WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/13 
23 November 2004 
 (04-5097) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices  
  
 
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
ON TRANSITIONAL REVIEW OF CHINA 
 
 1. The Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices undert ook the third transitional review of China 
pursuant to Paragraph 18 of the Protocol on th e Accession of the People's Republic of China 
(WT/L/432) at its meeting of 26 and 28 to 29 October 2004.  2. There is no information specified for subm ission to the Committee under Annex 1A to the 
Protocol.  Members submitted questions and comment s in the context of the transitional review 
relating to China's implementation of the Agr eement on Implementation of Article VI of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the Anti-Dumping Agreement).  These can be found 
in documents G/ADP/W/439 (submitted by the European Communities), G/ADP/W/440 (submitted 
by Japan), G/ADP/W/441 and G/ADP/W/443 (submitte d by the United States), and G/ADP/W/442 
(submitted by Chinese Taipei).    
3. The statements made at the meeting of 26 and 28 to 29 October 2004, at which the 
transitional review was item K of the agenda, are re flected in the minutes of the meeting, which will 
be circulated as document G/ADP/M/27.  The releva nt paragraphs of the minutes, which reflect the 
statements made and the discussion at the meeting, are annexed. G/ADP/13 
Page 2  
 
 Excerpt from the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
held 26 & 28 to 29 October 2004, to be circulated as document G/ADP/M/27 
 K. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL OF 
ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA TO THE WORLD TRADE 
ORGANIZATION 
 1. The Chairman
 recalled that Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of the People's 
Republic of China to the World Trade Organization provides that all subsidiary bodies, including the ADP Committee, "which have a mandate coveri ng China's commitments under the WTO Agreement 
or [the] Protocol shall, within one year after a ccession, review, as appropriate to their mandate, the 
implementation by China of the WTO Agreement and of  the related provisions of [the] Protocol."  He 
noted that China was to provide relevant informati on in advance of the review, including information 
specified in Annex 1A to the Protocol, and that Chin a can also raise issues relating to any reservations 
under Section 17 or to any other specific commitments made by other Members in the Protocol, in 
subsidiary bodies which have a relevant mandate.  The Committee must report the results of the 
review promptly to the Council for Trade in Goods.  Review is to take place after accession in each 
year for eight years, with a final review in year 10 or at an earlier date decided by the 
General Council.  The Chairman also recalled that  there are no procedures set out for the conduct of 
the transition review in the Protocol, except that Ch ina is to provide relevant information in advance 
of the review.   
2. The Chairman noted in this regard that there is  no information specified for submission to this 
Committee under Annex 1A.  He further noted that  Members had submitted questions and comments 
in the context of the transitional review by the Committee, and that these had been circulated in 
documents G/ADP/W/439 (submitted by the Europe an Communities), W/440 (submitted by Japan), 
W/441 (submitted by the United States), and W/ 442 (submitted by Chinese Taipei).   
3. Before turning to the questions posed by Memb ers, the Chair asked whether any Member had 
any general comments.   
4. The delegate of the United States
1 stated that in the three year s since China had acceded to the 
WTO, China had expended a great deal of effort to  fashion an anti-dumping regime intended to satisfy 
its obligations under the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreemen t and its Protocol of Accession.  The goal of 
the transitional review of the Committee, itself a pr ovision of China’s Protocol of Accession, is to 
allow Members to examine and report on China’s progress in meeting its obligations under the  
Anti-Dumping Agreement.  As of that point, China had made noteworthy strides in promulgating laws 
and regulations and building an administering author ity, but it still had much work to do.  China had 
quickly become one of the leading users of the an ti-dumping remedy – in the previous year China had 
imposed the second highest number of anti-dumping measures among all WTO Members.  However, 
China did not appear to have placed sufficient em phasis on the fundamental principles of transparency 
and fair procedures.  Transparency  and fair procedures form the co re of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 
– in order to build a WTO-compliant anti-dumping regime, any Member must embrace those concepts and instil them in its administrative culture.  The United States wished to outline its principal 
observations and concerns.  
5. China modified the legal framework of its an ti-dumping regime in the wake of the 2003 
reorganization of China’s anti-dumping administer ing authority into the Ministry of Commerce 
("MOFCOM").  However, it was not clear from Chin a’s recently delivered response to the questions 
the United States posed in May 20042 which ministerial rules were still in force, which rules had been 
                                                      
1 The statement of the United States was circulated in docu ment G/ADP/W/443. 
2 G/ADP/Q1/CHN/46, 18 October 2004  G/ADP/13 
 Page 3 
 
 
 annulled and which rules had been modified.  Fo r example, it was the United States' understanding 
that as part of this overhaul, China also had revi sed its Foreign Trade Law.  To the United States' 
knowledge, these revisions had not been notified to  the Committee for Memb ers’ information and 
review.  The status of ministerial-level rules was even more problematic.  While the United States appreciated China’s recent notification of its regul ations pertaining to anti-dumping actions, it urged 
China to clarify in detail to the Committee the full set of rules, regulations and laws that currently 
governed its anti-dumping regime. 
6. In addition to issues surrounding the legal fra mework of China’s anti-dumping regime, the 
United States continued to be concerned about tran sparency in several aspects of China’s conduct of 
its investigations and reviews.   
7. A principal concern involved timely access to info rmation needed by interested parties to 
participate meaningfully in China’s anti-dumping investigations.  The United States appreciated 
MOFCOM’s efforts to make certain types of documents available to interested parties.  The Bureau of 
Fair Trade ("BOFT"), MOFCOM’s dumping investiga tion unit, maintained a public reading room in 
which it provided non-confidential versions of the petitions filed by Chinese domestic industries and 
most anti-dumping-related questionnaire responses s ubmitted by responding parties.  Furthermore, the 
United States understood that the BOFT generally made  available to responding parties a summary of 
the key facts and decisions underlying the agency ’s dumping margin determ inations, although the 
United States was concerned about the limited substa nce and detail revealed in those summaries.  The 
United States urged BOFT to go a step further and ma ke available in the public reading room, or at 
least to interested parties, summaries of meet ings between interested parties and agency  
decision-makers and to ensure that confidentia l documents not released were identified in 
comprehensive indices so that all parties knew of their existence. 
8. In contrast to the relative ease  of access to non-confidential versions of documents from the 
BOFT, the United States had serious concerns a bout the availability of information from the 
Investigation Bureau for Industry Injury ("IBII"),  MOFCOM’s injury arm.  As noted in China’s 
response to questions posed by the United States  in May 2004, the IBII had just recently begun 
placing documents in the BOFT public reading room.  However, based on a very recent visit by US 
Embassy officials, that reading room contained a limited number of documents pertaining to a limited 
number of China’s ongoing investigations, but hardly all of its proceedings.  Furthermore, interested 
parties, including responding parties and officials of the US Government, had been frustrated in their 
attempts to obtain from the IBII non-confidential vers ions of even basic documents, such as Chinese 
industry responses to IBII questionnaires.  Unfort unately, the IBII often denied access to such 
documents, or it imposed impossible preconditions, su ch as requiring parties to identify the precise 
titles of the documents requested – despite the fact that there was no record available to a requesting 
party that listed the documents in the IBII’s possessi on.  This situation was exacerbated at an even 
more fundamental level.  To the knowledge of th e United States, the IBII had never disclosed to a 
responding party the essential facts under consideration as required by Article 6.9 of the Agreement.  
The United States intended to continue monitoring th is practice very closely but hoped that the IBII’s 
having recently placed in the public reading room so me documentation related to its current injury 
investigations was a signal that it intended to  make a broad move towards disseminating key 
information to interested parties on a timely basis. 
9. The timely availability of information, however, was only a first step.  Article 6 of the  
Anti-Dumping Agreement requires that non-confiden tial summaries of confidential documents must 
be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable unde rstanding of the substance of the information 
submitted in confidence.  Without access to conf idential information submitted to MOFCOM, it is 
essential to responding parties to have comprehens ive and informative non-confidential summaries in 
order to be able to mount an effective defence.   The United States noted that the quality of the  G/ADP/13 
Page 4  
 
 non-confidential summaries China had made availabl e varied considerably, and urged China to 
enforce tighter standards. 
10. Furthermore, the United States was concerned that, in some cases, critical arguments or 
evidence put forward by interested parties had not b een addressed adequately in either preliminary or 
final determinations.  This problem  was especially prevalent in injury determinations.  Similarly, and 
again especially in injury determinations, many of  the conclusions MOFCOM reached did not appear 
to be supported by adequate evidence.  In many in stances, either no evidence was cited at all, or the 
evidence cited was not available to anyone except the administering authority.  Conclusory statements 
without evidentiary support do not constitute "p ositive evidence" within the meaning of the  
Anti-Dumping Agreement.  In particular, details of the factual basis and reasoning supporting the 
investigating authority’s decisions as well as pe titioners’ allegati ons and briefs must be made 
available to all interested parties.    
11. Given the increasing number of investigations and reviews being undertaken by China, the 
United States urged China to apply fair procedures to  all parties to an investigation as envisioned by 
the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  For investigations a nd reviews, this includes, but is not limited to, 
timely access to administrators and favourable c onsideration of hearing requests, as embodied in 
Article 6.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  The United States was aware of a number of delays in 
responding to requests to hold hearings requested by in terested parties.  The United States also noted 
with some concern the increased use of meetings othe r than formal hearings in some investigations 
and urged that interested parties not present be quickly informed of matt ers discussed at such 
meetings. 
12. The United States recognized the e fforts that China had made to inject transparency into its 
anti-dumping regime.  However, with three years of WTO membership behi nd it, China needed to 
redouble its efforts to ensure that its anti-dumpi ng system fully conformed to WTO rules.  The 
United States stood ready to assist China in these efforts and looked forward to seeing substantial 
improvements in the very near future.   
13. The delegate of China
 stated, with regard to the meeting,  that China preferred to finish the 
agenda item during the morning session, because ther e was another transition review meeting going 
on in another Committee.  China hoped that the Me mbers would be understanding about finishing the 
meeting in the morning, to save time and avoid the conflict of the two meetings.  
14. The Chairman  responded that as long as the discussion could be finished in time, this would 
not pose any problem for the Chair.  He invited the delegation of China to take the floor to respond to 
the questions and comments submitt ed by the European Communities. 
15. The delegate of China  wished to present the Committee the developments in the area of  
anti-dumping of China since the review of the previous  year.  Firstly, in terms of China's legislation 
on anti-dumping, China's legal framework in its regi me was based on the foreign trade law which was 
just amended on 6 April 2004 and came into effect as of 1 July of the same year.  Comparing to the 
old Foreign Trade Law, the amendment does not include many essential changes in the area of  
anti-dumping.  The translation of the full text of this newly amended Foreign Trade Law was almost 
accomplished and would soon be subm itted to WTO for notification. 
16. On 31 March 2004 the State Council of Chin a issued its Decree No. 401 to amend the 
regulations of the People's Republic of China on an ti-dumping.  The amended regulations came into 
effect on 1 June 2004.  This amendment mainly i nvolved changes in the anti-dumping investigation 
and implementation brought by the recent Chine se Government restructure.  In addition the 
amendment also introduced adjustments in China' s investigation and implementation of anti-dumping 
measures in a manner more consistent with th e relevant WTO rules.  On 20 October 2004 the  G/ADP/13 
 Page 5 
 
 
 WTO Secretariat had circulated a notification of th e full text of this amended regulation submitted by 
China.  Secondly, on China's investigation and implementation of anti-dumping measures during the 
previous few years, China had initiated anti-dumpi ng investigations agains t nine imported products 
and had made preliminary determina tions on five products and final de terminations on three products.  
Since the first initiation of anti-dumping investig ations in December 1997, China had initiated  
anti-dumping investigations against a total of 33 im ported goods, all of which had been carried out in 
strict accordance with the anti-dumping regulatio n of China and with the WTO Agreement on  
Anti-Dumping Practices.  China sincerely believe d that the sole purpose of the Anti-Dumping 
measures should be to protect a balanced interna tional trading order, a fair competition environment 
as well as the rights and interests of the importing c ountries' domestic industries.  China believed that 
a target of anti-dumping investigations should only be the injury-causing imports priced below normal 
value.  As a major target of the anti-dumping invest igations China objected to any trade protectionism 
by means of anti-dumping measures, which China believe d would certainly do harm to the trade of all 
Members, especially that of the developing countries.   
17. The Chairman  recalled that the Committee was looki ng at the questions posed by the 
European Communities, and suggested  that for any future statements that China might be making on 
other replies, it would be appreciated if China could provide copies of their statements to the 
interpreters, as this would facilita te communication of their statements.  The Chairman asked the 
delegation of China if they wished to refer to the questions from the European Communities. 
18. The delegate of China  stated that a copy of the statement just made already had been given to 
the interpreter.  The delegate wished to respond to the questions raised to China, but to save time and 
also to avoid some overlapping questions, he intende d to respond to all of the questions relayed from 
the Members.  He apologized to the interpreters because the responses were going to be picked up 
from the various detailed regulations and rules, and he did not have a readily available copy of his 
statement.   
19. On the question regarding notification and rela ted matters of the Anti-Dumping Legislation, 
all of the current laws and regulations relati ng to anti-dumping practices under dates of issues and 
publications were available at the official website at the Ministry of Commerce.  To respond to the 
particular point raised in the opening statement of the representative of the United States, China's 
notification of Anti-Dumping Legislation reflected the latest development of the legislation.  One or 
two pieces of the legislation were not notified and th e reason was basically the burden of translation.  
As indicated, the translation of the revised Fore ign Trade Law was almost done and it would be 
notified in a couple of weeks time.  The newly amended Regulations of the People's Republic of 
China on anti-dumping had already been notifie d to the WTO and the reference number was 
G/ADP/N/100/CHN.  As to the changes made in th ese legislations, they mainly reflected the recent 
Chinese Government restructure and could be identif ied easily when compared to the old version of 
the legislation.   
20. On the question of notification of the choice of  the time-period in making a determination of 
negligible import volumes, China had submitted its notification a couple of weeks earlier.  On the 
question relating to the responsibilities between the Ministry of Commerce and the Customs General 
Administration, the Ministry of Commerce was respons ible for the investigation and determination of 
anti-dumping cases and the Customs General Administ ration was responsible for the implementation 
of anti-dumping measures.  The regulations on anti-dumping of the People's Republic of China 
stipulated that the Customs General Administ ration implemented the anti-dumping measures in 
accordance with the anti-dumping determination noti ces issued by the Tariff Commission of the State 
Council and the Ministry of Commerce.  The Depart ment of Duty Collection and Administration in 
the Customs General Administration was the respons ible office for anti-dumping with the function of 
implementing the anti-dumping measure throughout  the customs offices across the country and 
resolving related problems in customs clearance.   G/ADP/13 
Page 6  
 
 21. On the question relating to information discl osure, Chinese investigating authorities had 
always attached great importance to the informati on disclosure and transparency requirements.  The 
investigation authorities had enacted the interim rules on information disclosure in anti-dumping 
investigations and the interim rules on access to pub lic information in anti-dumping investigations.  
The two rules had been notified to the Committee.   Information of the investigations was duly 
disclosed in line with the provisions set forth in th e two rules.  And the interest of every concerned 
party were effectively protected.  While China c ould understood the concern expressed by one of the 
Members in this regard on some specific case s, China also recognize the requirement to 
"appropriately protect the confidential information"  as identified in Article 6 and Article 12 of the 
Anti-Dumping Agreement.  On that consideration th e authorities would not be in a position to release 
in the public notice some of the data used to de termine the dumping margin which was classified as 
commercial secrets.  However, the analysis of the data and the final determination were included in 
the public notice.  Furthermore, it needed to be underlined that Chinese authorities had always abided 
by the requirements identified in Articles 3, 6 a nd 12 identified by the Agreement.  Apart from the 
explanation of the public notice, the method and data employed in the calculation of the dumping 
margin were also provided to each and every ente rprise under investigation.  Sufficient opportunities 
for comment were also provided to the enterprises.  Chinese authorities were also ready to listen to 
comments from enterprises on the issue of informa tion released.  On the question regarding essential 
facts, according to the interim rules on the info rmation disclose in anti-dumping investigations, the 
essential facts included the following information:  with respect to normal value they included the 
establishment of normal value submit the transaction data and adjusted data in calculation of the 
normal value, data rejected in calculation of a norma l value and a reason for the rejection, etc.  With 
respect to export prices they included the establishment of export prices submitted with transaction data and adjustments of the data used in calculation of export prices, data rejected in calculation of the 
export prices and the reasons for the rejection, etc.  With respect to costs they included the data for the 
establishment of cost of production, allocation method for various expenses and data adopted, 
estimate of profits, establishment of abnormal or non -recurring items, etc.  They also included use of 
best information available and facts available and th e reasons, but with confidential information of all 
interested parties excluded.  They also in cluded the methodologies where calculation of dumping 
margins and other information the investigatin g authorities consider necessary to disclose.  
Considerations and interpretations of the data, which is the question of one of the Members, may be 
considered as essential facts.  And also access to the file could also be a part of the disclosure of 
essential facts.    
22. On the question regarding the measures fo r accessing the anti-dumping public information 
access room, the measures mentioned were firstly issued  by the former Minister of Foreign Trade and 
Economic Cooperation and reissued after the establis hment of the Ministry of Commerce, and was 
still working.  Information on injury investigations could also be accessed in the same reading room.  
MOFCOM's public reading room for anti-dumping inv estigation and reviews was the official place 
for all interested parties to have access to the public information on both dumping and injury 
investigations.  MOFCOM maintained a public inde x for all documents for the public, in the public 
reading room.  For the confidential materials, MO FCOM maintained an index of all documents only 
used by investigating authorities.  On the length of  time to make available documents relating to the 
dumping phase of the anti-dumping investigation, pub lic documents would be placed in the reading 
room immediately after receipt.  When relating to the injury phase of anti-dumping investigations the 
information would be placed in the reading room within 10 working days after the authorities obtain 
or generate them. 
23. 
For the ongoing cases involving US exporters, all the public documents relating to the cases 
had been put in the public reading room and were re adily accessible for all interested parties related to 
specific anti-dumping cases.  MOFCOM also provided the public version of written applications for 
initiation of the anti-dumping cases to the Govern ment of the exporting Members according to 
Article 6 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  Up until  that time, all public documents related to the  G/ADP/13 
 Page 7 
 
 
 anti-dumping cases had been put in the public reading room and were available to all interested 
parties relating to the specific anti-dumping cases in a timely manner.  Public information was 
provided to interested parties in strict accordan ce with the two rules on public information, as 
mentioned before.   
24. On the treatment of confidential information th e authorities would examine the request of the 
confidentiality and its explanation for good cause.  The examination would be based on evidence 
provided by interested parties.  Whether the in formation was considered  confidential depended on 
whether its disclosure would be of significant comp etitive advantage to a competitor or whether its 
disclosure would have a significantly adverse effect  upon a person supplying the information or on a 
person from whom that person acquired the information.  If the information had already been made 
public legally it would not be cons idered as confidential any longer. 
25. As to the requests for confidentiality posed by foreign parties, they were fully respected by 
the investigating authorities.  As a matter of fact th e confidential information in all the cases that had 
been submitted by the interested parties had never b een disclosed or used elsewhere, other than in the 
investigations.   
26. On the on-spot visit at domestic industry – in a ll the investigations initiated to that point, the 
authorities had conducted on-spot verification of th e domestic industry before making the preliminary 
determination.  Such a practice was likely to continue  in the future in good faith.  Verifications were 
conducted with the procedure in accordance with the requirements for data veri fications of domestic 
industries in the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement. 
27. In regard to use of facts available, the Chin ese authorities used facts available in cases where 
interested parties refused access to or otherwise did not provide the necessary information within a 
reasonable period, or significantly impeded the inv estigation.  Use of facts available depended on 
specific situations and the conditions of a specific case.  In line with Annex 2 of the WTO  Anti-Dumping Agreement, if the evidence or in formation was not accepted, the supplying party 
would be informed and given an opportunity to provide further explanations by the 
Chinese authorities.  On-spot visit was carried out to  prove supplied information or evidence.  Some 
evidence or information favourable to the investigat ed company or enterprise would be verified and 
accepted.  As a result the definitive duty levels mi ght be lower than the provisional ones imposed on 
the basis of facts available which was unfavourable to the enterprise.  The authorities do not rule out 
the possibility of conducting on-spot visits prior to the imposition of provisiona l measures.  It depends 
on the specific situation and conditions of the investigation in a specific case.   
28. On judicial review, pursuant to Articles 14 a nd 17 of the Law of the People's Republic of 
China on State procedure, the first trial of an admi nistrative case in relation to anti-dumping was to be 
heard by the Second Intermediate Court of Be ijing.  Also pursuant to the law of China on 
administrative procedures and the judicial interpre tation of the Supreme People's Court on certain 
issues concerning the application of law, on hearin g anti-dumping administrative cases, all interested 
parties were equally entitled to the judicial right s of filing a case, entrusting representatives providing 
evidence, debate before the court, accepting the ju dgement, appeals, and applying for endorsement, 
etc.  On the notification of this judicial interp retation, China was finalizing the translation, which 
would be notified in the coming months. 
29. On the issue of legal representation on anti-dumping cases, this was an issue of trade in 
services in nature.  The current requirement of China in this regard was consistent with the specific 
commitments made on legal services as contained in China's Services Schedule.  As far as China was 
aware, such a requirement was not only maintained by China but also by a lot of other Members.  As 
to whether there would be any change of this practice,  this was an issue to be dealt with in Services 
Negotiations.   G/ADP/13 
Page 8  
 
 30. As to the comment of a Member on China's practice regarding cumulative assessment, if one 
looked look into the facts, it was not true th at authorities cumulatively assessed imports without 
demonstrating by positive evidence that the volume of imports from each country was not negligible.  
In all the anti-dumping cases initiated by China, th e authorities did conduct serious examinations on 
the volume of imports of every interested country  in accordance with the ev idence and data provided 
by interested enterprises in order to confirm whether the volume was negligible.  The practice of the 
Chinese investigating authorities in conducting cumula tive assessments were in full consistency with 
Article 3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  When the import volume from certain countries was determined to be negligible the investigations were terminated in a manner consistent with the 
requirements of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  If th e Member concerned looked carefully into the 
cases notified to the Committee, it would find that  strict examination on whether the volume of 
imports was negligible was a common practice of the investigating authorities of China.  Secondly, the Member's statement that Chinese authorities conducted its investigation on condition of 
competition without any reason was also not true at a ll.  As stated in the notices cited by the Member, 
the investigating authorities of China always took into consideration physical and chemical 
characteristics, structure of raw materials, pr oduction process and also use of the products under 
investigation.  When examining the above elemen ts the authorities usually consulted experts who 
were completely neutral for advice.  China also noticed that the Working Group on Implementation of 
the Committee was discussing the draft paper regard ing the practice to be followed in cumulative 
assessment of imported products.   
31. China was willing to exchange views with othe r Members as to how to improve examination 
in this regard, but believed that there was no ground to say that the investigating authorities of China 
did not meet the requirements of positive evidence, and an objective examination in Article 3 of the 
Anti-Dumping Agreement.  In fact China's practic e was in strict accordan ce to the WTO rules and 
domestic legislation.  Therefore, China did not accept this allegation.  As to the issue of like product 
the facts also were not as commented by the Me mber.  The investigating authorities of China had 
always observed Article 2 of the Anti-Dumping Agre ement when determining like product.  It was 
well acknowledged that determina tion on products in anti-dumping investigations was a complex 
issue subject to further discussion.  In the process of determining like-product in every investigation, the investigating authorities of China carefully examin ed its physical characteristics, and users of the 
product made explanations thereof in the determinati on.  The situation referred to by the Member did 
not exist at all.  China therefore kindly advi sed the Member to make comments based on solid 
evidence and facts of individual cases.  On the speci fic case of dispersion single mode optical fibre, 
even before the comments were made by the Me mbers, the Chinese investigating authority had 
listened to reports and comments on this issue from the interested parties, and was working on a 
solution.  As always the investigating authorities in China had granted the right, in that particular case, 
to interested parties to comment and protect their own interests. 
32. Lastly was the question on the inquiry point.  The website was being r econstructed but this 
inquiry point, establishing the Ministry of Commerce, is working properly.  Inquiries could be sent to 
the inquiry point by fax or mail at the follo wing address which was the WTO Notification and 
Enquiry Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce of Ch ina, at 2 East China Street, Beijing.  The fax 
number was 00681065197340. 
33. China had faithfully prepared detailed responses to a number of the questions in a good spirit 
of cooperation and did not want to prolong the meeting, but hoped that the responses were satisfactory 
to Members who had raised these questions. 
34. The delegate of the United States
 stated that his delegation continued to believe that the 
transition review was a very useful exercise both for China and other Members.  It allowed Members to have their questions and concerns addressed, it helped Members to assess China's implementation  G/ADP/13 
 Page 9 
 
 
 progress, and it also clarified areas of agreement or disagreement.  The United States appreciated 
China's detailed responses to its questions and ha d just a few clarifications that it sought.   
35. The United States thanked the Chinese delegation for the efforts that they were making to 
implement transparency in their system.  The answer that was given regarding the types of 
information that both the BOFT and IBII would eventually be providing as part of their disclosure of 
essential facts was well-taken.  To the United St ates' knowledge, IBII had never as of that point 
disclosed essential facts to responding parties and th e United States asked if that was correct, and if 
not, whether the delegation of China could indicate cases where the IBBI had disclosed essential facts 
to responding parties. 
36. Also in response to China's answer about th e placement of documents in its public reading 
room, the United States was pleased that the IBBI had begun to do so, but as noted in the opening 
statement of the United States, this appeared more to represent China's goal in cases involving the 
United States rather than complete fact.  Given that  this did not yet reflect the actual situation, the 
United States asked what steps MOFCOM was taki ng to ensure that adequate non-confidential 
versions of all information subm itted to, or generated by MOFCOM, in the future would be made 
available to parties on a timely basis.   
37. The delegate of Japan  appreciated China's having provided informative answers to Japan's 
questions, and wished to raise some pr eliminary comments on the answers.   
38. Regarding the answer to question one, as far as Japan had read in the final or preliminary 
determinations of the recent AD investigations such as TDI and optical fibre, there were no 
disclosures in those determinations regarding how the authority made analysis of the condition of 
competition between imported goods an d domestic products, and why the authority concluded that the 
cumulative assessment was appropriate in light of th e conditions of competition.  If China truly made 
this analysis in detail as answered in the meeting,  Japan requested China to make adequate disclosure 
of this analysis in the preliminary and final determinations.   
39. Regarding the answer to Japan's question four, Japan appreciated China's efforts to resolve 
this problem.  Japan had heard that China had made  a public notice to resolve the problem but also 
had heard that Japanese respondents were still facing the problem of the implementation of the public 
notice because the public notice so far has not be en implemented by Chinese customs and other 
relevant authorities.  Japan hoped that China w ould quickly resolve this remaining problem. 
40. Finally, all of the questions raised were very technical, so to correctly inform other personnel 
in the capital of China's answers, Japan would hi ghly appreciate China's providing a written copy of 
its oral statement.   
41. The delegate of the European Communities  thanked China for the answers given and its 
efforts made to reply to the questions and comme nts.  That being said, the EC found itself in a 
particularly difficult situation for two reasons:  first,  the replies to the questions had not been provided 
in writing which made it difficult to note the answers and to see to what extent the questions had been 
replied to.  The EC had submitted its  questions more than one month be fore and considered this to be 
sufficiently in advance to allow China to provide written replies to the questions.  The second problem 
was that China had replied to four sets of questions in one general reply.  This also made it difficult 
not only for the EC but also for other Members to identify which answer corresponded to which 
question and whether ultimately all the questions had been replied to.  The EC thus requested, as had 
Japan, that China provide written answers.  China had made considerable efforts in preparing the 
replies so it would be beneficial to all to receive them in written form.  If this could not be done for 
the four sets of questions, the common reply whic h had been presented orally could perhaps be 
circulated in writing.   G/ADP/13 
Page 10  
 
 42. The delegate of China thanked the three dele gations that had made follow-up questions.  
Regarding the questions from the United States, in the detailed oral responses China had provided the 
answer that its investigating authority had enacted th e two rules with regard to information disclosure.  
Before coming from Beijing for the meeting the delegate  had been told by the investigating authority 
that China's practices with regard to the info rmation disclosure were conducted in line with the 
provisions of the two rules and also that the aut hority believed that this was consistent with the 
requirements of the WTO ADA.  The delegate took note of the comments, which he certainly would transfer back to the inves tigating authority of China. 
43. With regard to the comment from Japan, the de legate could certainly transfer the comment 
back, but on the last point, which also was echoed by the delegation of the EC, regarding the written 
copy of the responses, the delegate did not want to waste the time of the Members, but thought that it 
had been made very clear that it was the position of Ch ina that with regard to the TRM, as said in the 
Chairman's opening statement, there was no procedur e.  It had been clear that the Chinese delegation 
had always been not in the position to provide a written paper.  In that regard, he encouraged 
Members to have exchanges with China's dele gation through the other agenda items of the 
Committee.  China believed that that already pr ovided enough possibilitie s or opportunities for 
bilateral exchanges of views under which China be lieved it could also provide all the answers in 
written form.   
44. Turning to the Committee's report on transitional review, the Chairman
 recalled that there are 
no guidelines for this in China's Protocol of Accession,  and that in the past, the Chair acting on his or 
her own responsibility had prepared a brief factual report with references to the documents concerned 
and attaching the portion of the minutes of the meet ing which related to the transitional review.  The 
Chairman asked Members whether the same proce dure could be followed for this review.   
45. The Committee so decided.   
 
__________