RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/SG/M/7
19March 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-1134)
Committee onSafeguards
MINUTES OFTHE REGULAR MEETING
HELD ON25OCTOBER 1996
Chairman: Mr.A.Buencamino (Philippines)
1. TheCommittee onSafeguards heldaregular meeting on25October 1996.
2. Thefollowing agenda wasadopted:
Page
A. National Legislation 2
(i) Examination ofneworamended legislations notpreviously 3
reviewed bytheCommittee (Art. 12.6)
(a) Argentina 3
(G/SG/N/1/ARG/2)
(b) Brazil 3
(G/SG/N/1/BRA/3)
(c) ElSalvador 3
(G/SG/N/1/SLV/2)
(d) Hungary 3
(G/SG/N/1/HUN/2/Add.1, Suppl.1 andSuppl.2)
(e) Israel 3
(G/SG/N/1/ISR/2)
(f) Japan 3
(G/SG/N/1/JPN/2/CORR.1)
(g) Norway 3
(G/SG/N/1/NOR/3)
(h) St.Lucia 3
(G/SG/N/1/LCA/1)
(ii) Examination ofnotifications without legislative text 4
(a) Côted'Ivoire 4
(G/SG/N/1/CIV/1)G/SG/M/7
Page2
Page
(b) Kenya 4
(G/SG/N/1/KEN/1)
(c) Nigeria 4
(G/SG/N/1/NGA/1)
(iii) Status oflegislative notifications 4
B. Notifications ofactions related tosafeguard measures 5
(i) Notifications ofinitiation ofinvestigations (Art. 12.1(a)) 5
(G/SG/N/6/KOR/2, G/SG/N/6/KOR/3, G/SG/N/6/BRA/1)
(ii) Notifications offindings ofserious injury orthreat caused by 6
increased imports (Art. 12.1(b)) -(G/SG/N/8/USA/1)
(iii) Notifications regarding application ofprovisional safeguard measures 6
(Art. 12.4)-(G/SG/N/7/BRA/1)
(iv) Notifications regarding consultations (Arts. 12.4and12.5) 8
(G/SG/3, G/SG/5-G/L/110)
C. Examination andmonitoring ofmeasures covered byArticle 11.1 8
(G/SG/N/5/ZAF, G/SG/N/5/EEC/Suppl.1)
D. Progress inphasing outmeasures covered byArticles 10and11.1 8
E. Examination ofnotification oftermination ofasafeguard investigation with 10
nosafeguard measure imposed -(G/SG/N/9/USA/1)
F. Observers: international organizations -(WT/L/161, Annex 3) 10
G. Other business 10
H. Annual report totheCouncil forTrade inGoods -(G/SG/W/181) 10
I. Dateofnextregular meeting 11
A. National legislation
3. TheChairmanrecalledtheproceduresadoptedbytheCommitteeatitsMay1996specialmeeting
forthecontinuing review oflegislations, bothnewly submitted andthose thathavebeenpreviously
reviewed (G/SG/W/116). With respect tothelegislative notifications tobereviewed atthemeeting,
most written questions hadbeenreceived afterthe4October deadline. While theMembers whose
legislation wastobereviewed would beasked torespond toallquestions puttothem atthemeeting,
theChairman noted thatlatereceipt ofquestions made itdifficult forMembers torespond, andreduced
theeffectiveness ofthereview process.G/SG/M/7
Page3
4. TheChairman reminded Members thatfollow-up questions could beasked orally atthemeeting,
andthatifwritten answers tosuchquestions weredesired, thequestions should besubmitted inwriting
totheMember whose notification wasbeing reviewed, andtotheSecretariat, nolater than
25November 1996. Written answers toallquestions submitted inwriting should besubmitted tothe
Secretariat nolaterthan23December 1996.
5. TheChairman reminded theCommittee oftheprocedures thathadbeenagreed attheMay1996
special meeting fortherevisitation ofpreviously-reviewed legislations (G/SG/W/116). Inparticular,
anygiven suchlegislation would beplaced ontheagenda ofameeting onlyifwritten questions
concerning itwerereceived nolessthansixweeks before themeeting. Under theagreed procedures,
anysuchquestions would beanswered inwriting nolessthantwoweeks before themeeting, andthe
review atthemeeting would consist offollow-up tothewritten questions andanswers thathadbeen
exchanged. Nosuchquestions hadbeenreceived before thismeeting andtherefore thisitemwasnot
included ontheagenda.
(i) Examination ofneworamended legislations notpreviously reviewed bytheCommittee
(Art. 12.6)
6. TheCommittee proceeded tothesubstantive review ofthelegislation ontheagenda.
7. Thequestions concerning thelegislation ofArgentina canbefound inthefollowing documents:
G/SG/Q1/ARG/1 (Submitted byCanada)
G/SG/Q1/ARG/2 (Submitted byKorea)
Answers tothese questions canbefound inthefollowing documents:
G/SG/Q1/ARG/3 (ToKorea)
G/SG/Q1/ARG/4 (ToCanada)
8. Thequestions concerning thelegislation ofBrazil canbefound inthefollowing documents:
G/SG/Q1/BRA/1 (Submitted byKorea)
G/SG/Q1/BRA/2 +Corr.1 (Submitted bytheEC)
Answers tothese questions canbefound inthefollowing documents:
[NOREPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED TODATE]
9. ThequestionsconcerningthelegislationofElSalvadorcanbefoundinthefollowingdocuments:
G/SG/Q1/SLV/1 (Submitted byKorea)
Answers tothese questions canbefound inthefollowing documents:
G/SG/Q1/SLV/2 (ToKorea)
10. Noquestions were posed atthemeeting regarding Hungary 'slegislation.
11. Noquestions were posed atthemeeting regarding Israel'slegislation.
12. Noquestions were posed atthemeeting regarding Japan'slegislation.G/SG/M/7
Page4
13. Noquestions were posed atthemeeting regarding Norway 'slegislation.
14. Noquestions were posed atthemeeting regarding St.Lucia 'slegislation.
(ii) Examination ofnotifications without legislative text
15. Thequestions concerning thenotification ofCôte d'Ivoire canbefound inthefollowing
documents:
G/SG/Q1/CIV/1 (Submitted bytheUS)
Answers tothese questions canbefound inthefollowing documents:
[NOREPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED TODATE]
16. Thequestions concerning thenotification ofKenya canbefound inthefollowing documents:
G/SG/Q1/KEN/1 (Submitted bytheUS)
Answers tothese questions canbefound inthefollowing documents:
[NOREPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED TODATE]
17. Thequestions concerning thenotification ofNigeria canbefound inthefollowing documents:
G/SG/Q1/NGA/1 (Submitted bytheUS)
Answers tothese questions canbefound inthefollowing documents:
[NOREPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED TODATE]
(iii) Status oflegislative notifications
18. TheChairman reported onthestatus oflegislative notifications received fromMembers, noting
thatcompliance withthisobligation waslessthancomplete. Asof24October 1996, nolegislative
notification hadbeen received from thefollowing 45Members: Antigua &Barbuda, Bahrain,
Bangladesh,Barbados,Belize,Benin,Botswana,BruneiDarussalam,BurkinaFaso,Burundi,Cameroon,
CentralAfricanRepublic,Chad,Cyprus,Djibouti,Dominica,Fiji,Gabon,theGambia,Grenada,Guinea
Bissau,Guyana,Haiti,Jamaica,Kuwait,Lesotho,Liechtenstein,Madagascar,Malawi,Mali,Mauritania,
Mozambique, Namibia, Papua NewGuinea, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts &Nevis, Saint Vincent &
Grenadines, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Suriname, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, andUnited Arab
Emirates. TheChairman recalled thattheWTO wasnearing itssecond anniversary, andthatthelist
ofMembers nothaving made therequired legislative notification hadremained virtually unchanged
since oneyearearlier. TheChairman noted thattherequirement forlegislative notification, including
foraverysimple"nil"notificationfromMemberswithnosafeguardslegislation,isessentialforensuring
fulltransparency among allWTO Members, andthatthelackofcompliance bymore thanone-third
ofallWTO Members withthisrequirement created averyunfortunate gapintransparency inthisarea.
19. TheChairman reminded theCommittee ofthehorizontal efforts being made throughout the
WTO toimprove compliance withallnotification obligations, including through thedevelopment of
ahandbook forpreparing thevarious notifications. Heurged allMembers tocomplement theseeffortsG/SG/M/7
Page5
byencouraging theMembers thathadnotyetdone sotosubmit notifications concerning thestatus
oftheirlegislation, orthelackofanylegislation, assoonaspossible.
B. Notifications ofactions related tosafeguard measures
(i) Notifications ofinitiation ofinvestigations (Art. 12.1(a))
20. TheCommittee reviewed thethree notifications ofinitiation ofinvestigation thathadbeen
circulated since theprevious meeting: Brazil 'sinvestigation ontoys; Korea 'sinvestigation ondairy
products; andKorea 'sinvestigation onbicycles.
21. Noquestions were raised withrespect toBrazil 'snotification.
22. Withrespect toKorea 'sinvestigation ofdairyproducts, therepresentatives oftheUnited States,
NewZealand, theEC,andCanada asked therepresentative ofKorea toreport onthestatus ofthe
investigation. Therepresentatives ofNewZealand andCanada stated thattheyhadinformation that
afinding ofserious injury hadbeenmade, andsought confirmation ofthisfrom therepresentative
ofKorea. Therepresentative ofCanada indicated concern overtheinitiation, andasked foran
identification oftheMembers affected bytheinvestigation.
23. Therepresentative ofNewZealand asked Korea tomake known thegrounds foranysuch
determination, indicated thathisdelegation didnotbelieve thatsuchafinding waswarranted, andstated
thattheuseofsafeguard action withrespect toproducts thathadbeenliberalized under theBalance
ofPayments provisions andinthecontext oftheUruguay Round wasregrettable. Inaddition, the
representative ofNewZealand recalled theAgreement 'srequirement forbilateral consultations inthe
event thatapplication ofameasure wasproposed.
24. Therepresentative oftheECexpressed concern overtheinitiation, indicating thattheEChad
atrade interest inthematter. TheEChadsentaletter totheKorean Trade Commission, seeking
information beyond thatinthenotification, andhadjustreceived aresponse, which wasbeing studied.
TherepresentativeoftheECindicatedthatthenotificationofinitiationcontainedinsufficientinformation,
particularly astothereasons orrationale fortheinitiation, andmentioned, bycomparison, theKorean
notification ofinitiation intheinvestigation ofbicycles. Therepresentative oftheECsuggested that
theinformation contained intheletter ithadreceived fromtheKorean Trade Commission should be
included intheoriginal notification. Thisrepresentative alsonoted thatalthough theoriginal notification
wasdated 11June1996, itwascirculated 1July1996, andhevoiced concern overthedelay, which
could cause problems forMembers whomight needtoadopt legaldefense promptly upon initiation
ofaninvestigation byanother Member.
25. TherepresentativeofKorearegrettedhavinginconveniencedMembersbyanylackofinformation
inthenotification, andindicated thathisdelegation wasnotinaposition tofurnish additional information
atthemeeting. Heasked anyinterested Members toaddress theirquestions totheKorean delegation
inwriting, andindicated thathisdelegation would doitsbesttoprovide theadditional information
requested, solongassuchinformation wasnotconfidential.
26. TheChairman reminded thedelegation ofKorea oftheobligation tonotify anyaffirmative
finding ofserious injury duetoincreased imports, ifsuchafinding hadbeenmade.
27. RegardingKorea'sinitiationofaninvestigationonbicycles,therepresentativesofJapan,Canada
andtheUnited States expressed theirinterest. Therepresentatives ofJapan andCanada indicated that
theywould submit written questions toKorea about theinvestigation.G/SG/M/7
Page6
28. Therepresentative ofKorea stated thathisdelegation would respond toallsuchquestions
immediately.
29. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made.
(ii) Notifications offindings ofserious injury orthreat caused byincreased imports (Art.
12.1(b))
30. TheCommittee reviewed theonenotification ofafinding ofserious injury duetoincreased
imports thathadbeencirculated since theprevious meeting, thatfromtheUnited States withrespect
tobroom cornbrooms.
31. Therepresentative ofMexico asked forawritten clarification onwhether ameasure hadbeen
implemented. Therepresentative oftheUnited States indicated thaton1August 1996, theUS
InternationalTradeCommissionhadmadeanaffirmativedeterminationofseriousinjuryduetoincreased
imports, andthaton30August 1996, thePresident oftheUnited States haddeferred for90daysany
decision withrespect toapplying ameasure, toallow timeforanegotiated solution toaddress theserious
injury, tofacilitate industry adjustment andtobalance thecompeting interests involved. Hefurther
stated thatasthe90-day period wasstillunderway, nodecision hadbeentaken, butthatanyactions
taken oragreements reached inthematter would befullyconsistent withtheUnited States 'obligations
under theAgreement onSafeguards.
32. Therepresentative ofColombia asked when thesubstantive information onincreased imports
required initem2oftherelevant notification format would beprovided totheCommittee, given that
Colombia understood thatsuchinformation hadbeenreported totheUSPresident inAugust 1996.
Therepresentative oftheUnited States indicated that,inaccordance withtheUnited States 'usual
practice, andduetothelength ofthereport, thefullreport oftheUSInternational Trade Commission
ontheinvestigation hadbeenplaced onfilewiththeSecretariat rather thanbeing circulated toall
Members. Therepresentative ofColombia stated thatfromasystemic point ofview, theinformation
referred tointhenotification formats should beprovided therein, asitwasdifficult forsmall delegations,
andforcapital-based officials, otherwise tofollow developments inaparticular situation. Shenoted
thattheinitial USnotification indicated thattherelevant information would beprovided atalaterdate,
andstated thatsuchinformation should beprovided orotherwise updated.
33. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made.
(iii) Notifications regarding application ofprovisional safeguard measures (Art. 12.4)
34. TheCommittee reviewed theonenotification regarding application ofaprovisional safeguard
measure thathadbeencirculated since theprevious meeting, thatfromBrazil withrespect toimports
oftoys.
35. Therepresentative ofJapan noted hisdelegation 'sserious concern overthemeasure, andstated
thathisdelegation shared inparticular theconcerns raised bytheECinitsletter toBrazil (G/SG/3)
astothemeaning of"directly competitive products" andastothecausal linkbetween increased imports
andserious injury. Henoted thattheprovisional measure raised thetariffs ontwoHarmonized System
categories --wheeled toysandvideo games --above bound rates. Hestated thatitwasclearthatwheeled
toysandvideo games were different, duetothemanner andoccasions oftheir use,andother
characteristics, which raised serious doubts astotheconsistency ofthemeasure withtheAgreement.
Hestated thatvideo games werenotproduced bytheBrazilian domestic producers, andthatmostwere
produced bylicensees offoreign makers. Forthisreason, itwasdifficult toagree thattoysbyBrazilianG/SG/M/7
Page7
makers weredirectly competitive withvideo games. Heindicated thatJapan reserved itsrights under
theWTO withrespect tothemeasure.
36. Therepresentative ofJapan thenposed three questions (which already hadbeensubmitted in
writing tothedelegation ofBrazil). Firstwaswhether theprovisional measure applied toproducts
from Mercosur member countries, andifnot,whatthelegal basis wasforexcluding them, inlight
oftheGATT 'sandSafeguards Agreement 'sMFN requirements, andinlightofArticle 5oftheBrazilian
decree onsafeguards (Decree 1488/95, 11May1995). Therepresentative ofBrazil stated thatthe
measure applied toallcountries, butthatduetotheMercosur treaty which provides atariffpreference
of100% forimports from Mercosur countries, theeffect ofthemeasure onthese countries wasnil.
Therepresentative ofJapan indicated thathisgovernment wasnotconvinced bythisexplanation. The
representative oftheUnited States queried, inlightoftheearlier discussion oftheBrazilian safeguard
legislation andBrazil 'slegalsystem, whether themeasure 'slackofeffect onimports fromMercosur
countries wasbecause theMercosur treaty takes precedence overBrazil 'ssafeguards decree, andthat
thus,regardlessofthatdecree'sMFNprovision,thiswouldpreventapplicationofameasuretoMercosur
countries. Therepresentative ofBrazil indicated thatthere would benolegalbasisforexcluding any
countryfromapplicationofasafeguardmeasure,giventheMFNobligationsoftheSafeguardsAgreement
andtheBrazilian decree. TheAsuncion Treaty which created theMercosur customs union andfree
tradezoneprovided thateachMercosur member accord toalltheothers a100% tariffpreference (i.e.,
azerotariff), onallbutafewproducts listed asexceptions. Therefore, theissue wasnotwhich
obligation applied withrespect toMercosur members, butrather, thattwoobligations applied. He
further indicated thatnegotiations werebeing heldwithin Mercosur todraftacommon regulation for
theapplication ofsafeguard, anti-dumping andcountervailing measures. Thisregulation would make
clear thattheadoption oftrade remedies within thecustoms union would follow therules specified
therein.
37. Thesecond question posed bytherepresentative ofJapan wasregarding thevolume andvalue,
during thepastthree years, ofdomestic production ofeachproduct covered bythemeasure. The
representative ofBrazil indicated thatthisquestion, which hadbeenreceived inwriting, would be
answered inwriting.
38. Therepresentative ofJapan thenasked what theconcrete criteria were fordistinguishing
"directly" from "indirectly" competitive products, andwhen asked toclarify thisquestion, restated
itinterms ofthedistinction between "directly competitive" and"non-directly competitive" products.
Therepresentative ofBrazil stated thattheBrazilian safeguards decree doesnotcontain suchconcrete
criteria, nordoestheAgreement require thecreation ofsuchcriteria. Hequestioned whether itwas
possible toestablish suchcriteria, reminded theCommittee ofthelongdiscussion thathadtaken place
ontheconcept of"directly competitive", andreferred tothereport oftheAppellate Body ontheJapanese
liquor case,which treated thissubject, interalia. Therepresentative oftheECnoted hisdisagreement
withpartofBrazil 'sresponse. Although theAgreement contains norequirement todefine thecriteria
foradetermination ofwhether aproduct isdirectly competitive, itdoesrequire thatsuchadetermination
bemade. From thisperspective, itmight beamatter ofsemantics whether thecriteria arelisted or
described. Thisrepresentative indicated hisbelief thattheBrazilian authority wastackling theissue,
andnoted thatwhether itwasdoing sosatisfactorily wasanother matter.
39. Therepresentative ofJapan sought confirmation thatBrazil would provide written answers
tothewrittenquestions.TheChairmanrequestedthatthedelegationofJapansubmititswrittenquestions
totheSecretariat forcirculation totheCommittee. These questions weresubsequently circulated in
document G/SG/Q2/BRA/1. TODATE, NOREPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.
40. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made.G/SG/M/7
Page8
(iv) Notifications regarding consultations (Arts. 12.4and12.5)
41. TheCommittee reviewed thenotifications thatithadreceived concerning consultations between
theECandBrazil regarding theprovisional measure ontoys(G/SG/3 andG/SG/5-G/L/110). The
representative oftheECindicated thathisdelegation concurred withthenotification byBrazil asto
theoutcome andpresent stateoftheconsultations. Headded thatalthough theconsultations hadbeen
helpful inclarifying factual andmethodological issues, theECnevertheless remained concerned over
themeasure, andhadfollowed uptheconsultations withwritten questions regarding some ofthematters
discussed andcertain factual clarifications, theanswers towhich theECtrusted would beprovided
intimefortheECtomake further input intotheinvestigation. Hethenasked theBrazilian delegation
about theexpected timing fortheremainder oftheinvestigation. Therepresentative oftheUnited States
indicated thathisdelegation alsowasinterested inanswers tothequestion raised bytheEC. The
representative ofBrazil, withregard tothequestion from theUnited States, recalled theinformation
provided inthenotification oftheresults oftheconsultations, andstated thattheinvestigating authority
hadtaken duenoteofallpoints discussed intheconsultations, thatthenewwritten questions were
intheprocess ofbeing answered bytheauthority, andthattheanswers would beprovided inthenear
future. Astothetiming oftheinvestigation, therepresentative ofBrazil recalled that,ashadbeen
notified, theprovisional measure would expire on31December 1996, andthattherefore, anydecision
astoapplication ofadefinitive measure would betaken before thatdate.
42. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made.
C. Examination andmonitoring ofmeasures covered byArticle 11.1
43. TheCommittee reviewed thetwonewnotifications pertaining totimetables forthephase-out
ofmeasures covered byArticle 11.1thathadbeenreceived andcirculated since theprevious meeting,
onefrom South Africa andtheother, asupplement, from theEuropean Communities.
44. Therepresentative oftheECstated thatsince South Africa 'snotification hadcirculated, the
EChadhadbilateral contacts withSouth Africa concerning thetariff items fornewtyres thatwere
notincluded inSouth Africa 'snotification ontimetables forliberalization ofimport controls ontyres.
TheSouth African authorities hadinformed theECthatremoval ofimport controls ontheseremaining
items wasunder consideration, andmight beimplemented before January 1997. Therepresentative
oftheECrequested clarification bytheSouth African delegation regarding theelimination oftheimport
controls, andregarding thetiming ofanofficial communication tothateffect. Therepresentative of
South Africa confirmed thatthetarget dateof31July1996 fortheelimination ofimport controls on
those items thathadbeenlisted inSouth Africa 'snotification hadbeenmet,thatthose items would
remain under surveillance, andthatimport licenses would beissued freely. Asfortheother items,
forwhich nodatehadbeennotified, import controls would belifted inJanuary 1997, andanotice
tothateffect would bepublished intheSouth African Government Gazette. TheChairman requested
thatSouth Africa make anotification tothiseffect.
45. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made.
D. Progress inphasing outmeasures covered byArticles 10and11.1
46. TheChairman recalled thatArticle 13.1(d) oftheAgreement required theCommittee tomonitor
thephase-out ofmeasures covered byArticles 10and11.1, andthattheCommittee haddecided, at
itsmeeting of24February 1995, thatsuchmonitoring should beconducted onanannual basis. Two
Members, theECandKorea, hadnotified pre-existing Article XIXmeasures covered byArticle 10.
Inaddition, fiveMembers, Cyprus, theEC,Korea, Slovenia andSouth Africa, hadnotified pre-existing
greyareameasures, along withtimetables forthephase-out ofsuchmeasures. Each Member havingG/SG/M/7
Page9
sonotified wasasked tomake abrief statement regarding itsprogress inphasing outitsnotified
measures.
47. Therepresentative ofCyprus reported thatCyprus continued toabide byitspreviously notified
timetable, under which itsnotified measures would beeliminated by31December 1998, andcontinued
tobesubject tothisobligation.
48. Therepresentative oftheECindicated thattheprogressive elimination ofthemeasures covered
byArticle 11.1wasproceeding asnotified (G/SG/N/5/EEC). Some measures hadterminated on
1June1995, threewould terminate attheendof1996, andoneattheendof1997. Measures covered
byArticle 10would, inkeeping with therequirements oftheAgreement, beeliminated by
31December 1999.
49. Therepresentative ofKorea indicated thatthephase-out ofvoluntary export restraints was
proceeding asnotified. Heindicated thatthese weremeasures agreed bytheprivate sector interests
inKorea andtheaffected countries, andthatitwasnotappropriate tomake anychanges tothe
termination dates thathadbeendecided bythese private sectors. Herecalled thetermination dates
foreachmeasure: microwave ovens (ECandKorea) -31December 1998; colour picture tubes (EC
andKorea)-31December1997;stainlesssteelflatware(UK,GermanyandKorea)-31December1998;
oysters inairtight containers (allMembers andKorea) -31December 1998; andchestnuts inshells
(Japan andKorea) -31December 1998.
50. Therepresentatives ofBrazil, theUnited States, Japan, andCanada asked forclarification of
thenature ofthemeasures notified byKorea. Inparticular, given Korea 'sstatement thatthese were
measures agreed between private sector interests inKorea andother Member countries, thequestion
wasraised whether Korea considered thatthese wereorwerenotsafeguard measures covered bythe
Agreement. Alsoraised wastheextent towhich thegovernment ofKorea tookanyaction tosupport
suchagreements between private interests.
51. Therepresentative ofKorea stated thatthese werevoluntary export restraints thatwerefully
private sector measures, thatis,thattheywere agreed between theprivate sectors (importers and
exporters). TheKorean government 'srolewithrespect tothese measures wastoensure thattheterms
oftheagreements wererespected. Thus, thegovernment controlled Korean exports oftheproducts
toensure thatthequota levels thathadbeenagreed bytheprivate parties were notexceeded. The
representative ofCanada responded thatthisstatement indicated thattheKorean government didplay
aroleinenforcing themeasures, sothatCanada sawthemeasures asgoing beyond purely private
sector measures. Thegovernment ofCanada would follow upwithwritten questions.
52. TheChairman requested thatinterested Members submit written questions toKorea, sothat
Korea could provide answers inwriting.
53. Therepresentative ofSlovenia recalled thatinJanuary 1996, Slovenia hadnotified finaldates
forelimination ofthemeasures thathadbeennotified inMarch 1995. Since then,therehadbeensome
changes, andsome measures hadalready beeneliminated. Slovenia would provide anotification
indicating allofthechanges.
54. Therepresentative ofSouth Africa indicated thathisgovernment didnotintend todeviate from
thedates previously notified fortheelimination ofmeasures. Thatis,discretionary import licensing
onoilandpetrochemicalproductswouldterminateattheendof1998,andonpolymerandpolypropylene
filmbytheendof1996. Moreover, ashadbeennoted under theprevious agenda item, measures on
some newpneumatic tyreshadbeeneliminated asof31July1996, andontheremaining tyreswould
beeliminated inJanuary 1997.G/SG/M/7
Page10
55. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made.
E. Examinationofnotificationofterminationofasafeguardinvestigationwithnosafeguardmeasure
imposed
56. TheChairman recalled theCommittee 'sdecision atitsspecial meeting ofMay1996 toadopt
aformat forthenotification ofcertain information upontermination ofasafeguard investigation with
nosafeguard measure imposed. TheCommittee reviewed theonenotification ofthistypethathad
beenreceived andcirculated since theprevious meeting, thatfrom theUnited States concerning its
investigation oftomatoes andbellpeppers. Nocomments weremade orquestions raised withrespect
tothisnotification.
F. Observers: international organizations
57. TheChairman recalled theGeneral Council 's"Guidelines onObserver Status forInternational
Intergovernmental Organizations" (WT/L/161, Annex 3),inparticular theprovision thatrequests for
observer status beconsidered onacase-by-case basis byeachWTO body towhich sucharequest is
addressed, taking intoaccount suchfactors asthenature ofwork oftheorganization concerned, the
nature ofitsmembership, thenumber ofWTO Members intheorganization, reciprocity withrespect
toaccess toproceedings, documents andother aspects ofobservership, andwhether theorganization
hadbeenassociated inthepastwiththework oftheCONTRACTING PARTIES toGATT 1947. The
Chairman further recalled thatuptothattime, theCommittee had,pursuant toadecision taken atits
meeting of13-14 July1995, invited theIMF, OECD andWorld Bank toattend itsmeetings onan
adhocbasis, pending theestablishment ofnecessary criteria forobserver status ofinternational and
intergovernmental organizations. Given thattheGeneral Council hadestablished therelevant criteria
theChairman proposed toconsult informally onwhich international intergovernmental organizations
would begranted observer status intheCommittee, andpending theoutcome ofsuchconsultations,
heproposed thattheCommittee continue toinvite onanadhocbasis those organizations which had
beenfollowing theCommittee 'smeetings uptothattime.
58. TheCommittee sodecided.
G. Other business
59. TheChairman informed theCommittee thaton2May1996hehadreceived aletter fromthe
Chairman oftheCommittee onTrade andDevelopment requesting information ontheimplementation
ofdevelopment-related provisions intheSafeguards Agreement, inconnection withthatCommittee 's
periodic review andreporting totheGeneral Council regarding theapplication ofspecial provisions
intheMultilateral Trade Agreements andrelated Ministerial Decisions infavour ofdeveloping country
Members, andinparticular least-developed country Members. Because theCommittee onSafeguards
would nothavemetagain intimetoformulate aresponse totherequest, theChairman hadsubmitted
aresponse under hisownresponsibility, which hadbeencompiled bytheSecretariat, along withthe
responsesofotherCommittees,indocumentWT/COMTD/W/16dated27August1996andanAddendum
thatwould beissued shortly. Based onthisdocument, thematter wasunder consideration inthe
Committee onTrade andDevelopment.
60. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatement made.
H. Annual report totheCouncil forTrade inGoods
61. TheCommittee adopted itsannual report totheCouncil forTrade inGoods (subsequently
circulated asG/L/129).G/SG/M/7
Page11
I. Dateofnextregular meeting
62. TheCommittee decided thatitsregular Spring meeting for1997would beheldduring theweek
of28April 1997, thatis,inconjunction withtheregular meetings oftheCommittees onAnti-dumping
Practices andonSubsidies andCountervailing Measures.
63. TheChairman reminded theCommittee thatpreviously-reviewed legislative notifications would
beplaced ontheagenda oftheSpring meeting onlyifquestions concerning suchnotifications were
received from Members nolaterthansixweeks before themeeting, andthatsuchquestions should
besubmitteddirectlytotheMemberconcernedandtotheSecretariat.Membersreceivingsuchquestions
werereminded tosubmit theirwritten answers nolaterthantwoweeks before themeeting sothatthe
discussion atthemeeting could proceed onthebasis ofthewritten questions andanswers.
64. Themeeting wasadjourned.