WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/DS95/3
9 September 1998
(98-3494)
Original:  English
UNITED STATES – MEASURE AFFECTING GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Japan
The following communication, dated 8 September 1998, from the Permanent Mission of
Japan to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 6.2 of the
DSU.
_______________
On 18 July 1997, the Government of Japan requested consultations with the United States
pursuant to Article XXII of the Agreement on Government Procurement (hereinafter the "GPA") andArticle 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
(hereinafter the "DSU") regarding the Act Regulating State Contracts with Companies Doing
Business with or in Burma (Myanmar) enacted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on
25 June 1996 (WT/DS95/1, GPA/D3/1).
On 22 July, 2 October and 17 December 1997, the Government of Japan and the Government
of the United States held consultations in Geneva.  Unfortunately, these consultations failed to settlethe dispute on this matter.
In light of the above,  the Government of Japan hereby requests that a panel be established at
the next meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") pursuant to Article 4.7 and 6 of the DSU
and to Article XXII of the GPA, with standard terms of reference provided for in Article XXII:4 ofthe GPA.
Measure at Issue
The measure at issue in this request is the Act Regulating State Contracts with Companies
Doing Business with or in Burma (Myanmar) enacted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on 25
June 1996 (Chapter 130 of the Acts of 1996) (h ereinafter the "Act").  Under the Act, the public
authorities of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ar e, in principle, not allowed to procure goods or
services from the persons, whether US or foreig n, who are listed in the respected purchase list as
doing business with or in Burma (Myanmar).  In particular, the Executive Offices of Massachusettsoffered by the United States under the GPA are not allowed to award a contract to such persons if
there is a comparable low bid or offer by a person who is not on the list.
./.WT/DS95/3
Page 2
Legal Basis of the Complaint
The Government of Japan considers that the measure described above is inconsistent with the
obligations of the US under the GPA.  In particular, the Government of Japan claims that:
- Under the Act, the suppliers who are on the restricted purchase list are not provided
treatment no less favorable than that accorded to the suppliers who are not on the list, thus being
inconsistent with Article III:1;
- The Act treats a locally-established supplier less favorably than another locally-
established supplier on the basis of the degree of foreign affiliation or ownership, thus beinginconsistent with Article III:2(a);
- The Act imposes conditions for participating in tendering procedures which are not
essential to ensure a firm's capability to fulfil the contract, thus being inconsistent with Article
VIII(b);
- The Act prohibits entities from making awards to the tenderer whose tender is the
lowest, except under the specific evaluation criteria which is inconsistent with the GPA, thus being
inconsistent with Article XIII:4(b).
The Government of Japan asks that this request be placed on the agenda for the meeting of the
Dispute Settlement to be held on 22 September 1998.
__________