedinMarch
anumber ofspecific trade concerns including trade restrictions related tobovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE), andaproposed ECregulation onlevels ofaflatoxin incertain foods. TheSPS
Committee hadbegun tomonitor theuseofinternational standards onthebasis ofrelevant standards
identified byMembers. Further consideration hadbeengiven tothetechnical assistance needs of
Members. TheSPSCommittee hadagreed onaresponse totheFAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius
Commission regarding thestatus ofvarious Codex texts. TheWorld Health Organization (WHO) had
provided information totheSPSCommittee regarding itsrecommendations ontrade from countries
experiencing outbreaks ofcholera, andontheproposed revision oftheInternational Health Regulations.
Ithadbeenagreed thatinformal consultations onthelatter matter would beheldwiththeWHO prior
tothenextmeeting oftheSPSCommittee. Ataninformal meeting, theSPSCommittee hadfurther
considered thedevelopment ofguidelines tofurther practical implementation ofArticle 5.5. In
accordance withagreed procedures, atanother informal meeting prior toitsregular meeting, theSPS
Committee hadbegun itsreview oftheSPSAgreement asmandated inArticle 12.7. Onthebasis
ofissues identified byMembers, theCommittee hadconsidered matters related tothetransparency
andnotification provisions oftheAgreement, andhadagreed tocontinue withthese issues andwith
matters related totheimplementation ofspecial anddifferential treatment, andtechnical assistance
atitsnextinformal meeting.
Regarding theAgreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade, theTBT Committee hadheard
inMarch statements ontheimplementation andadministration oftheAgreement andontechnical
assistance. Ithadcarried outitsThird Annual Review oftheImplementation andOperation ofthe
Agreement under Article 15.3anditsThird Annual Review oftheCode ofGood Practice forthe
Preparation, Adoption andApplication ofStandards inAnnex 3oftheAgreement. Ithadstarted its
work programme arising fromtheFirstTriennial Review oftheOperation andImplementation ofthe
Agreement under Article 15.4.WT/GC/M/28
Page24
Inthetrade-related investment measures area,theCommittee onTRIMs haddiscussed inMarch
notifications submitted under Article 5.1oftheTRIMs Agreement. Responses hadbeenprovided to
questions previously putandfurther questions hadbeenasked, including inregard totheimplementation
ofArticle 5.2oftheTRIMs Agreement. Statements hadalsobeenmade oncertain measures recently
adopted orproposed tobeadopted bysome Members. TheCommittee hadtaken noteofthecurrent
situation regarding notifications under Article 6.2oftheTRIMs Agreement.
Inthetextiles area, theTextiles Monitoring Body hadheldfourmeetings since theGeneral
Council meeting inDecember 1997, andhadreviewed several notifications received fromMembers,
inparticular thenotifications oftheirintegration programmes. TheTMB hadalsocontinued toreview
thecommunications received from Members concerning theverification ofwhether thestatistical
information provided regarding integration referred, where appropriate, tothose portions oftheHS
linescovered bytheATC andnottotheentire respective HS6-digit lines. Furthermore, theTMB
hadalsoreviewed theissues brought toitbyaMember regarding themaintenance ofarestraint measure
which hadpreviously beenagreed withanother Member.
With regard totheWorking Party onState Trading Enterprises, arevised questionnaire on
statetrading hadbeenadopted on2April (G/STR/3), thusfulfilling oneofthethreemandates charged
byMinisters atMarrakesh, namely, toreview theadequacy ofthequestionnaire onstatetrading and
thecoverage ofenterprises notified. Therevised questionnaire hadbeenapproved bytheCouncil for
Trade inGoods andwould bethebasis forstatetrading notifications starting withthenewandfull
notifications tobemade in1998. While approving thequestionnaire, atthesamemeeting, theWorking
Party hadagreed tocontinue itswork, consistent withitsmandate, onpossible further information
needed toenhance transparency, andtoreconvene asearly aspossible tothisend. Ithadalsoagreed
thatthedeadline forsubmission ofthe1998newandfullnotifications bemoved to30September from
30June1998, inorder totakeaccount ofthepostponement incirculating therequest fornotifications
necessitated bythedateofadoption oftherevised questionnaire. Regarding itsmandate todevelop
anillustrative listofrelationships between statetrading enterprises andgovernments, andtheactivities
conducted bythese enterprises, theWorking Party hadconducted anumber ofinformal meetings in
which work hadadvanced considerably onthetextofsuchalist.Afirstrevision ofaChairman 's
textwascurrently under discussion, andafinaltextwasforeseen within thecoming months. With
regard totheWorking Party'songoing taskofreviewing thenotifications made under Article XVII
andtheUnderstanding ontheInterpretation ofArticle XVII ofGATT 1994, three newandfull
notifications andeight updating notifications hadbeenreviewed atthe2April meeting.
Intheareaofpreshipment inspection, the1997 report oftheWorking Party onPreshipment
Inspection totheGeneral Council hadidentified inparagraph 8arange ofissues onwhich theWorking
Party wastoexchange views overthecourse of1998. Atthemeeting oftheWorking Party on19March
1988, theChairman hadinvited Members tosubmit written communications ontheissues identified
inthatparagraph. Hehadalsoexpressed theviewthatthislistofissues hadnotbeenabsolute and
hadinvited delegations torefer toother issues astheysawfit.Thedelegation ofSwitzerland had
presentedaproposalofamodelagreementbetweenuserMembersandpreshipmentinspectioncompanies.
Thishadbeenwelcomed bytheWorking Party asafirststepinwhatMembers would liketoseeas
concrete andpractical work during 1998. During aninformal meeting on20April 1998, thedelegation
oftheUnited States hadcirculated apaper addressing thevarious issues asabasisforfurther discussions.
Thesituation withrespect totheIndependent Review Entity established under theAgreement on
Preshipment Inspection remained unchanged since December 1997; ithadreceived norequests for
anindependent review.
Withregard totheSafeguards Committee andtheCommittee onSubsidies andCountervailing
Measures, neither Committee hadtaken anyaction since December 1997. AstotheCommittee on
Anti-Dumping Practices anditssubsidiary bodies, theyhadnotmetsince theirOctober meetings and
hadnottaken anyaction since then.WT/GC/M/28
Page25
Mr.Akao (Japan), Chairman oftheCouncil forTrade inServices, saidthatsinceitslastreport
totheGeneral Council inNovember 1997, theCouncil hadcontinued topursue theimplementation
ofthework programme approved bytheSingapore Ministerial Conference. Insofar astheCouncil
itself wasconcerned, thework programme contained three elements: (i)Aninformation exchange
exercise onservices regulations; (ii)Thedevelopment ofdisciplines under Article VI:4oftheGATS
toensure thatdomestic measures donotconstitute unnecessary barriers totrade; and(iii)The
consideration ofguidelines andprocedures forthefuture negotiations mandated under Article XIX
oftheGATS. TheCouncil, since itslastreport, hadfocused itsdiscussions onthefirstitemthereof,
namely, information exchange exercise onservices regulations. Aconsiderable amount ofuseful work
hadbeendoneonthebasis ofsubmissions bydelegations andpapers bytheSecretariat. Aninformal
consultation process onthemodalities forthatexercise hadbegun. Theaimoftheexercise wasto
facilitateaccessofallMembers,andinparticulardevelopingcountryMembers,toinformationregarding
laws, regulations, administrative guidelines andpolicies affecting tradeinservices inorder tocontribute
totheassessment oftrade inservices which would assist future negotiations inservices. Atthesame
time, alldelegations weremindful thatthestructure ofthisexercise should besimple andavoid any
necessary burden toMembers ingeneral anddeveloping country Members inparticular.
Withregard tofinancial services, theCouncil hadheldon12December 1997aspecial meeting
toconclude thenegotiations onfinancial services, inwhich ithadadopted aprocedural decision which
would enter intoforce onlyifforsome unforeseen reason theProtocol didnotenter intoforce. In
February 1998, theCouncil hadconcluded thetechnical verification oftheschedules ofcommitments
andMFN exemption listsresulting from thenegotiations. TheFifth Protocol hadbeenopened for
acceptance bytheMembers concerned on27February 1998, andwould remain sountil29January
1999. Withtheentry intoforceoftheProtocol, thenumber ofMembers withcommitments infinancial
services would increase to102. Together withthewithdrawals orreductions inthescope ofMFN
exemptions, these results constituted amajor achievement ofWTO Members.
Intheareaofbasictelecommunications,theFourthProtocolrelatingtobasictelecommunications
hadbeenopenforacceptance bytheMembers concerned until30November 1997. Bythatdate,out
of70Members concerned, only50Members hadaccepted theProtocol. According totheterms of
theProtocol, uponthelapse ofthedeadline foracceptance, onlythose whohadaccepted hadtheright
todecide ontheentry intoforce oftheProtocol. On19December 1997, theCouncil hadadopted
aDecision extending thedeadline foracceptance oftheFourth Protocol relating tobasic
telecommunications until31July1998. Subsequently, those Members whohadaccepted theProtocol
haddecided thatitwould enter intoforce on5February 1998. TheCouncil hadtaken noteofthat
decision atameeting on26January 1998. TheProtocol wasnowinforce.
Asregards professional services, theWorking Party onprofessional services continued towork
towards thefinalization ofthedraft ofnewdisciplines ondomestic regulatory measures inthe
accountancy sector. Thedisciplines aimed toensure thatmeasures relating toqualification requirements
andprocedures, technical standards andlicensing requirements andprocedures didnotconstitute
unnecessary barriers totradeinaccountancy services. Substantial progress hadbeenmade onthetext
sincelastDecember. TheWorking Party wasalsodiscussing thelegalformthatsuchdisciplines might
takeandtheprocedures through which theywould enter intoforce.
OnGATS rules, theWorking Party onGATS rules hadcontinued itswork onthethree
negotiatingmandates,namely,emergencysafeguardmeasuresunderArticleX;governmentprocurement
under Article XIII; and,subsidies under Article XV. Itwould berecalled thattheCouncil forTrade
inServices hadadopted aDecision on26November 1997 toextend thenegotiations onthequestion
ofemergency safeguard measures until30June1999.
IntheareaofSpecific Commitments, consultations werecontinuing withaviewtofinalizing
theprocedures forthemodification ofschedules pursuant toArticle XXIoftheGATS. TheCommitteeWT/GC/M/28
Page26
hadalsofocused itsdiscussions onclassification issues relating totheexamination ofthestructure of
theongoing revision ofthecentral product classification system established bytheUNStatistical
Commission; institution ofasystem ofelectronically consolidated andupdated schedules of
commitments; and,possible revision ofthescheduling guidelines.
Mr.Major(Hungary),ChairmanoftheCouncilforTrade-RelatedAspectsofIntellectualProperty
Rights, saidthatatitsFebruary meeting, theCouncil hadtaken noteofseveral newnotifications of
legislation under Article 63.2oftheAgreement, including notifications ofamendments tolegislation
thathadbeennotified earlier. TheCouncil hadalsotaken upthereview ofoneMember 'slegislation
intheareaofenforcement outstanding from itsNovember 1997 meeting, when national lawsand
regulations of32Members intheareaofenforcement hadbeenreviewed. Atitsnextmeeting, the
Council would continue thisreview, would alsoreview thelegislation offiveMembers inthearea
ofcopyright andrelated rights andthelegislation oftwoMembers intheareas oftrademarks,
geographical indications andindustrial designs and,would revert toanumber offollow-up questions
posed inthecontext ofthereview ofnational implementing legislation in1996/1997, answers towhich
werestillpending. TheChair hadinformed theCouncil ofthestateoftheconsultations, heldpursuant
tothemandate given totheChair attheNovember 1996 meeting oftheCouncil, onpossible advance
reviews onavoluntary basis andwithout prejudice totransition entitlements under Article 65ofthe
Agreement, indicating thatconsensus hadnotyetbeenreached among Members ontheground rules
forsuchreviews. TheCouncil hadcontinued itsconsideration oftheimplementation ofArticles 70.8
and70.9oftheAgreement andhadnoted thatitwasopentodelegations toputquestions onthismatter
onthefloor oftheCouncil orbilaterally.
TheCouncil hadtaken noteofrecent developments regarding dispute settlement intheTRIPS
areaandofstatements bydelegations inthisconnection. Updated information hadbeenprovided to
theCouncil ontechnical cooperation activities. TheChair hadreported onfurther consultations held
ontheissueofthereview oftheapplication oftheprovisions oftheSection ongeographical indications
under Article 24.2oftheAgreement. Delegations hadsupported theapproach ofdeveloping achecklist
ofquestions about national regimes fortheprotection andenforcement ofgeographical indications,
towhich Members would beasked toreply. Adraftofsuchachecklist would beprepared onthe
basis ofquestions suggested bydelegations, which would bethesubject ofinformal consultations by
theChair prior totheCouncil 'smeeting inMay1998. TheChair hadreported thatfurther informal
consultations would beheldastowhatthenextstepshould beforcarrying forward work concerning
negotiations fortheestablishment ofaninternational system forthenotification andregistration of
geographical indications under Article 23.4asagreed inparagraph 34ofthereport oftheCouncil
forTRIPS totheSingapore Ministerial Conference, nowthatbackground information asrequested
bytheCouncil inFebruary 1997 hadbeenmade available totheCouncil. Finally, theCouncil had
noted thatanewrequest forobserver status hadbeenreceived from theAfrican Regional Industrial
Property Organization (ARIPO). Ithadagreed torevert tothenoweightpending requests forobserver
status from international intergovernmental organizations atitsnextmeeting.
Mr.See(Singapore),ChairmanoftheCommitteeonTradeandEnvironment,saidthatasagreed
inthereport oftheCTEtotheGeneral Council inDecember 1997, theCommittee hadcontinued to
broaden anddeepen theanalysis ofallitems oftheworkprogramme setoutintheMarrakesh Ministerial
Decision onTrade andEnvironment. Inorder toadvance thediscussions in1998, theCTEhadagreed
tobaseitsanalysis onthe"cluster approach" under thethemes ofmarket access andthelinkages between
themultilateral environment agenda andthemultilateral tradeagenda. Assetoutintheworkprogramme
andschedule ofmeetings fortheCTEin1998, which hadbeenadopted atitsMarch meeting, theCTE
would holdthree meetings thisyear, keeping opentheoption ofanadditional meeting ifnecessary.
TheMarch meeting hadaddressed those items relevant tothetheme ofmarket access andhadincluded
asubstantive, sector specific discussion ofthefollowing sectors: agriculture, energy, fisheries, forestry,
non-ferrous metals, textiles andclothing, leather andenvironmental services. Thewillingness of
delegations toengage infocused sector-by-sector discussions based onnational experiences shouldWT/GC/M/28
Page27
move forward theprocess ofidentifying situations where removing traderestrictions hadthepotential
tobeofeconomic andenvironmental benefit. Infulfilment oftherecommendation intheReport of
theCTEtotheSingapore Ministerial Conference (WT/CTE/1), theCTEhadestablished atitsMarch
meeting aWTO Environmental Database according towhich theSecretariat would, onanannual basis,
undertake acomprehensive review ofallenvironment-related notifications tocontinuously up-date the
environmental database, which would beavailable toMembers electronically through theDocument
Dissemination Facility and,conduct aninterim review oftheglossary ofsearch words usedinthe
compilation oftheenvironmental database, which would bemodified asnecessary. Thedevelopment
ofthisenvironmental database represented animportant steptowards increasing thetransparency of
trade-related environmental measures which were notified byWTO Members.
Hisgeneral objectives asChairman forthecurrent yearwould betofurther theanalysis in
theCTEofallitems onitsworkprogramme inorder toincrease theunderstanding oftheissues involved.
Hefeltimportant tocontinue tobroaden theparticipation insupport oftheCTE'sanalysis byinviting
Secretariats ofthose multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) relevant tothework oftheCTE,
toinform Members ondevelopments intheirrespective agreements inorder tocontribute totheanalysis
intheCTEofthelinkagesbetweenthemultilateralenvironmentagendaandthemultilateraltradeagenda.
Aninformation session withselected Secretariats ofMEAs would beheldattheCTE'smeeting on
23-24 July. With respect totheissue ofbroader participation, henoted thatinMarch theSecretariat
hadsuccessfully organized, under itsownresponsibility, anNGO Symposium onTrade, Environment
andSustainable Development. TheSymposium hadincluded theparticipation ofapproximately 150
NGOs, theDirector-General oftheWTO, theSecretary General ofUNCTAD, theExecutive Secretary
ofUNEP, theDeputy Administrator ofUNDP andalarge number ofWTO Members. Finally, at
itsMarch meeting, theCTEhadagreed toextend observer status totheWorld Intellectual Property
Organization.
Mr.Noirfalisse (Belgium), Chairman oftheCommittee onRegional Trade Agreements, said
thatsinceits1997Report totheGeneral Council on27November 1997, theCommittee hadheldformal
meetings andtwoinformal open-ended meetings inDecember 1997. In1998, theCommittee 'sSixteenth
Session hadtaken place intheweekbeginning 16February andaninformal meeting hadbeenconvened
inMarch. Regarding theexamination ofregional trade agreements, theCommittee wasdealing with
theexamination of52agreements. Seven newly notified agreements hadbeenreferred totheCommittee
forexamination sinceits1997Annual Report. Currently consultations wereunder wayondraftreports
foreleven examinations. Reports werebeing drafted for15agreements whose factual examinations
hadbeenfinished. Factual examinations wereinprocess for14other agreements, andexaminations
fortheremaining twelve agreements which hadbeenreferred totheCommittee would begin inthe
course oftheyear. TheCommittee hadalsothemandate "toconsider howtherequired reporting on
theoperation ofsuchagreements should becarried outandmake appropriate recommendations tothe
relevant body". AtitsFebruary Session, theCommittee hadbeenabletotakeadecision ofprinciple
toadopt procedural recommendations totheCouncil forTrade inGoods, theCouncil forTrade in
Services andtheCommittee onTrade andDevelopment onthismatter.
TheCommittee hadalsothemandate "toconsider thesystemic implications ofsuchagreements
andinitiativesforthemultilateraltradingsystemandtherelationshipbetweenthem,andmakeappropriate
recommendations". Todeepen itsunderstanding ofmatters identified inthe"checklist ofsystemic
issues", theCommittee hadbegun work according toa"three-pronged approach", entailing alegal
analysis ofrelevant WTO provisions, horizontal comparisons ofRegional Trade Agreements (RTAs),
anddebate onthecontext andeconomic aspects ofRTAs. Anupdated listofnotified RTAs, containing
information ontheGATT/WTO process, hadbeenprepared bytheSecretariat andhadbeendistributed
toMembers inFebruary. During itslastmeetings, theCommittee hadcontinued itslegal analysis
oftheterms "other regulations ofcommerce" (andrelated sub-topics) and"substantially allthetrade".
InFebruary,theCommitteehadrequestedtheSecretariattobeginpreparationsforhorizontalcomparison
work,drawingupaninventoryofnon-tariffprovisionscontainedintheregionaltradeagreementsnotifiedWT/GC/M/28
Page28
totheWTO andidentifying variations insuchprovisions, especially between customs unions andfree-
trade areas. TheSecretariat hadheldaninformation meeting toindicate howitwasdrawing together
thisinventory. Once theinventory wasproduced, theCommittee would deliberate onhowtousethis
rawmaterial.
Mr.Chowdhury (Bangladesh), Chairman oftheCommittee onTrade andDevelopment, said
thatsince December 1997 twomeetings eachoftheCommittee onTrade andDevelopment andthe
Sub-Committee onLeast-Developed Countries hadbeenheld. AttheMarch meeting oftheCommittee
onTrade andDevelopment, thefollowing threeissues hadbeenaddressed: (i)Technical cooperation
andtraining: TheCommittee hadadopted themanual ontechnical cooperation andtraining andhad
discussed areport bytheSecretariat ontechnical cooperation andtraining. General satisfaction had
beenexpressed byMembers onthese papers andtheSecretariat 'sactivities inthisarea. Suggestions
astobroadening thescope oftechnical assistance andcooperation, andmaking them more hands-on
weremade. Also, there hadbeendiscussions ondeveloping aneffective mechanism formonitoring
andevaluation. Concern hadbeenraised about theinadequacy, uncertainty anddependence ondonor
generosity fortechnical assistance funds. Heintended therefore toinitiate informal consultations with
delegationsonthisissueandwouldappraiseMembersontheoutcomeinduecourse;(ii)Implementation
ofspecial anddifferential treatment provisions infavour ofdeveloping countries: Members hadevinced
keeninterest onthissubject andhadexpressed anumber ofconstructive views. AnotebytheSecretariat
(WT/COMTD/W/35) hadbeenreviewed byanumber ofdelegations. Ithadappeared tohimthat
Members needed more timetoreview thisimportant paper tobeabletomake substantive comments
onitsvarious components. Hetherefore intended tocarry oninformal consultations andwould revert
tothisissue forfurther discussion intheCommittee inaninformal session; and(iii)Electronic
commerce: Apaper prepared bythedelegation ofEgypt hadformed thebasis ofdiscussions. The
delegation oftheUnited States hadcirculated apaper ithadpreviously introduced attheGeneral Council
onthissubject. Some Members hadprovided early, tentative reactions. Considering theimportance
ofthesubject andthekeeninterest displayed byMembers onit,which hadalsobeenreflected inthe
discussion ofAgenda item7ofthepresent General Council meeting, heintended toholdfurther in-depth
discussion onitinthenearfuture andwould revert tothisissueintheCommittee inaninformal session.
AlsoatitsMarch meeting, theCommittee hadtaken noteofanoralreport bytheSecretariat
ontheissueofthefollow-up activities totheHigh-Level Meeting onLeast-Developed Countries, and
hadformally elected itsnewChairman. AtitsApril meeting, theCommittee hadformally elected
theChairman oftheSub-Committee onLeast-Developed Countries andhadgranted observer status
totheUNDP.
AtthemeetingoftheSub-CommitteeonLeast-DevelopedCountriesinDecember1997,progress
ofwork inrelation tothefollow-up activities totheHigh-Level Meeting onIntegrated Initiatives for
Least-Developed Countries hadbeenreviewed. AtitsApril meeting, theSub-Committee hadreceived
anupdate bytheSecretariat onthefollow-up totheHigh-Level Meeting onIntegrated Initiatives for
Least-Developed Countries. Inthedebate, special stress hadbeenputontheimportance oftechnical
assistance andmarket access forleast-developed countries.
Mr.Jenkins(UnitedKingdom),ChairmanoftheCommitteeonBalance-of-PaymentsRestrictions,
saidtheCommittee hadmettwice since helastreported onitsactivities on10December 1997. On
17December, theCommittee hadcompleted consultations withtheSlovak Republic andhadadopted
theconclusions contained inWT/BOP/R/40. TheSlovak Republic hadsince notified theCommittee
ofareduction initsimport surcharge from 5%to3%on1April 1998, inaccordance withthe
undertaking ithadgiven during theconsultations. On11-12 February, theCommittee hadcompleted
consultations withNigeria which hadbeensuspended onfourprevious occasions. TheCommittee
hadbeenunable tocome toagreed conclusions onaproposal fromNigeria toeliminate asmall number
ofBOP restrictions over aperiod offiveyears. Hehadtherefore produced areport ontheseWT/GC/M/28
Page29
consultations which recorded thedifferent views expressed intheCommittee, inaccordance with
paragraph 13oftheUnderstanding ontheBOPProvisions oftheGATT 1994.
Mr.Jirapaet (Thailand), Chairman oftheWorking Group ontheRelationship between Trade
andInvestment, saidthatatitsMarch meeting, theWorking Group hadcontinued itsconsideration
ofitems I-IIIoftheChecklist ofIssues Suggested forStudy, which wasannexed totheGroup 's1997
report, andhadstarted work onitemIVofthisChecklist bydiscussing thefactual aspects ofthefirst
indent ofthatitem. Since December 1997, newsubmissions hadbeenreceived fromBolivia; Australia;
theUnited States; Switzerland; theEuropean Community anditsmember States; Costa Rica;
Hong Kong, China; Japan; Cuba andCanada, aswellasfromUNCTAD andOECD. TheWorking
Group hadalsorecently received background notes bytheWTO Secretariat onbilateral, regional,
plurilateral andmultilateral agreements, theavailability ofstatistics onforeign direct investment and
foreign affiliates trade, andoutward foreign direct investment from developing countries.
TheChairman, onbehalf oftheChairman oftheWorking Group ontheInteraction between
Trade andCompetition Policy, saidthatasagreed atitsNovember meeting, theWorking Group had
taken upatitsMarch meeting itemIIIoftheChecklist ofIssues attached totheGroup 's1997 report,
starting withageneral discussion oftheinteraction between trade andcompetition policy anda
consideration ofthefirstindent oftheitem, namely theimpact oftheanti-competitive practices of
enterprises andassociations oninternational trade. Ithadalsohadafurther discussion ofitemIIof
theChecklist, namely thestocktaking andanalysis ofexisting instruments, standards andactivities
regarding tradeandcompetition policy, taking upthethreeindents ofthatiteminthefollowing order:
existing WTO provisions; bilateral, regional, plurilateral andmultilateral agreements andinitiatives;
andnational competition policies, lawsandinstruments astheyrelated totrade. Written submissions
onthese items hadbeenreceived fromPeru; Australia; European Community anditsmember States;
Argentina; Hong Kong, China; Norway; United States; Japan; Poland; Canada; Czech Republic
andtheRepublic ofKorea. Anon-paper hadbeenpresented byTurkey. Withregard totherelationship
oftrade andcompetition policy todevelopment andeconomic growth, oneofthepoints under item
IoftheChecklist, theWorking Group hadagreed torequest theSecretariat toprepare apaper drawing
together thework doneonthisissue, taking account ofthework doneinUNCTAD andother IGOs
andthediscussions intheWorking Group. Withregard torequests forobserver status, theWorking
Group hadagreed torevert torequests made bySELA andtheOrganization oftheIslamic Conference
atitsnextmeeting. Atitsforthcoming meetings, theWorking Group would continue withthework
programme asannexed toits1997 report totheGeneral Council.
Mr.CorralesLeal(Venezuela),ChairmanoftheWorkingGrouponTransparencyinGovernment
Procurement, saidthatinFebruary 1998, theWorking Group hadcontinued itsdetailed discussion
oftransparency-related provisions inexisting international instruments ongovernment procurement
andnational procedures andpractices onthebasis ofaninformal notebytheChair listing theissues
thathadbeenraised, together withthepoints made onthese issues attheGroup 'sNovember 1997
meeting. TheWorking Group hadtaken upinturneachoftheheadings tothisnote,which corresponded
tothose usedintheSecretariat note"Synthesis oftheInformation Available onTransparency-Related
Provisions inExisting International Instruments onGovernment Procurement Procedures andNational
Practices", withtheaddition ofaheading ontechnical cooperation andspecial anddifferential treatment.
TheWorking Group would resume itsdiscussion ofthese topics atitsnextmeeting onthebasis of
anupdatedversionoftheChairman'snote.WrittensubmissionshadbeenreceivedsinceNovember1997
containing factual information onnational procedures andpractices inHong Kong, China; theCzech
Republic; Uruguay andAustralia. Australia, theUnited States andtheAPEC Government Procurement
Expert Group through itsChair hadalsomade contributions relating toelements oftransparency in
government procurementWT/GC/M/28
Page30
Therepresentative ofEgypt expressed gratitude totheChairpersons fortheirrespective reports
andasked whether itwould bepossible tohaveacompilation ofallthese reports inviewofMembers '
preparation fortheMinisterial Conference.
TheChairman saiditwashisunderstanding thattheprogress reports would beannexed tothe
update oftheGeneral Council 'sannual report tobeprepared bytheSecretariat following themeeting.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteoftheprogress reports andofthestatements.
(d) Addendum tothereport oftheGeneral Council (WT/GC/W/81)
TheChairman recalled thatinDecember 1997, theGeneral Council hadagreed thatthereport
oftheGeneral Council tothe1998 Ministerial Conference would consist ofthe1997 annual reports
oftheGeneral Council anditssubsidiary bodies together withabriefupdate report oftheGeneral
Council concerning developments inthefirstmonths of1998. Heproposed thattheGeneral Council
adopt thedraftupdate report contained inWT/GC/W/81 ontheunderstanding thattheSecretariat would
make thenecessary adjustments tothetextsoastoinclude matters which hadbeenconsidered atthe
present meeting, including theinformation provided intheoralreports bytheChairpersons ofsubsidiary
bodies under theprevious sub-item. Thisreport together withtheannual reports for1997oftheGeneral
Council anditssubsidiary bodies would becirculated andforwarded totheMinisterial Conference.
TheGeneral Council soagreed.
9. Transparency andderestriction
Therepresentative oftheUnited States, speaking under "Other Business", recalled thatatthe
19February General Council meeting, herdelegation hadraised theneedforenhanced transparency
andincreased derestriction ofdocuments, andhaddrawn attention tothefactthatthe1996 Decision
onderestriction (WT/L/160/Rev.1) under which Members presently operated called forareview and
possible modification ofitsprovisions inthelightofexperience aftertwoyears. With thisinmind,
theUnited States hadsuggested thattheGeneral Council should agree toorganize informal open-ended
consultations withtheobjective ofconsidering possible modifications tothe1996 procedures. The
proposal hadenjoyed considerable support, andherdelegation asked iftheChairman could inform
Members astohisideas onthismatter.
TheChairman recalled thatataninformal General Council meeting on23February, hehad
reviewed withdelegations theissues onwhich hebelieved consultations would beimportant inthe
upcomingperiod,andhadidentifiedtransparencyandderestrictionasoneoftheitems.Hehadsuggested
thatsome priority should begiven tothisissue, butthatperhaps itwasonewhich could waituntil
aftertheMinisterial Conference tobetaken uponconsultations under hisauspices.
Therepresentative ofCanada saidthatatprevious meetings herdelegation hadalsospoken
ontheneedformore transparency inthework oftheWTO. Inthatlight, herdelegation requested
thatthedocument circulated byherGovernment forthediscussion under Agenda item7regarding
atariff standstill forelectronic commerce (WT/GC/W/82) beissued asaderestricted document.
TheChairman saidthatCanada 'srequest would becomplied with.
Therepresentative ofMexico agreed withtheUnited States thatMembers hadtocomply with
paragraph 7ofthe1996Decision andalsoagreed withtheChairman about thetiming. Mexico believed
thatconsultations should takeintoaccount theprovisions ofparagraph 7oftheDecision andshould
notrefertosubjective concepts suchastransparency. Mexico would participate intheconsultationsWT/GC/M/28
Page31
inorder tocomply withparagraph 7,without prejudice totheoutcome. When Mexico hadparticipated
inthedrawing upofthepresent procedures, ithadanticipated anapproach somewhat different than
thatexpected bycertain Members withregard totheuseofWTO documents when theywere still
restricted.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements.
10. Premature disclosure ofdispute settlement panel reports
TheDirector-General, speaking under "Other Business", saidhewished toraiseamatter of
serious concern thatthreatened toundermine theWTO 'sDispute Settlement Understanding, andone
thathehoped Members would discuss intheDSUreview laterintheyear. Inthisregard, hereferred
tohisearlier statement onthisissue atthe19February General Council meeting. Theproblem was
oneofpremature disclosure ofdispute settlement panel reports. Thus far,almost allinterim reports
hadbeenleaked, sometimes within hours andusually within amatter ofafewdays. Thiscaused two
fundamental problems: First itthreatened thecredibility andimage oftheWTO asaninstitution.
Theleakswereoftenselective andcould present adistorted viewoftheWTO anditsdispute settlement
system. They were often usedbyindividuals andgroups, andreproduced bythemedia, asabasis
forpainting theWTO astheenemy ofdeveloping countries, consumers andtheenvironment, andas
apromoter ofprotectionism. While these charges could easily berebutted, theywere made under
circumstances where heandtheSecretariat could notrespond without endangering theirneutrality.
Bythreatening thecredibility andimage oftheWTO, these leaks imposed significant political costs
totheinstitution, forexample, initsrelations withNGOs. While leaks might beviewed bysome as
providing desirable transparency, theWTO stillsuffered asaninstitution, because theleaksweremade
onaselective basis andcontrary totherules. Second, these leaks undermined thedispute settlement
system. They stressed theconclusions oftheinterim panel report, bytheirnature preliminary and
tentative, instead ofthefinal, definitive result ofthepanel orAppellate Body decision. Thecreation
ofthese firstmis-impressions byselective leaks washighly undesirable because themis-impressions
wereunlikely tobecorrectable later. Moreover, leaks reduced thelikelihood ofamutually agreeable
solution, which wasthepreferred result oftheDSU andwhich wasthebasic reason forrevealing the
preliminary panel result totheparties inthefirstplace.
There were several suggestions, oneormore ofwhich Members might wishtoconsider, to
dealwiththisproblem. Oneapproach would betominimize theelapsed timebetween theissuance
oftheinterim report andthecirculation ofthefinalpanel report toallMembers. Todothis,Members
should devote more resources totheWTO, especially fortranslation, andshould alsoaccept thatthe
so-called descriptive partsofpanel reports hadbecome fartoolongandshould begreatly shortened.
Asecond possibility would betocirculate thefinalpanel report toMembers assoonasitwasavailable
inaworking language, itbeing understood thattheofficial dateofcirculation forDSUpurposes would
bethedateonwhich thereport wasavailable toMembers inallthree languages. Thiswould have
anadded, dueprocess benefit. When reports wereavailable toparties toadispute longbefore they
were available toother WTO Members, those parties might haveanunfair advantage iftheywere
involved indisputes where similar issues werepresented. Hedidnotintend tomake specific proposals
inthisregard, andnoted thattherewereother possible solutions andissues tobeconsidered. However,
heurged Members toconsider theissue ofimproving transparency pragmatically andexpeditiously.
Although attention hadbeendrawn tothisproblem onseveral occasions byMembers inmeetings of
theDSB, theleaks hadcontinued. Therefore, theissue washowtodealwiththismatter inaway
thatminimized thedamage totheWTO asaninstitution andtotheintegrity ofthedispute settlement
system.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States welcomed theDirector-General 'sstatement because
theissue oftransparency intheactivities oftheWTO, particularly dispute settlement proceedings,WT/GC/M/28
Page32
required urgent attention. Action wasneeded tostrengthen public confidence inthemultilateral trading
system, andbyincreasing thetransparency andopenness oftheWTO dispute settlement proceedings,
Members would buildpublic support andenhance theeffectiveness andcredibility oftheWTO system.
Members should come togrips witharealproblem ofpublic perception thatisonlyenhanced by
unnecessarily restricting documents andbydelaying therelease ofpanel reports tothepublic. Members
hadnowhadtwoyears ofexperience withthedispute settlement proceedings, which haddemonstrated
thattherulesrequiring confidentiality ofdispute settlement proceedings wereoutdated andunnecessary.
Theraising ofthisissueatthepresent meeting onlyunderscored theneedforaction assoonaspossible,
andtheUnited States looked forward withtheGeneral Council tofinding asolution.
Therepresentative ofIndonesia saidthattheleaking ofinterim reports ofpanels wasaserious
breach oftheobligation ofconfidentiality thatMembers hadagreed tointheDSU. While Indonesia
hadnospecific proposal onhowtodealwiththeproblem, itsupported wholeheartedly theDirector-
General 'ssuggestion thatthismatter should bediscussed during thereview oftheDSU.
TherepresentativeofJapanassociatedhisdelegationfullywiththeDirector-General'sstatement.
Confidentiality inaccordance withtheprovisions oftheDSU wasveryimportant, andtheleakage of
information oftheinterim report stage wasacritical issue. Inthisconnection, hebelieved thatthe
Director-General 'ssuggestion tominimize theelapsed timebetween theissuance oftheinterim and
finalreports would notbeasolution. Theonlysolution wasforeachMember toabide bywhathad
beenagreed intheDSU. Hisdelegation, haditself beenplaced inaveryawkward situation recently
bytheleaking ofthecontents ofaninterim report byanother party, andfullyshared theconcerns
expressed bytheDirector-General. Japan alsohadaserious problem with theUSstatement.
Transparency interms ofthederestriction ofWTO documents wasonething, buttransparency indispute
settlement process itselfwasquiteanother. Henoted thattherewasalonghistory behind thequestion
of"transparency" inthedispute settlement proceedings, andthatthishadbeen oneofthevery
controversial issues inthefinalization oftheDSU in1993, before Members hadfinally settled onthe
present language oftheDSU. Insisting ontransparency indispute settlement proceedings would mean
arenegotiation ofthetextoftheDSU itself.
Therepresentative ofMexico saidthiswasnotsomuch anissueoftransparency inthedispute
settlement system. Henoted thatunder thecurrent procedures allfinalreports ofpanels wereavailable
almost immediately tothepublic asunrestricted documents, evenbefore theiradoption orappeal.
Members weretherefore notbeing non-transparent. Mexico wasconcerned thatpanel reports were
made available tothepublic when theywerenotyetfinal. Suchdevelopments could leadtoachange
intheverynature ofthereports bysubjecting them toexternal pressures ofanon-legal kind. The
failure ofpanels tobasethemselves onlegalreasoning andtobegin totakeaccount ofpublic opinion
would bewrong. TheWTO should instead better inform public opinion sothatitwasnotmisguided
bycertain vested interests. Theproblem wastherefore notoneofimproving transparency, butrather
oneofimproving respect fortheguidelines thatallhadagreed toandofenforcing compliance.
Therepresentative ofTunisia, speaking inhiscapacity asChairman oftheDispute Settlement
Body, saidthatthismatter hadbeenraised byIndonesia atameeting oftheDSBtheprevious day,
andthere hadbeenabrief exchange ofviews onit.Heshared theprevious speakers 'concerns as
alsothose oftheDirector-General. Leaks ofthistypeseemed tohimsometimes nottobeaccidental,
andthiscould destabilize theverysystem ofdispute settlement within theWTO. Thiswasamatter
thatshould therefore beconsidered veryseriously, andhesuggested thatitshould belooked atinthe
course ofthereview oftheDSU.
Therepresentative ofThailand saidthatthebreach ofconfidentiality would havefar-reaching
negative implications fortheWTO anditsdispute settlement procedures. Thismatter should therefore
beaddressed urgently.WT/GC/M/28
Page33
TherepresentativeofColombiasaidthatdelegationshadspentalotoftimeattemptingtoestablish
rules about confidentiality andthederestriction ofdocuments. Hebelieved Members hadtoavoid
giving risetoasituation where public opinion could haveleverage overorapply undue pressure on
finalrulings bypanels. Itwasscandalous toseepress leaksabout panel reports stillataninterim stage,
andeditorials inimportant newspapers theworld overmaking non-impartial accusations about theWTO
orabout Member governments. Likeothers, hebelieved thatthequestion ofpremature leaks ofpanel
reports hadtobetaken veryseriously byMembers aswellastheSecretariat.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements.
11. Accession ofAzerbaijan
- Chairmanship oftheWorking Party
TheChairman, speaking under "Other Business", informed theGeneral Council that,following
consultations, Mr.W.Höynck (Germany) hadagreed toserve asChairman oftheWorking Party on
theAccession ofAzerbaijan.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthisinformation.
Therepresentative ofJapan saidthatwhile hisdelegation fullysupported theappointment of
chairpersons thatwereverywellqualified, andwaspleased thattheChairman andtheSecretariat were
trying toincrease transparency intheappointment ofchairpersons foraccession working parties, he
wished toknow whether theappointments were made bytheChairman oftheGeneral Council and
theCouncil subsequently informed, orwhether theappointments were amatter fordecision bythe
General Council.
TheChairman saiditwashisunderstanding thatatthetimeofestablishment ofaworking party
onaccession itwasnormal practice fortheGeneral Council toauthorize itsChairman toappoint the
chairperson forthatworking party inconsultation withMembers andwiththeacceding country in
question. Inthecaseoftheappointments under thisitemandthenext, thiswastheprocess thathad
beenfollowed. Consultations hadbeenheldandthematter wasnowbeing brought forward tothe
General Council fortheCouncil totakenoteoftheaction thathadbeentaken pursuant toitsearlier
request.
Therepresentative ofJapan asked whether theprocess outlined bytheChairman wasan
interpretation ofpractice orwhether there wasawritten rulesomewhere.
Mr.Barthel-Rosa, Secretary oftheGeneral Council, saidthatithadbeenthepractice going
backintoGATT years thatwhen aworking party onaccession wasestablished, theCouncil --now
theGeneral Council --authorized itsChairman toconsult anddesignate achairperson forthatworking
party. So,ineffect, theCouncil delegated itspowers ofappointment. Accordingly, theChairman
oftheGeneral Council consulted withMembers and,iftherewerenoobjections, appointed achairperson
andformally informed theGeneral Council ofhisdecision. Thisauthority wasdelegated tohimby
theGeneral Council atthemoment theCouncil established theworking party. Thiswasanestablished
practice, andnotarule.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthestatements.WT/GC/M/28
Page34
12. Accession ofLaos
- Chairmanship oftheWorking Party
TheChairman, speaking under "Other Business", informed theGeneral Council that,following
consultations, Mr.G.Raby (Australia) hadagreed toserve asChairman oftheWorking Party onthe
Accession ofLaos.
TheGeneral Council tooknoteofthisinformation andofthestatements byJapan, theChairman
andtheSecretary oftheGeneral Council under Item11.
13. Daily Bulletin
TheChairman,speakingunder"OtherBusiness",recalledthatinJuly1997,theGeneralCouncil
hadagreed thattheSecretariat should issueaDaily Bulletin, inEnglish only, foratrialperiod ofthree
months beginning inSeptember 1997, andthattheissuance oftheBulletin bereviewed inthelight
ofexperience andfinancial implications ifany. InDecember 1997, theGeneral Council hadagreed
thattheBulletin beissued forafurther trialperiod ofthree months inEnglish only, since itsissuance
inFrench andSpanish would havefinancial implications thatwould havetobeexamined bytheBudget
Committee. Itappeared thatdelegations regarded theissuance oftheDaily Bulletin asuseful, and
heproposed therefore thatitcontinue tobeissued bytheSecretariat.
TheGeneral Council soagreed.
__________