WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/CTE/W/141
15 June 2000
(00-2406)
Committee on Trade and Environment Original:  English
TRADE IN DOMESTICALLY PROHIBITED GOODS
Submission by Bangladesh1
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The impact of trade and environment on each other has become an important global issue in
recent years.  The link between trade and envir onmental protection, consisting of both the impacts of
environmental policies on trade as well as the impact s of trade on the environment, was recognized as
early as 1970.  The decade following the 1972 Stockholm Conference witnessed a flurry of
deliberations at the global level over explaining the relationship between the two.  Those deliberations
focused on the implications of environmental protection policies on international trade, reflecting the
concern of trade officials that such policies could become obstacles to trade, as well as constitute anew form of protectionism, i.e., green protectionism.
II. BACKGROUND
2. In 1982, a number of developing countries expressed their concern at the fact that products
prohibited in developed countries on the grounds of environmental hazards, health or safety reasons
continued to be exported to them.  With limited information on these products, they were unable tomake informed decisions regarding their impact .  At the 1982 Ministerial Meeting of the GATT
Contracting Parties, it was decided that the GATT ex amine the issue, and that all Parties should begin
to notify the GATT of any goods produced and exported by them that were banned for human health
reasons by their national authorities for sale in their domestic markets.  This raised ethical concerns
which, from the point of view of these countries, needed to be addressed within the bounds of the
multilateral trading system.  While the notification system began to function following this Decision,
Parties tended to notify DPGs whose export had also been prohibited rather than the ones, which theycontinued to export.  The notification system wa s not successful, therefore, no notifications were
received after 1990 (despite the fact that the 1982 Decision remains in force).
3. In 1989, a Working Group on the Export of Dome stically Prohibited Goods (DPGs) and
Other Hazardous Substances was established in the GATT.  The Group met 15 times between 1989
and 1991, when its mandate expired, but failed to resolve the issue.
III. WTO AND DPGs
4. In the 1994 Ministerial Decision on Trade and Environment, it was agreed to incorporate
DPGs into the terms of reference of the newly created Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE)
under the World Trade Organization (WTO).
                                                     
1 This paper was prepared for UNCTAD's Second Regional Workshop on Strengthening Research and
Policymaking Capacity on Trade and Environment in Developing Countries, which was held in Havana, Cubafrom 31 May to 2 June 2000 by A.K.M.  A.B. Siddique, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and MosharrofHossain, Joint Secretary (Dev), Ministry of Environmen t and Forests, Government of the People's Republic of
Bangladesh.WT/CTE/W/141
Page 2
5. While numerous international instruments already address the export of DPGs, such as the
Basel Convention of 1989 on the Transboundary Move ment of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal,
these instruments principally address chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and hazardous wastes.  The
objective was to protect by strict control, human health and the environment against the effects that
may result from the generation and management of hazardous wastes and other wastes.  Consumerproducts have been identified as a gap by most WTO studies conducted on this issue.  Some
delegations have argued that while other instruments exist, a number of them are only voluntary in
nature (in other words, Parties to these instruments do not have to fulfill their obligations if they
decide not to), and have expressed their wish to see quicker and better progress on the issue in the
WTO.
6. Collectively, the CTE has stated that while there is a need to concentrate on the role that the
WTO can play on this issue, it is important neither to duplicate nor to deflect attention from the workof other specialized intergovernmental fora.  It al so recognized the important role that technical
assistance and transfer of technology related to DPGs whose trade is allowed can play in both tackling
environmental problems at their source and in helping avoid unnecessary additional trade restrictions
on the products involved.  It stated that WTO Me mbers should be encouraged to provide technical
assistance to other Members, especially developing countries, either bilaterally or throughintergovernmental organizations.  This would assist these countries in strengthening their technical
capacity to monitor and, where necessary, control the import of DPGs.
7. Based on a Secretariat note prepared on the information already available in the WTO on the
export of DPGs, some delegations requested that the DPG notification system that had been in
existence between 1982 and 1990 be revived, particularly as the Decision taken to establish it remainin force today.  However, no decision on this issue was taken.
IV. THE RECENT PIC CONVENTION
8. The Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals
and Pesticides in International Trade (PIC Convention) was adopted and opened for signature in
Rotterdam in September 1998.  The Convention aims at monitoring and controlling the trade in highlydangerous pesticides and chemicals that - when released into the environment – may poison water and
land and eventually human animal and plant life.  The Convention enables importing countries to
decide whether they want to receive certain substances and refuse others.  If countries agree to trade
in those substances, procedural rules like labeling and information on potential health and
environmental effects will promote the safe use of those chemicals.
9. The PIC Convention applies to banned or severely restricted chemicals and to severely
hazardous pesticide formulations.  Article 5 of the Convention requires the Parties to notify any finalregulatory action that has been adopted for banned or severely restricted chemicals according to the
notification guidelines set out in Annex I.  The Secretariat forwards this acquired information to all
Parties.  A Chemical Review Committee, to be established by the COP at its first meeting, reviews the
information provided in such notifications and recommends to the COP whether the chemical in
question should be made subject to the Prior Inform ed Consent procedure and accordingly be listed in
Annex III.
10. Developing countries may propose to the Secretariat the listing of hazardous pesticide
formulation in Annex III to be subject to the PIC procedure.  Each party is obliged to implement
appropriate legislative or administrative measures with respect to the import of chemicals.  A response
concerning the future import of the chemical concerned shall be transmitted to the Secretariat,consisting of a Final decision to:
(a) Consent to import;WT/CTE/W/141
Page 3
(b) refuse import; or
(c) consent to import only subject to specified conditions.
11. Each party must take appropriate measures to ensure that exporters within its jurisdiction
comply with decisions that have been notified to the Secretariat under Article 10.  This Article
requires any party to provide an export notification to the importing Party when it exports chemicalsthat are banned or severely restricted in its territory.
V. EXPERIENCE OF DPG REGULATION IN SELECT DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
12. During the UNCTAD sponsored First Regional Workshop on Strengthening Research and
Policy-making Capacity on Trade and Environment in  Developing Countries held in the Philippines
during 11-13 November 1999, delegations from several countries cited examples of DPGs imported
by their countries.  It was pointed out that some DPGs may serve other functions, such as health and
food security.  The case of DDT was cited as an example, as it was deemed useful for fightingmalaria.  Several examples of DPGs were cited by the Bangladesh delegation.  It was noted that
hazardous waste was often imported in the guise of consumer products, such as fertilizers, vetch as a
lentil when it was not even deemed fit for animal feed in Australia.  However, the Government has no
capacity to deal with the disguises used by firms to export DPGs.  Uganda pointed out that carrier
bags, used clothing, etc. were also DPGs, which were causing problems to the domestic environmentand economy.
13. Costa Rica, however, pointed out that it had successfully dealt with DPGs, which was a large
problem about ten years back.  It had enacted Regulations for handling, management and use of
dangerous products – biological resources, water, heavy metals (mercury), explosives, etc.  The
Environmental Authority in Costa Rica had the responsibility for regulation of DPGs.  Brazil pointedout its regulation, which considers irresponsible disposal of batteries a punishable crime.  Several
countries felt that import bans would not be enough to control trade in DPGs.  It was necessary to
regulate handling, management and use of DPGs.  But to do that, it may be necessary to draw up an
indicative list of DPGs.
VI. SITUATION IN BANGLADESH
14. Bangladesh has formulated a five year import policy from 1997 to 2002 in compliance with
the WTO Agreements and the general concept of free market economy.  Import has been liberalized
to create an opportunity of accession of goods freel y to the Bangladesh market.  But some goods are
banned and restricted for import to Bangladesh on human health and safety as well as environmental
grounds.  Some of them are mentioned below:
15. Insecticides, namely Heptachlor T-40WP, DDT, Bidrin Brand in the generic name:
Dicrotopes, Methyl Bromide:  Chlordane -40WP and Daildrin, Poppy seeds and dried Postadana;Ghas (Andropogen SPP) and Bhang (Canabis Sativa);  Opium;  Petroleum gas and other gaseous
hydrocarbons.  But the following items, which are restricted but allowed to be imported subject to the
fulfilment of specific conditions.  These are Sulphur, Petroleum oil and all kinds of oil obtained from
bituminous mineral Crude and LPG, Ethylene Oxide gas, all petroleum products except liquid
paraffin, Sulphur, Methanol (methyl) Alcohol, Sulphonamides, etc.
16. Like other developing countries, Bangladesh is aware of the harmful effects of DPGs, and
seeks cooperation and assistance from the world community to take necessary measures for its control
globally.  The following recommendations are suggested for control of DPGs.WT/CTE/W/141
Page 4
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The issue of the export of DPGs has been a matter of serious concern to developing countries
since the 1980's.  Taking into consideration that no notifications pursuant to the Decision by
the GATT Contracting Parties in 1984 (BISD 31S/14) have been received since 1990, the
CTE should recommend that Members notify DPG exports in the area of consumer products,
where there exists a gap in the coverage of ot her international instruments.  The CTE should
take note of this recommendation to notify exports of domestically prohibited consumer
products in its Annual Report in 2000, for adoption by the General Council;
2. In order to address the problem of the export of DPGs, each country should have the
necessary domestic health and environmental standards and regulations in place for the
management of imports of DPGs.  Building on the recommendations contained in paragraph
205 of the CTE Report to the 1996 Singapore Ministerial Conference (WT/CTE/1), and in
order to contribute to the development of standards and regulations in this important area, the
WTO, in cooperation with other relevant international organizations, should provide technical
assistance to developing countries for capacity building;
3. Previous discussions and documents have set out that there is a gap in the coverage of DPGs
by other international instruments, which is w ithin the WTO's competence to address.  (See
the draft Decision on DPGs submitted by Nigeria in WT/CTE/W/32 and documents prepared
by the Secretariat in WT/CTE/W/29, WT/CTE/W/43 and WT/CTE/W/73).  As a result,
Bangladesh requests the Secretariat, in c ooperation with other relevant international
organizations, to prepare a study on the export of domestically prohibited consumer products
and their possible effects on human health and the environment;  and
4. There should be sharing of information on DPGs among developing and developed countries.
In this respect, the issue of the export of domestically prohibited goods should be a priorityitem on the agenda of the UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force on Trade,
Environment and Development.  A mechanism should also be developed for South-South
information sharing on illicit trade of DPGs;
__________