RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/CZE/4
G/SCM/Q1/CZE/4
8 September 1999
(99-3730)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Replies to Questions Posed by the EUROPEAN COMMUNITY1, TURKEY2,
and the UNITED STATES3 Regarding the Notification of the CZECH REPUBLIC4
The following communication, dated 3 September 1999, has been received from the
Permanent Mission of the Czech Republic.
_______________
Legal status of the WTO A-D Agreement in the Czech Republic
At the outset, the Czech authorities would like to comment on the legal status of the A-D
Agreement in the Czech Republic.
The A-D Agreement is an international agreemen t which has to be incorporated into domestic
law by a special act in order to impose duties and confer rights since, according to Article 10 of theConstitution of the Czech Republic, only internat ional treaties dealing with human rights and
fundamental liberties to which the Czech Republic is bound have direct effect.
Respective legal instrument incorporating the A-D Agreement into the Czech legal system is
the Act No. 152/1997 Coll., on the protection against imports of dumped products and on the change
and amendment of some laws (hereinafter referred to as "The Act") dated 17 June 1997 which came
into effect  on 10 July 1997.  The Act was notified to the WTO and is subject of this review.
The Act implements into the Czech law provis ions of the A-D Agreement. Since the Act
contains a specific incorporation clause contained in Section 37 through which all provisions of the
A-D Agreement may be applicable it is not aimed at reproducing the text of the A-D Agreement
word-by-word. Instead it introduces into the domestic legal system some new terms, establishesdomestic anti-dumping proceedings and determines authority responsible for A-D investigation.
Other parts of the A-D Agreement are directly applicable through the incorporation clause.
According to this clause provisions of this Act shall apply unless otherwise provided by the
international treaty binding the Czech Republic and published in Collection of Laws.  Thus, if a
conflict arises, the provisions of the A-D Agreement prevail and the Czech authorities are obliged toact in a manner consistent with the A-D Agreement.
                                                     
1 G/ADP/Q1/CZE/1-G/SCM/Q1/CZE/1
2 G/ADP/Q1/CZE/3-G/SCM/Q1/CZE/3
3 G/ADP/Q1/CZE/2-G/SCM/Q1/CZE/2
4 G/ADP/N/1/CZE + Corr.1 & G/SCM/N/1/CZE/1G/ADP/Q1/CZE/4
G/SCM/Q1/CZE/4
Page 2
QUESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
Q1. Is it foreseen to count the 30 - day time limit for replying to questionnaires from the date
of receipt of the questionnaire, as provided for in Article 6(1.1) of the WTO Anti-Dumping
Code?
Reply
Yes, the provision of Section 12 is consistent  with Article 6.1.1 of the A-D Agreement.  The
time limit of 30 days is counted from the date of receipt of the questionnaire.  The date of receipt isdeemed to be one week from the date on which  it  was sent to the respondent or transmitted to the
appropriate diplomatic representative of the exporting country.  An extension of the 30 - day time
limit is foreseen as well.
Q2. An extended definitive duty or undertaking can be valid for longer than five years.  Does
this mean the extension itself can be longer than fi ve years, or the total period of validity of the
duty/undertaking can be longer than five years?
Reply
The Act is consistent with the principle that an anti-dumping duty shall remain in force only
as long as and to the extent necessary to counteract injury caused by dumping.  Any definitive
anti-dumping duty and/or undertaking shall be terminated on the date not later than five years from
the imposition or from the date of the most recent review initiated according to the Act.  Section 32 of
the Act makes any extension of the five year period conditional upon the review of the need for thecontinued imposition of definitive duty and/or undertaking.  What is, therefore, meant is the total
period of validity of a definitive duty and/or undertaking.
QUESTIONS FROM TURKEY
Q1. Could the Czech authorities explain what is  meant by ”justification of the application”
in Section 8(1)(j)?
Reply
It is a formal brief summary of data and information provided by the applicant including a
clearly formulated request for the initiation of anti-dumping investigation.
Q2.  Could the Czech authorities clarify, in connection with Section 11of the law, whether
the government of the exporting member is deem ed to be a participant of the investigation?
Reply
Although Section 11 of the Act does not explicitly mention the government of the exporting
country, the Act provides ample opportunity to present in writing all evidence which it considers
relevant in respect to the investigation and defend its interests.  It will be informed of all essential
facts under consideration and relevant to the investigation and will have the possibility to present
comments before final determination is made.G/ADP/Q1/CZE/4
G/SCM/Q1/CZE/4
Page 3
Q3. It is stated in Section 12(1) of the law that participants of the investigation are obliged to
provide information required. What consequences may result from failure to abide by such
obligation?
Reply
No legal consequences result for participants who refuse access to, or otherwise do not
provide requested information.  However, when participants of the investigation do not cooperate and
thus relevant information is being withheld from the authorities, respective determinations may be
made on the basis of information available.
Q4. It is pointed out in Section 14 of the la w that laws regulating commercial, economic,
service and state secret are exempted from the co nfidentiality rule.  Compared with Article 6.5
of the Agreement, are these exceptions not too broad, and, do they not undermine the rationale
of the Agreement as regards the issue of confidentiality?
Reply
Provision of Section 14 is fully consistent with  the A-D Agreement. According to the Act, a
confidentiality of information means that such information shall not be disclosed without specific
permission of supplying person.  Section 14 of the Act does not exempts laws regulating commercial,economic, service and state secret.  On the contrary, its purpose is to underline that relevant
provisions of these acts are not affected and criteria for confidential treatment under the Act do not
substitute criteria laid down in the Commercial Code and/or the Act on protection of state secret.
QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES
Q1. No provision in the Czech law refers to anal yses of threat of material injury.  Does the
Czech Republic engage in threat analysis?  If s o, what factors are considered?  Does any section
of Czech law implement Article 3.7 of the A-D Agreement?
Reply
Yes, by introducing into the domestic legal system the term “threat of material injury”
Section 6 of the Act provides the possibility to make determinations regarding threat of material
injury.  Article 3.7 of the A-D Agreement, including the factors contained therein, shall be
implemented on the basis of the incorporation clause contained in Section 37.
Q2. Section 7(a) of the Czech law does not state what factors the investigating authority is to
examine in analysing the volume of dumped imports.  How does the Czech Republic implement
the requirement of Art. 3.2 of the A-D Agreem ent that the investigat ing authorities shall
consider whether there has a signif icant increase of dumped imports, either in absolute terms or
relative to production or consumption in the importing Member?”
Q3. Section 7(a) of the Czech law also does not state what factors the investigating authority
is to examine in analysing the price effects of dumped imports.  How does the Czech Republic
implement the requirement of Art. 3.2 of the A- D Agreement that ”the investigating authorities
shall consider whether there has been a signif icant price undercutting by the dumped imports
as compared with the price of like product of importing Member, or whether the effect of such
imports is otherwise to depress price to a signif icant degree or prevent price increases, which
otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree?”G/ADP/Q1/CZE/4
G/SCM/Q1/CZE/4
Page 4
Reply (to both questions)
In injury determination, the Czech investigatin g authority shall examine both the volume of
the dumped imports and the effect of the dumped imports on prices in the domestic market for a like
product and the impact of these imports on the domestic producers of such a product.  The
implementation of the requirements of Article 3 .2 of the A-D Agreement in respective anti-dumping
investigations is secured through the incorporation clause contained in Section 37.
Q4. Section 8(1) of the Czech law requires only that one filing an antidumping petition be
”natural or legal person with the place of busi ness on the territory of the Czech Republic.”  Is
there any further limitation on who may file peti tions? How is Section 8(1) of the Czech law
consistent with Art. 5.1 of the A-D Agreement, which requires that an application for
antidumping measures be filed ”on behalf of the domestic industry?”
Reply
No, there are no further limitations on who may file petitions. Although the Section 8.1 does
not contain direct reference to an application filled on behalf of the domestic industry it is fully
consistent with Article 5.1 of the A/D Agreement.  In accordance with Section 8.2, an application
shall be considered to be filed on behalf of the domestic industry if evidence of explicit supportexpressed by producers of the like product in the Czech Republic who represents more than 25 per
cent of the total production of the like product is presented.  Such evidence should be a part of any
application for anti dumping investigation.
Q5. Section 10(1) of the Czech law apparently allows initiation of an investigation if the
Ministry has evidence of dumped products.
(a) If this is referring only to the investigations initiated by the Ministry's own
initiative, how does this provision sati sfy Art.5.6 of the A-D Agreement, which
requires evidence of injury and causation as well?
(b) If this section is referring to the initiation of any investigation, how is
section 10(1) consistent with the requirement of Art. 5.2 of the AD Agreement
than an application must include evidence of injury and causation?  How is
Section 10.1 consistent with the requirement of Art. 5.3 of the A-D Agreement
that the authorities must examine the adequacy of the injury allegations?
Reply
Under Section 8(2)(g) of the Act the information on injury caused by imports of allegedly
dumped products including monetary expression of it s magnitude and information on available factors
mentioned in Section 7.1(b) is required.  Before initiating any anti-dumping investigation, the Czechinvestigating authority shall, in accordance w ith Section 37, examine adequacy and accuracy of
evidence of both dumping and injury as well as other information contained in the application.  No
A-D investigation shall be initiated unless authoritie s determine that there is sufficient evidence of
injury caused by dumped product.
Q6. Section 19(1) of the Czech law appears to permit imposition of provisional anti-dumping
duties without prior comment of the parties.  How is this consistent with Art. 7.1 of the A-D
Agreement?G/ADP/Q1/CZE/4
G/SCM/Q1/CZE/4
Page 5
Reply
Section 19(1) is consistent with Article 7.1 of the A-D Agreement.  No provisional measure
may be applied unless antidumping investigation has been initiated, public notice has been made andparties have been given adequate opportunities to submit information and make comments.  These
requirements are reflected in  Sections 10 and 12-16 of the Act.
Q7. Does Section 20(1) of the Czech law, like Art. 8.2 of the A-D Agreement, require that a
preliminary affirmative decision regarding dumping and injury be made before a price
undertaking may be sought or accepted?
Reply
Yes. Undertaking shall not be accepted or sought unless preliminary affirmative
determination of dumping and injury is made.
Q8. Section 32(2) of the Czech law appears to make extending a duty or an undertaking
mandatory if the exporters do not offer evidence to the contrary.  How is this consistent with
Art. 11.3 of the A-D Agreement, which states that  an antidumping duty will be terminated after
five years unless there is a determination that ex piry of the duty will lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping and injury?
Reply
Section 32(2) is consistent with Article 11.3  of the A-D Agreement.  Any extension of a
definitive duty or an undertaking is not mandatory.  According to Section 32(1) of the Act such anextension is possible only when the Czech investig ating authority determines, in review initiated
before expiration of the original date for application of duty or undertaking, that the expiry of the duty
or undertaking would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.
Q9. Does Section 32(3) of the Czech law allows an undertaking or duty to be extended for
more than five years without subsequent review? If so, how is this consistent with Art. 11.3 of
the A-D Agreement?
Reply
No.  Section 32(3) provides that any extension of duty or undertaking is possible only when
the Czech investigating authority determines in a re view that the expiry of the duty or undertaking
would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.
Q10. Does the Czech law authorise a regional industry analysis, as described in Art.4.1(ii) of
the A-D Agreement?
Reply
The possibility for a regional industry analysis is provided by Section 37 of the Act.G/ADP/Q1/CZE/4
G/SCM/Q1/CZE/4
Page 6
Q11. Does the Czech Republic engage in cumulative analysis when imports from more than
one country are simultaneously subject to invest igation, as authorised by Art. 3.3 of the A-D
Agreement?  If so, what criteria are applied?
Reply
Yes.  Cumulative assessment of the effect of imports is possible provided that criteria set out
in Article 3.3 of the A-D Agreement are met.
__________