RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE GPA/W/65
9January 1998
ORGANIZATION(98-0054)
Committee onGovernment Procurement
RELATIONSHIP OFTHE TOKYO ROUND AGREEMENT ONGOVERNMENT
PROCUREMENT TOTHE 1994 AGREEMENT ON
GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
Note bytheSecretariat
1. Thepresent notehasbeenprepared inresponse totheCommittee 'srequest atitsmeeting on
29September 1997 (GPA/M/7, paragraph 28).Itaimstoclarify thelegalandprocedural aspects of
thesupersession oftheAgreement onGovernment Procurement doneon12April 1979, asrevised
byaProtocol ofAmendments doneon2February 1987which entered intoforceon14February 1988,
(hereinafterreferredtoas"theTokyoRoundAgreement")bytheAgreementonGovernmentProcurement
doneinMarrakesh on15April 1994 (hereafter referred toas"the1994 Agreement"). Itdescribes
thestatus ofacceptances under thetwoAgreements anddiscusses themodalities ofthesupersession
oftheTokyo Round Agreement bythe1994 Agreement fortheconsideration oftheCommittee
established under the1994 Agreement.
2. Thefollowing GATT Contracting Parties were Parties totheTokyo Round Agreement on
Government Procurement: Austria, Canada, Finland, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Norway, Singapore,
Sweden,Switzerland,theUnitedKingdom,theUnitedStatesandtheEuropeanCommunity.TheUnited
States withdrew from theTokyo Round Agreement on10November 1995, with effect from
9January 1996(Let/1981), andAustria on15September 1997, witheffect from14November 1997
(WT/Let/170).
3. The1994Agreement onGovernment Procurement hasbeenaccepted byBelgium, theEuropean
Community, Canada, Finland, France, Greece, Israel, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Norway, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland andtheUnited States (WT/Let/51). Since itsentry intoforceon1January 1996,
theKingdom oftheNetherlands with respect toAruba acceded tothe1994 Agreement on
25October 1996 (WT/Let/111), Hong Kong on19June 1997 (WT/Let/141), Liechtenstein on
18September 1997 (WT/Let/166) andSingapore on20October 1997 (WT/Let/179).
4. With theaccession ofSingapore tothe1994 Agreement on20October 1997, allParties to
theTokyo Round Agreement havenowaccepted the1994 Agreement.
5. Article XXIV:3(c) ofthe1994 Agreement onGovernment Procurement provides that:
"3.(c) Between Parties tothisAgreement which arealsoParties tothe1988
Agreement, therights andobligations ofthisAgreement shallsupersede those
under the1988 Agreement."
Itseems clear from thisprovision ofthe1994 Agreement, which relates tothesame subject-matter
astheTokyo Round Agreement (plussome additional subject-matter), thatalltheParties totheTokyo
Round Agreement intend thatthematters covered should begoverned bythe1994 Agreement.
./.GPA/W/65
Page2
Therefore, inthelightoftheprovisions ofArticle 59.1(a) oftheVienna Convention ontheLawof
Treaties, 19691,2,itwould appear thattheTokyo Round Agreement hasbeenconsidered asterminated
witheffect from thetimethatallitsParties became Parties to1994 Agreement, thatistosay
20October 1997. Inthelightoftheabove, itwould notappear necessary foranyspecific further
action tobetaken, whether intheform ofindividual countries withdrawing from theTokyo Round
Agreement orintheform ofadecision oftheCommittee oftheTokyo Round Agreement formally
terminating itsexistence.3However, theCommittee ofthe1994 Agreement maywishtotakenote
ofthelegalopinion expressed inthisnoteatafuture meeting.
__________
1Article 59.1(a) oftheVienna Convention ontheLaw ofTreaties (1969) deals withthetermination or
suspension oftheoperation ofatreaty implied byconclusion ofalater treaty. Itstates that:
"1. Atreaty shallbeconsidered asterminated ifalltheparties toitconclude alatertreaty relating
tothesame subject-matter and:
(a) itappears from thelater treaty orisotherwise established thattheparties intended
thatthematter should begoverned bythattreaty;"
2Inthelight ofArticle 3.2oftheDSU which recognizes thattheDSU serves topreserve therights and
obligations ofMembers under thecovered agreements andtoclarify theexisting provisions ofthose agreements
inaccordance withcustomary rules ofinterpretation ofpublic international lawandgiven thatsuchrules have
been considered byWTO panels andtheAppellate Body toinclude, inparticular, those provided intheVienna
Convention, itisrelevant toexamine therelevant provisions oftheVienna Convention inthisconnection.
3Decisions ofthisnature were taken byCommittees oftheTokyo Round Agreements onCustoms Valuation
(VAL/M/36 andVAL/57), Import Licensing (LIC/M/37, LIC/25) andTechnical Barriers toTrade (TBT/M/50,
TBT/40) inthelightoftheDecision of8December 1994 adopted bythePreparatory Committee toterminate
GATT 1947 (PC/12, L/7583). However, theWTO agreements replacing these agreements didnotcontain
provisions concerning thesupersession oftheformer agreement bythelatter agreements.