RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/C/M/61
9 July 2002
(02-3812)
Council for Trade in Goods
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard – 23 and 24 May 2002
Chairperson:  Ambassador  Supperamaniam (Malaysia)
The meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods was convened by WTO/AIR/1799 Document
G/C/W/375 contained the Proposed Agenda on the ba sis of which the Council agreed to proceed.
I. TRADE FACILITATION WORK PROGRAMME: ARTICLE X OF THE
GATT 1994 ...................................................................................................................... ..........2
II. TRADE FACILITATION NEEDS AND PRIORITIES OF MEMBERS,
PARTICULARLY OF DEVELOPING AND LEAST DEVELOPED
COUNTRI ES...................................................................................................................... .....25
III. TRADE FACILITATION: TECHN ICAL ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY
BUILDING ....................................................................................................................... .......33
IV. DOHA MINISTERIAL DECISION ON IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED
ISSUES AND CONCERNS:  REQUEST FOR THE CTG TO EXAMINE
PROPOSALS CONTAINED IN PARAGRAPHS 4.4 AND 4.5 RELATING TO
THE AGREEMENT ON TEXTILES AND CLOTHING (WT/MIN(01)/17) – A
REPORT BY TH E CHAIRMAN..........................................................................................47
V. REQUEST BY COSTA RICA;  INDIA;  INDONESIA;  PAKISTAN;  PERU
AND HONG KONG, CHINA:  CTG'S OVERSIGHT FUNCTION PURSUANT
TO ARTICLE IV OF THE AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE WTO –
TRANSPARENCY REGARDING NEW RESTRICTIONS ON TEXTILE AND
CLOTHING PRODUCTS COMMENTED N BY THE TEXTILES
MONITORING BODY (G/C/W/260 /REV.1) – A REPORT BY THE
CHAIRMAN....................................................................................................................... .....48
VI. MAJOR REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT ON
TEXTILES AND CLOTHING DURING THE SECOND STAGE OF THE
INTEGRATION PROCESS, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 8.11 OF THE ATC –
A REPORT BY TH E CHAIRMAN ......................................................................................49
VII. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHILE AND COSTA RICA –
NOTIFICATION FROM THE PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT
(WT/REG136/N/1, WT/REG136/1).......................................................................................50
VIII. REQUEST BY EL SALVADOR FO R A WAIVER UNDER ARTICLE IX OF
THE WTO AGREEMENT FOR MINIMUM VALUES UNDER THE
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF THE GATT
1994 ........................................................................................................................... ...............50
IX. PREPARATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE
PROTOCOL ON THE ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF
CHINA .......................................................................................................................... ...........50
X. OTHER BU SINESS............................................................................................................... .51G/C/M/61
Page 2
I. TRADE FACILITATION WORK PROGRAMME: ARTICLE X OF THE GATT 1994
1.1 The Chairman recalled that Ministers had mandated the Council for Trade in Goods to review
and, as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant aspects of Articles V, VIII and X of the GATT 1994
and identify the trade facilitation needs and priorities of Members, in particular of developing and least-
developed ones. He further reminded delegations of  Ministers' commitment to ensuring adequate
technical assistance and support for capacity building in  this area. He noted that, in the line with the
work program on trade facilitation agreed by Members in the CTG meeting of 22 March 2002, the
present meeting will have three core agenda items: (i ) Article X of the GATT 1994; (ii) trade facilitation
needs and priorities of Members, particularly of  developing and least developed countries; and (iii)
technical assistance and capacity building. He reca lled that Members had agreed to have this session
focus on GATT Article X, while at the same time a llowing for delegations to also address questions
related to Articles V and VIII. Therefore, any dele gation wishing to speak on those Articles would have
the opportunity to do so under agenda item 1 as well.
1.2 The Chairman then informed delegations that, following a request by Members at an informal
meeting on trade facilitation on 25 February 2002, th e Secretariat had prepared a background note on
GATT Article X (G/C/W/374), to f acilitate delegations' deliberations on this matter. Communications
on Article X had further been received from the European Communities (G/C/W/363), Japan
(G/C/W/376), and Korea (G/C/W/377). Additional papers had also just been submitted by Canada and
the United States. Before opening the floor for comments from delegations on agenda item 1, he called
on the Secretariat and the relevant delegations to introduce their respective papers.
1.3 The representative of the Secretariat explained that the Secretariat paper had been prepared in
response to a request by Members at an informal trade facilitation meeting on 25 February 2002, to
prepare a background document on GATT Articles V, VIII and X. The present paper dealt with
Article X, in accordance with the main focus of the present discussion on agenda item 1. The general
idea was however to prepare a paper on all three Articles, which was why the present documentshould be regarded as a first part of what would be a paper on all three relevant provisions. Turning to
substance, the representative remarked that the Secretariat had followed Members' request by
restricting the document's focus to a factual outline of the Article from a legal perspective, without
entering into an analysis of whether, and to what extend there was room for possible clarification and
improvement. Such an assessment would clearly remain the prerogative of Members. The documenttherefore only outlined Article X's main provisions, including their negotiating history, analysed their
coverage and summarized the basic obligations established thereby. In addition, the paper would look
at how Article X had been applied by dispute settlement panels and the Appellate Body under the
GATT and the WTO.
1.4 The representative of the European Communities stated that their paper looked at the scope for
improving and possibly clarifying Article X, with a view to making it more operational and more in
tune with the needs of the trading community. Article X had been drafted more than 50 years ago and
the trading situation had changed since then, along with the expectations of business, which also had
changed. The relationship between governments a nd the trading community had evolved over the
years. In doing their own review of Article X, the Communities had considered the views and needs
of European and non-European business federations around the world. Also, the Communities hadlooked at the experience gained from a number of other WTO Agreements,  such as those on TBT and
SPS, which contained useful ideas on transparency and predictability that would go beyond the
current Article X. The European Communities had re ached the preliminary conclusion that there was
scope for some incremental improvement to the procedures and ideas in Article X, even though it had,
like many other GATT Articles, stood the test of time extremely well.  There was a possibility tomake it more operational and to improve its implementation. The representative suggested that all
Members shared the view that transparency and predictability were benefits that one should try toG/C/M/61
Page 3
develop further. Therefore, the Communities would see this process as a good opportunity for all
delegations to maximise transparency and predictability in the WTO through Article X.
1.5 The Communities' paper would make four or five suggestions on areas worth exploring in
more detail, if one wanted to clarify Article X. First, it would be useful to elaborate what kind of trade
rules and procedures should be made publicly available under the terms of Article X. Article X wasnot confined to primary legislation concerning trade regulations, but also included subsidiary rules,
decrees and procedures of general application. The Secretariat paper was extremely informative in
demonstrating that, over the course of time, through a number of panel cases, the idea that one had to
make public measures of general application had actually developed a deep reach. To capture the
original intention of Article X, it could therefore be useful to make this obligation more specific and
explicit.
1.6 Secondly, there was a case for improving the accessibility of information and making it more
easily available to traders, through, for example, modern website methods. The European
Communities recognized that this would have some resource implications which must not be ignored.
However, one had to clarify two things. The European Communities would not consider it feasible to
envisage any kind of comprehensive notification procedure on every customs procedure, ruling, orguideline of general application to the WTO itself. The resource burden would be too great and the
experience with the WTO notification system had shown that it had its limits. Therefore, the
Communities was thinking about the creation of domestic information desks or enquiry points in each
country for the trading community sur place.  Furthermore, the Communities would not expect
members to translate their regulations and procedures into a WTO language. The reality was thateverybody operated in his own national language(s), and that traders needed to access the information
used in that country. For resource reasons, it would not be feasible to suggest that kind of translation.
1.7 The third area the Communities considered worth exploring was the area of predictability, in
the sense of making the administration of trade regulations more predictable, particularly in thecustoms field.  This was already a key objective of GATT Article X, but could be improved by
allowing for the predictability procedures to be more systematic, such as by means of advance notice
of trade rules or regulations affecting trade, and by  developing better ways of consulting with the
trading communities directly affected by those regulations. Those proposals were not revolutionary
theory, but ideas which already existed in agreements like SPS and TBT with their mechanisms foradvance consultation, advance warning, and the possibility to give comments on regulations. There
was not anything comparable for more general customs or trade procedures and traders around the
world would certainly welcome the possibility of a more regular, structured right of consultation with
customs administrations and governments on rules as they are being developed. They would
obviously like advance notice of rules that are being developed as they could then adjust to change
without their trade being adversely affected. The Communities also saw some merit in the concept of
advance rulings, which already existed in the origin area and which could be extended to tariffclassification. This would be a basic measure of transparency and predictability for the business
community who was affected by customs decisions and rules on a daily basis.
1.8 The fourth area the European Communities would suggest to focus on when looking at
Article X, was appeal procedures against customs decisions.  This, was already present in Article X ofthe GATT, but, as the Secretariat's very interesting paper showed, these appeal procedures must only
be introduced "as soon as practicable", in the language of GATT Article X. That meant that there was
no absolute requirement to have any kind of appeal procedure within customs. The representative of
the European Communities argued that fifty five years after Article X was written, the time had come
for all Members to look at their customs arrangements and see whether appeals procedures had beenintroduced and, if not, consider doing so. It was a fundamental right of traders, or any legal or natural
person to have the right to appeal against adverse decisions of administrations that affect their
interests.G/C/M/61
Page 4
1.9 The last area on which the European Communities would like to draw attention was the
question of special and differential treatment and how this would apply in the area of Article X.  The
whole question of development aspects of trade facilitation special and differential treatment, was a
major issue, which the Communities will be addressing in a more substantial form in a later
submission to the Goods Council. This aspect was therefore only mentioned briefly in this paper, but
the Communities had ideas on this and was going to bring these ideas to the group's attention in thecoming months. As far as Article X was concerned, every Member would recognize that transparency
and predictability, however desirable they were in  themselves, would not be completely resource-free.
For some developing countries there was a resour ce implication in setting up mechanisms to ensure
prompt publication, advance notice, enquiry points. But clearly the benefits to trade were important.
Therefore, everybody should be ready to provide support and technical cooperation in their bilateral
programming to assist countries who in developing  further their domestic transparency arrangements.
As for the European Union's technical assistance  or development aid programming, the Communities
has just launched a new five-year cycle of all their aid programmes and, as far as trade-related
assistance was concerned, they had made it a priority to support just the kind of transparency and
predictability measures suggested in the present paper. In conclusion, the representative noted that
transparency was a fundamental area for improvement and a proverbial win-win. Both large and small
traders would look for transparency. Especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, transparencyand predictability were really key, which is why one should look at possible improvements of
Article X, to improve their trading situation on a day-to-day basis.
1.10 The representative of Japan noted that transparency, predictability and uniformity were the
principle elements stipulated in GATT Article X. Further improvement of these elements would lead
to the facilitation of trade and investment, and thus to economic development.  The merits to be
gained through the improvement of these elements would bring about economic benefits to both
developing and developed countries, exporting and importing alike, the private sector and
governments, as well as SMEs and large corporations. He emphasized that this was a win-win
situation. Based on each Member's national experiences regarding trade facilitation, as shared amongall Members during the course of the pre-Doha wo rk undertaken in the Council for Trade in Goods,
the costs incurred to governments for making improv ements in this field were less than the benefits
that could be gained by trade players, including the governments themselves. Moreover, if this
improvement could be achieved globally under the auspices of the WTO, this benefit could be
increased further. At the Doha Ministerial Conference held in November 2001, the Council for Tradein Goods was mandated to "review and as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant aspects of
Articles V, VIII, and X of the GATT 1994".  Thus, when considering the merits of improving the
three elements of Article X (i.e. transparency, predictability and uniformity) at a global level, the
following measures would be appropriate:
1.11 First, the identification of elements that should be provided in laws and regulations. Although
the current Article X did require Members to promptly publish trade-related laws, regulations, judicialdecisions and administrative rulings, it did not specifically provide rules on which elements were to
be included therein. By pursuing discussions on the identification and provisions of Article X, this
would lead to more efficient transparency and predictability for traders. Furthermore, by providing
trade-related procedures in laws and regulations and then publicizing them within the relevant
government offices, this would enable governments to administer effective trade policies. (II) Second,
the identification of means to publicize the laws and regulations. Article X only required Members to
promptly publish trade-related laws without stating how this was supposed to take place. Therefore, it
was sometimes difficult for traders to access such laws and regulations, thus creating an enormous
workload for traders, especially the SMEs with limited research abilities, as well as traders in
countries without sufficient means of accessing information, like the LDCs. Therefore, by settingdown rules on the practical ways for publicizing laws and regulations, this would further strengthen
Article X and would lead to improving transparency and predictability for traders. (III) Third, the
formulation and publication of administrative guidel ines. To secure a uniform administration of laws
and regulations, it would then be necessary to formulate and publish administrative guidelines.G/C/M/61
Page 5
Without such administrative guidelines, the administration of laws and regulations would depend
upon the arbitrary implementation of individual officials, thus hindering the uniform, impartial and
reasonable administration of laws and regulations as required in Article X. Furthermore, such
administrative guidelines would be beneficial for governments in order to secure an appropriate
administration of their laws and regulations. (IV) Fourth, the establishment of inquiry points and an
advance ruling system. In order to ease accessibility to trade-related information for the private sector,the establishment of inquiry points and, where appropriate, the development of an advance ruling
system would contribute to improving transparency and predictability. (V) And finally, the
establishment of appeal procedures. In order to make appeal procedures effective, as stipulated in
Article X, it was necessary to establish a system, as well as the formulation of laws and regulations,
which would make the system workable.
1.12 The representative went on to say that there were a few points that still needed to be
considered. For developing countries, appropriate technical assistance would be helpful for the
purpose of implementing the above-mentioned measures. As mentioned in the Doha Ministerial
Declaration, technical assistance was important. Thus, consideration needed to be given to developing
countries, especially the LDCs, in order to enable them to reap the benefits of an open, rules-based
multilateral trading system. Second, there were certain international organizations with expertise inthe area of trade facilitation, for example, the WC O in the field of customs procedures. Any existing
work done by such international organizations should be taken into account in order to ensure
technical assistance in this area and to avoid any unnecessary duplication from the viewpoint of work
efficiency.
1.13 The representative of Korea expressed his appr eciation to begin substantial discussion on the
issues of trade facilitation. He thanked the Eu ropean Communities, Canada and Japan for their
contributions in tabling valuable proposals as well as the Secretariat for its background note. In
introducing his delegation's communication, he underlin ed the importance of transparency, which was
directly related to improving Article X of he GATT 1994, as one of the basic principles of trade
facilitation. He noted that the Korean communication would suggest two ideas to  enhance transparency.
First, to establish a Single National Focal Point in order to respond to inquiries by Members and traders
regarding measures or information directly related to customs procedures and importation or exportation
regulations. Secondly, to introduce a notification requirement of core measures and their amendments to
the WTO Secretariat similar to what is used in the TBT and SPS. In suggesting these two ideas, Koreaconsidered how they can contribute to facilitating in ternational trade and how easily they can be drawn
into relevant WTO rules and eventually be implem ented. Korea believed that a Single National Focal
Point could contribute to trade facilitation by improving the accessibility of information for private
traders. It would also be easy to implement, as each government needed only to designate an office to
function as a liaison between the information seeker and the relevant government branch. Members
would also benefit from the notification of major measures since it enhanced their accessibility to
information and transparent implementation. Korea believed that these two ideas should be given due
consideration by Members, and welcomed insights  and suggestions of other Members on this issue.
1.14 The representative of Canada thanked the Secretariat, the European Commun ities, Japan,
Korea and the United States for their papers. Canada welcomed this opportunity to introduce its paper
and set out ideas on how to improve and clarify GATT Article X, as well as to flag possible areas fortechnical assistance on its proposals. Canada also circulated a short paper indicating its recent
technical assistance activities in the area of trade facilitation. The Canadian delegation considered
trade facilitation to be a win-win situation, especially for small countries, smaller exporters and small
enterprises at any stage in their development. The introduction of trade facilitation measures, based on
WTO principles, such as transparency, non-discrimination, predictability and due process, wouldreduce costs and generate benefits to both the private sector and to governments. Canada saw trade
facilitation as an investment, which would bring real returns to governments and the private sector in
terms of lower cost, faster release time, more effective enforcement and more efficient revenue
collection, without comprising consumer protection, health, safety and public security. These benefitsG/C/M/61
Page 6
led to other benefits: increased imports and exports, increased investment,  lower prices for inputs and
consumer products, and increased product growth, employment and development. These benefits
could be more significant if these improvements were based on multilateral provisions applied by all
trading partners, based on principles set out in Articles V, VIII and X.
1.15 Turning to Article X, the Canadian representative noted that transparency and predictability
mattered, as their lack in the area of importing and exporting rules could raise costs. If the necessary
information on applicable regulations and border procedures was not readily available, traders had to
spend time, money and resources to obtain the in formation, thus increasing their costs. These
additional costs were not only unnecessary, but could also be particularly burdensome, if not
prohibitive, especially true for small traders who could be discouraged from participating in
international trade. The Canadian paper focused on how to improve transparency and predictability,
looking at four different areas: publication and administration of requirements, consultative feedbackmechanisms, the right of review and appeal and advance rulings. In developing these ideas, Canada
had drawn on a number of existing WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Rules of Origin
and Customs Valuation as well as on a number of the national experience papers. As for
improvements in the accessibility of laws, regulations, judicial decisions, administrative guidelines
related to border procedures,  it would be very useful to specify what should be publicly available andwhere stakeholders could get this information. Many governments had turned to technology to
disseminate or distribute such information more quickly to their clients' attention. Technology,
internet systems etc. were very useful, but while technology is helpful where the capacity exists to
use, or where the technology can be implemented in the short term, technology is not a "have-to-
have"/mandatory requirement.  The kind of information needed could be made readily available inpublications such as customs tariff, official gazette, bulletins, public notices. It could be located at
appropriate customs offices, or other strategic locations. Special enquiry offices could be very useful
in providing access to the required information.
1.16 The second set of suggestions involved consultative feedback mechanisms. Consultation with
traders and other members of the public could increase transparency and predictability, enhance
government private sector cooperation and heighten the likelihood of compliance. The idea was to
provide early opportunities for stakeholders to comment on prospective rules and procedures before
they were actually implemented. Early notice of proposed regulations on border measures, annual
regulatory plans and public consultation processes could be worth exploring. Consultations with theprivate sector and the public would allow for a more cooperative and informed relationship between
government and the private sector as well as for a better understanding by the general public. Talking
to the traders in advance and getting their view s, would lead to better regulations and better
compliance. Canada also supported the idea of clarifying and improving the area of review and
appeal. The availability of a transparent, open, accessible and effective review and appeal system
would facilitate trade and instil both the pub lic's and the trading community's confidence in
government institutions and would further the effectiveness and efficiency of government measures.One should be looking at how to provide review and appeal for things such as tariff classification and
other customs rulings. Canada would also like to explore the idea of providing a mechanism for
allowing goods to be released in certain situations  while they are still under review and appeal (such
as, or example, some kind of monetary security arrangement). Turning to the last proposal on advance
rulings, the Canadian representative noted that his delegation would like to expand them to cover notonly rules of origin but also the main elements of import requirements such as tariff classification,
applicable duties, taxes and import licensing requirements. Both traders and government
administrations could benefit from binding advance rulings, not only because of their greater certainty
and predictability in terms of the treatment of their goods at the time of importation, but also due to
greater compliance with customs and border-related requirements. Furthermore, it would allowcustoms administrations to do a better job.
1.17 Finally, Canada was prepared to look at ways  to provide and improve technical assistance in
the areas covered by our proposals and suggestions. More generally, Canada recognised theG/C/M/61
Page 7
importance of technical assistance in its endeavours, particularly for the least-developed countries,
who do face real resource and capacity constraints in implementing WTO obligations. It also
recognised that certain developing countries may need time to implement some of the provisions.
Canada was ready and willing to engage with Members to assess in greater detail how one might best
identify, coordinate and deliver technical assistance where and when it is needed.
1.18 The representative of the United States thanked the Secretariat for its "excellent" paper, which
the United States had found very interesting and were  working into their own internal review. He also
thanked the European Communities, Canada, Japan and Korea for their submissions. The US
submission was work in progress. It differed a bit from the other submissions insofar as it was an
attempt to give an organization to the examination.  It was the Unites States' intention to have this
paper evolve as delegations would go forward with their discussion and as the United States would go
forward with their own internal analysis. The Un ited States would put a high premium on both this
work but also the work with regard to GATT Article X and the issue of transparency. The U.S. paper
was an attempt to reflect forward setting mechanisms that were used in the United States and that
others used as well. Reference had already been made by the European Communities to the United
States' work to operationalize and modernize GATT Article X.
1.19 The United States embraced references that had been made with regard to tools such as
advance rulings, or the use of internet to enhance the transparency in the trading system. In addition to
setting out mechanisms and references to WTO Agreement provisions that were relevant, the US
paper also made note of technical assistance. The United States were continuing their own internal
analysis in this area as well, and had the expectation to make further submissions with greaterspecificity. Apart from the phrase of just-in-time global economy, another important reference was
cost-benefit analysis. Clearly, the United States believed that the benefits were great under any type of
analysis, but they also acknowledged that there were costs and resource demands, particularly for
developing country Members. Therefore, the United States' presentation, which was an initial
presentation that would evolve further, would attempt to set out with great specificity the availabilityof technical assistance and experiences gained in this process, in order to bring all of that together as
work proceeded.
1.20 The Chairman informed Members that he had received requests from the WCO and the
OECD to make statements in their capacity as observer organizations. He drew attention to the fact
that both organisations had prepared communications relating to Article X, and invited their
representatives to introduce their respective papers.   
1.21 The representative of the WCO intr oduced his organization's paper on trade facilitation. The
WCO appreciated the Doha Ministerial Declaration's recognition of the case for further trade
facilitation and the need for enhanced technical assistance and capacity building in this area. The
WCO welcomed this undertaking, as this was an area the WCO had been championing andcommitting resources to for the past 50 years. The WCO had developed and circulated instruments
which provided the key principles for simple, effective and modern procedures. These modern
principles for the simplification of procedures to provide trade facilitation were later incorporated in a
single instrument known as "The International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization
of Customs Procedures", or the Kyoto Convention. The WCO saw their role as complementary to thatof the WTO in developing instruments to support the WTO rules. All the legal provisions and
principles in the WCO instruments were compat ible with and complimentary to the three GATT
Articles. The GATT Articles set out the high principles for trade facilitation, while the WCO
instruments, including the Kyoto Convention, provid ed the basis, practical guidance and information
for their implementation.
1.22 Turning to the GATT Articles X, the WCO re presentative noted that the Kyoto Convention
supported the principle contained in this article mainly through chapters 9 and 10 of its General
Annex. Chapter 9 related to "Information, Decisi ons and Rulings Supplied by Customs". The WCOG/C/M/61
Page 8
believed that the availability of information provid ed transparency to both trade and the governments
with regards to rules, rights and obligations of all parties involved in the movement and clearance of
goods through customs. It also ensured a high degree of predictability for the trade processes
involved. This chapter provided for making available information of general application of customs
laws, including in electronic format where possible, any changes to the supplied information due to an
amendment of laws and regulations, and specific information requested. The chapter also coveredother provisions such as on confidentiality of information, binding rules and advance rulings. The
guidelines to this chapter provided detailed info rmation for administrations to set up their procedures
for the publication of information. They further contained information on the method used by Member
administrations for the provision of different types of information. The WCO was also keen to make
use of the available modern technology and devised a recommendation on the use of World Wide
Web sites by customs administrations. They were accessible from the WCO's public web site. Turning
to the appeal procedures, the WCO representative explained that Chapter 10 of the General Annex setout the principles for "Appeals in Customs Matters". The WCO believed that the right of appeal
ensured protection for the individual against customs decisions that may not have been in compliance
with the respective laws and regulations. At the same time, these reviews could be a suitable means of
ensuring uniform application of laws and regulations. Furthermore, the WCO was of the view that the
availability of an independent judicial review as a final avenue of appeal, would inspire both thepublic and the trade with confidence in government institutions. In addition to these two specific
chapters, the General Annex contained several other provisions that enhanced the transparency of
customs procedures.  They included the establishment of customs trade consultations, rights and
obligations of related parties, and the active us e of memoranda of understanding with the trade to
enhance cooperation. Customs was only one part of the total trade chain. This was why the WCObelieved cooperation with other trade-related sectors to be vital to pursue that important issue. The
WCO was naturally committed to the WTO process, together with other stakeholders such as the trade
community and other international organizations.
1.23 The representative of the OECD gave an overview on some of the OECD activities with a
direct relevance to the trade facilitation discussions  in the WTO. In particular, she introduced two
studies that had been carried out in order to allow for a better understanding of the issues related to
trade facilitation and to trade-related regulatory effi ciency in general. The first one, titled "Business
Benefits of Trade Facilitation", was an overview of past research and analysis, trying to identify the
costs of inefficient trade procedures at the border as well as the benefits that trade facilitationmeasures could have on the economies introducing them. The paper's conclusion was that much of
this research was quite old by now and suffered from serious methodological problems. It
nevertheless contained an overview of some indications of the type of costs and burdens that one was
concerned with today. The observation that there were indeed problems in trying to evaluate the costs
of inefficient trade procedures had led OECD members to ask for further research and analysis. The
OECD was now in the process of trying to establish a template that would help both its member
countries and non-member countries to identify more appropriately the costs of inefficient andduplicative procedures at the borders in their respective countries. The second paper formed part of a
larger study the OECD Trade Committee had undertaken, comparing provisions in regional trade
agreements to corresponding provisions in the WTO w ith respect to a series of issues, including all
four Singapore issues. What was interesting in this study was that it would give WTO Members some
indications of how selected regional trade agreements (including NAFTA, EFTA and some initiativesthat are not binding like APEC) approached the principles under discussion at the present meeting and
presented by the European Communities, Japan, Korea, Canada and the United States in their
communications. As a final point, the OECD representative informed Members that the OECD had
undertaken reviews of regulatory practices in OECD member countries for three years, trying to see
how to reconcile regulatory efficiency with the openness of markets on the basis of what was calledthe "six efficient regulation principles". The first of those principles was transparency, openness of
decision-making and due process, and, after having reviewed 16 OECD member countries, the OECD
had received a mandate to draw best practices, to draw the most important approaches of memberG/C/M/61
Page 9
countries with respect to transparency and due process. The results of that work would be available
later this year.
1.24 The Chairman noted that the papers presented by the WCO and the OECD had touched on a
number of issues of direct relevance to the current deliberations on Article X, and asked whether
Members would agree to have these papers distributed as CTG documents.
1.25 The representative of India agreed with the Chairman on the relevance of the two papers and
the work of the OECD and the WCO in general, but expressed India's wish to look at the systematic
aspects of his suggestion. The Indian representative suggested to revisit this issue at a later date.
1.26 The representative of Chile thanked the WCO and the OECD two for their presentations, and
asked for their papers to be distributed as CTG docu ments, so that they could be translated to the
official WTO languages and send to the capitals. Currently, these documents were only available in
English and French. He asked the delegation who had expressed reservations, to agree to this
procedure, in order to allow for other Members to receive them as soon as possible, reminding that
their translation would take some time.
1.27 The Chairman suggested that, in the light of the reservation by one delegation, who required
more time to reflect on this matter, the issue would be decided at a later stage. He would inform
Members at the next meeting of the status.
1.28 The representative of Brazil expressed his a ppreciation of the Secretariat background note. It
comprehensively described the provisions of GATT Article X and their application in the GATT and
WTO jurisprudence. He also thanked the delegation of the European Communities for the circulation of
a set of specific proposals regarding Article X, wh ich Brazil was ready to discuss in more detail as
delegations would move along in their work. He noted that his delegation would have to limit its
comments to the paper submitted by the EC, as this was the only one Brazil was aware of. Therepresentative stated that Brazil had always taken th e stand that the term "trade facilitation" was a
misnomer, as everything one strives to achieve in  the WTO was, at least ideally, geared towards
facilitating trade between Members. This was true of  negotiations to remove tariff and non-tariff barriers
for exports and of negotiations on trade disciplines with the aim of avoiding  their disguised use for
protectionist purposes. The international environment seemed however to be currently characterized by
the persuasive protectionism that was always ready to corrode the foundations of the multilateral trading
system, particularly in times of less than optimistic economic dynamism. It was visible in an abusive
recourse to trade defence instruments and in the e xpansion of mechanisms destined to shield domestic
producers from the healthy competition of market fo rces. And yet, while meeting to discuss possible
new trade facilitation measures in the context of Articles V, VIII and X of GATT 1994, there was still
major unfinished trade facilitation business from the Uruguay Round, such as the harmonization work
programme of non-preferential rules of origin, a task  that was some four years overdue. The preamble of
the Agreement on Rules of Origin itself recognized that  "clear and predictable rules of origin and their
application facilitated the international flow of tr ade". It seemed that, until the misgivings of some
Members with the trade facilitation commitments undert aken in that Agreement were overcome and the
harmonization programme concluded, it would be very difficult to achieve significant progress in the
trade facilitation exercise.
1.29 Ever since work in the WTO on Trade Facilita tion had began, Brazil had been of the view that
there was scant evidence for the need to elaborate new disciplines in that field. Four years of exploratory
and analytical work within that body had not been ab le to convince Brazil otherwise. It seemed to his
delegation that the WTO Workshop on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building in TradeFacilitation, held in Geneva in May 2001, presented compelling evidence that the real problems lied not
in the inadequacy of multilateral disciplines, but in the deficiencies in the human, financial and
institutional resources of developing countries. The examples of a number of countries that had
benefited from comprehensive programmes of tec hnical assistance demonstrated that all tradeG/C/M/61
Page 10
facilitation objectives could be met with no need of  new multilateral disciplines. It seemed curious that
the way to overcome the resource constraints which cr eated difficulties for developing countries to meet
their existing multilateral commitments in that area, was to set the bar at an even higher level. For the
majority of developing countries, trade facilitation meant effective  market access for the products of
their export interest. It was only through this access, by  eliminating the real barri ers to their exports, that
developing countries would be able to benefit fro m the multilateral trading system. Only through the
fulfilment of their export potential would developing countries be in a position to gauge the need for
elaborating further disciplines for customs procedures . The most striking factor  of the proposal of the
European Communities was the complete absence of any kind of assessment as to any real problems
encountered in the implementation of Article X, other th an the fact that some of its concepts "have since
been developed further in the national regimes of some Members, in specific Marrakech Agreements on
Trade in Goods, or in other international instrument s. This situation would seem to be corroborated by
section 3.5 of the Secretariat note regarding interpreta tions of specific provisions of Article X by panels
and by the Appellate Body. None of  these instances reported any substantial inadequacy in the Article
itself, but were rather limited to clarifying the scope of some of its provisions. Brazil fully concurred
with the basic assumption of the EC paper that "t ransparency is the cornerstone of the multilateral
system". The divergence was in the perception of a need to amend Article X in the absence of any
concrete evidence as to any inadequacy of its pr ovisions. Nevertheless, Brazil was fully prepared to
examine in detail the specific proposals that were put before the Council.
1.30 The representative of the Czech Republic thanked all the delegations who had presented
submissions, and the Secretariat for preparing a paper on the scope and application of GATT Article
X, which the Czech Republic considered to be a very useful background document. He also thankedthe OECD and the WCO for their documents. Article X required a Member to first publish its trade-
related laws, regulations, rulings and agreements in a prompt and accessible manner. Secondly, it
would require them to abstain from enforcing measures of general application prior to their
publication. Thirdly, Article X demanded that Members administer laws, regulations, rulings and
agreements in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner. In the Secretariat background document,these provisions were presented as obligations. The Czech Republic fully agreed with such a
classification. However, the opposite side of obligations were rights. It was her delegation's view that
is was the legitimate right for a Member fulfilling  the above-mentioned commitments to expect the
same from its trading partners. Transparency was the best fundament for building up the house of the
multilateral trading system. Without transparency of trade rules and trade policy, other principles wereof less practical use. Therefore, it would be for the benefit of all Members to work on improvements
and clarifications, if necessary using mainly a product, but not a geographical approach. Another
important element for further clarification and im provement was the global trade environment formed
as the mosaic of national trade policies. The major part of that mosaic belonged to an overall
impression that was formed by the main trading partners. The representative concluded by expressing
his delegation's view that would be useful to use the standards and experience of the WCO wherever
possible.
1.31 The representative of Pakistan thanked all the Members who had made submissions, as well as
the WCO and the OECD for their interesting and us eful presentations. Pakistan had not yet had the
opportunity to study those documents in detail, but ha d a great interest in doing so. Everybody realised
the importance of transparency, predictability a nd accessibility of information related to trade
facilitation. All Members were aware of the importa nce of trade facilitation for the smooth conduct of
international trade for all parties. There was no denyin g of the fact that, in t oday's world, user-friendly
procedures and administrative regulations had an im mense impact on the smooth flow of international
trade. Pakistan was not in a position to make sp ecific comments at this meeting on each of the
submissions that had been tabled, but was hopeful to  do so that as Members would proceed with the
discussions.
1.32 As a general comment, Pakistan wished to note that it fully recognised the importance of trade
facilitation for its national economy. But at the same  time, it would also like to note that WTO MembersG/C/M/61
Page 11
were at different levels of development. For Paki stan, there was no level-playing field. Therefore, when
talking about multilateral rules on trade facilitation, developing countries were fully justified in having
serious concerns. The issue of trade facilitation ha d very wide ramifications, it involved numerous
stakeholders, and its implications were not limited to any particular trade or industry, but affected the
economy in general. Pakistan would therefore plead to Members, especially from the developed world,
to keep in mind that ground realities were different. Therefore, any suggestion on trade facilitation hadto be realistic and not overly ambitious. The de veloping countries had se rious apprehensions when
seeing suggestions they believed to interfere with the sovereign rights of individual Members.
Regarding the suggestion for "prior consultations" in the EC paper, Pakistan was at a loss to understand
as to how one could have multilateral rules for prio r consultations without infringing upon the individual
sovereign rights of Members. As regards technical as sistance, for Pakistan, the issue was not that simple.
Pakistan was interested in hearing more from the European Communities on this account as stated by
them, but had to note that the words "technical assist ance" were buzz words being used rather loosely in
the WTO as a panacea for all evils and problems. For Pakistan, the issue was not all that simple. WTO
Members were at different levels of developmen t with different indivi dual needs for technical
assistance. Technical assistance was not just pr oviding a few computers to customs officials or
enhancing the capacity of EDI, but could expand to bigger issues like the development of infrastructural
facilities, i.e the development of port facilities, te lecommunication networks et c. For Pakistan, technical
assistance was therefore of a multi-dimensional nature.
1.33 One major apprehension in the minds of developi ng countries and especially that of Pakistan,
was the DSU. Pakistan's question in this regard was therefore whether these proposed rules relating to
GATT Article X would be subject to the DSU procedures. These questions became all the more relevantand pertinent when there was no level playing field and the differences in levels of development of
various Members were very vast. The other issue Pakistan was apprehensive of, was that Members
could resort to trade distorting measures in the na me of trade facilitation, which could hamper the export
interests of developing countries. In conclusion, the representative of Pakistan expressed his delegation's
firm commitment in carrying out the mandate given by the ministers at Doha in a very positive andconstructive manner. Pakistan was keen to hear ing other Members' viewpoints in this regard.
1.34 The representative of Uruguay thanked the Secretariat for a very useful paper. He also
expressed his thanks to the European Communities for their contribution, whose suggested
improvements and clarifications to Article X of GATT Uruguay was now analysing. He furtherextended his thanks to Japan, Korea, Canada and the United States for their papers, which his
delegation would be looking into very carefully. With respect to the issue of trade facilitation,
Uruguay considered it important to bear in mind that Members were not as yet in a negotiating phase.
In accordance with the provisions of paragraph 27 of the Ministerial Declaration of Doha,
negotiations would only be held after the Fifth Ministerial Conference, on the basis of a decision to be
taken by explicit consensus at that Ministerial Conference on the negotiating modalities. Therefore,
what Members had to do in the period from now unt il the Fifth Ministerial Conference, in accordance
with the Doha mandate, was to examine and, as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant aspects of
Articles V, VIII and X of the GATT 1994. Furthermore, they had to identify the needs and priorities
of Members in that area, in particular the developing countries and least-developed countries.
Uruguay considered it important to bear this clearly in mind. The issue of trade facilitation should be
very closely linked to the essential aspect of market access. Uruguay attached particular importance tothat matter. If trade facilitation was taken as an isolated element, one would have to wonder about its
real meaning. Therefore, greater and more effective market access, in particular for developing
countries, should be one of the main measures adopted in the area of trade facilitation. The
representative referred to the refraining from the adoption or the maintenance of trade restrictive or
trade-distorting policies as a possible example for such trade facilitation measures. Developing
countries had been particularly affected by such restrictive policies. Major trading partners who
advocated the issue of trade facilitation, would at the same time adopt trade measures going in the
opposite direction. Turning to GATT Article X, the representative of Uruguay point out that his
delegation fully complied with its provisions. It was important to carefully analyse the proposalsG/C/M/61
Page 12
tabled by Members who believed that certain aspects of this Article should be further clarified or even
improved. Uruguay would participate in this process in a constructive spirit.
1.35 The representative of Chile thanked the Secretariat for an excellent paper and delegations of
Japan, Korea, the European Communities, Canada and the United States for their contributions. He
also extended his thanks to the WCO and the OECD  for their presentations. Although his delegation
had unfortunately not been able to make a written contribution to this issue, Chile, as a developing
country, was very interested in the drawing up disciplines and rules in the area of trade facilitation,
particularly as regards transparency. Nobody could challenge the fact that transparency was a
fundamental principle of the WTO, or that it would provide benefits for trade operators, not only for
small- and medium-sized enterprises, but also for traders in small countries. Transparency and non-
discrimination were the main pillars of the WTO, on which Members had built the architecture of
trade liberalization. One could find the principle of transparency throughout all WTO Agreements, butin the goods area, it lagged behind. Unlike many transparency provisions in other Agreements, such
the Services Agreement, the TRIPS Agreement or the SPS Agreement, Article X, which had not been
reviewed since 1947, was is completely out of step. The world had changed, but the Article remained
the same, which made it extremely important to have this Article brought into step with the realities of
today. Currently, a trade operator would get a far better deal in services than under the goods area.Members should bear in mind that there were enquiry points in the GATT, which enabled these issues
to be dealt with.
1.36 Turning to the point raised by another speaker on the GATT/WTO jurisprudence not making
any reference to Article X needing reform, the Chil ean representative argued that it was not logical to
expect the DSB to make a ruling in that sense. It was Members, and not the DSB, that were the
negotiating body, which was why the DSB could never come to the conclusion that certain rules
needed improvement. As for human resources, there obviously was a problem. Every country needed
trained personnel in order to best apply existing disciplines. This was why Chile believed that all trade
facilitation matters needed to go hand in hand with technical assistance in the area of humanresources. On Pakistan's remark that trade facilitation measures could have a distorting effect on trade
flows of interest to developing countries, the Chilean representative noted that, as a developing
country, Chile always had in mind that trade facilitation measures needed to help, particularly because
they would be horizontal in nature, and apply to agricultural products, which were of interest to Chile.
These measures would also be helpful in other areas, such as textiles, which were of interest to othercountries. Trade facilitation measures would go beyond the purview of customs. As a final point, the
Chilean representative remarked that looking at how  transparency issues were dealt with in other
regional agreements could help Members in their current discussions. Referring to Chile's experience
with transparency obligations in free trade agr eements, he noted that the costs related to such
measures had proven to be not very high.
1.37 The representative of Hong Kong, China commended the efforts of the Secretariat in preparing
a "useful" paper on the background of GATT Article X and its panel interpretation. His delegation was
appreciative that the Secretariat would prepar e similar background papers on the other two GATT
articles to facilitate subsequent discussions. He also welcomed the submissions by the EC, Canada,
Japan, Korea and the US, which put forward useful suggestions for improving GATT Article X. Cutting
red tape and reducing business transaction costs ha d more or less become the catch phrases of every
responsible administration nowadays. Hong Kong Chin a believed that some of the ideas in the papers
were in fact being practised by many Members on a unilateral basis. Hong Kong China had been
working towards that direction and spared no effo rts to create a facilitating environment for its
businesses to thrive. It would stand ready to expl ore with Members how to modernise GATT Article X
and the feasibility of formalising some of these arra ngements to enhance transparency and predictability
of Members' trade regimes, while taking into acc ount the unique circumstances of individual Members
and different levels of economic development. Technical assistance and capacity building was an
important area that needed to be fully taken into account in identifying improvements to the three GATT
Articles.G/C/M/61
Page 13
1.38 The representative of India underlined her delegation’s commitment to participate in the
discussions on trade facilitation within the meaning of paragraph 27. It was however important not to
go beyond that mandate. Paragraph 27 mandated Members to examine, in order to clarify or, as
appropriate, improve GATT Article X, among other listed GATT Articles. India therefore failed to
understand how some delegations' references to “elaborating” or “modernizing” would relate toparagraph 27. It was important to maintain the mandate’s cohesion and to work constructively
forward on it. The representative complimented the Secretariat for its very useful paper. India looked
forward to coming back on it in a more detailed way. India thanked all the Members that had
presented papers. It agreed with some of the previous speakers on the importance of identifying the
needs and priorities of developing countries in the area of trade facilitation. As countries were seeking
to deal with border measures in order to facilitate trade, typically under the aegis of international
bodies, it was important to recognise the constraints faced by them. It was also important to recognisethe intrinsic differences in the trading environm ent between various WTO Members when seeking to
formulate harmonized priorities or objectives. India agreed with Brazil that there were a number of
issues which impacted on effective market access, and that the incomplete work on rules of origin was
relevant unfinished business. Many other Members, among them even trade majors, would agree that
rules of origin were perhaps the single most important trade facilitating element. India was lookingforward to the completion of that work in a timely  way. Turning to the submissions by the WCO and
the OECD, the representative expressed her thanks to the two observer organisations for their
presentation, which had given her delegation some food for thought.
1.39 Having listened to the ongoing debate, there were six aspects which particularly struck India.
In the first instance, it was important to recognis e that national governments had the right to review
and eliminate unnecessary or unwarranted border controls and procedures. This aspect had to be
balanced with any possible loss of flexibility through multilateral rules in dealing with the issues as
they best suited the circumstances of each country. The second aspect which needed to be born in
mind was that there were other international organizations, in particular the WCO, which had alreadydone much work in this area, so that one had to be careful no to duplicate their efforts. A number of
governments, particularly in developing countries, were already under various programmes with, for
example, the WCO, UNCTAD or the World Bank, all of which had international sanctity and
cohesiveness to them. It was surely not the intention of the proponents of trade facilitation to require
national governments to throw those works aside regardless of their state of completion and to put inplace alternative systems that might be considered in the WTO. Thirdly, it must be kept in mind that
there was always a balance between (i) border controls and procedures to meet legitimate trade policy
objectives and (ii) greater emphasis on post-import procedures. Advance rulings, for example, would
come in the domain of the latter category of policy objectives. But these advance rulings did not serve
as well when possibility of fraud at the border was an issue. A fourth aspect that needed to be kept in
mind related to the substantive content of the changes proposed in some papers which would have to
be followed through in each country's relevant laws and regulations. As noted in page 5 of theSecretariat's paper, the Appellate Body had ruled in the EC poultry case "that Article X relates to the
publication and administration of laws, regulations, judicial decisions and administrative rulings of
general application rather than to the substantiv e content of such measures". It was therefore
important that any WTO work on the matter did not to seek to amend Article X in order to build in
substantive content into Article X. The work mu st be kept within the scope of publication and
administration. Another aspect which came to mind when reading the Secretariat's paper was that of
the balance between rules of general application and specific transactions. In the context of some of
the proposals related to advance rulings or advanced warnings and import licenses, for instance,
Canada had stated that it would like to have advance rulings in this area, but, as noted on page 6 of the
Secretariat's document referring to the EC poultry case, the Appellate Body had ruled to the contrary
that "licences issued to a specific company or applied to a specific shipment cannot be considered to
be a measure of general application within the meaning of Article X". India would therefore like to
learn from the proponents how they intended to remain within the basic requirements and provisions
of Article X when making this suggestion. Finally, India also agreed with Brazil on the importance ofG/C/M/61
Page 14
recognising that much of the current inadequacies or  lacunae in border measures in different countries
were caused by deficiencies in the human, financial and institutional resources of developing
countries. It had been such considerations which had allowed for some flexibility in certain provisions
such as, for instance, paragraph 3 of Article X, dealing with the setting up of a review mechanism.
Built into this flexibility was the recognition that there might be constraints for some Members, which
was why the paragraph stated that Members shall put in place such systems as soon as practicable .
However, the Article also provided some comfort for all traders in that it required such a review to be
prompt, and in that it entailed a prompt correction of administrative action relating to customs matters.
Article X therefore was not completely out of tune with the current realities. There were some checks
and balances in place and there were useful aspects to these provisions, which needed to be borne in
mind.
1.40 On another delegation's remark that Article X had been drafted more than 50 years ago and
that situations of governments and trading entities had changed since then, India referred to the
Secretariat document according to which various aspects had been improved over time, the last one
being the 1994 Ministerial Decision on notification procedures. It should be reminded that a central
Secretariat registry of notifications had been established. One needed to see the incremental efficacy
of the suggested enquiry points against the gains that were already accruing to WTO Membersthrough the Secretariat's registry of notifications. When looking at the trade facilitation needs and
priorities of developing least-developed countries, it was important to ensure their effective
participation in the trading system in order to avoid inequities between developing and least-
developed trading entities. The objective could not be to further entrench systems that had been
practised by either the multinational corporations or major traders. This would only lead to the further
marginalisation of the already marginalised. Equally, the intention should not be to transpose the
systems or the practices of others onto the systems or situation of developing countries.
1.41 Turning to the point made by Chile that one should not wait for the DSB to tell Members to
negotiate rules, the Indian representative noted that  the DSB certainly would not be in a position to do
so, as its mandate was to interpret and to provide guidance on what had been negotiated already. The
inference that Chile had made was that Members needed to somehow run faster than the DSB and
negotiate rules themselves, but when the DSB interpreted what Members had negotiated the DSB
could still run faster and go beyond their mandate. As a rationale for negotiating fresh rules on Article
X, India would not find the argument convincing.
1.42 The representative of Mexico thanked the Secretariat as well as the EC, Japan, Canada, Korea
and the US for their material. He also extended his thanks to the WCO and the OECD for their inputs.
Mexico had some general comments to make.  Nobody could object to the principle of transparency.
The reality was that there were resource problems which all Members had to a different extent. The
relevant questions for the discussion therefore refered to scope and mechanism. It needed to be
clarified what Members wished to improve in Article X in the specific case. This was where Membersshould direct the discussions in the next few months. Mexico had some problems but still wished to
see how the discussions evolved. This was the current task until the Fifth Ministerial when Members
were to take decisions on the negotiations.
1.43 The representative of Malaysia thanked the Secretariat for a very informative and useful
background note as well as those delegations who had tabled written contributions. The mandate for
the work on trade facilitation was laid down in the Doha Ministerial Declaration, and it was important
for all Members to share the sentiment that this was not a pre-determined exercise. The current work
was to try to review and, if appropriate, clarify and improve GATT Articles V, VIII and X. Therefore,
it was important for all Members to keep an open mind on this. Malaysia shared the view that tradefacilitation encompasses many things, and that market access was the most important of all.
Therefore, if market access in areas of concern to many developing countries such as agriculture,
textiles, and perhaps steel was improved, it would help a lot in trade facilitation. Turning to Article X,
Malaysia was wondering whether one should ask the question if this article was adequate. InG/C/M/61
Page 15
Malaysia's view, and based on the paper presented by the Secretariat, it would seem that Article X
was a very comprehensive provision. The founding  Members of the GATT had thought way beyond
1947. And, as India had pointed out, Article X had been improved over the years. Malaysia was
wondering whether the proponents would see a need to improve Article X just because it was 50 years
old.
1.44 Malaysia shared the concerns of Brazil. The proponents had not yet made the case for
embarking on such an exercise. Malaysia had not heard that there was a problem with Article X as
such. The proponents needed to tell other Members about the actual problems they faced in that
respect. All the earlier interventions had said that improvements on Article X would be good for the
SMEs. Why only them? Was it because of a problem with SMEs themselves or is it a problem with
Article X? Malaysia needed some answers on that. It agreed on the importance of transparency.
However, some of the papers, as well as certain interventions had proposed this to take place on anon-discriminatory basis, thus implying that Article X, as it currently stood, allowed certain forms of
discrimination. This was not what Article X had in mind. The non-discriminatory aspect was there in
the GATT, in all WTO agreements. Therefore, if there was an obligation to publicise or to be
transparent about one's regulations, it would go without saying that it had to be on a non-
discriminatory basis. Malaysia shared the view that there was a question of human resources andassociated deficiencies in the case of developing countries, but this was just one aspect. The
Malaysian representative agreed with Pakistan, that it was not a panacea for overcoming whatever
problems countries had in terms of transparency. Technical assistance, even if provided to developing
countries, would not cover some of the policy difficulties those countries had. Turning to the EC
proposals, he noted that they were way too ambitious. The proposals were prescribing a lot of thingsthat Members would eventually have to undertake. Look ing at certain parts, such as para.3, calling for
information to be presented in a simple and accessible manner, and reading the comments that
followed that particular paragraph, one would see that they talked about some kind of agreed
standards and that, at the very minimum, Members had to achieve simplicity of information in a more
standardized format. Malaysia would take from this that that the EC was trying to prescribe some kindof harmonized standards for all Members. This was something Malaysia was not able to look at this
stage.  If one were really looking at harmonizati on of administrative procedures, Malaysia would have
to consider that in more detail. Article X, as a standard, was comprehensive, and should not be made
more burdensome. As already pointed out by Hong K ong, China as well as the United States in their
proposal, many countries had formulated procedures on a unilateral basis in order to advance tradefacilitation work. Article X was there, and it was up to countries who considered trade facilitation to
be important, to set up the process they considered appropriate to facilitate trade for their importers
and exporters, within their own human constraints. Looking at the measures the US had put in place in
the context of Article X, Malaysia was wondering how long it had taken them to set up those kind of
procedures. Equally, Malaysia was wondering how much it had cost to have these measures in place.
Coming back to the policy differences, the Malaysian representative noted that there were certain
points in the EC paper, such as, for example adva nce rulings, where no amount of technical assistance
could overcome the fact that there were policy differences. Malaysia would therefore find it difficult
to agree to advance rulings.
1.45 The representative of Indonesia thanked the Secretariat for its background note, which he
considered useful to improve Members' understanding of the issue. He also expressed his thanks to
the delegations of the EC, Japan and Korea for their written contributions. They had helped to
stimulate the current discussion. Since this was the first substantive meeting, Indonesia's comment
was still preliminary and general in nature. The topic of the present meeting was how to enhance
transparency and predictability in the context of GATT Article X. Indonesia had no objections to
improving transparency in trade as well as cust oms related regulations. It recognised the role of
improved transparency for the facilitation of international trade flows among WTO Members. Some
Members had referred to the win-win implications of  enhancing transparency for both big companies
and - particularly - small and medium sized ones. However, when this transparency issue would be
brought to the WTO, Indonesia would carefully study its accompanied burdens and obligations. Here,G/C/M/61
Page 16
one had to conduct an analysis of possible costs and benefits. Indonesia wished to achieve
transparency, but it should not pose heavy admini strative and financial burdens or additional
obligations on members, especially on developing ones. From Indonesia's past experience in
implementing transparency-related issues in other WTO agreements, obligations, which seemed easy
at the beginning, could turn up difficult to undertake during the implementation period. In this light,
the question of coverage, scope and depth of the transparency would be the real issue. Thus, was isimportant for Indonesia to see in greater detail the content and the element of transparency to be
proposed.  The European Communities had mentioned various ways to enhance transparency. It was
the content of the proposed review of article X that  had a far reaching implication. It would lead not
only to a review with a view to clarifying and improv ing article X, but also to a change in its content
by introducing new concepts such as prior consultation and minimum time periods before a  measure's
entry into force. Indonesia agreed on the importance of  predictability in the trade facilitation area, but
believed that this should not be achieved at all cost. By improving transparency itself throughnotification, prompt publication and the commitment to take administrative actions, decisions or
rulings where a legal basis to do so was established, (as mentioned in paragraph 4 of the EC
submission) it would sever to enhance predictability. Some members had made reference to the TBT
and SPS Agreements as models of transparency, mainly in their prior consultation phase. From
Indonesia's experience, it had been difficult to comply with this type of transparency obligation. Theyhad worked for other agreements, but it was questionable whether they should be models for each of
the issues to be discussed in the WTO. On the section of special and differential treatment, including
technical assistance, Indonesia welcomed that the EC had provided their thoughts on this important
subject and looked forward to hearing more from  both the EC and other members on this issue. In
Indonesia's view, trade facilitation was not a simple issue which could be addressed by technicalassistance alone. The weaknesses in developing countries are based on their limited human and
financial resources, as well as with respect to institutional and infrastructure aspects. These
weaknesses should be considered in a comprehensive manner and addressed by comprehensive
assistance.
1.46 The representative of Hungary noted that trade facilitation was an ongoing and inherent
obligation of all WTO Members. The main task was to ensure proper conditions for international
trade where the rules of the game for traders were clear, transparent and predictable. This task was of
paramount important for traders, especially for SMEs. The relevance of this organization was at stake
if Members were to fail to improve those regulations aimed at making trading easier, smoother andmore predictable. Turning to Article X, the Hungarian representative thanked the Secretariat for a
document which was very useful, educative and concise. Hungary was expecting with great interest
the other two documents to come. He also thanke d the EC, Japan, Korea, US and Canada for their
proposals as well as the WCO and OECD for th eir valuable contribution. Hungary had no major
problems with the proposals, which were basically related to prior consultation, enquiry points, or
some of information centres. His delegation was also open to look at how the appeal system could be
widened.  Hungary was keen to look at the pres ent notification system, and to examine what was
missing, or not covered, as well as to look at th e good examples, such as import licensing, and to see
what can be done in this field. Hungary considered the provision of technical assistance in parallel
with negotiations, very important. It seemed that  Article X as such was in relatively good shape
despite its age. None of the proposals were directed against the present provisions of Article X. The
problem laid in its application and implementation. In Hungary’s view, it was not necessarily required
to modify Article X in order to create an enquiry point or focal point. One should first discuss whether
one needed a certain measure and only after that, how it could be implemented.
1.47 The Hungarian representative expressed his disappointment over certain statements by other
delegations, which did not seem to be open to even substantially discuss the proposals. He called uponall Members to discuss these proposals on their own merits and decide on how to proceed and how to
possibly implement them. Article X could not be challenged on the substance of its regulations, but on
its administration. If the substance of a measure had an administrative character, it could be
challenged because, as noted in another panel decision, if the substance of a rule could not beG/C/M/61
Page 17
challenged even if the rule was administrative in nature, it was unclear what could ever be challenged
under Article X. The matter was rather complicated and while he fully agreed that Article X’s main
trust was the administration and publication of the respective rules and regulations, one had to be very
careful in deciding what could be challenged, and what should be an obligation to notify or make
publicly available. The Hungarian associated himself with India’s statement, according to which
everybody's participation in the trading system was important to avoid further marginalization. Thiswas the main aim of the task ahead.
1.48 The representative of Brunei Darussalam thanked all delegations and the Secretariat for their
contributions for the present discussions. Brunei Darussalam viewed them as contributions to the
early stages of the work. As a general point, his delegation did not wish to see this phase of the
discussion prejudge the outcome of Members work on trade facilitation. Brunei Darussalam also was
of the view that any mechanism eventually agreed  upon should not be burdensome for developing and
least developed countries. Like Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam also shared the view that the paper of
the European Communities appeared to be too ambitio us in terms of its objective. The representative
referred to the paper's section on advance rulings  as an element, which had struck his delegation.
Brunei Darussalam also had reservations on the specific suggestion for "reasoned motivations for a
proposed measure" since this would imply a value judgement on its national policies in proposingsuch rules and regulations.
1.49 The representative of Australia welcomed the start of substantive work in the CTG under the
Doha mandate.  He thanked the Secretariat for the useful background note and the EC, Canada, Japan,
Korea and the U.S. for their papers on GATT article X. Australia agreed with these members thatthere was scope for clarifying and improving this article. Australia had long supported an approach to
further work on trade facilitation in the WTO, whic h enhanced existing disciplines relevant to trade
facilitation and responded to developing country concerns related to technical assistance and capacity
building.  It believed many of the ideas suggested at  this meeting to be consistent with this approach.
In Australia's view the key was is to identify measures, which respond to the modern needs of traders.Traders, in developed and developing countries alike, wanted to avail themselves of predictable
information which minimised clearance formalities and facilitated their compliance with customs
requirements, they wanted to be sure that customs officials take a consistent approach in the
application of practices and policies, they wanted information regarding customs procedures to be
available and easily accessible and they wanted pred ictability in their dealings with customs. While
Australia agreed with the point made by others that continued market access improvements are
important, it would like to underline that traders often encountered problems in areas where there
were no obvious market access barriers. Market access improvements were of limited use if the goods
were held up at the border. Measures to improve and clarify Article X were important in this context.
Australia attached great importance to ensuring that developing countries had the capacity to
implement measures aimed at enhancing existing GATT disciplines. Its assessment was that many of
the measures suggested in the papers presented at the meeting were relatively straightforward and notoverly difficult to implement with appropriate technical assistance. Australia was aware that many
customs administrations already utilised some of these measures including some developing
countries.
1.50 The representative of Singapore welcomed the start of substantive work by the Council for
Trade in Goods on relevant Articles of the GATT in relation to trade facilitation. Trade facilitation
should be an area of keen interest to all, both developing and developed countries. When talking of
trade facilitation, one was talking about how to ensure smoother and more expeditious flow of trade
across borders. In that sense, it was going towards ensuring effective market access to export markets.
This was something that would especially benefit the SMEs in developing countries. From theperspective of a small trading nation, whose life blood is trade, trade facilitation was of paramount
importance to Singapore. Over the past years, Singapore has sought to streamline and simplify
procedures to increase efficiency, expedite the movement of goods and consequently save business
costs. While proceeding with the discussions on Article X, one should bear in mind that the mandateG/C/M/61
Page 18
given to delegations in Doha was to work on all three Articles – X, V and VIII. The topic of trade
facilitation was wide-ranging, and one should, at the end of the day, bring all the elements together for
a meaningful review of trade facilitation. In this aspect, Singapore acknowledged that work on other
fronts, e.g. rules of origin, was also important in the context of any discussion in trade facilitation and
market access. However, the pace/progress on other fronts should not hinder Members' work in the
CTG on trade facilitation – in fact, work should be multi-pronged. Substantial work had make carriedout and much progress was achieved in the area of trade facilitation in the run up to Doha, and one
could build on the elements of past work.
1.51 Turning to agenda item 1, Singapore thanked the Secretariat, various Members and observer
organisations for their contributions to the discussions on Article X.  The papers from the European
Communities, Japan, Korea, Canada, and the United States would contribute to further the
understanding on different aspects on Article X.  In this respect, Singapore found that Japan’s paper
could be a useful basis for further work. No one disputed the desirability of having transparency andpredictability for the trading community, especial ly for the smaller traders, who may not be as
knowledgeable or have the necessary resources to find out the procedures and regulations of foreign
markets. The full implementation of transparency in Article X would go towards creating a greater
level playing field for all traders. In this context, Singapore highlighted that transparency works both
ways as it benefited both a Member’s import and export interests. Singapore acknowledged that therewould be costs involved in the implementation and enhancement of transparency and predictability
and that there may be some tension with other domestic needs like customs border enforcement.
However, the costs should be balanced against the benefits of smoother and more efficacious trade.
His delegation was looking forward to participating in substantive discussions on Article X, as well as
on the other articles. Singapore had particular interests in Articles V and VIII, where it saw gaps to befilled. It therefore looked forward to the Secretariat’s papers and members’ contributions on these
other articles.
1.52 The representative of New Zealand welcomed the discussion and thanked the Secretariat for a
useful background paper, as well as those delegations, who had presented submissions. She also
extended her thanks to the OECD and the WCO for their contributions. New Zealand had been
particularly interested in the idea of a complementary nature of the work between the WTO and the
WCO in the area of trade facilitation, as referred to in the WCO's presentation. It was very useful to
have an update of WCO activities in the standards setting area, as well as with respect to their
initiatives in the capacity building area. Turning to se veral points raised by other delegations in earlier
interventions, she noted that a few Members had usefully highlighted other WTO areas, where trade
facilitation work was going on, such as the Harmonization Work Program on Rules of Origin or
market access initiatives. New Zealand agreed that these were very important areas of trade facilitation
work in the broader sense of the concept, and, as a proponent of trade facilitati on, New Zealand was
working hard in those areas to ensure that outcomes in those fora were trade facilitating as well. But
New Zealand also endorsed the statement made by Australia that, even if Members were to achieve
zero tariffs tomorrow, market access would contin ue to be impeded by deficiencies in the more
narrowly defined customs area. On the apprehension that WTO Members could in the future, resort to
trade distorting measures under the name of trade facilitation, the representative noted that that was a
concern her delegation had a particular sympathy for,  and that New Zealand would argue that that was
actually a particular problem at the moment. But New Zealand would see future improved and
enhanced trade facilitation disciplines as a means of ensuring that measures taken under the name oftrade facilitation were not trade distorting.
1.53 Turning to Article X issues, the representative of New Zealand remarked that Article X, as it
currently stood, addressed publication and administrative decision making issues under the driving
principles of transparency and predictability. What had really struck the delegation of New Zealandwhen looking at this article was that a lot of its concepts had been borrowed and elaborated upon in
other WTO areas since 1947, such as in the case of the SPS and the TBT Agreements, or in the areas
of customs valuation and rules of origin. It was noticeable that this had not happened at the WTOG/C/M/61
Page 19
level as regards customs trade facilitation issues in the narrow sense. It had happened at a national
level, across other international instruments, and, as Chile had pointed out earlier, in other regional
organizations and initiatives, but the WTO article did not reflect those advances that have taken place
in other fora and at a national level. Looking at the papers that had been introduced so far, New
Zealand very much welcomed some of the ideas set out therein. There were a lot of commonalties
between them. The papers made proposals in areas such as publication, notification, single contactpoints, and consultations with the public and with other WTO Members. They also raised due process
issues such as advance rulings, and highlighted the role of technical assistance and special and
differential treatment. There were a number of excell ent ideas which really helped to put into context
what was currently missing from Article X: the need to make it more operational and more on tune
with modern trade transaction realities, in orde r to provide real tangible benefits to traders.
New Zealand was gratified to hear from the EC that when it comes to notification, they were not
proposing the need to notify every single piece of legislation in its full content. It was important totake a selective approach to notify information to  the WTO in the light of the burdens that such a
requirement could create for delegations. A number of the ideas raised in the papers were very
familiar to Members, as they appeared in a number of other WTO agreements. It was also important
to keep in mind that a number of WTO committees  were currently examining ways to improve the
functioning of tools such as publication and notification, in order to improve developing countryaccess to them. From New Zealand's experience, a lot of the proposed ideas were already being
carried out at the national level; but there were also some measures which required the introduction of
new concepts. New Zealand would consider those ideas worth pursuing where it saw tangible
benefits. A number of the proposed ideas had particular benefits for both New Zealand's importers
and customs services as well as for its exporters, particularly the smaller ones, who made up themajority of people engaging in trade transactions.
1.54 As a general comment to the numerous benefits that could be gained from some of the tabled
ideas in terms of transparency, New Zealand saw them mostly with respect to smoothing the way for a
more effective relationship between governments, cu stoms services and traders. The idea was to allow
for a more effective development and implementation of customs measures in a way that ensured that
customs organizations could pursue their own tasks like tax collection, protection of public health and
safety, while at the same time allowing traders to pursue their goals of achieving efficient and fast
goods clearance at the border. As Members’ discussions progressed, there would be a number of
principles against which to assess the tabled proposals. These principles would relate not just toArticle X, but also to the other articles. The representative outlined the benchmarks against which her
delegation would be comparing these proposals. New Zealand wanted to see ideas which reflected
current best business practices and best regulatory practices in governments, but which were also
neutral enough to change with the times. Therefore, her delegation did not see any particular scope for
mandating the specific use of particular technologies. Good trade facilitation was not necessarily
dependant on technology. In keeping with the appr oach followed in the development of other WTO
rules, New Zealand did not want to see an overly prescriptive approach to any future rule making inthis area. It was important that WTO Members retained a certain amount of national policy space in
order to implement and pursue legitimate policy objectives in related areas. Another sort of
benchmark New Zealand would be looking at was the adjustment costs for administrations to
implement certain proposals for the first time. In doing that, it was useful to keep the benefits in mind,
as well as that there were a number of ideas, which were easy targets for early technical assistance.New Zealand did not want to go too much into the issue of technical assistance at this stage, as there
were another two agenda items of relevance to that matter, but it wanted to indicate that it had
submitted a brief paper on its technical assistance activities it was looking forward to discuss at a later
stage.
1.55 The representative of Cuba associated herself with other speakers in expressing thanks for the
proposals submitted by the European Communities, Japan, Canada, Korea and the US, as well as in
communicating thanks for the document prepared by the Secretariat and for the presentations given by
the WCO and the OECD. In the light of the little time Cuba had had to study this text, it would onlyG/C/M/61
Page 20
make a few comments of a general nature at the present time, and refer to specific points at future
meetings. As a first point, Cuba would like to recall that the mandate given to Members for the time
between now and the fifth Ministerial Conference, was to review and, as appropriate, clarify and
improved relevant aspects relating to Articles V, VIII and X of GATT 94, and to identify the trade
facilitation needs and priorities of Members, in particular of the developing and least-developed
countries. At the same time, the Cuban delegation felt that the concept of trade facilitation was a muchbroader one, and that it should not be circumscribed and limited to three or four articles only. Cuba
believed that the objective of the WTO was to f acilitate international trade. Therefore, the best
contribution that could be made at the present time, was to eliminate those policies, and unilateral
commercial measures that obstructed and sometimes impeded trade between WTO Members. Cuba
therefore agreed with Brazil that progress in the work on trade facilitation would be directly linked to
progress made in obtaining real and effective access to the markets of the main industrialized
countries due to the elimination of existing restrict ions. From Cuba’s point of view, the work ahead
required Members to consider the different levels of development between WTO Members. One
should not try to copy or imitate the rules and procedures applied by the developed countries and
make them obligatory and compulsory for everyone. These measures called for the development of
human and material resources as well as the development of technologies, which all had financial
implications that developing countries and LDCs would currently find impossible to meet. Theinadequacy of their resources was directly linked to the impossibility of implementing some of the
proposed procedures. Therefore, Cuba considered it extremely important to really consider this
matter. The Cuban delegation believed that in order to improve the existing disciplines, Members
should not create new obligations for developing countries and LDCs. Cuba had noted that some of
the proposed ideas were far from promoting better and greater integration of these countries in themultilateral trade system and might in fact even lead to a greater degree of marginalization. As noted
by Pakistan, Cuba would like to get some clarification as to whether provisions related to Article X
would be subject to dispute settlement procedures. The Cuban representative expressed her support of
India’s view that Members should continue to study this issue in depth, taking into account the
concerns expressed by many developing countries as well as the early stage in which delegationsfound themselves in this area.
1.56 The representative of Poland welcomed the launching of the debate on Article X of the GATT
1994. Members had an explicit mandate to review and as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant
aspects of this Article. This mandate enabled an unbiased and substantial debate on the submittedproposals on their merits. Poland hoped this debate to be a fact based one. Members were not
negotiating now and it seemed superfluous to introduce various linkages and concepts, which were
not part of the present exercise. The process of implementing Article X had brought Poland on a very
high level of transparency, non-discrimination and predictability to both Poland's own benefit and that
of all its trading partners. There certainly might be new solutions, which could enhance this standard,
and Poland was open to examine them. Global trade and an open trading system required an equal
global playing field to conduct trade. It was obvious that WTO members differed on the ground oftheir development levels. And there may be problems of trade facilitation, which required technical
cooperation and assistance. But existing differences in levels of the economy should not justify
substantial differences in procedures. It would put some WTO Members in a situation of inequality
and nullification or impairment of their WTO rights. Contemporaneous civilization required countries
to grant homogenous treatment in various areas of mutual relations and trade procedures certainlybelonged to them. Levels of development did not give rise to question many internationally
recognised standards in air and maritime transpor t, telecommunication etc. The Polish representative
wondered why trade facilitation should from the outset  be questioned as a subject of solutions whose
final scope, modalities and intensity will have to be taken up later on.
1.57 The representative of Lithuania thanked the Se cretariats of the WCO and the OECD for their
papers, which his delegation considered very valuable for both for the current discussion and further
work on the issue. He also thanked EC, Japan, Korea, Canada and US for their submissions and the
speakers for clearing some doubt and for raising issues Members needed to think about. As a countryG/C/M/61
Page 21
whose national product relied on exports to more than fifty percent, and which faced cross border
problems on a daily basis, Lithuania supported the discussions on trade facilitation. It was due to these
reasons that his delegation generally supported the views expressed in the presented written
submissions. On the other hand, as a country which started to establish its customs authorities only
little more than a decade ago, Lithuania fully understood the concerns of developing countries as
regards possible additional burdens. He remembered the year 1992, when every proposal regardingchanges or modifications on several aspects of customs authorities where met with some concerns in
his country. He also remembered that it was not easy for both importers and exporters to get access to
the relevant regulations, which were changed from time to time. Fortunately, during the last decade,
Lithuania succeeded in creating customs administrati ons, which fully meet the international standards,
with the assistance of the WCO and bilateral technical cooperation. Therefore, while Lithuania
believed that its present procedures do not create any obstacles to trade, it also saw more clearly what
obstacles could be created by inefficient customs procedures and related measures. His delegationfaced these problems every day.
1.58 Turning to Article X, the representative noted that transparency issues were the beginning of
probably all discussions related to customs and transit procedures as well as the avoidance of related
problems. Measures like concrete notification and publication requirements, or the establishment ofinquiry points could avoid problems with other countries by timely identifying measures created by
them. In this context, the representative drew Members’ attention to two recent examples which had
been raised in the WTO. The first one involved a co untry in accession. During the last meeting of the
working party on Russia’s accession to the WTO, some developing countries, among them Members
which had also voiced concerns in the present forum, expressed concerns regarding customsprocedures supplied by Russia. Despite Russia not being a WTO Member, this case was of relevance
to the WTO Membership, and it showed that transparency was a better way to identify existing
measures in a timely manner in order to avoid damage to the domestic industries. The second example
was a problem raised in the March meeting of the CTG, regarding a measure imposed by one Member
relating to transit issues. Here, some developing countries had also expressed their systemic interest inthe matter and seemed to argue in favour of possible solutions regarding trade facilitation. In this
particular case, Lithuania was of the view that it would have been possible to avoid problems between
the parties if clear procedures regarding publicati on, advance rulings, and prior consultations would
have been in place. It showed why Lithuania suppor ted the views expressed in the papers presented at
the current meeting. Lithuania faced cross-border problems stemming from measures applied by somecountries, which were not WTO Members, on a daily basis. This was also a systemic problem. On the
other hand, Lithuania also understood the concerns expressed by some developing countries regarding
possible additional burdens for their administrations, the financial costs and possible infringements
with sovereign rights. The representative expressed his view that Members needed more discussions
on every concern raised and every argument, in order to clear the doubts and apprehensions. In this
context, he noted that his delegation supported the ideas expressed by Hungary regarding the
possibility of further consultations on that issue.
1.59 The representative of China noted that he had found the papers submitted by the EC, Japan,
Korea, Canada and the US very useful. He also expressed his delegation’s appreciation of the
contributions made by observers like the WCO and the OECD. He remarked that he had found all the
statements made so far relevant and interesting. At this stage his delegation would just like to makethe following three points: First, China supported the principle of transparency as far as Article X was
concerned. Therefore, it was of the view that all trade-related laws and regulations should be
publicized. Those laws, regulations and rules that were not publicized, should not be implemented.
The information concerning the publicized laws and regulations should be easily accessible and to be
obtained in a non-discriminatory manner. Secondly, it was very important for technical assistance tobe made available to the developing Members of this organization, included the LDCs. He
emphasized that China was developing country and entitled to any technical assistance available.
China needed that assistance and hoped to thereby in crease its ability to enhance the transparency of
its trade regulations as well as their administration. As a last point, the Chinese representative notedG/C/M/61
Page 22
that trade facilitation had been discussed in other organizations, as well as in some regional trade
arrangements and other frameworks and institutions. It would be advisable to draw on the experience
and achieved results in those entities, such as, for example, on the simplification of customs
formalities and the coordination of customs administration, in order to avoid duplication of work.
1.60 The representative of the European Communities suggested focusing the discussion on
substance. Members could best discharge the Doha mandate by identifying the main problems and
looking at possible solutions. He expressed his wish to react to a number of points raised in the earlier
discussions, which he had thought to be extremely interesting and generally very constructive, as
there had been a general interest in trade facilitation behind a lot of politically correct rhetoric.
Everybody understood the importance of this issue to  traders. He was convinced that Members would
find mutually satisfactory solutions to the problems identified.
1.61 On the point raised by Singapore regarding the linkages between trade facilitation and the
market access negotiations on industrial and agricultural goods, as well as with the incomplete
harmonization work on rules of origin, the representative recognized that these were problems, and
linkages the Communities were aware of. He would hope that everyone wanted to make real progress
on all fronts. What should be borne in mind, howev er, when talking about trade facilitation in the
specific WTO context, was that one was not talking about mercantilist gains and concessions
negotiations. This was a systemic area, it was about looking at the procedural rules that underpin the
movement of goods and market access. It was not actually about tariff liberalization or classic
mercantilist trade-offs in itself, but something where everybody could gain equally through
simplifying the respective bureaucratic procedures. On the point made that the EC's proposal was tooambitious, he noted that he did not share this view. The European Communities had taken pains to
remain strictly within the scope of Doha mandate. Furthermore, everything the Communities' had
suggested had its origin in practices the EC and many Members had found useful and where Members
had already reached consensus in other areas of the WTO. The measures proposed by the EC had
been tested and found very useful in other areas of the WTO like TBT, SPS, origin, valuation and theGATS. Equally, the Communities would not think there was a case for total harmonization. The EC
agreed with the view expressed by some delegations that one needed to take full account of the
different levels of development. One needed to take account of differing trade patterns and different
trade realities in different countries. These were real issues that Members had to address. In this
context, he would agree with a lot of what had been said by India in her intervention. On the real casefor reviewing or possibly improving GATT Article X,  the EC representative noted that it was not
simply because the Article had existed for more th an 50 years without being changed. That in itself
was not a reason to do anything. However, what had become clear from numerous consultations both
in the WTO, and with the business community, was that there was a great desire from the trading
community in every region of the world to see the WTO work on greater transparency and greater
predictability for them. One had to recognize the very strong business case for greater transparency
and greater predictability and less grey areas and discretion. When looking at some of the specificelements that might be considered for a clarification or a better implementation of Article X, one was
not breaking new ground. There were useful ideas in other WTO Agreements that had worked, such
as the concept of advance rulings. In the area of rule of origin, Members had already made a
multilateral commitment to establishing advance ruling s. There was a value in full predictability to
help traders understand their rights, to understand that the same concept that existed in the origin areabe extended to tariff classification. So if the trader wanted to know the classification of his product, he
could go to the responsible authority to get that classification. The same information could then be
made more generally available for other traders trading the same product, who would also like a
degree of certainty. That was a very simple, useful proposition that would help trade in a very
concrete manner. He agreed that it was a policy choice for countries to do that. But clearly, the tradingcommunity would be grateful for such a measure in any part of the world. Similarly, the proposal to
give some justification or rationale of a proposed new measure (such as a customs rule or procedure)
when promulgated it, was not anything new. It was something Members already did in the TBT area,
when developing any regulation or a standard. This was an extremely sensible thing to do, but notG/C/M/61
Page 23
resource burdensome. The EC was not doing that for customs decisions, for customs rules or for
customs procedures, but was willing to do so in the future in a multilateral context. This was a policy
decision and an issue Members had to look at collectively to see whether it was feasible.
1.62 On the remark that one needed to look at whether Article X needed any kind of improvement,
and whether there was a business case or a cost-benefit analysis to be made, the representativereported that the EC's consultations with business around the world suggested that there were real
improvements that could be made to help the day-to-day business of trade. It seemed unsatisfactory
that currently a services provider or an exporter of agricultural products had a certain guarantee level
of transparency and advance consultation on measures that affected him, whereas a textiles trader
would not have that. In that sense, Article X was behind the times. The standard customs rules and
customs treatment applicable to the majority of products in international trade did not benefit from the
same levels of transparency and predictability that were applied on a day-to-day basis to services orproducts falling under SPS or TBT requirements. On the point raised by some delegations that
Members should not take any steps which involved a giving up national sovereignty, he remarked that
it was unavoidable to give up a little centimetre of sovereignty if one was to get into an exercise of
making any kind of multilateral commitments in the WTO. This was what the international trading
system and the WTO were all about. Members had accepted to give up a little of their sovereignty inother areas such as TBT or SPS in order to help international trade. He did not see anything
philosophically difficult with doing that.
1.63 Another important area which had been raised  by others was to look at the question of
discrimination. Reviewing passed panel cases, the Secretariat paper suggested that there was no non-discrimination requirement within Article X. The paper cited a panel case where a country had
informed its domestic companies about some regulations several days before it notified them to a third
country trader, which was a clear case of non-application of national treatment. Given that the
publication of regulations was not a substantive trade regulation within the meaning of Articles I or III
of the GATT, this would mean that Articles I and III of the GATT did not apply to cases ofdiscrimination in the dissemination of trade information. It seemed that that was an area that Members
should try to fix, as it was not acceptable to have situations where countries could each give
information on their new trade legislation, regulations, procedures and customs guidelines to their
domestic interests and not to third countries or to only some third countries and not others. That was a
very important and practical example of way in which Article X needed to be carefully looked at.Finally, the EC representative thanked the WCO and the OECD for their interventions. He was
looking forward to seeing their papers. He was extremely impressed with the vision that the WCO had
expressed in terms of how the future relationship between the WCO and the WTO might work. The
EC certainly saw that relationship as a complementary one. There were a number of areas where the
WCO and WTO worked together in a very constructive way and the EC hoped that that kind of
relationship could be perpetuated in the trade facilitation area more generally. He expressed his hope
that there would be some more time to continue the discussion based on the substantive merits on thisissue. Those were important issues that Members needed to clarify.
1.64 In response to the point raised by the European Communities on the possibility to revert to
currently debated issues at a later stage, the Chairman recalled Members’ agreement that, while each
of the first three meetings would focus on one particular GATT Article, delegations would be free to
raise issues related to the other two articles. Me mbers would therefore have the opportunity to come
back to discussing  Article X at the next meetings.
1.65 The representative of the United States noted that what had struck him most was the question
of what was the problem that needed to be fixed. It was an important question that one should
continue to ask oneself all the way through the current exercise. The United States' view on that was
that, while there probably had been a time when problems at the border caused by inefficient practices
where viewed more as irritants, as sand in the gears and as something that was to be brushed aside
when needed for individual transactions to get in, one could not look at it that way nowadays. TheG/C/M/61
Page 24
demands of the business community, of today's economy, called for a different approach. At times
where – contrary to the perception there that the United States would not let in any imports anymore –
imports worth over a trillion dollars entered the US last year, one had to look at systemic approaches
and solutions.
1.66 The problem with GATT Article X was not its age as such. Age along was not necessarily a
reason for an overhaul. But there were problems related to its scope, and to insufficient specificity. By
way of an example, the representative of the United States presented the case of a country in the US
hemisphere, which required numerous import licences, which were published like other requirements
through the traditional means, such as a national gazette. Despite this "publication", there was no way
for exporters to effectively obtain the procedures needed for the import license within a reasonable
time. The country did not, for example, provide for advance classification rulings. Therefore, when
one of the robotic machines broke down in an auto motive plant in that country requiring a spare part
from the United States, there was no way to identify the precise requirements regarding the import
licenses ina reasonable time. Therefore, the spare part set on the dock, while customs officials debated
the tariff classification and the application of an import license. As a result, that particular factory had
to move to manual production, losing more than US $ 500 000 a week. In addition, and, perhaps more
importantly, the company, which was thinking about expanding its investment in manufacturing,changed its mind. As a consequence, both the exporter of the spare part and the importing side had
lost. Going through this story one would find that  there was no readily apparent violation of GATT
Article X, and yet, this incidence had been very costly for all sides. This would be just one example
for the systemic problems that existed and that need to be solved jointly.
1.67 On the issue of technical assistance, the US representative agreed with the statements made
by some members, that this was not a panaceas. But the United States would view this exercise, as a
problem that needed to be solved together, and technical assistance would certainly be a part of that.
Several delegations had raised serious questions, like for example, the ones brought up by the
representative of Pakistan, which were all questions Members would have to take up. Delegationswould have to decide for themselves on the best approach to some of these issues. The question of the
problems that needed to be solved was one that Members should carry with them as they moved
forward in the trade facilitation work.
1.68 The representative of Japan responded to three points: The first one related to the other areas
which seemed to contribute to the facilitation of trade, such as the harmonization work on rules of
origin, or the market access discussion. He pointed out that if one advanced these issued and thus
stopped the discussions on trade facilitation, the problem of trade-related procedures would still
remain. In some areas, however, there had unfortunat ely been no meaningful progress, although there
were some reasons behind that situation. As there was no linkage among those reasons, one should
continue to progress through trade facilitation. The second point was about the problem of advance
rulings. He recognized that certain problems could occur in some countries, but emphasized thattraders needed to know the course of events from the responsible authority if they were to do
something. Such an answer being necessary, trad ers needing this kind of mechanism were eager to
establish it. As a third point, he thanked Singapore for emphasizing elements of the Japanese
contribution. Singapore rightfully highlighted the problems encountered by SMEs. Although there
were many famous large companies in Japan, more and more Japanese SMEs were suffering from thelack of transparency, like those in developing countries. The problem of lacking transparency,
predictability and uniformity was therefore not only a problem in developing countries, but also in
developed ones. This meant that the improvement of these elements would be beneficial for everyone,
which was why this was a win-win situation.
1.69 The Chairman said that the Council had taken not e of the statements made by the delegations.
Without wanting to summarize the discussions, he hi ghlighted some key points set out in the proposals
as well as statements made by delegations. Several el ements had been pointed out in many of the tabled
proposals, such as the importance of transparency and predictability for economic and otherG/C/M/61
Page 25
developments. The proposals had also highlighted th e significance of reducing trade transaction costs.
SMEs had been identified as particularly negativ ely affected by lacking transparency. Among the
measures most frequently suggested in the various proposals were the establishment of inquiry points,
advance ruling systems and effective appeal proce dures. It had also been proposed to allow for a
reasonable period of time between the adoption of a measure and its implementation. All the proposals
underlined the importance of technical assistance.
1.70 Several delegations had expressed concerns, especially with respect to possible cost
implications, both in terms of human and financial resources. Some Members had also highlighted the
different levels of development, and resulting differing  needs. In addition, concerns had been raised with
respect to a possible infringement with sovereign ri ghts of national governments. Several Members had
linked advances in trade facilitation with progre ss in the areas of effective market access and the
harmonization work on rules of origin. The need fo r technical assistance had been expressed by a
number of developing countries and duly acknowledged by those delegations proposing rules on trade
facilitation. Several Members had underlined the impor tance to consider the work undertaken by other
organisations in order to avoid duplication of work . Overall, the discussion had been very frank and
constructive. There had been some concrete proposal s and some constructive reactions to them. He had
not been able to detect any delegation rejecting th ese proposals outright as such. Rather, there had been
the willingness and readiness to engage in discu ssions, which would allow the parties to see how some
of the issues and concerns could be addressed. He was looking forward to an even more focussed and
constructive discussion at the next meeting.
1.72 The Council took note of the statements made.
II. TRADE FACILITATION NEEDS AND PRIORITIES OF MEMBERS,
PARTICULARLY OF DEVELOPING AND LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
2.1 The Chairman recalled that the Doha Minister ial Declaration in its paragraph 27 mandated the
Council for Trade in Goods to "…identify the trade facilitation needs and priorities of members, in
particular of developing and least-developed countries."  Clearly, such identification stood in close
relation to the other elements of the Doha trade facilitation mandate: the (i) review and possible
clarification and improvement of GATT Articles V, VIII and X, and (ii) the provision of adequate
technical assistance and capacity building. Identifyi ng Members' trade facilitation needs and priorities
could also facilitate Members’ discussions on age nda item 3, technical assistance and capacity building.
He invited delegations to share their views on how to go about this identification process.
2.2 The representative of China underlined the importance to help developing countries and LDCs
to participate effectively and meaningfully in this process of discussing trade facilitation. China
believed that there were many ways of identify ing the trade facilitation needs and priorities. The
approaches taken in some other committees of this organization included the distribution ofquestionnaires or the conduct of surveys and some other means, such as the organization of seminars
on the subject-matter in order to solicit views and opinions, proposals and suggestions from the
interested parties. There would certainly be also other means to proceed with this job. The essence of
the matter was to ensure that the work Members we re doing fully reflected the spirit of the Doha
Declaration. Members had to make extra efforts to ensure that there would be an effectiveparticipation of developing countries and LDCs in the Doha round.
2.3 The representative of Pakistan thanked the EC for their last intervention, which he considered
balanced and productive. Pakistan felt that there was a lot of work to be done, not only on Article X,
but on the whole ambit of the Doha trade facilitation mandate. While his capital was still engaged inidentifying areas of interest to Pakistan in term s of seeking technical assistance and capacity building,
Pakistan felt that the concept of trade facilitation affected all WTO agreements. This meant that the
identification would also cover all agreements. The Customs Valuation Agreement, for example, withG/C/M/61
Page 26
its hierarchy of rules providing for valuation of internationally traded goods at customs borders for
uniform application, was a very trade facilitative provision. Also, as already mentioned by several
delegates, the area of rules of origin, which contained principles for origin determination in a neutral,
transparent, non-trade-restricting manner. Unfortunately, the harmonization work had not yet been
completed, and the actual origin rules were yet to be finalized, for which negotiations had been going
on for 7 years. That was a very disturbing element in terms of trade facilitation measures. Otheragreements, which came to his mind, were the Agreement on Import Licensing, as well as the TBT
Agreement, which provided that product standards should be based on scientific information, and
should not be applied as to cause unnecessary obstacles to trade; or the SPS Agreement, providing
that SPS regulations are not to be formulated and applied so as create unnecessary obstacles.
2.4 Pakistan is fully engaged in the deliberations on Articles V, VIII and X in pursuance of the
Doha mandate. These WTO provisions were aimed at removing or reducing non-tariff barriers ingeneral. On the other hand, Pakistan believed that there were many other international organizations
which had been working on developing guidelines and harmonized procedures in different spheres of
international trade. The identification process Members faced at the conceptual and definitional level,
also needed to bear in mind how Members viewed the exercise of technical assistance. Pakistan
believed that the divide in the level of development was very vast. The different ground realities hadto be kept in mind. As a delegate from a developing country and as a custom officer by practice and
by profession, he understood Pakistan's ground realities in terms of trade facilitation. The concepts
and practices Members were discussing with regard to trade facilitation, were matters of perception
and perspectives. While developed Members were talking about EDI's and paper less clearances,
developing countries had problems in clearances on paper. When discussing electronic disseminationof information, it had to be born in mind that many of Pakistan's customs officials did not even know
how to operate a computer. Therefore, when identify ing Members' needs, one had to be very practical,
and, when launching an exercise of developing multilateral rules on trade facilitation, one had to think
about how to bridge the divide. Pakistan had been  involved in trade facilitation measures at the
national level and it understood and recognized the importance of trade facilitation. It was not only anissue of international recognition, but also of national recognition. Trade facilitation was a compulsion
at the domestic level; Pakistan's importers, exporters and traders wanted trade facilitation in order to
benefit from international trade. But at the same time, Pakistan had a conceptual problem when
developed countries talked about certain concepts, because its capacity constraints did not give
Pakistan that policy space to get into the realm of those activities. He called upon other Members,especially from developing countries and LDCs, to present their national experiences and inform
other delegations about how their national governments had identified their domestic compulsions in
terms of providing trade facilitation measures, which had helped them improve the existing system.
He concluded by indicating that his delegation was involved in identifying Pakistan's areas of interest,
and that he hoped to make some concrete suggestions in this regard in due course.
2.5 The representative of Hungary responded to the point raised in relation to the so-called
separate agenda item. He clarified that he had never understood it as a separate agenda item, even
though the Doha Declaration connected two parts of a sentence with an "and" for obvious reasons.
This did not mean that the second part of the sentence was not linked to the first part. In response to
the invention by Pakistan, he noted that he wanted to outline how his delegation saw this part of the
problem, which formed an integral part of the whole issue. He did not want to question the validity ofthe constraints mentioned by Pakistan, which were very serious and had to be taken very seriously.
There were many ways how the whole Doha Development Agenda tried to address that problem. The
part related to trade facilitation spoke of the trade facilitation needs and priorities of Members,
particularly of developing and least developed countries. This implied that this identification was a
general problem, and not only the problem of developing or least developed countries. Hungarywould never agree to any interpretation that qualified  trade facilitation as a North-South issue. There
was a high level of understanding that this would not  be the case. He would like to avoid injecting
such a notion. Technical assistance and capacity building were legitimate issues. During the Doha
preparatory process, Members had agreed to conf ine work around the three GATT Articles V, VIIIG/C/M/61
Page 27
and X. Members had tried to look at the trade facilitation problem through these Articles, and that was
what they were going to do in the coming months. Members tried to tackle the issue by looking at
how certain rules were administered, whether they were sufficiently simple, transparent and
predictable. It was not the intention to tackle the substantive part of the problem per se . In the area of
trade facilitation, one was looking at the issue from another angle. He did not want to trigger a huge
discussion on whether a debate on how to improve the predictability and transparency of GATTArticle X was a substantive discussion. He would consider it an important one, but one that did not
address the substance of the issue as such. He agreed that there were many problems in the WTO
Agreements, but when discussing trade facilitation per se , Members had to confine their deliberations
to certain aspects of this complex issue. Hungary's approach would be to first identify the concrete
issues and problems Members would like to improve, and only after that put certain priorities.
Therefore he would first concentrate work on agenda item 1, then deal with agenda item 2, which was
important for all Members. In parallel with items 1 and 2, one would have to deal with agenda item 3.
2.6 The representative of India remarked that, in relation to paragraph 27 of the Doha Ministerial
Declaration, some specific aspects were exceptionally clear as to what was envisaged. Looking at
paragraph 27, there was a clear recognition for the need for enhanced technical assistance and
capacity building in the area of trade facilitation. In India's mind, this needed to be translated to actual
action, and that there was a need for enhancement, keeping the incremental nature of technical
assistance and capacity building on the forefront. The second aspect, which was extremely important
to keep in mind, was the commitment to providing "adequate" technical assistance and support for
capacity building. When looking further into paragraph 27, one would see that during the course of
work until the Fifth Ministerial, Members had to identify the trade facilitation needs and priorities ofMembers, in particular developing and least-developed countries. The Indian representative stated that
India would reflect on the comment of Hungary on technical assistance.
2.7 On the issue of whether agenda items 2 and 3 were separate items, the Indian representative
noted that she would see a very clear mandate in paragraph 27 to identifying the needs and prioritiesof Members, in particular developing and least-developed countries until the Fifth Session. Therefore,
she was not convinced by Hungary's assertion that Members first needed to concentrate on agenda
item 1 and then, in parallel, deal with agenda item 3. India would perhaps come back to this matter at
the July meeting. On how to give effect to what Ministers had clearly mandated Members to do, it
was clear that, as China had indicated, there were a number of ways of going about it. One was thedesign and distribution of questionnaires. This was a very practical suggestion and worthy of
consideration at this session. Members could authorize the Secretariat to design such a questionnaire.
For guidance for the Secretariat we had had trade facilitation seminars and we had also had input from
other organizations such as the presentations by the WCO and the OECD.  The Indian representative
noted that the OECD was trying to prepare a template of inefficient or duplicated border measures.
Perhaps the Secretariat could try to build in work already being done in other organizations in
designing such a questionnaire which could then help developing country Members to look at theidentification of this in an action-orientated way. In India's view, this would also be a useful way to
supplement inputs by Members themselves. Pakistan had indicated that they were reflecting on how to
put forth their own ideas.  India too was working on the identification of its own needs and priorities
in a systematic and meaningful way. India will come back on this and perhaps the questionnaire
would be a useful way to commence work on this area.
2.8 India had not gone through all the papers that had been discussed in a preliminary way in the
morning session and earlier in the afternoon, but there was one implicit notion in the paper by the
European Communities, which gave considerable cause for concern. On the last page of their
submission, they noted that trade facilitation-related technical assistance or capacity-building neededto be integrated with the sum of the trade fa cilitation commitments that the WTO Members would
take on. Also earlier parts of their submission seemed to quite explicitly hint that some of their own
proposals could be worthy of trade-related technical assistance. There was thus an element of already
pre-judging the outcome of Members' discussions, or of locking in proposals through the issue ofG/C/M/61
Page 28
technical assistance and capacity building, which India felt was not the most appropriate or
constructive way to proceed.  Members would have to be a little more open in their approach and
really see in what manner these solutions needed to be tied in with technical assistance and capacity
building. India was also looking forward to comi ng back on other papers and on what suggestions
might have been made on them at the next session.
2.9 The representative of Brazil observed that the statements made under agenda item 2 revealed a
certain lack of clarity as to what Ministers had meant by the phrase "identify the trade facilitation
needs and priorities of Members, in particular developing and least-developed countries". The
Brazilian authorities were also looking into this is sue with a view to determining if there were any
needs or priorities Brazil would like to present to the Council in the discussion on trade facilitation.
Brazil would possibly come back to this later on. What was important to stress at this stage was that
Brazil did not see a necessary link between this specific mandate for item 2 and the question oftechnical assistance. It might be that needs and priorities did involve technical assistance, but it should
not be limited exclusively to technical assistance. This was why the two issues were treated separately
in paragraph 27 and had been reflected as such in the agenda, in order to keep in mind that this
identification should not be limited to the issue of technical assistance.
2.10 The representative of Paraguay expressed his delegation’s view that items 2 and 3 were very
closely inter-linked and that it would be difficult to separate them. Turning to the question of the
identification of technical assistance and capacity building, the representative noted that paragraph 27
of the Doha Ministerial Declaration referred to these elements by adding the words "in this area".
Members had to discover what that area was. In Paraguay’s opinion, the answer to this question couldbe found in the beginning of paragraph 27, which referred to the expediting of the movement, release
and clearance of goods, including goods in transit. This was the area Members had to identify in
relation to technical assistance and capacity building. This applied not only to the developing and the
least developed countries, but to all Member States. Paraguay agreed that this was not a North/South
issue, but one that concerned all WTO Members, be they developed, developing or least developedcountries. This identification had to be made by each individual country. Each Member had to identify
their needs for technical assistance and capacity bu ilding in this area. Following this identification
process, countries could then enter into cooperation. There could be a really broad level of
cooperation. This was a very specific mandate that did not refer to all technical assistance and
capacity building of the entire WTO system. China’s suggestion to use formula in order to develop awhole technical assistance and capacity building programme was extremely interesting.
2.11 The representative of the European Communities agreed with most of the points made in the
last three or four interventions. He shared the view of Brazil that when Members were asked to
identify needs and priorities, that was not only about technical assistance, and also not necessarily
about technical assistance. Rather, it could be about much more substantive issues unrelated to
technical assistance. He was hoping to get the disc ussion going in the future on the real needs and
priorities. Pakistan had very comprehensively underlined that, for many developing countries, the
domestic realities needed to be well understood. The Communities shared this view and it was their
our number one objective in this area to reduce the growing development gap which they saw
emerging between those WTO members who were unilaterally (or through bilateral agreements)
putting in place simplified procedures for goods trade and those countries who were not doing that. Itwas an obligation to try to reduce this potentially widening development gap.
2.12 On the issue of a questionnaire, the European Communities would be perfectly happy with
such an idea in principle, although it was not clear to them exactly what questions were going to be
posed by it. If the aim of some kind of questionnaire was to allow Members to identify their specifictechnical assistance needs, it would be very he lpful for those Members who were providing quite
substantial development aid programmes. One of the difficulties the EC sometimes had in the needs
identification aspect of development assistance, was the extent to which partners could, in a demand-
driven manner, clearly identify what their priority needs were, however that demand was formulated.G/C/M/61
Page 29
The European Communities would not consider the Goods Council itself to be the place to follow-up
with the detailed provision debate, as this Body was not a development agent itself, but a forum for
starting a process.
2.13 As a further point in response to the intervention by India on the relationship between the EC
proposals and the question of technical assistance, he  remarked that the EC approached this issue in
all innocence. The EC had been extremely open in setting out what they thought could usefully be
done in the WTO. As the EC did not want to present any surprises in this or any other area of the
Doha Agenda or the work programme, they had considered it useful and constructive to set out what
they thought could be looked at, to possibly impr ove and clarify Article X. They would be equally
clear and simple when coming to Articles VIII and V, where they thought to be a case for action. But
the EC also recognized up front that, however desirable some measures were, these things would
sometimes require resources, and it would not be just or appropriate to suggest that all WTO Membersof the WTO were to assume commitments if they di d not have adequate resources to fulfill them. That
was why in those areas, where the EC considered a measure to imply some kind of resource
constraint, an answer had to be given. Measures needed to be matched with resources. There were
also some areas which were not resource-intensive. The principle of non-discrimination, for example,
was not a major resource-intensive principle to appl y in any area of trade policy. The situation was
similar in the area of transparency, although in so me instances, being more transparent did require
resources.  If that was the case, it should be matched with assistance. That was the nature of the
linkage.
2.14 The representative of the Secretariat noted that there were a number of things the Secretariat
needed to know from Members, before being able to embark on the process of designing a
questionnaire. First and foremost, the Secretariat w ould need to know where to focus on, and in what
form. It was necessary to understand what approach Members would like the Secretariat to take, as
this would significantly influence the design of a questionnaire. It was essential to clarify whether
delegations would like it to focus on needs in relation to the proposals tabled so far, or to needs in a
broader sense, in which case it was necessary to identify the specific areas Members would wish to
see covered, and in relation to what factors.
2.15 Equally, as regards priorities, this was an area where the Secretariat needed Members’ input.
It was hardly possible for the Secretariat to know each individual Member's trade facilitationpriorities. It was Members, who could best tell what their needs really were. In the light of the fact
that some countries had informed the Council that they were already working on the identification of
their needs at the national level, the representative raised the question whether Members would not
want them to first share some of the ideas and experiences gained in the course of this exercise as an
example on which to possibly build upon at the next  meeting. Based on that outcome, Members could
then agree on some kind of terms of reference for the Secretariat to draft a questionnaire. A precise
mandate was important.  Without such direction, the risk was high to come up with something thatwould not meet the approval of all Members.
2.16 The representative of Canada said that the idea of a questionnaire would make g ood sense in
the context of the technical assistance examination, but at this point Members were going through a
nexus of activities, one of which was technical assistance. Some delegations had put some ideas onthe table at the present meeting, which could, to some extent, be interpreted as their priorities, and
several other Members would provide more information at the next meeting. That was where
Members should keep their work it at this stage. Once there was a broader picture as to where
Members saw needs and priorities - and that involved all the Members – one would then be in a better
position to start fine-tuning some of the instruments Members might want to develop to further theirwork.  As regards starting to develop a questionnaire, he was not sure what that question could at this
stage other than "What do you see as your needs and priorities for trade facilitation?"G/C/M/61
Page 30
2.17 He agreed with the representative of Paraguay that the guidance Members had was
paragraph 27 , which identified three particular areas. On Pakistan's point regarding the various areas
Members may be looking at, he noted that, to the de gree that they related to the areas identified in
paragraph 27, this was the right place to talk about them. But one needed to be careful to put each
issue at its right place within the overall body. In other areas, there were already technical assistance
activities going on, such as in the fields of SPS or TBT. It might therefore be useful for all Membersto familiarize themselves with the various activities, as one should be aware of that in the interest of
transparency.  What was most important for everyone to do at this stage was to identify their needs
and priorities in the area of trade facilitation. The agenda for the next meeting allowed delegations to
return to Article X as well as to look at Arti cles V and VIII, so that Members could get a more
comprehensive sense of the situation. Delegations should take that opportunity.
2.18 The representative of India noted that the Secr etariat's intervention had been very useful in
setting out some of the issues involved in desi gning and conducting a questionnaire. One thing India
would like to make clear was that for India, the iden tification of needs and priorities was not limited to
the context of technical assistance, and therefore designing a questionnaire, which was intended to deal
with technical assistance, would be just touching a part of the matter. Rather, it was more in relation to
what the Secretariat itself had said that it was relate d to proposals that were on the table, but those dealt
only with some aspects of the matter. India was anticipating more proposals related to Articles VIII and
V, and there would certainly be linkages between Articles V, VIII and X in relation to the needs and
priorities. India would not make any prejudgements  by saying that one would have to identify them
separately for Articles V, VIII and X, but the ambit of the questionnaire was quite clear. Also, as hinted
in India's first intervention, work done on various development aspects and the lacunae and challenges
faced by developing and least deve loped countries, such as during the seminar the WTO had conducted,
and interventions and papers by WTO Members, whic h were already on the table and which did identify
the needs and priorities, perhaps could all be harnesse d by the Secretariat. India was willing to engage in
more informal consultations on this issue. It was im portant to start the exerci se now so that one would
have a draft before us from which one could proceed on this issue.
2.19 The representative of Pakistan expressed his th anks to the WTO Secretariat for its intervention,
which had given delegations a sense of direction a bout the issue of the questionnaire. The way Pakistan
viewed the identification process was that the work on trade facilitation per se  would go into the realms
of many agreements. There was the conceptual problem for his delegation, whether Members were
involved in identifying trade facilitation needs a nd priorities in relation to both these individual
agreements and Articles V, VIII and X, or whether the identification exercise was confined to relate to
these three Articles spelled out in paragraph 27. This  was still not very clear for Pakistan, which was
why his delegation appreciated this discussion taki ng place, which would help clear the ambiguity. On
the questionnaire, China's proposal was one of the options the CTG could further deliberate on. Pakistan
understood the points raised by Canada on this acc ount, but considered the proposal one option worth
looking at when identifying the trade facilitation n eeds and priorities of Members. Priorities and needs
could and would be different. Paki stan was at a different level of development than other developing
countries, and therefore had different developmental needs.
2.20 On Hungary's point regarding sequencing, Pakistan  was of the view that § 27 needed to be taken
in total, and not broken into bits and pieces. Agenda items 1, 2 and 3 were a package and would
continue to be so until the end. The Council needed to be very clear in which direction to head to, be it
through a questionnaire or be it through individual identification of needs by Members. As it was not
clear to the representative whether Members would basi cally just work on those three Articles, or on all
the Agreements identified in ear lier interventions as well, Pakistan needed some direction on this
account.
2.21 The representative of Hungary expressed his appreciation of the way the Secretariat had
answered to the request regarding the questionnaire.  Hungary felt that at the moment this was the
maximum to which to Secretariat could go without ta king over the role of delegations. Hungary wouldG/C/M/61
Page 31
also like to clarify a misunderstanding: Agenda ite m 3 was relevant as of day one – Hungary was not
sequencing it in any sense. But in looking at age nda items 1 and 2, one could see that these two items
were interrelated in the Doha Ministerial Declaration. This interrelation was the reason why it was now
difficult to put certain priorities, as one would not have all the materials and thoughts. That was also
why maybe Members might have to wait a little bit before embarking on this exercise. Members could
begin the exercise at the national level. He highlight ed that he had never said that technical assistance
and capacity building were separate issues in the sense that they should not be relevant immediately. If
Members were thinking of a certain kind of questionna ire or country profile on technical assistance, this
was a different issue. One should not mix up the two things.
2.22 The representative of Chile noted that there seemed to be some confusion. It was very clear  that
the issue of trade facilitation was going to look at Article V, VIII and X of the GATT 1994. This had
been agreed in the informal consu ltations prior to both Seattle and Doha  that this would be one of this
tasks that was going to be undertaken, and that one should not deal with TBT, SPS, or other issues.
Chile certainly did not want to be involved in doing anything of that ki nd. The discussion on other
agreements was a little confusing and there may be some misunderstandings. The matter should be
clarified so that one was not going to deal with any other agreements. Chile would certainly oppose such
a scenario. As regards the identification of need s and priorities this was an ambiguous concept
particularly in Chile's case. Chile felt that prioriti es might be in relation to a particular market where
there were certain measures which created obstacles , which is why they would need trade facilitation.
This may happen to each country at a particular time, which is why there may be a need for technical
assistance. The identification of priorities was so mething where Members had already had two seminars
at the WTO, one on technical assistance and one on the substance of trade facilitation measures itself,
which helped identify the priorities and needs of the members. That was why one had to be careful not
to make more work for this house and duplicate work which had already been done. One had to bear in
mind that the mandate was one for a fixed period of tim e and that there was an end in sight, which was
the next Ministerial Conference in Cancun. If one started an exercise where there was a questionnaire
then Members would find themselves going into issu es which were perhaps beyond these three Articles
and then spend time on details regarding the questionna ire, such as what questions would be included
therein, and all this would take considerable time. One should be rather careful with respect to this
proposed questionnaire. Members should not forget th e seminars, which could be very useful, and the
contributions of the delegations themselves in relati on to this question of identification of the needs and
priorities.
2.23 The representative of Pakistan clarified his delegations' position by referring to an example
given by the Ambassador of Paraguay. The Ambassador had rightly reminded the Council what the case
for trade facilitation was. The basis was laid dow n in the opening sentence of paragraph 27, which
recognized the case for further expediting the movement, release and clearance of goods, including
goods in transit. The removal of the ambiguity w ith regard to technical assistance was important,
because, even if Pakistan had adopted all multilateral ru les and concepts relating to Article X in terms of
transparency, need for publication and availability of  information, such as, for example, advance rulings,
it would not really serve the purpose. In terms of expediting the movement, release and clearance of
goods, if Pakistan did not have the clearance facilities at the ports, if it had a problem of berthing, or of
port congestion, the Article X commitments would not help the clearance of goods at ports in practical
terms. At the end of the day, it would not really benefit Pakistan's trading community, nor bebeneficial for the smooth flow of international trade from either the exporter's or the importer's
perspective. There were linkages to all these thin gs, which made the identification of the areas for
technical assistance and the discussion on technical assistance for the development of infrastructural
facilities, or telecommunication facilities so important. All Members agreed on the importance of
predictability and transparency, and appreciated these sublime concepts, but that did not solve theproblem. If one had technical assistance just on Article X, one might have the most automated ideal
system on publication of domestic regulations, but if one could not clear a good at a port any faster, it
was of no use for the country itself, or for their trading partners.G/C/M/61
Page 32
2.24 The Chairman observed that the Doha mandate called for a discussion of Articles V, VIII and
X, and suggested that, since Members had so far only discussed Article X, with the deliberations on the
two other Articles still outstanding, it could be useful to first debate the remain ing articles, in order to
get a clearer picture of the scope of the mandate. It would be prudent on the part of Members to limit the
discussions to the mandate. It was clear to him that  one would have to focus the discussion on the three
articles and then, in relation to them, identify the need s and priorities, in terms of what was expected in
the context of the proposals and possible new rules. Turning to the questionnaire, he wondered whether
it would be useful for Members to have such a questionnaire at this stage or whether it would not be
better to first conclude the discussions on all thr ee Articles, before deciding whether to develop a
questionnaire. One could not just identify the needs a nd priorities in relation to Article X, but had to do
that in relation to Articles V and VIII as well. If  countries could on their own identify their needs and
priorities, as some of them had stated they were al ready doing, and then come back at the next meeting
with national experiences relating to these needs and priorities, that would certainly help. It would serve
as an input for the Secretariat to prepare a questi onnaire. This could be one way of approaching it. If
delegations would want the questionnaire to come out now, it was essential to provide some kind of
ideas and inputs to the Secretariat as to how this questionnaire could be devised if it was to serve a
meaningful purpose. The Chairman called upon delegations to reflect on this. Members had taken the
right spirit and were working on finding some ways to facilitate international trade flows in the context
of GATT Articles V, VIII and V. He noted that those were just his pers onal thoughts and called upon
any delegations with different views to  suggest how to approach this issue.
2.25 The representative of India highlighted that one  would not start the identification of needs and
priorities de nouveau. There already were a number of  submissions on the table including very useful
trade facilitation seminars. India's idea was for the Secr etariat to pick up whatever is already available in
the Secretariat at this stage and see if it can give some kind of coherence whether there was sufficient
input to provide some coherence. It would be a us eful first step to commence on. One could come back
in July and if there were additional submissions from Members which facilitated further work on the
questionnaire, so be it. But India would not see them as either sequential or exclusive aspects.
Submissions by Members on the identification of ne eds and priorities were one aspect which would
proceed regardless of whether or not one would actua lly get any inputs on the questionnaire. It would be
useful to take advantage of the material that was already with the Secretariat and on which Members had
spoken over at least the last three years, from 1998, onwards, and benefit from it.
2.26 The representative of the United States associat ed himself with India's suggestion. It was not a
de nouveau situation. The United States would take the Chairman's point of a questionnaire being
premature, but at the same think that such a survey  as suggested by China would not be the only means
for submitting needs and priorities.
2.27 The Chairman asked the Secretariat to brie fly indicate what kind of information had been
received from Members so far.
2.28 The representative of the Secretariat informed that there was actually not very much material
on Members' precise trade facilitation needs and priorities as such. What did exist was a number of
submissions on national experiences with respect to trade facilitation measures that had been
undertaken. There were also the reports on the two workshops, one of which had focussed ontechnical assistance and capacity building issues. D onor countries, certain international organizations
and representatives of the private sector had reported at that workshop on their technical assistance
programmes, without addressing the issue of trade facilitation needs or priorities per se . Therefore,
while the Secretariat could provide Members with an overview of the two reports on the workshop
and the symposium and of the existing communications that Members had submitted to theSecretariat, delegations should be aware that the existing material was of a very general nature and
contained little information on the specific trade facilitation needs and priorities as such.G/C/M/61
Page 33
2.29 The Chairman concluded that the question on the questionnaire would be taken up by
Members at a later meeting, and that in the meantime, the Secretariat would make available the kind
of information that was within the Secretariat as a result of the workshops and the various
submissions by Members.
2.30 The representative of Pakistan expressed his delegation's willingness to go along with the
Chairman's proposal. He drew attention to the trade facilitation symposium in 1998 as a source of
information, and suggested the Secretariat to take it up as well. India's point of not seeing it as a de
nouveau issue made sense. Members could take advantage of the work done by other international
organizations such as the WCO and the OECD. Members had the advantage of having their
representatives present and would welcome their submissions on this  matter. Finally, he referred to
the Compendium of Trade Facilitation Recomme ndations by UN/CEFACT and UNCTAD as another
source of information he wanted to share with the Council.
2.31 The Chairman expressed his hope that at the July meeting, there would be more solid
proposals regarding the identification of needs and priorities, especially from developing countries.
He reminded Members of the suggestion made by one developing Member for developing countries
to share their own experiences as to how they dealt with the trade facilitation needs. That would bevery useful for Members to have at the next meetin g. The course of action with respect to a possible
questionnaire had already been agreed upon by all Members. Delegations would take up the issue at
the next meeting and see how to move ahead.
2.32 The Council  agreed to proceed on that basis  and  took note of the statements made.
III. TRADE FACILITATION: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY BUILDING
3.1 The Chairman recalled that Members had committed themselves at Doha to ensuring
adequate technical assistance and support for ca pacity-building in the area of trade facilitation.
Delegations had attached great importance to this subject-matter throughout the consultations on a
trade facilitation work programme conducted under his predecessor, Ambassador Hovorka. There had
been broad agreement on the necessity to give adequate room for discussion on this item. Many
Members were currently in the process of carrying out technical assistance and providing support for
capacity building. Members may therefore wish to provide some details of their respective
programmes. The Secretariat had also embarked on a trade facilitation-related technical assistance
programme, details of which could be found in WT/COMTD/W/95/Rev.3. He drew attention to the
Secretariat's report on last year's workshop on technical assistance and capacity-building in trade
facilitation, which had been circulated as G/C/W/297. He also informed Members about a
communication by New Zealand on its technical assistance activities, which had been received the
day before.
3.2 The representative of New Zealand introduced her delegation’s submission on technical
assistance, which provided a list of trade facilitation-related projects New Zealand had conducted over
the last years.  New Zealand was looking to enhance trade facilitation-related technical assistance in
the WTO context, and considered it important to think about how to do that. It had a good sense of
from what base it would enhance its activities, and wanted to give other Members an idea of the kindsof activities New Zealand was currently conducting. New Zealand would welcome any comments or
suggestions as to future activities that countries would find helpful in this area. It was also conscious
that, at the broader WTO level, there was a lot of work proceeding in the technical assistance area to
try and catalogue assistance provided across relevant WTO issues and agreements, and it was in that
spirit in which the paper was contributed, to provide a snapshot of where it currently stood withtechnical assistance in the area of trade facilitation and to facilitate a discussion on how one could
improve and build upon the current approaches. A second representative of New Zealand noted that
the main goal was to make technical assistance and capacity building work and to make progress onG/C/M/61
Page 34
this issue. It was an expensive episode for everybody and New Zealand wanted to make sure
Members got something that lasted and actually had real benefit. Badly-targeted technical assistance
or capacity-building served no purpose. It was not about just ticking of the right-hand column of a box
and say, one had delivered 15 technical missions a year, if the recipients did not get some value from
that. The representative voiced some concern related to the targeting of technical assistance. New
Zealand fully accepted that its training and its missions should be tailored to the needs of therecipient, and it had heard a number of Members state that they would not see that as being the case.
Technical assistance off the target would be a serious concern. By way of an example from within the
APEC region, the representative reported that under the collective action plan New Zealand was the
"lead shepherd" on providing technical assistance to  Members on advance ruling systems, with the
support of Korea. Such advance rulings had been a topic for discussion the day before, and during that
time one heard concerns expressed about whether advanced classification systems or ruling systems
would in fact be implemented by Members. This led to the question of the usefulness of technicalassistance activities which had been provided at the request of a Member. Within APEC, it was not
the developed countries saying they would provide a recipient with that training, but up to each
Member to identify what training they needed and how they wanted it delivered. New Zealand had
provided 6 or 7 missions on advanced classificati on or advanced ruling systems at the request of
Members, yet now some Members said they did not believe that they would ever want to implementsuch systems, which drew his delegation back to the whole question of if it was going to move
forward in its assistance activities and make a real difference over the next few years. The
communication between the donors and the recipients needed to be improved, to ensure that donors
provided targeted training that would actually make some difference. New Zealand would therefore
like to hear from delegates on how one could ensure that communication is developed.
3.3 The representative of Canada thanked New Zealand for their intervention. He informed
Members about an Canadian paper that identified some of the trade facilitation-related technical
assistance activities that were undertaken by the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency. The paper
not only indicated some of the activities that were carried out in the fiscal year 2001/2002, but alsowhat Canada was planning for fiscal year 2002/20 03. He noted that APEC would show up on that list
and that Canada was involved in a couple of other projects with them. The reason for circulating this
paper was that Canada wanted to let people know what it was doing, and what it had been asked to do,
as most of these projects had emanated from requests. Furthermore, Canada also wanted to inform
other donors about its activities, since one would have to get into a discussion of how donors wouldbe going to coordinate themselves. Canada agreed with New Zealand on the need for a
communication system between the donors and the recipients to ensure a good exchange of
information about the activities carried out by the various donors. It was important to know where the
gaps were and where the gaps had not been filled, so donors could make their assistance much more
effective. It was Canada's desire and objective to have effective technical assistance. Canada's paper
was designed to stimulate the discussion on how to best communicate amongst the providers of
technical assistance in order to identify what are the capacities to deliver technical assistance, andwhat are the gaps. Canada encouraged Members to ma ke submissions as well, both in terms of their
capacity and technical assistance needs, and, from the donors, as to what they are providing and can
provide.
3.4 On a broader level, Members also needed to talk about how this Council could contribute to
the general WTO discussion on technical assistance. The Canadian representative raised the question
as to how Members could contribute to the development of the WTO 2003 technical assistance plan.
Canada was very encouraged by the 2002 plan, but would consider it fair to say that it could be
improved. He therefore wondered whether there were things Members could do to help. Likewise
Members needed to continue last day's discussion about how they were going to identify their needsfor technical assistance in the area of trade facilitation and how one could best coordinate.
Furthermore, it was important to identify what role the WTO could play and what role it could not
play. Members had to be realistic in terms of looking at what was the competency of the WTO to
deliver technical assistance. If there was a request that involved, for example, technical assistance forG/C/M/61
Page 35
tariff classification, there was a complementary re lationship between the WTO and the WCO. In those
cases, one would have to see how the WCO could get involved, since they had the expertise. Canada
wanted effective outcomes. It wanted technical assistance to lead to real results and real
improvements. Canada was therefore looking forw ard to engaging with other Members on how to
achieve that common goal.
3.5 The representative of Korea noted that Korea had actively participated in technical assistance
activities since 1996. In March of this year, 15 Asian and pacific countries had been invited by the
Korean customs service to an assistance activity on customs procedures. A special technical
assistance activity for developing countries located in Asia and the pacific, was scheduled for
October, to which about 15 countries would be invited. Also in October, about 15 Asian and pacific
countries would be invited to an assistance activity on rules of origin. Apart from carrying out a
number of technical assistance activities, Korea had also participated in technical assistance activities.This year at least 30 countries would be invited for technical assistance activities, especially in
relation to trade facilitation. Technical assistance activities by the Korean customs service had
focused on specific areas and specific topics, such customs procedures, rules of origin, valuation or
the understanding of the Kyoto Convention. The technical assistance activities for specific areas
seemed to be more effective than general support for enhancing the comprehensive structure ofdeveloping countries.  The results and outcomes of these activities were expected to be circulated at
the next CTG meeting.
3.6 In addition to technical assistance activities, the Korean delegation also wanted to make a late
comment on real barriers to trade facilitation in the area of rules of origin. As mentioned the daybefore by some delegations, the harmonization work program for non-preferential rules of origin had
been initiated almost eight years ago, but it had stayed under negotiation and discussion in the
Committee on Rules of Origin (CRO). Korea believed that one of the biggest obstacles for trade
facilitation was driving from origin matters. From this point of view, the delay of the successful
completion of harmonized rules of origin could be regarded as one important obstacle to enhancingtrade facilitation in world trade areas. The Harmonization Work Program (HWP) has been undertaken
on the basis of HS 1996, but at present, the HS 2002 had been adopted almost five months ago, so
even if the HWP was completed in good time, the result could be discrepancies between HS96 and
HS02, and that kind of discrepancy could be regarded as a real obstacle to international trade
facilitation. In Korea's understanding, the Technical Committee on Rules of Origin  (TCRO) in theWCO had requested such situations to be resolved at the level of the Committee on Rules of Origin at
the WTO, but in almost two years there had been no reply to updating or to technical amendments to
comply with the newly effective HS02. Therefore, if Members wanted to realise real trade facilitation
in world trade, that kind of absurd phenomenon should be corrected. The CTG could show more
concern and more interest in the completion of a successful HWP and also in the rectification by the
TCRO at the WCO, because if not, even though the HWP would be completed, the outcome could not
be complied with the reality of trade in society.
3.7 The representative of Thailand first expressed hi s wish to present his views on Article X as he
was taking the floor. The purpose of Article X was to  ensure the transparency and predictability that
members should provide by making important trade information available to the public. He expressed
his conviction that most WTO Members had already co mplied with this Article at different levels of
development and capacity. Some may had provided information in the form of a national gazette, or
publication and some may have provided it via in ternet and notice board. Some Members had raised
concerns that small traders and SMEs need more tran sparent procedures of customs practices to be able
to facilitate the importation and exportation of goods. The representative expressed his view that small
traders and SMEs were very busy with their own ope rations and management. Many of them used the
services of customs brokers for the clearance of im ported or exported goods, who, as experts, were more
familiar with official procedures and formalities.  International companies, on the other hand, did not
have problems with transparency and predictability matter under Article X, as they had adequate
resources and efficient employees, as well as specialised departments for customs clearance, legal andG/C/M/61
Page 36
appeal matters, transportation and warehousing to en sure a smooth clearance of goods. Therefore, the
problem might not be one of Article X regarding transparency and predictability, but rather a matter of
commercial practices of small traders and SMEs. He believed that all important trade information
regarding importation and exportation was available and easily accessible to the general public.
However, small traders and SMEs were sometimes of the view that the information was not available at
the right place at the right time. It was important to  note that if Customs Brokers complained about the
lack of necessary information and transparency, one  should come back to seriously review Article X.
3.8 As regards the identification of needs and prioriti es of Members, particularly of developing and
least developed countries under agenda item 2, he considered it important. It was a mandate given by
Ministers at Doha and should be discussed in the next regular meeting. With respect to agenda item 3,
Thailand considered it, especially for developing count ries and LDCs, but was of the view that it should
be discussed together with agenda item 2 to ensure  that technical assistance and capacity building were
provided in accordance to Members' needs and prio rities. In addition, technical assistance and capacity
building should not be defined as limited to the provision of technical experts or the conducting of
seminars, workshops or symposia. Rather, it should extent to a broader scope so as to also cover
hardware and the development of infrastructure as well.
3.9 The representative of India underlined the importance of technical assistance and capacity
building. The Doha mandate contained a clear recognition of the case for "enhanced" technical
assistance and capacity building, as well as for ensuring adequacy of both elements. The agenda for
the present meeting had rightly made a distinction between the identification of trade facilitation
needs and priorities of Members and technical assistance and capacity building, as well as betweentechnical assistance on the one hand and capacity building on the other. They were aimed at
enhancing the ability of developing countries to meet the challenges of introducing systems and
procedures to facilitate trade, and dealt with the implications for multilateral cooperation in this area
as well as with support for capacity building in developing countries.
3.10 As regards challenges, Members were already aware of the kinds of challenges developing
countries faced. Pakistan and a number of other speakers had already drawn upon many of these
issues earlier. India was still this aspect of the mandate, but wanted to share with Members at least
some of the kinds of challenges developing countries faced, whether they related to safeguarding
customs revenue or reducing the incidences of illegal imports, whether they relate to poorinfrastructure, or whether it was a question of lack of resources. The Indian representative illustrated
that, when speaking of poor infrastructure facilities, there were various reasons why those facilities
remained inadequate to meet the objectives of facilitating trade. It was not as though developing
countries did not enshrine the objective of facilitating trade in their development policies or trade
policies or indeed in their laws. But India's infrastructure facilities could not be compared with those
that prevailed in much of the developed world.
3.11 By way of example, the Indian representative explained that, despite India's best efforts and
despite the fact that it was well advanced in some aspects of IT, computer connectivity in India was as
yet to be achieved even amongst various agencies dealing with trade. India's infrastructure constraints
at ports and airports, the very absence of modern port handling equipment and related technological
support, as well as labour problems, were some of the issues which were virtually non-existent in thedeveloped world. Likewise, due to various reasons, such as considerations regarding the protection of
the domestic industry and the raising of resources, India's tariffs had remained high, leading to issues
such as controlling, the incidence of illegal imports, or indeed the challenges of fraudulent imports.
Therefore, the level of control required at the border in developing countries was not the same as that
in developed countries, where the situation was very different.
3.12 The other major challenge was the lack of availability of resources, in terms of human,
financial and physical resources. By way of example, the Indian representative illustrated that to equip
one of India's ports with a container scanner woul d amount to about 600 million rupees (the exchangeG/C/M/61
Page 37
rate of the dollar being 48 rupees to a dollar); and there where more than 200 sea ports in the category
of major or minor. This meant that just equipping India's ports with a single container scanner, was an
enormous amount of resource expenditure, whereas a container scanner in a developed country port
would have already been established at each of the customs field commissions. This was relevant for
all developing and least-developed countries. Another constraint related to the security scenario.
There were indeed multi-dimensional challenges developing countries faced which perhaps called forgreater and somewhat more different checks and heightened vigilance at the border. Therefore, if one
was to also keep all this in mind, as Michael Finger and Philip Schuler had indicated, the capacity of
developing countries to put into place more modernized or automated systems of accounting and
clearance was limited. Their access to information regarding other trading partners was also limited.
Coming back to the specific aspects, from the perspective of developing countries, there was indeed
an interlinkage between the two objectives that were sought to be achieved through technical
assistance and capacity building. The nature and quantum of enhanced obligations taken by Membersfor capacity building in developing countries, which would be aimed at improving their institutional
framework for a better application of their national laws and at their ability to reduce the
administration costs of border measures associated with the movement, clearance and release of
goods, would indeed have an important bearin g on the evaluation India would make of the
implications of clarifications and improvements to existing GATT Articles.
3.13 In due course, India would also elaborate upon its expectations from the technical assistance
activities and the support for capacity-building envisaged under paragraph 27. India had some
questions and was looking forward to the trade facilitation proponents' explaining better how this
aspect was to be dealt with. How exactly, for instance, would the institutional capacity in developingcountries be improved, would such capacity be limited to Articles X, VIII and V or would it be more
generally related to customs matters? These questions had also been raised in the debate earlier, while
there had been a very useful discussion, it was an issue where better appreciation of the issues
involved was necessary. Furthermore, India was wondering whether the resources, which would be
made available for different forms of technical assistance and capacity-building, would be adequate,timely and for a sufficient period of time so as to enable the countries at different stages of
development to gain adequate experience and to create adequate capacity. The Indian representative
raised the question whether such resources would be quantified in the work ahead. Referring to New
Zealand mentioning the need to develop a system  of communication for targeted training, India
agreed that this was important, but noted that it wo uld equally be useful to understand how exactly the
needs and development objectives of developing countries and least-developed countries would be
taken into account so as to avoid a donor-driven process. The Indian representative wondered whether
such a process would include the creation of an or ganisation that would or could coordinate capacity-
building and technical assistance to developing countries on a regular basis, while at the same time
maintaining an arm's length relationship with the donors. She also posed the question as to what forms
of technical assistance and capacity building would be provided which would enable developing
countries to develop the necessary tools and expertise and to define the means of obtaining thenecessary resources. What would be put in place to, for instance, set up and run effective risk
assessment mechanisms or the information dispensation mechanisms that had been proposed by some
of the proponents of trade facilitation? It was important to get the debate going so that when
developing countries approached the issue of clarification and possible improvements in the existing
multilateral obligations, they would have a better knowledge and appreciation of what was involved.As a final point, the Indian representative remarked that it was too early for her delegation to state in a
reasonable way what India's technical assistance or capacity building needs were in this area.  An
iterative exercise in this area might be unavoidable and as India's technical knowledge improved, the
need for a better understanding of these issues would correspondingly be there.
3.14 The representative of the Philippines returned to the discussion on agenda item 1, as her
delegation had not yet been able to comment on that matter. She assured Members that the Philippines
were committed to the work on trade facilitation and that they would engage constructively in the
discussions, as they believed trade facilitation to be a win-win situation for developed and developingG/C/M/61
Page 38
Members alike. The Philippines were very grateful for all the written contributions that had been
circulated in advance, as the proposals contained therein addressed specifically the Doha mandate to
review and, as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant aspects of GATT Articles V, VIII and X.
Some of these submissions had shown very clearly what other Members would like to see improved
on Article X. It was exactly this kind of contribution the Philippines welcomed, as it allowed their
capital to study the improvements that were being sought.
3.15 The representative associated herself with most of the points raised by Brazil the other day,
and reminded delegations that all the work in the WTO was about trade facilitation. She could
understand that certain Articles might need some improvement, because of technological
developments. But at the same time, there was some unfinished business in terms of trade facilitation,
especially with respect to the harmonization work programme on rules of origin. The unfinished work
on HWP poses difficulty for moving on to yet another area of trade facilitation which may entailadditional obligations. She noted that she had been struck to see various references to the Agreement
on Rules of Origin in the US paper submitted for purposes of Article X discussions. These references
reinforced the importance she attached to the completion of the HWP. The Philippines would not ask
for the completion of the harmonization work programme for the sake of finishing it, but in order to
contribute to the work on trade facilitation. Like other delegations, the Philippines were facilitatingtrade on a unilateral basis, as this had proven to be beneficial for the country. This aspect should not
be forgotten.
3.16 Turning to technical assistance matters, the representative thanked New Zealand and Canada
for their contributions.  She had heard a lot of concerns expressed therein, which was why she wantedto assure these two delegations that the Philippines very much appreciated the assistance provide to
them. It was thanks to these two delegations as well as others in the APEC context, that the
Philippines were currently improving their customs procedures. The Philippines Bureau of Customs
itself had just told her prior to the meeting that they  had received a lot of technical assistance through
APEC and that this was very much appreciated. In the area of technical assistance, there was a lot ofcoordination work to be done, which was why the points raised by Canada should be addressed. How
would the work on trade facilitation be coordinated with the overall work in the WTO on a
coordinated technical assistance? The CTD had asked all Members requesting technical assistance to
submit their national needs by the end of June, in or der to it incorporate them into the WTO Technical
Assistance Plan. The examples of constraints given by India in terms of capacity building were alsovery true for the Philippines. As rightly pointed out by Brazil, as well as by many speakers at last
year's technical assistance seminar on technical as sistance, there were many developing countries,
which faced serious deficiencies in terms of human, financial and institutional capacities.
3.17 The representative of Pakistan remarked that there was a linkage between agenda items 2 and
3. In Pakistan's view, item 2 was an exercise to identify the trade facilitation concerns, needs and
priorities, while item 3 was the action-oriented part Members were discussing. He expressed hisgratitude to the representatives of New Zealand, Canada and Korea for sharing their national
experiences. This was necessary, as it allowed Members to know exactly what national governments
were engaged in in terms of technical assistance and capacity-building. He encouraged other
Members to also inform the CTG on what their national governments were doing on this respect.
Looking at the WTO Technical Assistance Pl an, COMTD/W/95/Rev.3, and its section on trade
facilitation, it seemed that there was an action plan for the year 2002 on various Agreements, with
about 15 national seminars on trade facilitation planned for several countries in the current year.
Pakistan acknowledged that these national seminars were required and demand-driven. But in
Pakistan's view, technical assistance went beyond national seminars. Also, it seemed that the listed
activities were basically confined to the Customs Valuation Agreement or to market access. However,as already referred to by previous speakers, especially India, New Zealand and the Philippines,
technical assistance had to go beyond covering one or two agreements. It permeated into many
agreements, like the ones mentioned in Pakistan's earlier intervention. Therefore, his delegation would
see technical assistance as something that had to go beyond national seminars. He drew the Council'sG/C/M/61
Page 39
attention to paragraphs 38 - 41 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, which laid down Ministers'
wishes and desires in the field of technical cooperation and capacity-building.
3.18 Turning to the point raised by Canada, he expressed his full support for Canada's views in
terms of the need for coordinated action. Pakistan al so viewed it as an issue of coherence. Providing
technical assistance and capacity building to address the demands and needs of developing countriesand LDCs would amount to much more than what the WTO Secretariat could deliver. The Secretariat
had its capacity constraints both in terms of human and financial resources, which was why there was
a need for coordinated action between organisations  like the WCO, the OECD or the World Bank.
Those were some of the organisations which could join hands, as they had the technical expertise and
resources to undertake such exercises in terms of capacity-building and technical assistance. There
might be a need to sit down and work out a plan as to how Members envisaged whether this exercise
was going to be basically a demand-driven one, or whether it would be donor-driven. Members had tocoordinate this activity, maybe in the framework of  some informal consultations, as to how one could
draw up a plan for such an exercise. Pakistan fully associated itself with the views earlier expressed
by India, the Philippines.
3.19 The representative of El Salvador expressed her thanks to the Canadian delegation. Canada
had assisted El Salvador and the Central American region in dealing with problems related to customs
matters. El Salvador had had discussions with Canada  on problems connected with customs issues last
November, and in February of 2002 there was the first visit of technical experts from Canada to El
Salvador. Thanks to the efforts to find Spanish speaking technical experts, this had been of great
assistance and help to her delegation. Returning to the current situation, she noted that a request fortechnical assistance had already been made to the Secretariat on earlier occasions, back in 1999, to
which her delegation was still awaiting a reply. El Salvador therefore considered it important to draw
attention to the fact that many programmes lacked follow up, and that while there were many
assistance projects, little was known about their results. Therefore, one had to focus the attention on
an adequate follow up of the assistance projects. This information could be used as input for the workof the Secretariat. It was often felt that countries who provided technical assistance, concentrated a
great deal of regional information. This information could be of great assistance, not only to the
Secretariat but also to all other Members.
3.20 The representative of the European Communities addressed three issues that had come up in
the earlier discussions. The first one related to the question of short term technical assistance, notably
that delivered by the WTO Secretariat in 2002 and 2003. Pakistan was right when noting that the
short-term assistance offered by the WTO Secretariat was of limited nature. It was meant to be.
Providing support of an educative nature to help officials better understand the issues being discussed
or negotiated in Geneva, was the area where the WTO had the capacity to carry out technical
assistance. Nobody had suggested the WTO to get into the much bigger area of infrastructural
development aid. Looking at the WTO 2002 technical assistance plan, the EC had been very pleasedto see that it was demand-driven, and that the trade facilitation-related activities were there at the
request of individual countries. The EC was surprised, however, that so few countries had asked for
any kind of assistance of a seminar nature on this subject. The Communities would have thought that
many customs administrations or trade officials in developing countries considered it valuable to get
some more first hand appreciation of the different issues Members were currently discussing underthe aegis Articles V, VIII and X of the GATT. As for the EC, the Communities had allocated a certain
amount of money to provide a number of regional workshops and seminars on market access and
trade facilitation and they would like to work with the Secretariat or other WTO members to organize
those workshops towards the end of this year or early next year. It was useful to do these things on a
regional basis, were possible, as it saved time and cost. The EC had also found it useful to groupmarket access and trade facilitation together as the officials targeted by such seminars would often be
the same.G/C/M/61
Page 40
3.21 The second point related to the longer-term technical assistance and the importance of
infrastructural development aid in the field of trade facilitation. Although trade facilitation had been
called a new issue, it was actually a very old one, and technical assistance in this field was not new
either. The EC had been providing development aid in the areas of customs, port infrastructure,
transport and transit development for many years in every region of the world, and would continue to
do so with or without any future WTO provisions on this issue, because they considered it extremelyimportant per se . Last year, the European Union had decided to make trade one of the five priority
areas of their future development aid, and it was very glad that both at Doha and at Monterrey, the
importance of trade-related technical assistance had been recognised as a key component of
development. The EC programming for trade-related  assistance was expected to approach one billion
Euro per annum. The EC developed programs and projects at the demand of partners. It was not
something that was in any way imposed or preached  to partners, but it was a question of demand and
often, the partners would chose to concentrate the aid on other areas such as export promotion orsmall enterprises, diversification of crops, health and education or other areas, according to the many
competing needs in developing countries. To the exte nt that the partners wanted to prioritise trade–
related technical assistance and work on issues like customs simplification, procedural improvements
or modernization, that was something the EC would look at very favourably because they considered
it a  very important part of any development mix. by way of example the representative of the ECrefered to a US$ 40 million program in Egypt for customs simplification and reform, which was
carried out at the demand of the Egyptian government, picking up from a USAID program which had
recently finished There had been some good coordination on that  issue. Secondly, the EC had agreed
on a new technical assistance programme with the Mercosur counties in the field of customs, covering
the next three years. Turning to the scope of tech nical assistance in the area of trade facilitation, he
remarked that from the EC perspective, whatever  will or won't be done in the WTO as regards
improving and clarifying any WTO provisions, the scope of assistance and aid will be much greater
than anything that could be contemplated in the rule-making area.
3.22 Turning to lessons and experiences that EC had drawn from technical assistance
programming in the area of technical assistance, th e EC representative highlighted the co-ordination
and coherence between donors and recipients as an area of particular important. At the very least, it
was important to assure a basic level of transparency of programs, as that could reduce overlaps and
gaps as well as ensure proper sequencing of pr ograms. A second important issue was the scope of the
programme. Traditionally, the EC and some other delegations with a long record of ODA had tried todevelop very comprehensive programs in the believe that one had to tackle everything in order to
tackle one thing. The EC had changed that view ov er the last few years. The EC now thought that it
was possible to select and give assistance to very specific self-standing issues or problems. Such an
approach could actually unblock problems and bottlenecks in the trade process. By way of an
example, he referred to the proposed improvement of Article X by establishing an inquiry desk in
customs administrations as a measure that could be implemented as a self-standing, independent
action that would not need a complete overhaul of a customs administration to be successful. Otherimportant lessons were that it often was not an absence of good will or lack of funding and resources
that caused problems, but the limited absorption capacity of some small administrations. Change
could only take place in stages and could not be swallowed all at once. As a last point under the
question of the longer-tem technical assistance, the representative underline the important role of the
private sector. The amount of FDI available in th e private sector dwarfed the amount of official
development aid available from major donors. It was therefore very important to harness the potential
of the private sector in that respect. There was a real interest on their side in contributing more in
terms of technical assistance. The EC was currently developing a kind of consortium with a number of
private sector international federations, which the EC  would then invite to work with the EC in the
design and implementation of future trade facilitation programs to the extent that was welcomed bythe recipient countries.
3.23 Thirdly, the representative of the EC outlined how his delegation saw the relationship
between technical assistance and the current exercise related to the Doha mandate, and how technicalG/C/M/61
Page 41
assistance and the improvement of provisions in th e WTO could be related in the future. It would be
useful if all donors could provide the kind of information that had been received from New Zealand
and Canada. The EC was working on a comprehensive database of its programming as part of the
overall effort to complete the WTO's database, which would set out the complete list of the EC's
programs. The question was what to do with it af terwards. He did not think that the WTO was and
ever would be the place to carry out the very detailed coordination or implementation of technicalassistance programming. Certainly, it had to be a place for transparency; it must offer a platform for
ensuring that donors and recipients do know what was going on and arrange programming in a very
coherent way. The EC would agree with India that  the possible further elaboration of existing WTO
provisions had to be seen in relation to questions of resource constraints, infrastructural constraints
and the supply side of technical assistance. If there were to be any future WTO provision on trade
facilitation, that needed to be complemented at least with technical assistance and capacity building
measures which allowed countries to implement those provisions. The EC did not want to repeat thehistory of the past with the many problems related to implementation following the introduction of
some of the Uruguay Round Agreements, which had carried infrastructural implications. One should
learn from this lesson. In developing possible further provisions on trade facilitation, Members needed
to match them with a commitment to improve the quantity, quality and coordination of technical
assistance. This was an integral part of the work. Such an approach required careful planning. In themedium term, the WTO could therefore perhaps together with UNCTAD provide a joint platform for
providing that coherence, possibly together with the WCO, the World Bank, other UN agencies as
well as the private sector.
3.24 It was the EC's view that there was a virt uous relationship between the WTO provisions or
future commitments and the question of technical assistance. One of the existing problems was that
there were no common benchmarks or globally agreed standards or reference points in many areas of
trade facilitation, particularly in the customs area. To the extent, that Members were able to agree in
the WTO on a certain number of basic reference points, that would give a very natural focus of any
future technical assistance efforts, as there were benchmarks to which it could be directed in acoherent and consistent way. One of the consistent messages that the EC had received from the
private sector who was willing to participate in FDI and the provision of aid in this area, was that if
the could see a greater degree of predictability and certainty through WTO provisions on trade
facilitation, they would match that correspondingly with a much greater participation in assistance
programs.
3.25 The representative of Malaysia thanked New Zealand, Canada and Korea for providing their
experiences in terms of their trade facilitation-related technical assistance activities. Malaysia was
grateful for the assistance received either bilaterally, or through activities within ASEAN and APEC.
He also extended his thanks to the EC for their comprehensive briefing, which had set out the
situation as Malaysia saw it in terms of the issue at hand. Based on the experiences provided by India,
Pakistan and a few others, and the interventions  by New Zealand, Canada, Korea and the EC, it
seemed that there was a lot of assistance being provided, as well as many weaknesses in developing
countries, which impacted on what Members were actually doing in the current meeting. Although
these weaknesses varied from country to country, th ey had to be overcome. Some of these weaknesses
were related to a country's infrastructure, while ot hers took the form of "hardware weaknesses" or of
weaknesses related to software, including deficienci es in the area of human resource development.
He underlined that no amount of rules, whether related to GATT Articles V, VIII and X as they
currently stood, or whether extended to include also new articles, would help, as long as those
weaknesses were not overcome. Even if Members were to give special and preferential treatment in
terms of further time extensions for countries to be able to comply with the rules, it would not help, if
those weaknesses were not overcome.
3.26 Drawing upon the intervention by the EC, the representative of Malaysia expressed his view
that Members needed to get an understanding of the kind of parameters they were actually working on
in terms of technical assistance. He would define a first parameter in very broad terms. MalaysiaG/C/M/61
Page 42
accepted the argument that the WTO was not a development agency, but if one was to go along with
the short-term assistance mentioned by the EC, co vering the provision of an understanding of the
relevant rules and related matters, that was fine to a certain extent, but would not address the
weaknesses mentioned earlier. The understanding of the rules was one thing, but if the weaknesses
remained, the rules would not mean anything. Therefore, one had to approach the parameter of
looking at long-term infrastructure problems and hardware problems etc, and come up with a systemthat clearly showed what other agencies were doi ng.  Coordination among the various donors was key
in this process. While Malaysia agreed that the role of the WTO was limited in terms of the
coordination work, it had to be kept in mind that Members were actually working on a set of rules,
which would eventually affect them, and that, if Members would not coordinate their technical
assistance to help overcome the weaknesses of many countries, in order to enable them to comply
with the rules, one would lose the focus on the ki nd of assistance that people wanted and donors
would be able to give. It was necessary to look a bit further on that. However, Malaysia was notsaying that bilateral or plurilateral technical assistance had not been helpful. On the contrary, such
assistance was something that needed to be commended, and Malaysia thanked the countries that had
been doing this. But if one had bilateral and plurilateral systems in place, there could be the concern
that some countries would fall out of the bilateral assistance net. One had to ensure that technical
assistance was provided in a more equitable manner, so that all countries would be able to get theirshare of technical assistance, taking into account that weaknesses varied.
3.27 Finally, there was another parameter that needed to be looked at in more detail. He raised the
question whether Members were looking at technical assistance in relation to GATT Articles V, VIII
and X, or whether it was necessary to look at trade facilitation in a broader context, that would cover
some other agreements as well. Members needed some clear direction on that. Malaysia had no clear
answers at this time but wanted to raise these issues in order to discuss them either now or mull over
them and come back to them at a later time.
3.28 The representative of the European Communities replied to the point raised by the
representative of Malaysia on the question of coordination. There seemed to have been a
misunderstanding, which he would like to correct.  Members had agreed under the overall Doha Work
Programme to develop a data base in the WTO on all the different technical assistance programmes
that Members were giving and receiving or working on, in all the different areas of the Doha Work
Programme, including trade facilitation. With that in mind, Members would provide a comprehensivelist of their respective various programmes to the Secretariat. Those activities were the longer term
infrastructural programmes, the ODA programmes, that he spoke about, covering a wide range of
infrastructural improvements. The question that was to be faced then was one which would be faced
across the board in all the areas of the WTO's work: would Members be content with the WTO simply
being be a kind of noticeboard for transparency where a Member could check whether a certain
programme was being carried out in a certain area in a particular country? Such a scenario was one
was one of the options, and a minimal one. If Members wanted to go beyond that, they might decideto follow the philosophy of the Integrated Fram ework, whereby the different agencies, bilateral
donors and aid recipients sat around the table and, based on the information at their disposal, actually
coordinated the design and sequencing of implementation of programmes. That was another
possibility.  In addition, there was an intermediate option, which, in the EC's preliminarily thinking,
was probably the most appropriate one. Members would use the information at their disposal in theWTO to ensure transparency, to have a certain degree of coordination amongst donors and recipients.
Under this option, the real coordination of the im plementation of the programmes would continue to
be done not through the WTO itself, but the way it was currently being done in capitals, in discussions
between agencies and donors. There were a number of levels to which one could envisage
coordination and coherence within the WTO on the question of technical assistance. The EuropeanCommunities had an open mind on it. In the Communities' view, the WTO should not only stop at
seminars. It should not simply stop with transparency. There would be a role for coherence between
donors and recipients and agencies on programmes. To  what extent that coordination would take placeG/C/M/61
Page 43
in the WTO was a real question the European Communities did not have an answer to today, but it
was the Communities' hope to collectively develop an answer to that question in the months ahead.
3.29 The representative of Hungary suggested to try to  simplify the subject and to look at it in the
light of the Doha mandate. Hungary had a certain experience for being both a recipient and a donor
country, as it was currently carrying out important activities in the Balkan area. There were ongoingtrade facilitation activities at the bilateral, regional and plurilateral level. This was a good thing that
needed to continue. Such activities would help to build consensus on negotiations in this body. But
Members had to understand that there was the task of identification and clarification ahead of them,
followed by negotiations on the improvement of certain rules. At the moment there was a basic need
to discuss Article X and the various related proposals that had been tabled. Every country should
assess the situation and identify what it would have to do in order to be able to accept these proposals.
Technical assistance should focus on enabling countries to undertake those commitments theyconsider necessary. It was only after an agreement had been reached, that one should think about how
to implement these commitments with investment and technical assistance. But one had to be clear
that in the context of these negotiations technica l assistance and capacity-building activities should,
for the time being, be concentrated on trying to identify the situation and to evaluate the proposals so
that Members could agree to doing certain things provided they were to get certain assistance. Suchassistance was not equal to the so-called infrastructural type investments, but was nevertheless
essential to accomplish the Doha mandate. One had to concentrate on assistance to least-developed
and the poorer developing countries.
3.30 The representative of Jamaica noted that his delegation could identify itself with many of the
challenges highlighted by India, Pakistan and Malays ia as challenges faced by developing countries in
enhancing their trade facilitation practices. He highlighted two practical points as issues of particular
importance to his delegation. The first, as pointed out by the delegation of Malaysia, was that no
amount of rules could bring about a desired trade facilitation status if structural weaknesses, human,
financial and infrastructural were not overcome. The second point, as mentioned by the EuropeanUnion representative, related to the absorption capacity of a country's administration. It was a real fact
that changes took place in stages and that the pace at which a country's administration is able to make
those changes and the pace changes according to ea ch country and according to the developmental
level and that pace must be determined by each administration in light of the resources available to
them.
3.31 The representative of Canada noted that he considered the current discussion to be very
valuable, as Members had started to lay out some of the parameters they would have to deal with in
the future. He suggested looking at what kind of inputs could be used for the next meeting to help
advance this discussion. Canada would be intere sted in knowing more from the Secretariat on the
planning for next year's WTO Secretariat Technical Assistance Plan. He knew that the Secretariat was
currently in a state of receiving requests, and would not have the whole plan laid out just yet, but he
would like to get a sense of where the thinking wa s going and how Canada could contribute to that in
the area of trade facilitation. Canada was also interested in knowing whether any information could be
provided at the next meeting in terms of the devel opment of the bigger databases, and in terms of the
work that was underway at the OECD in terms of identifying the larger programmes that were going
on there as regards technical assistance. Such knowledge would help in terms of coherence. In thiscontext, the Canadian representative referred to a document that had been compiled by the Secretariat
two years ago and that Canada considered very useful, called "The Handbook of Technical Assistance
Resources".  He did not want to impose more work on the WTO Secretariat, as they already had a lot
of work imposed on them, but thought that there may be a possibility to update that handbook for
some background information. It would help Members get some sense of what the WTO Secretariatwas planning on trade facilitation as well as of what was happening at the broader level.
3.32 He expressed his agreement with the European Communities' view on the interrelationship
between technical assistance and possible rule-making in the future. The Canadian paper on Article XG/C/M/61
Page 44
tried to flag the kinds of proposals Canada suggested, as well as the kinds of technical assistance it
was prepared to provide in order to fill possible resource gaps of certain countries. But that was only
one element of the kind of technical assistance Members needed to talk about. It was necessary to get
a clear picture on the broader scope of technical assistance under the gambit of trade facilitation. A
look at both the New Zealand and the Canadian paper would reveal that a number of the things that
were currently undertaken went beyond Article X. One of the key messages were that there wereneeds out there and that they needed to be identifie d. But one also needed to identify what was already
there and what role Members needed to play.
3.33 The representative of Botswana expressed his appreciation of the contributions made by
India, Pakistan and Malaysia regarding the constraints faced by developing countries in enhancing
their customs administration. It was very clear that many of them also needed to develop and
strengthen their customs administration agencies in order to enhance their capacity to meet the trade
facilitation requirements. He associated him self with the point made by the representative of the
European Commission that there was a lack of standards, benchmarks and reference points to which
technical assistance should be applied. He underscored the need for coordination in terms of technical
assistance to ensure that the technical assistance needs of developing countries were properly assessed
and coordinated. Although trade facilitation appeared amongst the Singapore issues as a new issue, itwas actually an old issue, and probably as old as trade itself. It had to be tackled in order to enhance
world trade, and it needed to be tackled heads-on. Trade facilitation was an essential issue for
Botswana, which was glad to see the Council taking it up as early as now, as mandated in the Doha
Declaration. Botswana wanted to encourage Members to continue their deliberations at the Goods
Council and to ensure that Members would do ever ything possible to fulfil their Doha mandate.
3.34 The representative of the Secretariat responded to Canada's question regarding the planning of
the WTO 2003 Technical Assistance Plan and as to how Members could contribute to that. She
reminded delegations that the Technical Assistance Plan was demand driven and any assistance
requests by Members needed to reach the Secretariat by the end of June 2002. The process wasbeginning very quickly – all Divisions had to submit their plans by the end of July, for which they
needed inputs from delegations by the end of June. The 2003 plan was then expected to go out to
Members in October. As regards the database, this was an ongoing process which was being put up by
the Technical Cooperation Division. It was supposed to be ready by the second half of this year.
Members should be aware however that the database would only contain activities already carried outby the WTO or other organizations. It would not  cover the various requests made by Members.
Nevertheless, it would be very useful to precisely describe a technical assistance request address to
the WTO, as it would help the Secretariat to address a Member's specific needs. It was essential for
the Secretariat to coordinate with other organizations, as the WTO was not capable of doing
everything. By way of example, the representative noted that if a Member was looking for technical
assistance related to the Customs Valuation Agreem ent, the WTO was able to provide such assistance,
while it could not address a request for assistance in the area of risk assessment or the construction ofa database, in which case it was necessary toe would have to ask involve other organisations such as,
for instance the WCO.
3.35 The representative of Canada thanked the WTO Secretariat for already having answered two
of his questions. He had wanted to sense where these activities were as they were part of the bigger
picture Members needed to know about. It was cl ear by now that the WTO Secretariat was in the
demand-driven stage for the 2003 work programme. That was what he had been looking forward to
hearing at the next meeting, and already learned right now.
3.36 The Chairman noted that as Members had to submit their technical assistance requests by the
end of June, he would hope that the Secretariat would get some information between now and the next
meeting on 22- 23 July so that they may be in a position to briefly outline the state-of-play in terms of
those requests.G/C/M/61
Page 45
3.37 The representative of Canada noted that this had been his next point. What the Secretariat had
done just now was very useful. It had given Members an update of the current state-of-play and
indicated what Members needed to do. He would cons ider it useful to get a similar short update at the
next meeting. Even a two-minute presentation like the current one would be very useful. There was no
need for a paper on this issue, but his delegation would certainly be interested in knowing what kinds
of things were being identified, so that his capital could start to look at their plans for next year. Onthe larger database, it was useful to know that at least one had something timewise, to know where
this was being contributed. If there was something new to report at the next meeting, it would be
interesting to learn about it, and if not, one should come back to it at a later point. As for updating the
"Handbook of Technical Assistance Resources", it would be useful, but he was prepared to say that he
would not put it as a major priority at this time. One should advertise that there was one out there, and
that it was two years old. It was something people should look at, as it might give them a better
picture of what was going on out there.
3.38 The Chairman asked the Canadian representative to specify what kind of handbook he had
been referring to, as there seemed to be a lack of clarity as to the precise document he had in mind.3.39 The representative of Canada clarified that he had been referring to the "Guide to Sources of
Trade Related Technical Assistance" which had been compiled by the Technical Co-operation
Division. It had not been the CTG or the Market Access Division doing it. The document basically
just identify organizations who provide technical assistance in various ways. The document was about
two years old now. He way sorry if he misled th e Secretariat in thinking the document had been
issued by the Market Access Division.
3.40 The representative of Pakistan noted that he had forgotten to mention UNCTAD in his
previous intervention when listing important organisations who should be involved in trade
facilitation activities to ensure a coherent and integrated approach. He would therefore like to add
UNCTAD to that list. Turning to the statement made  by the European Communities, he expressed his
appreciation for the detailed briefing about the Communities' activities on trade facilitation. He asked
the EC representative whether he could circulate hi s statement as a non-paper, as it would facilitate
delegations' recollections at subsequent meetings. He also thanked the Secretariat for drawing
Members' attention to the demand-driven nature of the technical assistance that was to be provided by
the WTO for the year 2003.
3.41 Turning to the question of the requests to be made by Members by the end of June for
technical assistance workshops or seminars in 2003, the EC representative noted that  regretted there
so little was  being organized at the regional level. That was due to Members coming to the Secretariatwith a national request from their country only. He recognized that it was not so easy for different
regional groupings to make request, but noted that, insofar as it was possible for Members to think in
terms of regional-based activities, requests for such regional initiatives should really be pursued.There were many regional groupings round the worl d, whether they were FTAs or customs unions,
and there were great efficiency gains to be made if one could organize some of these seminars and
activities at the sub-regional basis rather than at a purely national level. He therefore encouraged
Members belonging to regional groupings to put together requests on a regional level.
3.42 The Chairman agreed on the relevance of the last point. He referred to ASEAN as another
example of a regional grouping where several areas for technical assistance and capacity building had
been identified in discussions among Members on a regional basis. Also in respect of the WTO
Technical Assistance Programme, Members should not just focus their attention on national activities
but identify programmes which could be applied on a regional basis.
3.43 The representative of Botswana sought clarification from the Secretariat on the conditions for
Members to submit their technical assistance requests. He recalled that earlier that year, Members had
been involved in an information gathering exerci se with regard to technical assistance needs andG/C/M/61
Page 46
requirements in relation to the Global Fund. It had been his delegation's understanding that the
database and the country files that were being developed within the Secretariat, were developed with a
view to identifying technical assistance gaps and to seeing how these could be filled. Botswana was
wondering whether one could obtain coherence within the WTO Secretariat, in order for Members not
having to work with both the Technical Cooperat ion Division and another part of the Secretariat to
compile the same information. He wondered whether the technical assistance request countries hadbeen asked to submit by the end of June, were outside the purview of the global fund or within the
global fund. He wanted to enhance coordination to ensure that Members would not find themselves
duplicating their requests because of dealing with various arms of the Secretariat on the same sort of
issues.
3.44 The Chairman replied that the Global Trust Fund was going to be utilised for the technical
assistance and capacity building activities of the WTO, and that there were also some activities
funded from the regular budget, like the trade policy courses. He noted that there had been some
coordination problems in the past among the WTO Divisions which were all operating independently.
But it was the Secretariat's objective to coordinate the technical assistance activities. The overall
responsibility for technical assistance matters lied with the Technical Cooperation Division, which
was working very closely with the other Divisions of the Secretariat to ensure that there was noduplication of technical assistance activities. Turning to Canada's request for more information on
what the OECD was doing, he was wondering whether it would not be more appropriate to invite the
OECD representative to indicate at the next m eeting what was being done in the area of technical
assistance.
3.45 The representative of Canada argued that it would be interesting to invite other organisations,
not just the OECD.  He clarified that what he had been referring to in terms of the OECD was the fact
that under the Doha mandate, the OECD and the WTO Secretariat were working together to compile a
list of the technical assistance that had been prov ided over the last years. That was to what the
Secretariat had been referring to earlier, and he had just wanted to get an update on the latestdevelopments. On the idea of asking some of th e other organisations to give Members an update of
their latest activities, Canada would support that as something quite useful.
3.46 The representative of Japan informed Members that Japan was in the process of preparing a
paper on its technical assistance programme, which he hoped to introduce at the next meeting.3.47 The representative of the Philippines commented on the participation of observer
organizations at the trade facilitation discussions in the CTG. The Philippines had nothing against
those organizations attending the facilitation meetings. She reminded that these observers had not
only already participated at the previous Council meetings, but also at the WTO seminar on trade
facilitation, where they had presented their current work. She warned however that, if Members were
to listen to every observer organization presenting their work, time might be lost to focus on WTOwork itself. Therefore, it might be more useful to have the Secretariat ask them for an update in case
there was any new information of relevance.
3.48 The representative of Canada agreed with the point made by the Philippines, but noted that
was not to say that if any of the organisations such as UNCTAD, ITC, OECD wanted to present a
brief update in paper form as opposed to a presentation, he would find that useful. All he was looking
for was to find out what other secretariats were doing. The Secretariat had already provided an answer
and if there was more information at the next meeting that would be fine, but if there was not more
information by then, one could refer the item to a subsequent meeting when there was some more
information.
3.49 The representative of Egypt sought clarification whether one was going to invite other
organisations, and if that would fall into the framework of observers.G/C/M/61
Page 47
3.50 The Chairman answered that trade facilitatio n was not under negotiation and that the earlier
understanding applied, according to which observers, who had been participating in the CTG, would
continue to do so as far as trade facilitation was concerned. He assumed Egypt's concern to be more in
relation to the status of observers regarding the negotiating groups.
3.51 The representative of Egypt expressed his view that the question of observers was one that
covered both the negotiating groups and the ordinary groups.3.52 The Chairman further clarified that those observers who had been participating in the CTG,
the Services Council or even some of the Working Groups, and who already enjoyed observer status
would continue to do so. The problem only arose in  respect of new applications for observership.
3.53 In his concluding remarks, the Chairman noted that the discussions had been very
constructive, leading to the emergence of several key points. First, Members had been in complete
agreement on the importance of  technical assistance and capacity building for trade facilitation.
Secondly, there had been an agreement on the importance of communication between donors and
recipients as well as amongst the providers of technical assistance. In this context, there had been a
suggestion to allow for an exchange of information on the technical assistance currently beingprovided. Thirdly, delegations had underlined the need to precisely target the audience of an
assistance activity as well as the specific areas in which technical assistance was required. They had
also highlighted the necessity to identify the needs of recipients, as well as the gaps in the currently
existing programmes. Another point stressed by several delegations was the need to ensure a
coordinated and coherent approach to technical assistance. In addition, Members had also highlightedthe need to identify what the WTO could and could not do. Some of the developing countries had
raised salient concerns, especially with respect to a possible rule-making exercise. They had also
pointed at some of the challenges they were facing in the area of trade facilitation, such as the need to
safeguard customs revenue, the absence of modern port handling equipment, labour problems,
infrastructure problems, lack of human and financial resources and security concerns. Developingcountries had also voiced the need to know more about the technical assistance provided by donors, in
particular, whether it would also include institutional capacity building and whether it would take
development objectives into account.
3.54 These points provided a lot of food for thought and further reflection. At the next meeting on
22 and 23 July, Members would examine Article VIII as a first agenda item, before reverting to the
identification of needs and priorities and questions related to technical assistance and capacity
building. He expressed his hope that at the July meeting, both developing and developed countries,
would come back with more detailed proposals or even take the opportunity to allay concerns and
address the difficulties that had been pointed out at the present meeting. As for India's reservation
with respect to the circulation of the WCO and OECD  papers as CTG documents, he noted that he had
been informed that India was still awaiting a response from its capital. He would therefore carry outsome informal consultations on this matter.
3.55 The Council took note of the Chairman's remarks and the statements made.
IV. DOHA MINISTERIAL DECISION ON IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES
AND CONCERNS:  REQUEST FOR THE CTG TO EXAMINE PROPOSALS
CONTAINED IN PARAGRAPHS 4.4 AND 4.5 RELATING TO THE AGREEMENT
ON TEXTILES AND CLOTHING (WT/MIN(01)/17) – A REPORT BY THE
CHAIRMAN
4.1 The Chairman recalled that, when the Council had met on 2 May, there was an initial
discussion of the two proposals which had been referred to it for examination, with recommendations
to be made to the General Council by 31 July 2002 for appropriate action.  At that meeting, he hadG/C/M/61
Page 48
undertaken to arrange a series of informal consul tations to examine these proposals along with some
other ATC matters, comprising five meetings during May and June.  He reported to the Council that
the first of these informal consultations had been held on 13 May, at which time there was an
extensive exchange of views on the broader issues involved.  This discussion set the stage for the next
informal meeting where participants would move into greater detail on each of the proposals.  He
undertook to keep the Council informed of developments.
4.2 The representative of Pakistan expressed appreciation for the programme of consultations and
noted that the Council had a time-limited mandate.  He stressed that the issues under examination
were of utmost importance to developing country Members.  Pakistan approached these discussions
with a positive attitude and looked forward to a constructive engagement with its trading partners in
the discussions.
4.3 The representative of India also expressed his delegation's appreciation for the schedule of
meetings and emphasized the extreme importance of textiles and clothing trade for developing and
least-developed country Members in terms of both e xports and employment.  India, along with other
developing Members had, for some time, been raising the issue of a lack of meaningful product
integration by the restraining Members under the ATC.  The ITCB members had submitted a jointpaper (G/C/W/368) on the two proposals set out in th e Doha Decision to facilitate the examination of
these matters in the Council.  The CTG had had some discussion on the basis of this paper at its last
meeting and there had been further discussion in the informal consultations.  As India had underlined
at the last meeting, the origin of these two proposals lay in the implementation-related concerns with
respect to the ATC as expressed by ITCB members and other developing countries and they hadprovided the means to address the issue of meaningf ul integration.  He looked forward to a positive
and constructive dialogue on these two proposals at the upcoming consultations, keeping in view the
deadline of 31 July for the report to the General Council.
4.4 The representative of the United States stressed the importance of conducting the
consultations on the two items in an open and tran sparent manner, with participation by all Members,
including capital-based officials.  It was also important to have a full examination of the two
proposals within the time frame provided by the mandate.  He reiterated that the matters under
examination were implementation proposals and while the United States was fully engaged in the
discussion, he maintained that it was proceeding with the implementation of the ATC in fullcompliance with that Agreement.
4.5 The representative of Canada also confirmed that his delegation was fully engaged in the
examination and looked forward to the coming discussions, both the informal consultations and the
Council meeting on 13 June.  He underlined that Canada had carried out all of its obligations under
the ATC, but continued to be prepared to discuss th e issues on that basis with their trading partners.
4.6 The Council took note of the Chairman's report and of the statements made.
V. REQUEST BY COSTA RICA;  INDIA;  INDONESIA;  PAKISTAN;  PERU AND
HONG KONG, CHINA:  CTG'S OVERSIGHT FUNCTION PURSUANT TO
ARTICLE IV OF THE AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE WTO –TRANSPARENCY REGARDING NEW RESTRICTIONS ON TEXTILE AND
CLOTHING PRODUCTS COMMENTED ON BY THE TEXTILES MONITORING
BODY (G/C/W/260/REV.1) – A REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN
5.1 The Chairman explained that this agenda item related to a matter brought to the Council by a
group of Members concerning the oversight responsibility of the Council for issues arising from the
ATC.  At the last meeting it had been agreed that  he would conduct informal consultations with a
view to arriving at an understanding on how to respond to the proposals which had been made, as setG/C/M/61
Page 49
out in document G/C/W/260/Rev.1.  He advised the Co uncil that he would be arranging consultations
on this in the near future and would keep the Council advised of the outcome.
5.2 The Council took note of this report.
VI. MAJOR REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT ON
TEXTILES AND CLOTHING DURING THE SECOND STAGE OF THE
INTEGRATION PROCESS, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 8.11 OF THE ATC – A
REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN
6.1 The Chairman recalled that this agenda item related to the work being done in relation to the
preparation of a draft report on the outcome of the major review of the ATC, for consideration and
adoption by the Council.  At the last meeting, he ha d undertaken to hold informal consultations with a
view to arriving at agreement on the text of this draft report.  He reported to the Council that
consultations had been held in the previous week at which exporting and importing Members had set
out very clearly their difficulties with certain aspects of the current draft report, which had been put
before them earlier in the year by his predecessor.  Following a constructive exchange of views, the
participants had accepted to give consideration to the points raised by others and to prepare theirspecific proposals on how the current draft report might be further developed in future informal
meetings to encompass their particular needs.  He undertook to keep the Council informed of the
situation.
6.2 The representative of India said that his delegation remained fully engaged in the dialogue
and reiterated the importance of the major review for exporting, developing country Members.  He
recalled Article 8.12 of the ATC which required that "[In] the light of its review, the Council for
Trade in Goods shall by consensus take such decisions as it deems appropriate to ensure that the
balance of rights and obligations embodied in this Agreement is not impaired".  The ITCB members
had demonstrated objectively in their joint submissions and interventions at the earlier Councilmeetings how the balance of rights and obligations accruing to the textile exporting Members had
been impaired.  It was, therefore, important th at the Council competes the review exercise, as
mandated under Articles 8.11 and 8.12 of the ATC, at the earliest possible date and takes appropriate
decisions in the light of this review to restore th e balance of rights accruing to restrained Members.
He expressed appreciation for the Chairman scheduling a number of informal consultations andassured him that India would be engaging in these consultations with a view to concluding this review
at an early date.
6.3 The representative of Canada confirmed that his delegation would work with the Chairman
and other Members in trying to conclude this review as early as possible.  In this regard, he underlined
that the review and its report had to be based on two key factors:  what the ATC actually required and
what had actually happened during the period under review.
6.4 The representative of the United States said that he concurred fully with the comments made
by the delegation of Canada.6.5 The spokesman for the European Union expressed his agreement with the preceding speakers,
confirming that they were ready to continue discussions to conclude the examination, which must
remain within the framework on the ATC.
6.6 The representative of Pakistan endorsed the views expressed by the delegate of India and
underlined that the major review must arrive at certain decisions and indicate how far the
implementation of the ATC had been able to achieve the objectives set out in the Agreement.
6.7 The Council took note of the Chairman's report and of the statements made.G/C/M/61
Page 50
VII. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHILE AND COSTA RICA –
NOTIFICATION FROM THE PARTIES TO  THE AGREEMENT (WT/REG136/N/1,
WT/REG136/1)
7.1 The Chairman drew attention to the Free Trade Agreement between Chile and Costa Rica
which had been notified under GATT Article XXIV.  The texts of the Agreement and its notification
had been circulated in the documents listed.
7.2 In the absence of comments, the Chairman proposed that the Committee on Regional Trade
Agreements carry out the examination of the Agreement in accordance with the following terms of
reference:  "To examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the GATT 1994, the Free Trade
Agreement between Chile and Costa Rica and to submit a report to the Council for Trade in Goods.  Itis understood that the understanding read out by the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods
under Item VII of the Agenda of the Meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods of 20 February 1995
as contained in document WT/REG/3/1, will apply mutatis mutandis  to the examination of the
Agreement.  It is also understood that, during the examination, due account will be taken of the
intrinsic differences between customs unions and free trade areas."
7.3 It was so agreed.
VIII.  REQUEST BY EL SALVADOR FOR A WAIVER UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE
WTO AGREEMENT FOR MINIMUM VALUES UNDER THE AGREEMENT ONIMPLEMENTATION OF ARTIC LE VII OF THE GATT 1994
8.1 The Chairman drew attention to the request by El Salvador for a waiver under WTO Article
IX with respect to the application of minimum values for certain products as detailed in document
G/C/W/372.  The representative of El Salvador briefly introduced the request and informed Members
that consultations were underway with interested Members.
8.2 The Chairman suggested that the Council take note of the statement made and that it return to
this request when the relevant draft decision had been submitted.
8.3 It was so agreed.
IX. PREPARATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL
ON THE ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
9.1 The Chairman said that this item has been placed on the agenda at the request of the
delegation of the United States.  In accordance with the protocol of accession of the People's Republic
of China, this Council was required to report to the General Council with respect to China's
transitional review mechanism.
9.2 The representative of the United States stressed the importance of establishing a pragmatic
timeline to receive the notifications, questions and replies necessary to conduct China's transitional
review, in order to make the review mechanism a meaningful and efficient exercise and to facilitate
the task of the Secretariat in terms of translation and timely circulation of relevant documents well in
advance of the review meeting.  The United States was in no way interested in renegotiating China's
Protocol commitments.  The main goal was to al low for sufficient time to receive the necessary
information from China, and for subsequent exchange  of questions and answers that would assist the
CTG in preparing adequately for the review as required under Paragraph 18 of the Protocol.  HerG/C/M/61
Page 51
delegation therefore proposed a time-limit of 90 days before the meeting at which the review would
be carried out for notifications to be received from China, 60 days before the meeting for questions
from Members to be submitted to China, and 30 days before the meeting for written responses to be
received from China, as was the standard practice applicable to similar notifications and exchanges of
questions and replies in the WTO.  Her delegation thought that it would also be worthwhile to
consider how the CTG would deal with questions to which China was unable to reply at the reviewmeeting.
9.3 The representative of China said that, as a new member of the World Trade Organization,
China took its membership seriously.  China was willing to fulfill its obligations and attached great
importance to paragraph 18 of its Accession Protocol, and had been making great efforts in
preparations for the transitional review.  With understanding and support from its trading partners,
China was determined to do its utmost in trying to  overcome practical difficulties in this regard.
However, as far as the transitional review is concerned, China had no more obligation than those
stipulated in paragraph 18, and any attempt to go beyond that and increase the obligations of China,
under whatever pretext, would be firmly rejected.  Since paragraph 18 had already established
important guidelines on the frequency, procedure, scope and substance of the transitional review, it
was inappropriate for any subsidiary body of the WTO to renegotiate or redefine the terms of suchreviews as provided in paragraph 18. According to paragraph 18, subsidiary bodies of the WTO which
had a mandate covering China's commitments, could conduct the said transitional review once a year.
China was of the view that such a review might in  principle take place at the last regular meeting of
each subsidiary body concerned for that year.  Once a specific regular meeting was chosen, and the
date fixed for the transitional view included as one of its agenda items, the WTO Secretariat shouldinform China of the schedule for the meeting as soon as possible, so that China could make the
necessary preparations.  To facilitate the process of the transitional review, Members were welcome
to raise relevant questions of concern to China well in advance of the review, and China was prepared
to do its best to address them under paragraph 18.  On the other hand, China was also entitled, under
the same paragraph 18, to raise issues and questions of its concern to other Members who weremaintaining prohibitions, quantitative restrictions and other measures against imports from China in a
manner inconsistent with the WTO rules and their commitments with regard to China's accession.  It
was hoped that through such an exchange of views and dialogue, better understanding would be
reached among WTO Members on how to improve the implementation by all Members and facilitate
a faster and sounder growth of trade between China and the rest of the world.  In this regard, Chinawas ready to work closely with the CTG and make every positive contribution it could toward the
fulfilment of its objectives.
9.4 The Chairman said that the last regular meeting of the year for the CTG was scheduled for
22 November 2002.  The Agenda for that meeting w ould include the review of the implementation of
China's commitments in relevant areas pursuant to paragraph 18 of its Protocol of Accession.  In this
regard, he proposed that the Chair be ready to conduct informal consultations to best determine howthe CTG should carry out its obligations under this review, within the time-frame for our report to the
General Council.
9.5 The Council for Trade in Goods took note of the statements made.
X. OTHER BUSINESS
10.1 The Chairman made the following statement:   In the interest of improving the effectiveness
of preparations for CTG meetings, he asked for Members' views on how the CTG might improve the
distribution and availability of relevant documents.   Currently, for example, the Secretariat included
in the package of documents that was made available on the day of the meeting new documents which
had not before appeared on the agenda of previous meetings.  Where agenda items recurred, and
where no new documents were circulated, the general line taken was that documents which had beenG/C/M/61
Page 52
put in the package made available on the day of a previous meeting were not included in the package
for a subsequent meeting.  It might be that delegations might want to have a full package of
documents made available at all meetings irrespective of whether a document had been made
available in such a way previously.  He welcomed views on how the CTG could improve the
availability of documentation in the interests of transparency and fulfilling the information needs of
Members.
10.2 Second , he recalled that the agenda point "Request for a WTO waiver – New EC special
tariff arrangements to combat drug production and trafficking" appeared on the CTG agenda of
2 November 2001, for the first time.  In accordance with Article IX, paragraph 3(b) of WTO
Agreement, the Goods Council should submit a report to the General Council on this item after a time
period which shall not exceed 90 days.  As the 90 days were over, the CTG was under an obligation to
report in accordance with Article IX:3(b) of the WTO Agreement to the General Council.  In theproceedings, some Members expressed concerns regarding the EC's preferential regime.  He intended
to report to the next General Council
10.3 Third, he proposed that the Council for Trade in Goods hold its next scheduled meeting on
Thursday, 13 June, 2002.
__________