./.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SG/Q1/POL/4
10 April 2002
(02-1930)
Committee on Safeguards Original:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLE 12.6 OF THE AGREEMENT
Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES
Regarding the Notification of POLAND1
The following communication, dated 9 April 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
1. Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Polish law and various other articles of the law, refer to the
taking of safeguard measures against “excessive imports”, and Article 3 of the law appears to indicate
when imports might be excessive.  However, this is not a term used in the Safeguards Agreement.  Forpurposes of the Polish law, what does the term mean, and what is its significance?
2. The definition of “like products” in Article 4, paragraph 1 (1), of the Polish law suggests that
there might be two types of “like” domestic products in a safeguards investigation, products that are
“identical in every respect” and “other products which, although not identical in every respect, have
characteristics strictly corresponding to those of the products under investigation”.  When both types
of domestic products exist, please explain how the Safeguards Agreement authorizes a member tolimit the domestic industry to the producers of the first type of product.  Please also explain the
difference between this “other [like] products” definition and the definition of “directly competitive
products” in Article 4, paragraph 1 (2), of the Polish law.
3. In the case of measures taken against countries with which Poland has entered into free trade
agreements (Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Polish law), what measures might Poland apply, and may
those measures exceed tariff rates or other restrictions applicable to other WTO countries?  Under
what conditions might Poland exclude imports from countries with which it has free trade
agreements?
4. The definition of “directly competitive products” in Article 4, paragraph 1 (2), of the Polish
law suggests that “like” products would never be directly competitive with each other.  Is this the
intent of the Polish law?
5. Articles 16 through 18 of the Polish law set out procedures that the minister “may” follow in
conducting investigations, including with respect to part icipation by interested parties.  The use of the
word “may” in these articles suggests that the minister may choose to follow other procedures, or
provide no opportunity at all for interested parties to participate.  Article 3, paragraph 1, of the
Safeguards Agreement, sets out certain procedural requirements and makes them mandatory (it uses
                                                     
1 G/SG/N/1/POL/3G/SG/Q1/POL/4
Page 2
the term “shall”).  Please explain how Poland w ill ensure that the procedures it follows in its
investigation will meet the Safeguards Agr eement requirements in Article 3, paragraph 1.
6. What provision will Poland make for protection of confidential information?  Does Polish law
include a provision similar to that in Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Safeguards Agreement relating toconfidential information?
7. The list of factors in Article 20, paragraph 2, of the Polish law, to be considered in
determining whether there is a threat of serious injury to the domestic industry, does not include
capacity utilization (which is one of the factors listed in Article 4, paragraph 2(a), of the Safeguards
Agreement).  Is there a reason for the omission?
8. Article 21 of the Polish law allows the minister to apply provisional measures when he
preliminarily determines that imports are excessive and that introduction of a measure only after
completion of the investigation would cause or threaten serious injury which would be difficult to
remedy.  Please explain how this provision is cons istent with the requirements of Article 6 of the
Safeguards Agreement, which allows a Member to take a provisional measure in “criticalcircumstances where delay would cause damage which it would be difficult to repair” and requires a
determination that there is “clear evidence that increased imports have caused or are threatening to
cause serious injury”.   For example, Article 21 does not refer to “critical circumstances”, nor does it
require a determination that there is “clear evidence” that increased imports are causing or threatening
serious injury.
9. Article 28, paragraph 6 of the Polish law provides for a remedy in the form of a “non-
automatic registration of imports”.  Are such measures applicable only to imports from non-WTO
countries, as suggested by Article 9, paragraph 2, of the Polish law?  Please describe in greater detail
what such a registration is and how it would work, and if such measures can be applied against WTOmembers, indicate the provision in the Safeguards Agreement that authorizes a member to apply a
measure in such form.
10. Article 34, paragraph 6 of the Polish law sets out the basis for determining whether a
safeguard measure may be extended.  It includes as part of that determination a finding whether
continuation is necessary “to facilitate adjustments in the domestic industry.”  Article 7, paragraph 2
of the Safeguards Agreement, however, requires, inter alia , “that there is evidence the industry is
adjusting”.  Does the Polish law require the minister to make such a finding?  Please explain how this
provision of Polish law is consistent with the requirements of the Safeguards Agreement.
__________