RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/ACC/SAU/35
14 July 1998
(98-2783)
Working Party on the
Accession of Saudi ArabiaOriginal:  English
ACCESSION OF THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA
Additional Questions and Replies
The Ministry of Commerce of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has subm itted additiona l replies
to questions raised by members after the fourth meeting of the Working with the request that they becirculated to members of the Working Party.  The questions and replies are reproduced hereunder
_______________
Table of Contents
Question Page
II. ECONOMY, ECONOMIC POLICIES AND FOREIGN TRADE
2. Economic Policies
(a) Main directions of ongoing economic policies
- Privatization-P e t r o l e u m1
2-61
1
(d) Foreign and domestic investment policies 7 2
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS1. Import Regulation
(a) Characteristics of national tariff 8-13 3(f) Import licensing procedures
- Timing- Licenses from the Ministry of Interior- Licenses from the Ministry of Agriculture- Chivalry Club- Licenses from the Ministry of Post, Telegraph and 
Telephone
- Bans and National Treatment14-19
20-2122-2627-3233-3536-37
384
56789
10
(h) Customs valuation 39-43 11(j) Pre-shipment inspection 44 12(l) Rules of origin 45-47 12(m)(n)(o) Anti-dumping, countervailing duty and safeguard regimes 48 13
3. Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods
(b) Technical barriers to trade
- Food standards and Shelf Life
- ICCP49-56
57-67
68-9813
15
22
(c) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures 99 37WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page ii
Question Page
4. Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Agriculture
- Re:  Document WT/ACC/SAU/13/Add.1/Corr.1- Domestic Support100-103
104-120121-12637
3843
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 127-133 44VII. INSTITUTIONAL BASE FOR TRADE AND ECONOMIC
RELATIONS WITH THIRD COUNTRIESPreferential Trading Arrangements 134-138 46WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 1
II. ECONOMY, ECONOMIC POLICIES AND FOREIGN TRADE
2. Economic Policies(a) Main directions of ongoing economic policies
Privatization
Question 1.Could Saudi Arabia explain if and how foreign companies participate in the privatization of
Saudi industries?
Reply
According to the Council of Minister’s Re solution No.60 dated 1/4/1418 H, regarding the
Government’s objectives of privatization, one of those objectives is:
"the encouragement of national and foreign capital to undertake domestic investment".
The Ministerial Committee on Privatization formed by the above Resolution shall approve the
implementation program for each project planned for privatization by the Government.  The program
shall include a study on the participation of foreign investment according to the circumstances andnature of each project.
Petroleum
Question 2.In WT/ACC/SAU/29- Question 22, Saudi Arabia states that "The reference to petroleum and
asphalt in earlier documentation reflect a long st anding arrangement.  The need for the control
is under review."
We appreciate Saudi Arabia's commitment that, by the time of accession, it will be in
conformity with WTO obligations.  We will exp ect this commitment to be reflected in the
working party report and protocol commitment .
Please report to the Working Party when the revi ew is complete and outline the Steps that will
be taken to ensure conformity.
Reply
We take note of the observations.
Question 3.
Can Saudi Arabia confirm that local industries that use liquefied gas still enjoy a benefit of
30 per cent .  Has this practice or other practices pursued which result in national users of these
other feedstocks paying less than world market prices been extended to other raw materials for
ethylene production (e.g. naphtha condensates?).WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 2
Reply
Saudi Arabia confirms that the national industries still receive a 30 per cent discount from the
export price.  This discount is applied to all NGL’s from the Master Gas System (Propane, Butane,
and Light Naphta) that are used as a feedstock.  Refined products, including refined naphta, do not
receive this discount.
Question 4.
Why is the rebate applied to the minimum export price reported in that quarter and not to the
average price?
Reply
This is done for purely accounting purposes and to avoid the complaints from the customers
of applying averages, since the export price is a contract price set by the exporting entity.
Question 5.
Can Saudi Arabia state the specific proporti ons of the costs associated to LPG exports
(refrigerating, storage, mooring, and marketing) that totally account for the 30 per cent rebate?
Reply
We do not have specific proportions of the cost associated to LPG exports due to the
fluctuation of such costs depending on the flow of gas, the capacity of the plants and many other
factors associated with refrigerating, storage, mooring and marketing of LPG.
Question 6.
Is the "stated objective of diversifying Saudi's economic base and lessening dependence on  the
export  of raw material" (WT/ACC/SAU/3c page 4) to be taken to mean that the production
associated with this rebate is meant far export only? If not, how much of this  production will beabsorbed by the Saudi market?
Reply
The Council of Ministers’ decision No. 68 did not specify the discount for export industries.
It is intended for local industries, whether Saudi or  foreign owner, using it as feedstock whether their
output is for domestic or export markets.  The proportion to be absorbed by the domestic marketdepends on economic and population growth, inve stment patterns and many other factors.
(d) Foreign and domestic investment policies
Question 7.With regard to technology transfer requirement, specifically what kind of measures are
required for foreign capital in the transfer of technical know-how or management know-how?
Reply
No precise measures are specified.  Foreign investors have to give an undertaking that they
will arrange the transfer of technical and management know-how.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 3
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS
1. Import Regulation(a) Characteristics of national tariff
Question 8.
Could Saudi Arabia confirm that there is no local production of tobacco products.Reply
Yes, there is no local production of tobacco and products thereof in the Kingdom.
Question 9.
In 1994 the export duty for untanned hides and skins was 22.6 per cent. Has this duty been
increased since 1994?  What is the total revenue collected through this duty?
Reply
The rate of duty is SRLSls2,000/ton.  Rate has not been increased since 1994.  The total
revenue from hides and skins is about SRLSls834,000
Question 10.
Which animal's untanned hides and skins are subject to the export duty?
Reply
The hides and skins subject to export duty are those falling under headings 41.01, 41.02 and
41.03.
Question 11.
What tariff is  currently applied to the import of the same goods?Reply
The rate of duty currently imposed on the imported skins is 12 per cent (ad valorem).
Question 12.
What tariff does Saudi Arabia intend to bind for the import of these goods?
Reply
At 50 per cent ad valorem.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 4
Question 13.
This export duty which Saudi Arabia affirms in  response to Question 126 is applied only for
revenue purposes, together with the eventual appl ication of an import tariff creates a serious
market distortion which is difficult to reconcile with a willingness to join the WTO.  How does
Saudi Arabia intend to eliminate this distortions?
Reply
The GATT 1994 rules permit the imposition of export duties.  The Agreement (GATT 1994)
does not contain any provision restricting the right of any country to levy duties on exports.
Moreover, Article XI of the GATT 1994 permits the use of export duties the same way as it permits
the use of import duties.
(f) Import licensing procedures
Question 14.
Question  19  WT/ACC/SAU/29  What costs are involved in obtaining a license? Are they
different for foreign and Saudi companies?  What happens in case of a trade fair: Do you still
need an import license?  Do you need to obtain a temporary license, if it exists?  Do you still
need a commercial registration?
Reply
There are no costs in obtaining a license.  In the case of trade fairs, once a company gets
permission to hold a trade fair, no import license or commercial registration is required to import
merchandise for display at the fair.  However, such merchandise can not be sold at the fair.
Timing
Question 15.
In this document, there are references to different  "average time" requested to deliver a license.
Is it the time to deliver a license determined by law or by a specific administrative order?
Reply
There is no law or specific administrative order.  It is a well established practice.
Question 16.
The application review times in Saudi Arabia are described in terms of average time periods,
except for telecommunications equipment these time periods are under 30 days.  Could Saudi
Arabia state whether there is any law, decree, et c. that confirms that reviews cannot exceed the
30 day limit stipulated in the import licensing agreement?
Reply
There is no law or specific administrative order.  However, it is a well established practice.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 5
Question 17.
From the information provided in WT/ACC/SAU/30 we note that process varies.  Can Saudi
Arabia explain the reasons for the different appeal processes?
Reply
The slight variations are because of the proced ures of different Ministries and Departments.
Question 18.
Question 4 WT/ACC/SAU/29  Which legislation or administrative order is applied and is there
a publication of the reasons for  the decision?  Is there a publication of' the decision of the
Board of Grievances and of the reasoning upon which it is based'?
Reply
There is no legislation and reasons for decision are not published.  Similarly there is no
publication of the decisions of the Board of Grievances nor the reasons thereof.   However, the Board
of Grievances supplies copies of its decisions to all concerned parties and reasons for decisions are
recorded in its judgments.
Question 19.
What Is the composition of the Board of Grievances and how are members selected?Reply
The Board of Grievances consists of President, who has the status of a Minister, one or more
Vice- presidents and Members (called deputy assistants).  The number of vice presidents and
members is not fixed.  The president is appointed by the King and reports to him.  The Vice-
presidents and members are appointed by Royal Decree, on the recommendations of the president.
Members of the Board should have a degree in sharia or any other University degree equivalent tothat.
Question 20.
While time frames have been stipulated for the consideration of an application, no indication is
given concerning the time frames for the consideration of appeals.  Is there a standard period
for the consideration of appeals?
Reply
No, there is no standard period for considerat ion of appeals.  Time periods would depend on
the nature of different cases and the work-load at a particular time.
Licenses from the Ministry of Interior
Question 21.
In WT/ACC/SAU/4.Add.1 Saudi Arabia listed many goods that are subject to licensing by the
Ministry of Interior for security reasons but that have legitimate commercial uses as well.  The
responses to questions to questions 39-46 in WT/ACC/SAU/29 state that only certain items with
security applications will be subject to licensing.  We appreciate this clarification.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 6
In WT/ACC/SAU/30 section IV on the Ministry of Interior only covers four product groups
(paragraph 22), but there are many other items listed in the annex to SAU/4/Add.1 as being
subject to import licensing by the Ministry of Interior, such as spectacles and burglar alarms.
Could Saudi Arabia confirm that imports of all the items listed in the annex as- being licensed
by MOI are subject to the same procedural and documentation requirements described in
WT/ACC/SAU/30 section IV paragraphs 22-27?
Reply
Yes.
Question 22.
Questions 41 and 42 WT/ACC/SAU/29 We are not convinced of the need for import licensing
for burglar/fire alarms and high quality  photocopiers.  There must be less trade restrictive
measures to achieve the same objective, for example the use of water-marking and holograms
on documentation.  As for burglar/fire alarms why have these been singled out?  Is material
contained in these alarms which is not available elsewhere? Such alarms are widely available in
other countries and are not used for making explosives.
Reply
We take note of the question.  However, as explained earlier, for security reasons the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has restricted the import of these items.
Question 23.
What are the national security reasons to submit  items listed in point 22 (c) and (d) to import
licensing?  Why cannot a less restrictive system be envithe Government of Saudi Arabiaed?
Reply
The reason for restricting items listed in point 22(c) is to prevent import and the misuse of
these items by persons who could pose a security risk.  Only Ministry  of Interior can vet whether a
person importing such equipment could be a security risk. As for fire fighting equipment, the
procedure has been changed.  Now no import licensing is required from the Ministry of Interior.  If
the imported equipment meets Saudi or international standards, import will be allowed after customs
have checked compliance with standards.
Question 24.
Point 33 (ii) do you have to undergone the full procedure if you do not want the subsidy?  If yes,
why?
Reply
No, you do not have to undergo the full procedure if you do not want the subsidy.
Question 25.
Point 33 (iii) who tests the suitability of the imported machine?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 7
Reply
A committee of the Ministry of Agriculture and Water consisting of agricultural and
mechanical engineers tests the suitability of the imported machine.
Licenses from the Ministry of Agriculture
- License for Importing Agricultural Machinery and EquipmentQuestion 26.Saudi Arabia stated that one of the reasons fo r restricting the import of agricultural machinery
and equipment, is to determine the "right" subs idy, and provide the Agricultural Bank with the
price and subsidy for each consignment,
Does this statement mean that only machinery  and equipment for which subsidies are provided
can be imported?
Reply
No, machinery can still be imported even if importer does not ask for subsidy.
Question 27.
Under what circumstances could someone or an  agent import non-subsidized machinery and
equipment?
Reply
Anyone having commercial registration or any agent can import non-subsidized machinery
and equipment.
Question 28.
Reply 35 in WT/ACC/SAU/29 states that "If a person or entity wants to import agricultural
equipment without receiving the state subsidy, it  still has to apply for an import license."
However, in the fourth working party meeting Saudi Arabia stated that the license was only
required if the importer wanted the subsidy.
Could Saudi Arabia please clarify this issue?  Is the license only required when importing
subsidized agricultural equipment?
Reply
Import license is still required even if imported agricultural equipment does not receive State
subsidy.
- Licenses for Importing Seeds and Fertilizers
Question 29.It is stated that the reason for requiring a li cense for the importation of seeds is to ensure
compliance with Saudi standards and specification s, and to ensure that infected seeds, and
chemicals are not imported.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 8
How is a license used to ensure that  infected seeds are not imported?
Reply
License contains phytosanitary dispositions to be met by imported seeds.
Question 30.
Could Saudi Arabia provide information on how seeds are inspected and what the cost of
inspection is?
Reply
There is no cost for seed inspection.  The inspec tion is carried out firstly by visual inspection
of the seeds and insuring the absence of impurities and checking phytosanitary information in the
export documents.  And lastly, samples are sent to laboratory to check for aflatoxins.
Chivalry Club
Question 31.Can Saudi Arabia provide more information on the Chivalry Club?Reply
We have already given information on Chivalry Club.  However, we can give more information if it is
specified what precise information is required.
Question 32.
One of the requirements for importing horses into  Saudi Arabia is that the horses have to be
imported by air, on a direct flight from the exporting country to specified airports in Saudi
Arabia.
Could Saudi Arabia explain why only air transportation can be used to transport horses into
Saudi Arabia?  In a case where there is no direct flight from the exporting country to Saudi
Arabia, will a shipment that comes in throug h a connecting flight be denied entry in the
Kingdom?
Reply
Animal quarantine facilities are only available at major airports of the Kingdom.  That is why
import is allowed only by air.  If there is no direct  flight to the Kingdom, a shipment by a  connecting
flight will not be denied.
Question 33.
Saudi Arabia also noted that the issuance of an import license for the importation of' Arabian
breed horses, is contingent upon the approval of the Arabian Horse Center.
Does the Arabian Horse Center publish and make available to the public, the guidelines for
determining the breed and origin of th e Arabian Horses that can imported?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 9
Reply
The Arabian Horse Center publishes all the guidelines for determining the breed and origin of
Arabian Horses that can be imported.  Furthermore, the Arabian Center is a member of International
Arabian Horse Organization which gathers inform ation on Arabian horses on an annual basis.
Question 34.
In the reply to question 52 Saudi Arabia says that "Importation of' other than Arabian horse
strain is permitted. provided a license is obtained from the Chivalry Club ... Will the license be
granted automatically. and if not. what ar e the criteria for obtaining a license ?
Reply
A license is granted automatically by the Chivalry Club.
Question 35.
Saudi Arabia does not specify the license processing time for import licenses for horses in the
Section on the Chivalry Club (WT/ACC/SAU/30 page 8-9).
Could Saudi Arabia confirm that the Chivalry Club processes license applications within
30 days of receipt of the documentation'?
Reply
Yes, it is so confirmed.
Licenses from the Ministry of Post, Telegraph, and Telephone
Question 36.An outstanding issue that is highlighted by WT/ACC/SAU/30 is the issue of timing.Article 3, Section 5(f) of the Agreement on Import Licensing says., "the period for  processing
applications shall, except when not possible for reasons outside the  control of the Member, not
be longer than 30 days if applications are considered as and when received, i.e. on a first-come
first-served basis.... "
The timing for issuance of import licenses exceed s 30 days for licensing of several categories of
goods.
For radio communication apparatus, it takes one to two months to issue a license.
(WT/ACC/SAU/30 page 5)
For network equipment, it takes six to twelve months, to obtain a license, (WT/ACC/SAU/30
page 5)
All countries take steps to prudently allocate spectrum and to rationalize use of frequencies.
However, this process is normally independent of the import licensing procedure.  Since theprocessing time exceeds 30 days and the allocation of spectrum is not "outside the control of the
Member.," the current system does not meet WTO requirements.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 10
The problem does not seem to lie in the licensing  system itself but in the mingling of import
licensing with other regulatory functions.
What are the time periods for review by the Frequency Department?  For review by the
Licensing Committee?  Perhaps Saudi Arabia co uld consider splitting out the approval of the
actual import license from the broader telecommunications regulatory process.
Reply
The time period required for review by the frequency department is one week from the date of
receiving complete required data. The time period required for reviewing by the licensing committee
is one week.
Question 37.
If a product meets the frequency requirements and technical specifications, does the Licensing
Committee approve the application within 30 days?
Reply
If a product (Request) meets the frequency requirements and technical specifications, the
licensing committee will take a decision within a period of 30 days.
Bans and National Treatment
Question 38.WT/ACC/SAU/29/Add.3 contains several products that have not appeared on previous lists.
One such item is HS 4819. The description states that the ban applies to "Empty bags separately
presented bearing mark or information on foodstuffs or cement or trademark.,; of the
manufacturers excluding those imported by national companies."
- What is purpose of this ban?
- Why is this ban not applied to national companies?
Reply
The import of empty bags is prohibited to ensure that these bags are not misused by packing
deceptive goods thus misleading  the consumer.  The restriction does not apply to State owned
companies (National companies) as they do not indulge in such practices.
(h) Customs valuation
Question 39.
In response to, among others,  question 135 Saudi Arabia describes a three phase plan for the
incorporation of the Agreement on Customs Valuation into Saudi legislation.  Which phase is
Saudi Arabia currently implementing?
Reply
We are implementing section A of phase I at present.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 11
Question 40.
Which actions have already been taken'?Reply
As stated in reply 27, we are implementing section A of phase I.  As for section B of phase I,
we are in touch with the WCO to arrange the visit of Saudi customs officials to the WCO.  We are in
early stage of thinking and planning the training program for custom officials.
Question 41.
Can Saudi Arabia specify the duration of each phase and when the plan will be completed?Reply
Phase I will last one year, whereas phase II and phase III will each have a duration of three to
four years.
Question 42.
Does Saudi Arabia intend to complete this plan before acceding to the WTO?  If not, which
parts of the plan does Saudi Arabia intend to complete after accession?
Reply
The plan will not be completed before accession to the WTO.  Phases II and III w ill be
completed after accession.
Question 43.
A minimum price is currently  applied to the import of Spanish tiles into Saudi Arabia and does
not respect the value declared in the commercia l documentation.  The evaluation seems to be
made in a discretionary way following instructions from Saudi Ceramic Co. The same
procedure is not applied to tiles imported from other countries.  What does Saudi Arabia intend
to do to eliminate this discriminatory practice?
Reply
Minimum prices are used for valuation of ceramic products falling under HS
heading 6908.9010, imported from all countries.  These is no discrimination in the use of minimum
prices.
(j) Pre-shipment inspection
Question 44.
We are particularly concerned about the pre-shipment arrangements which Saudi Arabia will
apply extensively. The overall impression is that it can hardly be considered a proper
justification of the use of pre-shipments by just listing that this arrangement is based upon thereference to PSI-Agreement the Preambular text st ating that "so far as it is necessary to verify
the quality, quantity or price of imported goods" as Saudi Arabia repeatedly states in the
background documentation.  We have no problems to accept that pre-shipment arrangements
can be useful in some cases and due to la ck of competence in the importer country.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 12
Furthermore we respect Saudi Arabia’s explanat ion for the need of pre-shipment arrangements
as a result of inadequate infrastructural and technical expertise capabilities to perform these
duties in the country itself.  We also welcome the Saudi assurances that the PSI and PST
activities will be reduced proportionally to the developments regarding the infrastructural
capabilities.
Reply
We take not of the observations.
(l) Rules of origin
Question 45.Is it correct that every certificate of origin must be approved by a Saudi Embassy?Reply
Certificates of origin shall be attested by the Saudi Embassy or Consulate.  Where no Saudi
Embassy or Consulate exists, such certificate shall be attested by the Chambers of Commerce in the
exporting country.
Question 46.
Is it correct that a certification of European Co mmunity origin is not accepted and that specific
country must always be specified?
Reply
Yes.
Question 47.
In response to question 241 Saudi Arabia affirms that marking of origin has to be printed or
stamped on all expensive textile fabrics.  When is a textile fabric considered expensive?
Reply
Expensiveness of the fabric depends on a number of factors including the quality, the brand
name, the tissue, texture, design and the price relative to other fabrics.
(m)  Anti-dumping regime
(n) Countervailing duty regime
(o) Safeguard regime
Question 48.
In response to question 221, Saudi Arabia affi rms that trade remedies legislation would be
enacted after it joins the WTO.  Could Saudi Arabia confirm that it will not take any
antidumping, safeguards and countervailing measures until a WTO consistent legislation isenacted?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 13
Reply
Saudi Arabia confirms that, after accession to the WTO, it will not take any anti-dumping,
safeguard or countervailing measures until an appropriate legislation in line with the WTO
Agreements is enacted.
3. Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods
(b) Technical barriers to trade
Question 49.Will the non-tariff barriers in the form of non-automatic licensing of import and ban on import,
for example import ban on position 0401 0000- UHT milk, pasteurized in packages above 1 litre
in order to prevent falsification (document WT/ACC/SAU/29/Add.1 of 22 November 1997) belifted after Saudi Arabia's accession to the WTO?  If not, on what WTO provisions will they be
applied (what kind of derogations does Saudi Arabia plan to obtain)?
Reply:
The ban on import of position 0401 0000- UHT milk, pasteurized in packages of more than 1
litre and other bans will be lifted after Saudi Arabia's accession to the WTO.  As for non-tariff
barriers, Saudi Arabia will remove all non-tariff barriers against WTO rules.
Question 50.
Saudi Arabia should supply a complete list of all Saudi standards and technical regulations.
How many international standards have been adopted by Saudi Arabia as national standards?
Reply
Saudi Arabia is a member of ISO, IEC, OIML and CAC.  All Saudi (SASO) standards are
thus notified to all other members of these international organizations, including the Philippines.  A
high percentage of SASO standards utilizes intern ational standards and other widely accepted national
standards as references.  About one third of SA SO standards cover food products predominantly
utilizing CAC (Codex codes) as major references .  A list of SASO standards in which Codex
standards have been used as the main reference is attached (see document WT/ACC/SAU/34).
Further, a complete updated list of the 1323 Saudi standards is attached (see document
WT/ACC/SAU/34), including cross reference numbe rs of the international standards which were
adopted in their entirety as SASO standards.  The list of SASO standards applicable to each one of the
76 ICCP Regulated Product Categories had been made available to the WTO as an attachment to
WT/ACC/SAU/15.  A second copy is attached herewith.
Question 51.
If Article 4(a) of the Council of Ministers Resolu tion No. 50 does not relat e only to the externally
administered substances, specifically what kind of standards have been adopted by SaudiArabia for those hormones and auxines whose standards for residues are set out in CODEX?
(WT/ACC/SAU/29)WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 14
Reply
There are no approved Saudi standards regarding maximum residue limits of hormones in
food products.  Most of Saudi standards for meat and meat products state that such products shall be
free from synthetic hormones.  Recently a draft Gulf standards is being prepared on maximum residue
limits of veterinary drugs including hormones in food of animal origin.
Regarding the auxines, there are no approved Saudi standards concerning maximum residue
limits in food products.
Question 52.
Please provide the specific review schedules of the articles referred to under this question?Reply
The review will be completed before Saudi Arabia’s accession to the WTO.
Question 53.
We note that In the list of restricted  (banned and controlled) items contained in
WT/ACC/SAU/29/Add.3, live sheep and goats end meat thereof are ncluded and GATT 1994
Article XX(b) cover is claimed, Could Saudi Arabia provide information of the basis of whichthese are maintained?
Reply
Restrictions on imports of live sheep and goats are maintained according to the reports of the
OIE and its regulations of declaring the areas free from the disease.
Question 54.
What arrangements are there for reviewing and removing restrictions which may be imposed
for specific disease occurrences (eg. Morbillvirus in horses)?
Reply
Restrictions which may be imposed for specific disease occurrences are reviewed and
removed whenever reports received from the OIE declaring the area free from the diseases according
to the OIE regulations.
Question 55.
With regard to restrictions on cuttings and se edlings, we would appreciate further detailed
information concerning the products affected the procedures for determining disease status,
and the need for the measures to protect plant life in Saudi Arabia?
Reply
All cuttings and seedlings imported into Saudi Arabia are affected by these measures.  The
procedures include phytosanitary certificates from the country of origin and visual inspection in thequarantine area.  These measures are needed to make sure no infected plant is imported so that plant
life could be protected.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 15
Question 56.
Annex C to the SPS Agreement stipulates require ments in relation to control, inspection and
approval procedures.  Article 4 of the SPS Agreement also requires WTO Members to accept
the sanitary and phytosanitary measures of oth er members, subject to confirming objectively
that these are adequate to achieve the importin g country's level of sanitary and phytosanitary
protection. Can Saudi Arabia confirm that it will accept the certification of exporting countries,
in accordance with these requirements under the SPS Agreement?
Reply
Yes, Saudi Arabia confirms that it will accept the certification of exporting countries, in
accordance with the requirements under the SPS Agreement.
Food Standards and Shelf Life
Question 57.
With regard to long-11 per cent pasteurized mi lk in packs exceeding one liter, could  Saudi
Arabia explain the nature of the deceptive practices that have given rise to the ban on imports?
Does this apply to all imports?
Reply
As stated earlier, the ban will be removed and replaced by tariffs after Saudi Arabia’s
accession  to the WTO.
Question 58.
In relation to questions 189 to 195 and 200 to 258 in WT/ACC/SAU/29, relating to shelf life, we
note that there is widespread acceptance of manufacturer determined shelf life, based on a body
of recognized scientifically based literature.  Will Saudi Arabia accept manufacturer
determined shelf life where applicable?
Reply
Saudi Arabia relies for the determination of the shelf life of food products on available
scientific studies by specialized, and internationally recognized bodies and on references, based on
research conducted for academic or industrial/commercial purposes.  The fact that part of this research
is conducted by manufacturers demonstrates  that Saudi Arabia takes into consideration differences inmanufacturing and packaging processes.  This wide spectrum of scientific basis does not affect Saudi
Arabia's right to engage in shelf life determination as an SPS measure for perishable food products
and as a TBT-technical regulation appropriate to Saudi Arabia's climatic conditions for shelf stable
food products.
Question 59.
Can Saudi Arabia provide an assurance that shelf life regulations applied to products destined
for areas where adequate transport, storage facilities exist are not more restrictive than
necessary?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 16
Reply
Saudi Arabia's shelf life for perishable food products is determined based on the assumption
of a controlled storage temperature (by refrigeration or freezing) in accordance with internationally
recognized norms.  As for shelf stable products, the main consideration for its determination is the
prevailing climatic conditions of Saudi Arabia.  The inadequacy or abuse of the transport andhandling conditions are not particularly factored in.  However, in cases where the internationally
recognized scientific studies and references are not in concurrence on the appropriate shelf life period,
the tendency in the past for higher risk products had been to rely on the study with the shorter shelf
life period.
Question 60.
Do the Administrative arrangements and evaluation process outlined in  WT/ACC/SAU/27
include provision for "acceptance SPS measures applied by other countries, including
manufacturer data where these may differ from Saudi Arabian standards but where the
exporter can  objectively demonstrate that the standards are appropriate to Saudi  Arabia's
level of  SPS protection'?
Reply
Shelf life is considered partly as an SPS measure only for perishable food products.  By its
definition, SPS measures are taken by countries (governments) whenever they choose to interfere ininsuring an appropriate level of SPS protection.  Manufacturer determined shelf life determination
that may be followed in other countries are neither uniform nor can be considered as official SPS
measures by governments.  Nevertheless, shelf life  periods of perishable food products are not applied
imposed unilaterally, but rather adopted in accordance with the same open process applicable to
standards, i.e. through technical committees entrus ted with the preparation of the standard whose
diversified membership includes representatives of the industrial and commercial sectors.  These
members have the opportunity to influence the decision on shelf life determination and insure its
responsiveness to the needs of the industry, not to mention the period afforded for consultation and
comment by any interested parties.  In additi on, SASO administrative procedures and directives
provide the opportunities for manufacturers to submit at any time the scientific basis for their owndetermined shelf to SASO for evaluation.  If these manufacturers can demonstrate objectively that
their shelf life periods are appropriate to Saudi Arabia's level of SPS protection as well as the food
quality criteria, Saudi Arabia will revise its shelf life standards accordingly.
Question 61.
(WT/ACC/SAU/29)  The reply to question 200 states that "... final determination of shelf-life is
made based on the studies for which " the stated storage conditions" most closely resemble
Saudi Arabian conditions ... these conditions have been thoroughly invest igated and surveyed …
in a report entitled Proceedings of Symposiu m on the Transportation, Handling & Storage of
Food Products to the Kingdom, Part I and II dated 26-28 February 1989”.
Please explain how the appearance of a date on a food package alone will prevent,
directly or indirectly, the risk of food contamination in the Government of Saudi
Arabia's regulated food products.
Please explain what specific food safety risk the Government of Saudi Arabia is
attempting to prevent by displaying the shelf-life date on a food product package and
what impact non-fulfillment, i.e. the absence of a shelf-life date, would create.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 17
If the Government of Saudi Arabia justifies the use of its’ shelf-life measures as
necessary to protect the health and safety of its consumers, on a product by product
basis, please provide the generally accepted scientific data which supports why each
shelf-life date has been applied to each of the Government of Saudi Arabia's regulated
products?
Because quality attributes can change (sometimes rapidly) in some food products based on the
type of product, how it is handled, packaged, and stored throughout distribution, please
illustrate:
How the appearance of a date on a food package  can ensure the quality of the Government of
Saudi Arabia's regulated food products?  What other methods does the Government of Saudi
Arabia use to ensure quality?
What is the risk non-fulfillment would create, i.e. the absence of a shelf life date?Saudi Question 203 Reply states that “Codex defi nes “Use-By-Date” as “the date which signifies
the end of the estimated period under any stated storage condition after which the productprobably will not have the quality  attributes  normally expected by the consumer … the term
"unacceptable to the consumer" and "unit for human  consumption" respectively correspond to
and are self evident from the above definition…"
 "Unacceptable to the consumer" relates to sensory and quality attributes while "unfit for
human consumption" relates to the products safety i.e. risk of contamination which makes the
product unsafe or harmful to the consumer.
Does the Government of Saudi Arabia use shelf life dating as the primary means by which to
control and ensure the safety and quality of both domestic and imported regulated foodproducts?
Reply
Saudi Arabian standards for food products are adopted either entirely or by and large from the
Codex Code.  They cover the various factors that  affect food quality and safety (e.g. SSA 220/1984
Hygienic Regulations for Food Plants and their Personnel).  The purpose of Saudi Arabia’s date
marking is to insure that products which meet the required criteria at time of production, and thus
were initially safe and wholesome, maintain their microbiological, sensory and nutritional qualities
during the shelf life period at the stated storage temperature.  Thus, Saudi Arabia does not rely on date
marking alone as is stated.
Saudi Arabia had previously stated in its WTO submissions that shelf life is both a TBT
(quality) issue as well as an SPS (food safety) issue.  In this course, it is necessary to make the
following distinction:
(a) Perishable food products:
These products carry the inherent risk of concurrent deterioration of food safety and quality
properties, and thus date marking plays a contributing role in the maintenance of food safety; this
gives it the priority to be classifiable as an SPS measure in addition to its TBT classification as
technical regulation for quality of health.  By and large, perishable food products are stored undercontrolled and uniformly specified temperature and humidity conditions (refrigeration or freezing).  In
this case, Saudi Arabia predominantly adopts the shelf life periods determined by the scientific studies
of internationally recognized specialized instit utes listed as references in the attachment to
WT/ACC/SAU 27 for each individual product, without deviation.  In limited cases noted (Labneh,WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 18
chilled meat ... etc.), Saudi Arabia conducted the studies itself and provided copies to the WTO.
Thus, Saudi Arabia has totally met the scientific justification criteria required by the SPS Agreement.
Nevertheless, a WTO Member who believes that any shelf life period(s) are not objectively
determined in accordance with scientific justification, is always welcome to submit the relevant
technical grounds.  SASO is willing to study each individual case and make the required amendments
in its shelf life determinations, if warranted.
(b) Shelf stable food products:
These products generally remain safe for some time after food quality properties start to
deteriorate.  Thus, date marking of shelf stable products contributes mainly to the maintenance of food
quality, and falls under the provisions of TBT Agreement.  The Agreement grants Members the right
to prepare and adopt standards that are “appropriate” to the Member’s “fundamental climatic,infrastructural and technological conditions”.  Shelf stable products are normally stored under
room/ambient temperature conditions.  In the case of Saudi Arabia, shelf life determination of these
products has to take into account the prevailing high ambient temperatures  in the country and the
wide fluctuations between day and night and different seasons, ranging between -10
oC to 55oC
averaging 33oC on a year round basis, not to mention the extreme variations in relative humidity.  In
contrast, shelf life for shelf stable products determined by most  food exporting countries are based on
an assumed ambient storage temperature not exceeding 25oC.  A study conducted by Natic Research
for the United States Army found that shelf life periods of shelf stable products under a constant
storage temperature of 32.22oC are generally half those determined under 21.1oC, thereby confirming
Arrhenius Equation and the Q 10 rule used by researchers.  Nevertheless, comparison of Saudi Arabia’s
actually determined shelf life periods with the result s of the study shows that they generally fall in the
mid-range between the periods determined by the study at these two storage temperatures.  For
several products, Saudi Arabia’s shelf life period coincided with the study’s 21.1oC condition, with
few exceptions coinciding with the 32.22oC condition (e.g. highly risky products such as baby food).
Thus, Saudi Arabia’s shelf life determinations for shelf stable products are in fact less strict thanwarranted by its climatic and infrastructural conditions.
Question 62.
(WT/ACC/SAU/29)  Responding to the Government of Saudi Arabia's definition of CODEX
shelf-life guideline, CAC/VOL VI-Ed. 1 states the purpose of date marking, is to give the
consumer a date which will provide information about the expected quality of the product
provided that it has been properly stored.  Th is does not mean that date marking guarantees
either the acceptability or the safety of the product.  Unquote. Under definition of types of date
marking CODEX also defines:  "sell-by-date", “date of minimum durability ("best before"), in
addition to "Use-by-date" marking.  In general shelf-life is the period during which the food
keeps its microbiological and sensory quality at the specific temperature of storage.
Page 9 (b), paragraph 4 -  The compelling argument made by SASO, is that, quote ... the most
hazardous effect of temperature, which leads to rapid quality deterioration and microbiological
decay of foods, is temperature, handling and storage.
This is true, however, why is the producer of an imported product being held responsible for the
Saudi food handlers inadequate methods of storing or transporting the product once in the
Kingdom?
Page 14 (b) -  The scientific studies specified in this document are done at a constant
temperature to evaluate and estimate shelf-life.  These studies do not include testing for
temperature abuse specific to Saudi Arabia.
How does Saudi use these studies in determining its existing shelf life?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 19
Saudi Arabia has the right to require expiration dates that meet the standards set by standard
testing methods; however,  they do not have the right to expect the rest of the world to
determine how much temperature abuse a specific product can withstand in Saudi Arabia based
on compliance to triggers beyond their control and which fall under the authority and
capability of the Government of Saudi Arabia to  take corrective enforcement action to prevent.
Saudi Arabia seems to impose on the foreign manufacturer the added obligation of being
responsible for the irresponsible handling and tr ansportation of their product once it has
entered the Kingdom, hence the half life/shelf life date requirement on imports.
Reply
The same shelf life periods are applied on domestic and imported food products alike.  In the
case of shelf stable products, the TBT Agreement gran ts Saudi Arabia the right to take into account
the effect of the country’s specific climatic and infrastructural conditions (i.e. transportation, storage
and handling conditions).  However climatic conditions is the only one of these factors actually
considered as the major essential factor by SASO in determining shelf life.  In rare cases coveringparticular products where non-concurrence or differences were found between the internationally
recognized studies and references, the tendency had been to rely more heavily on the shorter shelf life
periods determined by these studies as an indirect compensation for not specifically accounting for the
infrastructural factors.  With the improvement of th e infrastructural factors, a more laxed attitude will
be adopted.
Question 63.
(WT/ACC/SAU/29)  Question 204 Reply states that the Government of Saudi Arabia has
identical shelf-life periods and marking requirements applied for domestic and imported foodproducts... on an non-discriminatory basis... and that the half the shelf life  requirement for
imported foods is not an SPS issue, but rather a requirement for the marketing of the food, i.e.
to allow enough time for the exporter to ship and the importer time to facilitate the distribution
and marketing to all regions of the Kingdom.
How does the Government of Saudi Arabia compensate for the geographic advantage of
domestically produced regulated food products  mandatory shelf-life measures when these same
measures impose an unfair burden on imported foods?
If half-life/shelf-life is not an SPS issue and it does not support the quality attributes of the
product, how does the Government of Saudi Arabia justify the punitive nature  of this
requirement on imported foods i.e., if half the shelf life does not remain on the product theimported product is denied entry into the Kingdom?
Saudi Arabia asserts that it accepts the CODEX definition of shelf life, then why does the
Government of Saudi Arabia impose a half-life/shelf life date requirement (i.e. half the shelf-life
must remain on the product before it wi ll be allowed entry) on imported foods.
Reply
Regarding the requirement of half shelf life validity at time of entry of food products, Saudi
Arabia has previously explained that this has nothing to do with the Codex definition of shelf life, butis purely a requirement for the marketing of food products.  It insures that at least 50 per cent of shelf
life validity remains on food products to allow for reasonable and adequate time for the distribution
and marketing of these products throughout Saudi Arabia.  The first 50 per cent of shelf life allowed
to be lost before entry exceeds the time required for shipping from the most distant country fromWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 20
Saudi Arabia, thereby accounting for the geographical disadvantage inherent in imported products,
and thus is not a punitive requirement as stated.  Even with the half shelf life requirement imposed,
the local distribution system and Saudi consumer are still at a disadvantage when buying imported
food products versus domestically manufactured products which can provide full shelf life and
freshness utility.  Needless to mention, food products arriving in Saudi Arabia with inadequate or near
expiry shelf life remaining will put an unreasona ble strain on the distribution and marketing system
and may wind up having to be wasted, thereby inflicting unnecessary losses on the national economy.
Question 64.
CODEX states that when a specific CODEX food standard requires date marking that the “date
of minimum durability” (preceded by the word s “Best Before”) shall be declared. the
Government of Saudi Arabia plan to align it’s date marking measures with the CODEXstandard?
Reply
Codex CAC/VOL VI-Ed. 1 is intended as guidance to Codex committees and stipulates that
"first consideration should be given to the date of  minimum durability" but does not preclude all other
date marking types prescribed in Codex standard No. 1/1985.  Saudi Arabia explained in Section 2 of
WT/ACC/SAU 27 that “use  by - recommended last consumption - expiration date” is appropriate for
microbiologically highly perishable foods, while "date of minimum durability - best before date" is
appropriate for the other food products where quality and nutritional value are the major factorsconsidered.  Thus, Saudi Arabia’s date marking is totally consistent with Codex.  Moreover, Saudi
standard SSA 703/1993 provides the option of expressing shelf life in any one of the date marking
types prescribed by Codex.
Question 65.
Why does SASO use standards experiments of other countries which do not the Government of
Saudi Arabia's special climate conditions (i.e. A nnex 4 list, “References Used for Evaluation of
Shelf-Life ...,” Netherlands for Food Group:  Milk and Milk Products)?
Reply
As stated in reply 61 above, only shelf stable foods are subject to Saudi Arabia’s special
climatic conditions.  Milk and milk products food group are stored under controlled temperature (by
refrigeration or freezing), and excluding any transportation, handling, or storage abuse, are not
affected by climatic conditions.  Thus, shelf life studies for these products conducted in other
countries are applicable to any other country including Saudi Arabia and can serve as scientificreferences.
Question 66.
To determine the methodology used and results of the scientific studies performed by the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Annex (1), “References Used for Evaluation ...”  We request copies of
all studies it does not already have (all fifteen (15)) as noted in Annex (1) for consideration to
determine at what temperat ure(s) they were conducted.
Reply
Required references are available.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 21
Question 67.
(WT/ACC/SAU/27)The document has several well developed statements pertaining the
Government of Saudi Arabia's concerns associ ated with food safety in several product
categories which are presented to demonstrate and support a legitimate scientific argument.
Two examples used in this paper illustrate wh y the use of this method of justification is
insufficient to satisfy a health claim for the use of mandatory shelf-life dating as imposed by the
Government of Saudi Arabia.
Page 8 (a) Internal Factors relating to the properties of a food commodity - Paragraph 1, pH
Value:  If a product has been properly canned, there are no organisms present to produce a
change in pH values.  There is no such thing as spontaneous gen eration, consequently if there is
a bad can, the organisms will grow and effect th e can in such a way as to make it obvious that
there is something wrong.
Page 9 (b) External Factors - paragraph 3 - the Government of Saudi Arabia makes a point of
saying that products stored below 2 degrees C causes the formation of ice crystals which break
the cells and permit internal nutrients to es cape which, according the Government of Saudi
Arabia, is a cause of rapid decay.  This can happen, however, only after the product is raised to
a temperature that will permit the organisms to grow in the first place.  They will not grow at 2
degrees C, and consequently the food will not de cay.  Only when the temperature is raised will
the organisms grow.
Reply
The examples related to internal and external factors mentioned in SASO paper, pages 8 & 9
affecting the product properties, are only general examples for the scientific basis showing the effect
of these factors.
ICCP
Question 68.
We seek further details on the charging regime under the ICCP and any changes that may be
necessary to bring it into confor mity with GATT 1994 Article VIII?
Reply
The subject of the ICCP's fees has been fully clarified and explained in previous
documentation submitted to the WTO.  For a comprehensive coverage of this issue please refer toSection 5 of Chapter IV of WT/ACC/SAU/26, a nd to Reply 1 of "Saudi Arabia's Response to
Questions from Canada following the May 29-30 Working Party" submitted to the WTO as
supplementary document dated 26 November 1997 (circulated informally).
Question 69.
We are aware of the assurances from Saudi Arabia inter alia listed in document
WT/ACC/SAU/16 in the answers to Member countries that Saudi Arabia has designed its
ICCP-programme to be consistent with the various WTO instruments (see question 3).
However, we would appreciate further informat ion on how the ICCP-programme operates and
what the terms of purpose are and the rationale for this comprehensive regime.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 22
Reply
The fact that the ICCP has been designed from the outset to be consistent with various WTO
instruments is not mere assurances voiced by Saudi Arabia, but is rather evidenced by Saudi Arabia’s
ability to respond positively to the multitude of WTO Members’ questions and concerns while
providing full clarification or justification that rely on specific provisions and principles of therelevant WTO and GATT 1994 Agreements, not  to mention the latest successful streamlining and
fine tuning of the Program via the issue of the new “ICCP Comprehensive Procedures & Guidelines -
October 1997” after careful consideration of the legitimate comments of WTO members and other
concerned parties. Nevertheless, in an effort to consolidate all relevant issues and put them in
recapping context, Saudi Arabia had submitted to the WTO the comprehensive document
WT/ACC/SAU/26 dated 23 September, 1997 which reiterates the rationale of  the Program (Section I
- General Concept), and demonstrates its consistency with every relevant article of the TBT, PSI andGATT 1994 Agreements.
Question 70.
We still consider that the different compliance verification options, in particular the type
approval and licensing process, are excessive for the type of products which are listed and do
not respect the WTO TBT Agreement requirement to adopt the least trade restrictive
procedures to meet the legitimate objectives of  the Saudi authorities.  According to
international practice, only products such as pharmaceuticals which can pose high health
hazards are submitted to such an extensive procedure.
Question 71.Saudi Arabia should adapt the conformity assessment procedures to the inherent health and
safety hazard risk of products.  Such measures would be less trade restrictive and would enableto reach the same goal, that is to demonstrate that products comply with Saudi Arabian
requirements and approved standards.  In addition, it would ensure that the principle of
national treatment is respected during the implementation of the program.
Question 72.For most of the products listed (e.g. electronics & products), Saudi Arabia should rely on the
suppliers declaration of conformity and on random sampling to establish and enforce the
conformity to Saudi Arabian requirements.
Reply 69, 70 and 71
The PSI Agreement facilitates the conducting of inspection procedures on a preshipment basis
rather than on a post-market sampling basis, particularly for developing countries.  By providing "the
possibility to have conformity assessment activities undertaken at the site of facilities ...", the PSIprocess satisfies the "access" requirements of TBT Article 5.1.1, whereas post market sampling does
not (refer to WT/ACC/SAU/26 Chapter III paragraph 2).  Moreover, the core of the Registration
process under ICCP is substantiated suppliers’ declaration.  Thus, the ICCP’s compliance verification
option of Registration plus Preshipment Inspection, available for exporters of any regulated products,
is equivalent to supplier’s declaration plus random sampling applied in developed countries.  As such,
it is in accordance with international practice and respects the TBT Agreement requirement to adopt
the least trade restrictive procedure.
The objective behind the ICCP’s Type Approval Licensing is to provide exporters with an
option "allowing the import of their products with the minimum of intervention", mostly through
exemption from Preshipment Inspection.  In accordance with the principle of proportionality, thisWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 23
maximum laxing of compliance verification should be associated with the highest level of confidence
that the product can convey as to its conformity to Saudi requirements.  Accordingly, Model Third
Party Certification (ISO Guide 28) was adopted, as it is "the most comprehensive" conformity
assessment procedure that can provide such a confidence.  The ICCP Comprehensive Procedures &
Guidelines clearly stipulate "Exporters may choose the route most appropriate to their product range
and frequency of exports".  Thus, Type Approval Licensing is not mandatory for any regulatedproduct regardless of its risk classification.  Expo rters who do not see worthwhile benefits in Type
Approval Licensing for their products are always welcome to adhere to the Registration/PSI option.
Question 73.
For products which contain higher health risk (e.g. some medical devices), the manufacturer’s
declaration of conformity could be coupled with a type approval evaluation or with a Qualitysystem certification.  The manufacturer shou ld have the choice between those different
conformity assessment procedures.
Reply
As for providing a choice between product and QS approval, please refer to details in our
reply to the European Communities’s question 5 submitted to the WTO as supplementary document
dated 26 November 1997 (circulated informally),  which demonstrates the shortcomings in such a
choice, and the doubtful success of the EC system.  In fact, many individual EC countries’ marking
systems, such as BSI’s Kite Mark, as well as other developed countries such as Japan’s JIS Mark arebased on evaluation and approval of both the product and the QS.
Question 74.
We seek details on the procedures and costs fo r laboratories seeking SASO approval to carry
out type and conformity testing under the ICCP?
Reply
The approval procedures are very simple and straight forward.  Laboratories seeking SASO
approval are required to complete the "SASO/ICCP Laboratory Application Form"
(WT/ACC/SAU/34).  The form basically provides SA SO with information about the accreditation that
the laboratory already has and the type of ICCP Regulated Products that it has the capabilities to test
in whole or in part.  The information is evaluated and verified and the laboratory is approved
accordingly.  In countries that do not have Nati onally Recognized Laboratory Accreditation Bodies
that accredit laboratories in accordance with ISO Guide 25, a higher degree of scrutinizing is
conducted in order to gain assurance at the laboratory's competence.  There are no costs involved forlaboratories seeking SASO approval.
Question 75.
How are laboratories already participating  in the program notified of any changes, including
on product coverage?
Reply
Approved laboratories will be furnished with and are continually updated on all Program
documentation appropriate to their level of involvem ent, i.e. standards, guidelines, type testing
requirements, etc.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 24
Question 76.
Non-Discrimination and National Treatment.  Imported and domestic products are currently
approved by different agencies, This increases the risk of procedures being designed and
applied differently.  To avoid this risk, the ICCP sc heme should explicitly state not only that the
same standards apply equally to domestic goods and imports, but that the same type approval
procedures also apply and are administered in  an identical manner.  In earlier informal
discussions with Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Arab ian government expressed willingness to make
explicit in its legislation these non discrimination requirements, but apart from a cursory
mention in the ICCP Introduction this has not been done.
We reiterate our request that the relevant Sa udi legislation for domestic product controls
should be cited in the scheme as a demonstration of transparency and non-discrimination, andthe we would also like a copy of it,
Reply
Non-Discrimination and National Treatment:  TBT Article 6.1 account of the different
conditions that prevail in Member countries by allowing for application of different conformity
assessment procedures (CAP), subject to the test that  they offer "equivalent" assurance of conformity.
SASO Quality Mark scheme is equivalent to the IC CP's Type Approval Licensing, as both are based
on approval of the product and the quality system.  The SASO QM scheme has been in operation
since 1986 i.e. long before the ICCP was initiated.  Close examination of its rules and regulationsindicates that it is even more strict than its ICCP counterpart especially with respect to surveillance.
The ICCP Procedures & Guidelines are intended to be exactly what its title indicates, simple steps to
be followed by exporters of the regulated products.  Saudi Arabia does not find it necessary to load it
with details that are irrelevant to these exporters apart from stating the principle of equal application
of the Saudi standards on imported and domestic products.
Question 77.
Choice of conformity procedure:  In  previous meetings Saudi Arabia has stated that producers
can seek product type approval under ICCP without having first to undergo the stages of fullPSI or registration, However, the current version  of  the Guidelines (October 1997) still refers
to type approval being made available throug h the progressive registration (page 6 of the
Guidelines).  In other words type approval appear s to be the culminating stage.  We believe the
ICCP must be amended to reflect the intention that type  approval can be sought independent of
any registration stage.
Reply
Choice of conformity assessment procedure: The statement in the ICCP Comprehensive
Procedures & Guidelines referring to the qualifying for type  approval "through the progressive
registration process" is intended to cover the case of manufacturers who are already registered in the
Program.  The next sentence in the same paragraph covers the case of "manufacturers of unregisteredproducts who choose to apply directly for type approval".  Nevertheless, there are some common
requirements between the pre-assessment required in the latter case and registration.
Question 78.
Exports from the manufacturer/from an independent exporter.  The ICCP type approval
regime foresees slightly different type approval procedures depending on whether  the product
was exported directly by a manufacturer or via a separate trader, There are no grounds in the
TBTA to differentiate in this way between like products.  We therefore urge Saudi Arabia toWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 25
merge the two procedures into one by applying to all products the procedure applied to
manufacturers who exported.  This would involve as a consequence the deletion of those
paragraphs in the ICCP guidelines referring to products coming being presented by an
importer/exporter who is not the manufacturer.  Our understanding has been that since there
are no significant differences in treatment such a modification would be considered positively.
We would welcome Saudi Arabia's views on whether this change can be made.
Reply
Exports from the manufacturer/from an independent exporter: In accordance with clause 5.1.1
of Article 5 of the TBT Agreement, equal conditions of access for suppliers of like products need only
be applicable in comparable situations.  A Type approval license is only granted to manufacturerswith approved quality system.  Type approved  products are not necessarily marked with SASO
quality mark for differentiation.  Exporters normally deal with several manufacturers and markets and
may be involved in assembly, conversion or repacking which may change the original characteristics
of the product and render it incompliant.  The lower level of confidence justifies different
corresponding proportionate measures.  The exporter is still entitled to get the benefit of waiver ofroutine PSI, by obtaining the authorization of the manufacturer who owns the license. The CoC can
then be issued by either the manufacturer or the SCO.
Question 79.
Transparency:  We suggest that the ICCP shou ld explicitly state that a single uniform
concordance of Saudi and other equivalent standards exists, is regularly updated by SASO
which is solely responsible for setting standards, and is available from any SASO Country
Office.  We would also like a clear statement in the ICCP that the Saudi Arabian government is
the body determining technical regulations, sta ndards, conformity assessment procedures and
their application, and that companies applying such rules on products prior to export are acting
in conformity with those rules established by th e government.  This is to ensure that different
test houses, inspection services cannot deviate from the centrally established rules, standards,
and assessment procedures.
The concordance of standards should also identi fy for which standards a third party conformity
assessment procedure is or is not required, our understanding being that there are products
which must meet certain standards but for which there is no ICCP procedure.
Finally. the ICCP should identify describe  in more detail the nature of the conformity
assessment procedures applicable and identify the relevant ISO guides or other standards
governing these procedures.
Reply
In accordance with Chapter 2 - Definition of Terms of the ICCP CPG, it is clear from the
definitions of Certificate of Conformity, International Conformity Certification Program, RegionalLicensing Center (RLC), SASO, and SASO Country Offi ce (SCO) that the RLCs and SCOs are
carrying out their duties on behalf of SASO/MOC under the rules of the ICCP.  The adherence of
these bodies to these rules, and their accountability to SASO/MOC is further reflected in the second
paragraph under the heading of SASO Program Management on page 14 of the CPG, as well as the
full recourse to the Saudi Arabian authorities provided for in the grievance procedures included asattachment to Appendix C. As for equivalency of standards, the second paragraph of Chapter I -
Introduction states: "Compliance with the releva nt SASO standards, or approved equivalent
alternatives, results in the issue of a CoC, The same thing is reiterated in the first paragraph of
Chapter 3 Procedures for Product Compliance.  The term "approved" is intended to signify standards,WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 26
the second paragraph of Chapter I - Introduction states: "Compliance with the relevant SASO
standards, or approved equivalent alternatives, re sults in the issue of a CoC.  The same thing is
reiterated in the first paragraph of Chapter 3 Procedures for Product Compliance.  The term
"approved" is intended to signify approval by SASO.  All these measures are in place to insure that
bodies designated and entrusted with the implem entation of the Program do not deviate from the
centrally established rules, standards and assessment procedures.
Products which are subject to certain SASO mandatory standards but not fall under the ICCP
regulated products list are presently considered to be of low risk to the Saudi consumer and no
conformity assessment procedures are required for them.  This does not preclude the Saudi
Government's right to sample test such products from time to time, or to add -them to the ICCP
regulated products upon prior consultation and notification, should the need arise.
All the ICCP's CAP are in accordance, with ISO Guides, particularly Nos. 2, 22, 25 and 28.
The sections in the CPG covering the procedures of Registration and Type Approval Licensing are a
translation of the implementation of these guides into detailed and comprehensive steps for exporters
and inspection/licensing/certification bodies alike to follow without ambiguity-
Question 80.
Non-Compliance:  ICCP continues to provide that type approval certificates would be annulled
if' a product was found to be non-compliant.  We have argued in earlier WTO discussions that
this was to attack- the wrong target: in such cases the product should be suspended and actiontaken against the person responsible for marketin g the product.  Only in those cases where the
type approval certificate was inaccurate or fraudulent should it be revoked.
We reiterate our views that the ICCP Should be amended to say that revocation of certificates
remain a possibility in cases where a certificate is fraudulent or is materially inaccurate.  Thisrevision should remove the implication that rev ocation is the standard response to unsafe
product determinations.
Reply
The final version of the CPG had been amended from the initial draft on account of the
discussions with WTO Members, as follows:
"If discrepancies or violations are found, SCO w ithholds CoC ID number, and nullifies CoC, and
notifies SASO and the manufacturer.  An expedient investigation is carried out and appropriate action
taken on the basis of the findings.  Depending on the severity, frequency, and cause of the
discrepancy, appropriate action may include suspension or withdrawal of the Type ApprovalLicense".
It is clear that the action warranted is proportionate to the seriousness of the facts at hand on a case by
case basis.  Suspension (which may be temporary) or  withdrawal of the License is only a possibility in
extreme cases, such as fraud or material inaccuracy.
Question 81.
Proportionality:  We find it difficult to acce pt that ICCP products have to undergo not only
product type approval but also factory quality system certification.  This double barrelledcertification is in virtually all parts of the globe reserved only for very high risk products such
as pharmaceuticals and medical devices and applied to lower risk goods is a disproportionately
heavy means of regulation.  Where it can be demonstrated that some form of third partyWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 27
certification Is necessary, manufacturers should be given a choice between product or quality
system certification  but not have to run the gauntlet of both.
We have already explained that international st andards related to quality system certification
already contain sufficient checks on the product related aspects to provide the guarantees of
product conformity necessary.
Secondly, we question the justification for annual licensing of approved manufacturing sites.
This again is a disproportionate measure and is  more trade restrictive than necessary.  Even if
Saudi Arabia were to amend the ICCP to provide that manufacturing quality system
certification is an alternative to product certification a requirement for annual licensing is over-
regulation.  Standard international practice for re-inspection of quality systems in high risk
areas such as pharmaceuticals production is two to four years, It is also unclear as to whether"licensing" equates to quality system inspection or not. If it does not then as a procedure it does
not seem necessary.  We would appreciate clarification on this point.
Thirdly, we question the justification for pre-market certification of consumer
electronics/electrical appliances and processe d foodstuffs- this runs against international
practice and (in the case of foodstuffs) the principles established by FAO and WHO, and in the
HACCP system with which Saudi Arabia is familiar.  Border control of processed foodstuffs
does not in itself offer guarantees of health a nd safety since this is to ignore the whole chain of
production conditions, storage, distribution, retail  conditions etc.  We suggest that Saudi Arabia
consider removing pre-market certification for these products.
Fourth, concerning inspection and certification of new tyres, the cost of the procedures for this
have been a source of concern for tyre manufact urers.  A detailed explanation of the concrete
procedures and costs of approval for this product would be appreciated.
Fifth, concerning certification of perfumes.  We have been told of new requirements that
display, not-for-sale samples of perfumes are subject to the full certification requirement.  Saudi
Arabia has however said that this was not the case. examples of perfumes were exempt.  Such
exemptions should, we submit, be specified in the ICCP guidelines.
A second issue relates to requirements for soaps containing perfumes which are subject to the
full ICCP requirements for cosmetic products (3307 of the Harmonized system), and are not
treated like other soaps (HS 3401 ), This is a costly and heavy procedure for exporters.  We
would appreciate Saudi Arabia's considering an adjustment of its procedures - namely to treat
perfumed soaps as soap falling under 3401 and therefore exempt it from ICCP – to remove this
problem.
Reply
The PSI Agreement facilitates the conducting of inspection procedures on a preshipment basis
rather than on a post-market sampling basis, particularly for developing countries.  By providing "the
possibility to have conformity assessment activities undertaken at the site of facilities... ", the PSIprocess totally satisfies the access requirements of TBT Article 5. 1. 1, whereas post market sampling
does not (refer to WT/ACC/SAU/26 Chapter III paragraph 2).  Moreover, the core of the Registration
process under ICCP is substantiated suppliers' declaration.  Thus, the ICCP's compliance verification
option of Registration plus Preshipment Inspection, available for exporters of any regulated products,
is equivalent to supplier's declaration plus random sampling applied in other developed countries.  Assuch, it is in accordance with international practice and totally respects the TBT Agreement
requirement to adopt the least trade restrictive procedure.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 28
The objective behind the ICCP's Type Approval Licensing is to provide exporters with an
option  "allowing the import of their products with the minimum of intervention ", mostly through
exemption from Preshipment Inspection.  In accordance with the principle of proportionality, this
maximum laxing of compliance verification should be associated with the highest level of confidence
that the product can convey as to its conformity to Saudi requirements.  Accordingly, Model Third
Party Certification (ISO Guide 28) was adopted, as it is "the most comprehensive " conformityassessment procedure that can provide such a confidence.  The ICCP Comprehensive Procedures &
Guidelines clearly stipulate "Exporters may choose the route most appropriate to their product range
and frequency of exports ". Thus, Type Approval Licensing is not mandatory for any regulated
product regardless of its risk classification.  Exporters who do not see worthwhile benefits in Type
Approval Licensing for their products are always welcome to adhere  to the Registration/PSI option.
As for providing a choice  between product and QS approval, please refer to details in our reply to the
European Communities's question 5 submitted to the WTO as supplementary document dated26 November 1997 (circulated informally) which demonstrates the shortcomings in such a choice, and
the doubtful success of the EC system.  In fact, ma ny individual EC countries' marking systems, such
as BSI's Kite Mark, as well as other developed countries such as Japan's JIS Mark are based on
evaluation and approval of both the product and the QS.
Concerning certification of perfumes, please refer to Saudi Arabia's reply to question 9 of  the
European Communities comments on draft ICCP Procedures & Guidelines submitted to the WTO as
dated 26 November 1997 (circulated informally).
Regarding the regulation of soaps under the ICCP, Saudi Arabia has adopted the definition of
cosmetics prescribed by the EC Cosmetics Directive 76/768/EEC, which classifies toilet soaps and
deodorant soaps as cosmetics, regulated by the ICCP.  The HS Codes are only indicative and not the
basis for whether the product is regulated or not.  HS 3401 was inadvertently missed from being
included in  the list, and a correction is due.  Even though perfumes and cosmetics are listed under one
product category, only standards pertaining to the particular product are applicable.  For cosmeticsoaps, the applicable standards are SSA 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 492 and 493.
Question 82.
While the prospective with regard to the timing for a reduction of the scale of pre-shipment
inspections and pre-shipment testing will be redu ced we remain convinced of the need to point
out that there will be  a need for unqualified commitments by Saudi Arabia in the accession
Protocol that national standards, conformity assessment procedures under the ICCP-
programme, sanitary and phytosanitary arrangements, and pre-shipment inspections
arrangements will be operated in a manner in  full conformity with the relevant WTO-
provisions.
Reply
We take note of the observations.
Question 83.
We would like to draw the attention to the basi c provisions in the PSI-Agreement where it is
stated in the Preambular text th at the PSI-inspection should be carried out "without giving rise
to unnecessary delays or unequal treatment" which is restated in Art. 2 paragraph 1 and
paragraph 15 of the Agreement.  Our information is that the ICCP procedures lead to weeks of
delays.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 29
Reply
Typical turnaround times of the ICCP are in accordance with clauses 15 and 16 of Article 2 of
the PSI Agreement.  Paragraph a) of column 1 on page 12 of the Comprehensive Procedures &
Guidelines states that PSI is "normally conducted within five working days from the date of
notification by the exporter that a consignment is ready for shipment.  Following the receipt of thefinal documents and successful completion of the preshipment inspection, a Certificate of Conformity
is issued within five working days".  ICCP pe rformance records demonstrate that the actual turn
around times have averaged about half the stipulated periods.
Question 84.
In addition Saudi Arabia states in her answer to question 2 in document WT/ACC/SAU/16 that
with regard to quality this reference should be read as “quality identified as conformity to Saudi
standards”.  In this respect we lack a reference to international standards.
Reply
Refer to reply 5 of "Saudi Arabia’s Response to further questions raised by Australia on the
draft ICCP Procedures & Guidelines" submitted to the WTO as a supplementary document dated
26 November 1997 (circulated informally).
Question 85.
It is our view that the selection of products su bject to  the ICCP control measures seem to be
somewhat arbitrary.  Furthermore we welcome Saudi Arabia’s assurance at the 5 May 1998
meeting that, in compliance with TBT Agreement Articles 2.9 - 2.12 and 5.6 - 5.9, at least
60 days advance notice will be given before new products will be added to the ICCP-programme.  We assume that this privilege also includes foreign suppliers.
Reply
All regulated products under the ICCP were selected for WTO legitimate objectives.  Refer to
reply to question  9 of WT/ACC/SAU/13/Rev 1.  The 60 days notice for addition of any new
product(s) to the ICCP applies to all exporters (foreign suppliers) of the affected products.  In addition
to publication in the major local newspapers, SASO will specifically notify the known local importers
of the products, the foreign embassies in Riyadh, the Chambers of Commerce and the trade
associations of the foreign manufacturers.
Question 86.
Saudi Arabia states in document WT/ACC/SAU/16 that the country closely follows ISO/IEC
standards for type approval licensing, which leads us  to pose the question what is then the
reason for these extensive control and verification procedures while other countries applying
these standards seem to get by with much less  stringent product control regimes.  In addition
the Pre-Shipment Compliance Verification is just  one of  the verification procedures in use in
Saudi Arabia, while exporters also will face demands of registration, certification of conformity
(associated with individual consignments) and type approval evaluations and licenses (issued on
an annual basis), factory quality certification demands as additional conformity certification
procedures.
We consider the multitude of product control conformity assessments in Saudi Arabia as not
consistent with the over all principle in the WTO trade regulations to select the least trade
restrictive possible means of regulation proportionate to the goal sought.  We agree with othersWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 30
that Saudi Arabia as other countries should apply quality system certification combined with
suppliers (importer or producer) declaration of conformity, or the supplier’s (importer or
producer) as a standard practice for conformity controls.  This procedure could certainly be
supplemented by tests based upon random sampling procedures.
Reply
The PSI Agreement facilitates the conducting of inspection procedures on a preshipment basis
rather than on a post-market sampling basis, particularly for developing countries.  By providing "the
possibility to have conformity assessment activities undertaken at the site of facilities …", the PSI
process totally satisfies the "access" requirements of TBT Article 5.1.1, whereas post market sampling
does not (refer to WT/ACC/SAU/26 Chapter III paragraph 2).  Moreover, the core of the Registration
process under ICCP is substantiated suppliers’ declaration.  Thus, the ICCP’s compliance verificationoption of Registration plus Preshipment Inspection, available for exporters of any regulated products,
is equivalent to supplier’s declaration plus random sampling applied in other developed countries.  As
such, it is in accordance with international practice and totally respects the TBT Agreement
requirement to adopt the least trade restrictive procedure.
The objective behind the ICCP’s Type Approval Licensing is to provide exporters with an
option "allowing the import of their products with the minimum of intervention", mostly through
exemption from Preshipment Inspection.  In accordance with the principle of proportionality, this
maximum laxing of compliance verification should be associated with the highest level of confidence
that the product can convey as to its conformity to Saudi requirements.  Accordingly, Model ThirdParty Certification (ISO Guide 28) was adopted, as it is "the most comprehensive" conformity
assessment procedure that can provide such a confidence.  The ICCP Comprehensive Procedures &
Guidelines clearly stipulate "Exporters may choose the route most appropriate to  their product range
and frequency of exports".  Thus, Type Approval Licensing is not mandatory for any regulated
product regardless of its risk classification.  Exporters who do not see worthwhile benefits in TypeApproval Licensing for their products are always welcome to adhere to the Registration/PSI option.
As for providing a choice between product and QS approval, please refer to details in our reply to the
European Communities' question 5 submitted to the WTO as supplementary document dated
26 November 1997 (circulated informally), which demonstrates the shortcomings in such a choice,
and the doubtful success of the EC system.  In f act, many individual EC countries’ marking systems,
such as BSI’s Kite Mark, as well as other developed countries such as Japan’s JIS Mark are based on
evaluation and approval of both the product and the QS.
Question 87.
We are particularly concerned about the Saudi practice to differentiate between manufacturers
who export directly to Saudi Arabia and those who are not themselves manufactures.
Reply
In accordance with clause 5.1.1 of Article 5 of the TBT Agreement, equal conditions of
access for suppliers of like products need only be applicable in comparable situations.  A Typeapproval license is only granted to manufacturers with approved quality system.  Type approved
products are not necessarily marked  with SASO quality mark for diff erentiation.  Exporters normally
deal  with several manufacturers and markets and may be involved in assembly, conversion or
repacking which may change the original characteristics of the product and render it incompliant.  The
lower level of confidence justifies different corresponding proportionate measures.  In order for theexporter to get the benefit of waiver of routine PSI, he must obtain the authorization of the
manufacturer who owns the license.  The CoC can then be issued by either the manufacturer or  the
SCO.  This does not preclude the case whereby exporters totally devoted to a licensed manufacturer
can be treated the same as manufacturers.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 31
Question 88.
With regard to the principles of non-discrimination and national treatment we find the Saudi
practice of the pre-inspection and pre-shipment  testing programme as an eclatant breach of
these principles taking into account that domestic products only will be subject to a “analogousapproval system”.
Reply
Refer to reply question 3 of response to the European Communities' comments on draft ICCP
Procedures & Guidelines submitted to the WTO as a supplementary document dated
26 November 1997 (circulated informally).
Question 89.
Further more with regard to dispute settlements we would like to stress the importance of that
Saudi Arabia establish independent dispute se ttlement procedures.  We do not consider
Program manager ITSI as an i ndependent complaint authority.
Reply
A four level dispute settlement procedure has been included in appendix D of the ICCP
Guidelines as attachment to the request for certific ation (RFC).  The procedure starts with complaint
to the SCO or RLC up to SASO Program Manageme nt in Riyadh up to the Minister of Commerce and
ending with independent review procedures.
Question 90.
(WT/ACC/SAU/21, paragraph 7, letter d)  In this paragraph, it is stated that it is not feasible to
determine the equivalency of some national sta ndards to international ones.  Further below in
the same paragraph, it is mentioned that “t he ICCP registration process provides for the
"...determination of equivalency of the standard s that partially satisfy the requirements of the
Saudi standards".  This appears contradictory since the equivalency to the Saudi standards is
evaluated under the ICCP on a case by case.
Reply
What is intended in our WT/ACC/SAU/21 paper is  that this is an extensive undertaking that
could not be instantly completed upon the start of implementation of the ICCP (predetermination).We feel that even developed countries may not be able to produce accurate and comprehensive instant
equivalency lists for all the world’s national standards in the context of the WTO’s definition of
equivalency.  Nevertheless, the ICCP, through its Registration process, has already succeeded in
establishing a rich data base for equivalency of standards.  Appropriate non-Saudi standards have
already been identified as the basis upon which product compliance may be assessed, as well as thespecific Saudi Arabian National Deviations (SANDS), that may apply.  This information is available
for exporters on request at all the SASO Country Offices or Regional Licensing Centers.  The data
base is being continuously updated.
Question 91.
In document WT/ACC/SAU/26, Chapter II, paragraph 2, it is stated that Saudi Arabia uses
international standards except when found inappropriate because of the country’s fundamentalWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 32
climatic and geographical factors.  With the exception of food products, could Saudi Arabia
specify for which type of products the int ernational standards are judged ineffective?
Reply
Examples are international standards which do not specify performance or testing of
equipment apparatus or material at high ambient temperatures representative of Saudi conditions.
Question 92.
According to document WT/ACC/SAU/21, inspections and testing under the ICCP are "due to
Saudi Arabia’s inadequate infrastructural and technical expertise capabilities to perform these
tasks in-country".
We consider that this situation could lead to  difference of treatment between national and
foreign manufacturers.  Therefore we welcome the information according to which Saudi
Arabia’s infrastructural capabilities are being progressively developed and that the PSI and
PST activities under the programme will be reduced proportionately.
We would like to know if a time schedule has been established with regard to the replacement of
PSI and PST activities by the recognition of a supplier’s declaration coupled with random in-
country sampling (for most products except high hazard categories).
Reply
Regarding Saudi Arabia’s infrastructural plans, refer to reply to Canada’s question 4
submitted as dated 26 November 1997 (circulated informally).
As for proportionate measures to reduce PSI, the ICCP has already encouraged several
consistently compliant manufacturers to apply for type approval licensing.  Initially, few have taken
the steps towards this transition, and the process is expected to accelerate in the forthcoming period.
Question 93.
ICCP CAP accepts the results of credible CAP of other countries through ... for routine PSI is
eliminated.  Could Saudi Arabia specify for which products this paragraph applies and give
examples of countries or bodies whose certificates are recognized?
Reply
Any existing test reports or certificates issued by accredited bodies for the regulated product
under another national or international conformity assessment or certification scheme can be
submitted by exporters as documents substantiating their compliance.  Full recognition is duly given
to those reports/certificates in so far as they satisfy the Saudi requirements.  Where the full Saudi
requirements are met, the role of the ICCP Regional Licensing Center would be limited to evaluation,verification, administration, issuance and validation of the confirming Statement of Registration or
Type Approval License.  The SASO Country Office  would still carry out the required PSI associated
with Registration and issue the final Certificates  of Conformity.  For products holding SASO Type
Approval License, CoCs can be issued by the manufacturers themselves.  This applies to all products
and countries.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 33
Question 94.
What is the difference between the bodies mentioned in this paragraph and the laboratories
mentioned in paragraph 7, letter b?  (see also document WT/ACC/SAU/26, chapter III,
paragraph 3).
Reply
Accredited laboratories, third party certification or notified bodies are all bodies whose test
results and certificates are recognized as indicated in (a).
Question 95.
We welcome the proposal to make more flexible  investigation relating to Type Approval than
the current one.
Reply
Statement noted.
Question 96.
Saudi Arabia should eliminate the difference of treatment between manufacturers who export
directly and exporters who are not the manufacturers themselves.  Such a measure finds no
justification under the WTO TBT Agreement.  A pr oduct can be imported in Saudi Arabia only
if it fulfills Saudi Arabian requirements.  The supplier, either the producer or the importer, is
responsible for the conformity of the products he  is marketing.  In addition, problems which
arise from goods marketed in Saudi Arabia may also stem from the distribution and retailing
system.
Reply
Please refer to supplementary document dated 26 November 1997 (circulated informally).
Question 97.
At the most recent round of informal WTO acces sion discussions, held in Geneva in early
November, the Saudi Arabian government stated it s readiness to consider modifications to the
ICCP scheme in order to render it more compatible with the WTO TBT Agreement.  We
welcomes the statement of the Saudi side in this respect, and in a constructive spirit sets outbelow its principal comments on the ICCP and the further improvements we seek to the scheme
to render it fully compatible  with the WTO TBT Agreement.
(a) Non-Discrimination and National Treatment.  Imported and domestic products are
currently approved by different agencies.  This increases the risk of procedures being designed
and applied differently.  To avoid this risk, the ICCP scheme should explicitly state not only
that the same standards apply equally to dome stic goods and imports, but that the same type
approval procedures also apply, and are administered in an identical manner.  The relevant
Saudi legislation for domestic product controls should be cited in the scheme as a demonstration
of transparency and non-discrimination, and we would also like a copy of it.
(b) Exports from the manufacturer/from an independent exporter:  The ICCP type
approval regime foresees slightly different type approval procedures depending on whether the
product was exported directly by a manufacturer or via a separate trader.  There are noWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 34
grounds in the TBTA to differentiate in this way between like products.  We therefore urge
Saudi Arabia to merge the two procedures into one by applying to all products the procedure
applied to manufacturers who exported.  This would involve as a consequence the deletion of
those paragraphs in the ICCP guidelines referr ing to products coming being presented by an
importer/exporter who is not the manufacturer.  Our understanding from Mr. Molla of SASO
at the November meeting was that there were no  significant differences in treatment and that
such a modification would be considered positively.
We would welcome confirmation that this ch ange to the ICCP procedure is being made.
(c) Transparency:  The ICCP should explicitly state that a single uniform concordance of
Saudi and other equivalent standards exists, is regularly updated by SASO which is solely
responsible for setting standards, and is availa ble from any SASO Country Office.  We would
also like a clear statement in the ICCP that the Saudi Arabian government is the body
determining technical regulations, standards, conformity assessment procedures and their
application, and that companies applying such rules on products prior to export are acting in
conformity with those rules established by the gov ernment.  This is to ensure that different test
houses, inspection services cannot deviate from the centrally established rules and standards.
(d) Non-Compliance:  ICCP continues to provide that type approval certificates would be
annulled if a product was found to be non-compliant.  We had argued in May that this was to
attack the wrong target:  in such cases the product should be suspended and action taken
against the person responsible for marketing the product.  Only in those cases where the type
approval certificate was inaccurate or fraudulent should it be revoked.
In the November meeting Saudi Arabia said it had made changes to the enforcement measures
to take in account this concern.  We reiterate our view that the ICCP should be amended to say
that revocation of certificates remained a possibility in cases where a certificate is fraudulent oris materially inaccurate.  This revision should remove the implication that revocation is the
standard response to unsafe product determinations.
(e) Proportionality:  We find it difficult to ac cept that ICCP products have to undergo not
only product type approval but also factory quality system certification.  This double barreledcertification is in virtually all parts of the globe reserved only for very high risk products such
as pharmaceuticals and medical devices, and applied to lower risk goods is a disproportionately
heavy means of regulation.  Where it can be demonstrated that some form of third party
certification is necessary, manufacturers should be given a choice between product or quality
system certification but not have to run the gauntlet of both.
We  have already explained that international standards related to quality system certification
already contain sufficient checks on the product related aspects to provide the guarantees of
product conformity necessary.
Secondly, we question the justification for annual licensing of approved manufacturing sites.
This again is a disproportionate measure and is  more trade restrictive than necessary.  Even if
Saudi Arabia were to amend the ICCP to provide that manufacturing quality system
certification is an alternative to product certification a requirement for annual licensing is over-
regulation.  Standard international practice for re-inspection of quality systems in high risk
areas such as pharmaceuticals production is two to four  years.  It is also unclear as to whether
"licensing" equates to quality system inspection or not.  If it does not then as a procedure it does
not seem necessary.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 35
Thirdly, we question the justification for pre-market certification of consumer
electronics/electrical appliances and processe d foodstuffs; this runs against international
practice and (in the case of foodstuffs) the principles established by FAO and WHO, as
expressed in the HACCP system with which Sa udi Arabia is familiar.  Border control of
processed foodstuffs does not in itself offer guarantees of health and safety since this is to ignore
the whole chain of production conditions, storage, distribution, retail conditions, etc.  We willprovide a more detailed aide memoire on foodstuffs controls for consideration by Saudi Arabia.
We expect nevertheless for Saudi Arabia to remove, in time, pre-market certification for these
products.
Finally on certification of Perfumes.  At our November meeting we expressed concerns over new
requirements that display, not-for-sale samples of perfumes were being subject to the full
certification requirement.  Saudi Arabia said this was not the case.  Samples of perfumes wereexempt.  We would appreciate formal confirmation of this.
A second issue relates to requirements for soaps containing perfumes, which are subject to the
full ICCP requirements for cosmetic products (3307 of the Harmonized system), and are not
treated like other soaps (HS 3401).  This is a costly and heavy procedure for exporters.  We
would appreciate Saudi Arabia’s considering an adjustment of its procedures - namely to treat
perfumed soaps as soap falling under 3401 and therefore exempt it from ICCP - to remove this
problem.
Reply
The Aide Memoire dated 27 November, 1997 acknowledged in its cover page that the
document was drawn up before receiving Saudi Arabia’s latest paper on the subject.  All the issues
(with the exception of one), were previously raised by the European Communities and addressed by
Saudi Arabia in the "Response to the European Communities' comments on draft ICCP Procedures &Guidelines" submitted to the WTO as a supplementary document dated 26 November 1997 (circulated
informally). (See also replies to questions 76, 78, 79, 80 and 81.)
Question 98.
Shelf-Life Regulations for Processed Agricultural Products
Legal Basis:
- Gulf Standard No. 150/1993, "Expiration period of food products"
- Saudi Standard 702/1993, “Expiration period of food products”
- Saudi Arabian Standard SSA 457/1986, “Expiration periods for food products”
Description:
Shelf-life of products in particular chocolate covered or stuffed biscuitsUnder Gulf Standard No. 150/1993, the expiry dates for sugar confectionery and chocolate
products have been defined as follows:
Cocoa powder:
- 24 months for containers in metal, glass or aluminum foil containers packed undervacuum or in the presence of an inert gas;
- 12 months for the other containers, such as paper or plasticWT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 36
Sweetened or salted biscuits:
- 9 months for paper containers or wrapped in  special paper cellophane or aluminum foil;
- 12 months packed in metallic tins
Cake mixes:
- 18 months for paper containers or aluminum foils
Plain hard candy:
- 24 months for all suitable containers
Enriched fortified hard candy:
- 12 months for all suitable containers
Filled and coated biscuits:
- 12 months for metallic containers.  In our opinion the translation for packaging in paper
has been omitted
All types of chocolate:
- 12 months for packed in paper, aluminum foils or plastic containers.
Exporters encounter difficulties in particular with the category of products "Salted or
sweetened biscuits" and "stuffed or covered biscuits".
In addition to Gulf Standard No. 150/1993 to  which all GCC member countries subscribe, Saudi
Arabia continues to apply standard No. SSA 457/1986 finalized by the SASO in 1986,
prescribing a shelf life of only six months (ins tead of 12 months as prescribed in the Gulf
Standard) for "stuffed or covered biscuits", contained in paper containers or wrapped in
special paper or cellophane.
International Practice:
In international trade, shelf life is dete rmined by the producers and under their own
responsibility according to the technology used.  This corresponds to the provisions of CodexAlimentarius, in particular to:
(i). Article 4.7 "Date marking and storage Instructions", Section 4 "Labeling of 
Prepackaged Food", Codex Alimentarius.
(ii) Article 4.7.1 of Section 4 of the Codex Al imentarius indicates that "The date of 
minimum durability shall be declared for pre-packaged Foods".
Recommendations:
The Gulf Standard No. 150/93 and the Saudi Arabian Standard SSA 457/1986 should be
amended so that:
- all types of biscuits should have the same shelf-life of at least 12 months, without making
a distinction following the packaging material;
- governmental bodies should not be involved in the determination of the shelf-life of 
foodstuffs;
- shelf-life should be determined by the ma nufacturer; it is in the interests of the 
manufacturer to keep his reputation by guaranteeing a realistic shelf-life.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 37
Reply
Updating SSA 702/93 (GS 150/93) and SSA 45 7/1986 Part Two is currently underway.
These findings shall be observed in cooperation with the factories concerned with these products.
(c) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures
Question 99.We would appreciate further Information In response to question 177, 178, 180, 181 and 182 in
WT/ACC/SAU/29 as the Information provided in the answers does not provide sufficient
information to judge whether or not  Saudi Arabia's arrangements in relation to SPS measures
are consistent with the SPS Agreement?
Reply
Please state what precise information is required.  We believe Saudi Arabia's arrangements
are consistent with SPS Agreement. Where these are not found to be consistent, Saudi Arabia willensure their consistency by the time of its accession to the WTO.
4. Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Agricultural Products
Question 100.How will the protection" policy be applied to Imported products “to safeguard the national
agricultural sector”?
Reply
The "Protection" policy is applied to imported products "to safeguard" agriculture through
keeping out diseases and pests away from the national agricultural sector.
Question 101.
Concerning Saudi Arabia's ban of certain agricultu ral products such as, dates and long-validity
pasteurized liquid milk in containers of more than one liter:  the WTO Agreement on
Agriculture, Article 4, paragraph 2, prohibits the imposition of the use  of quantitative import
restrictions.
Can Saudi Arabia confirm that the tariff rates offered in WT/ACC/SPEC /SAU/2/Rev.2 are
intended to replace these bans and that after accession to the WTO no bans will be applied to
the importation of these products'?.
Reply
Yes, the offered tariff rates are intended to replace the bans on dates and long-validity
pasteurized milk in containers of more than one liter, and after accession to the WTO no bans will be
applied to the importation of these products.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 38
Question 102.
Saudi Arabia has said (WT/ACC/SAU/29 - Reply to question 47) that it may replace the import
ban on long-life pasteurized Milk by tariffs upon accession.  According to Article 4.2 of the
Agreement on Agriculture. no border measures other than ordinary customs duties are
permitted.  We expect Saudi Arabia should conf irm that it will comply with this provision.
Reply
It is so confirmed.
Question 103.
Saudi Arabia has recently increased the duty rates for tobacco and tobacco products and said
that the increase has to be seen in the context of health and safety matters.  We take note of this
statement and we expect that Saudi Arabia will not increase the import protection for any other
agricultural product during its WTO accession negotiations.  Can Saudi Arabia confirm this
expectation'?
Reply
During its WTO accession negotiations, Saudi Arabia will not increase the import protection
for any agricultural product other than tobacco and tobacco products.
Re:  Document WT/ACC/SAU/13/Add.1/Corr.1
Question 104.
(Question 2) Saudi Arabia explained that the Grains, Silos, Flour, and Milling Organization
(GSFMO) purchases domestically produced and im ported barely and then sells it to livestock
producers at an administered price of US$74.67 per ton.
What criteria does the GSFMO use to set the administered price fixed at US$74.67 , or does it
fluctuate in accordance with the market price of barley?
Reply
The administered price of barley for livestock producers is fixed at US$ 74.67, and does not
fluctuate in accordance with the market price of barley.
Question 105.
(Question 2)  Saudi Arabia was asked to explain the reasons for denying a request for an import
license for an agricultural product.  In respo nse, Saudi Arabia referenced the document on
import licensing (WT/ACC/ SAU/30).  However, WTIACC/SAU/30 does not explain the reasonsfor denying a request for an import license for an agricultural product.  This document
indicates only that an application is assessed on the basis of how it meets Saudi Arabia's
standards and specifications.
Could Saudi Arabia please describe its standards and specifications for issuance of import
licenses.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 39
Reply
The application for an import license is verified to ensure that the material meets the Saudi
standards and specifications which differ according to the nature of the product.
Question 106.
(Question 32) Saudi Arabia was asked to outline its criteria for determining seed quality and to
discuss how it determines and enforces seed use for planting and food.  In response, Saudi
Arabia referenced the document on impo rt licensing (WT/ACC/SAU/30).  However,
WT/ACC/SAU/30 does not explain the criteria for determining seed quality and how it
determines and enforces seed used for planting and food .
Could Saudi Arabia please provide more information on determining seed quality and how it
determines and enforces seed use for planting and food.
Reply
The use of seeds for planting or food is determined by confirmation in the export certificate
specifying if the seed is for planting or food.  The quality of the certified seed is checked and the
export certificate is verified by the Saudi authorities at the entry points.
Question 107.
(Question 37)  Saudi Arabia noted that there are no existing bans on the exportation of wheat
and wheat flour with the exception of subsidized wheat and wheat flour.  What percentage of,
wheat and wheat flour is subsidized and theref ore subject to export bans? what governmental
authority sets this percentage, and on what basis does it do so?
Reply
As noted, there are no existing bans on the exportation of wheat and wheat flour, with the
exception of subsidized wheat and wheat flour.  All wheat and wheat flour produced domestically aresubsidized and therefore subject to export bans.  No governmental authority sets any percentage.
Question 108.
(Question 37)  In previous documents, Saudi Arabia explained that it prohibited and/or
restricted the exportation of certain agricultural products (livestock, horses, baby milk, date
palm seedlings, barley, corn, maize, soya beans), However, in the response to question 49, SaudiArabia noted that "exportation is neither prohib ited or restricted". Exportation of such items
"is conditional on the repayment of subsidies intended for support of domestic production.'
Furthermore, Saudi Arabia stated that the lice nsing procedure for exporting such products is
'transparent and nondiscriminatory since it is available for every exporter."
Could Saudi Arabia please clarify whether certai n agricultural products (livestock, horses, baby
milk, date palm seedlings, barley, corn, maize, soya beans) are subject to export prohibitions
and/or restrictions?
Could Saudi Arabia describe in detail the export licensing procedures and in particular, the
transparent and non-discriminatory manner in which export licensing procedures are
administered.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 40
Reply
Exportation of female livestock and horses is prohibited in order to maintain productivity of
such animals. Exportation of date palm seedlings, barley, corn, maize, and  soy beans is conditional
on the repayment of subsidies intended for support of domestic production.
Question 109.
(Question 53)   Saudi Arabia stated that "prohibited" items may be imported for "legitimate
use" (i.e., by governmental agencies for their own use and not for commercial sale) .
Could Saudi Arabia please provide examples of how governmental agencies would use such
"prohibited" items?
Would any of these "prohibited" items fall with in the agricultural sector?  Could Saudi Arabia
please provide a list of such "prohibited" items at the 6 digit HS level?
Reply
Examples are "postage or revenue stamps" which can be imported only by governmental
agencies, or "parachutes" which can only be imported by the Ministry of Defense for its own use.
As for the list of items, please see the revi sed list in document WT/ACC/SAU/29/Add.3.  The
list is not available at 6-digits HS level.  It is only maintained at Saudi 8-digit level.
Question 110.
(Question 56) Saudi Arabia was asked to clarify what it meant by "quality requirements" for
import licenses for seeds in its reply to Question 31 of WT/ACC/SAU/ 13/Add. 1. Saudi Arabia
referenced the document on Import Licenses (WT/ACC/SAU/30).  This document does not
explain what is meant by "quality requirements".  Could Saudi Arabia therefore please provide
information on how licenses are issued for seed that meets quality requirements?
Reply
Quality requirements mean standards.
Question 111.
(Question 84)  Saudi Arabia was asked to explain why it had removed "feed (corn and
soybeans)" and ,"other products" from its AMS table, and reflected corn and soybeans as
"input subsidies" for poultry  in Supporting table DS:7.  Saudi Arabia replied "this is only a
statement."
Could Saudi Arabia clarify the response "this is only a statement".  Also could Saudi Arabia
please explain how and where it plans to place corn and soybeans on its domestic support
notifications.
Reply
Corn and soybeans are reflected as "input subsidies" for poultry in Supporting table DS:7 of
revised AMS table in conformity with WT/ACC/4 technical note.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 41
Question 112.
(Question 96)  Saudi Arabia was asked to provide information about the prices of stock held
wheat and barley.  It noted that only wheat is stock held for food security purposes, stock held
wheat is purchased at "administered prices, wh ich are the market prices in Saudi Arabia.
If stock held wheat is purchased at the market price, why does Saudi Arabia consider the price
"administered?" Which governmental authority sets the administered price of stock held wheat
and on the basis of what specific criteria?
Reply
Stock held wheat is purchased at administered prices, which are the market producers prices
in Saudi Arabia.  The amount shown in Supporting Table DS : 1 reflects the cost of storing wheat held
for food security.
Question 113.
(Question 104)  Saudi Arabia was asked to provide data on wheat exports after 1995.
Furthermore, it was asked to explain whether an  agency/agencies or private firms replaced the
GSFMO in exporting wheat after the GSFMO was prohibited from doing so.  Finally, Saudi
Arabia was asked to provide the Working Party with the "nil" supporting table ES:1 if export
subsidies were not provided to wheat.  We would be grateful for the requested information.
Reply
No wheat was exported by GSFMO since 1995.  No other agency/agencies or private firms
exported wheat during this period.  Saudi Arabia has included supporting table ES:1 in its recentrevised WT/ACC/4 tables, and completed the table by including a statement related to its wheat
export policy.
Question 114.
(Question 105)  Saudi Arabia was asked to clarify the sources of the data provided in
WT/ACC/4. It responded "that data in WT/ACC/4 is based on actuals."  Could Saudi Arabia
please clarify the term "actuals"?  Could Saudi Arabia also explain what data the information
in WTIACC/4 is based upon?
Reply
Saudi Arabia does not have a separate/specific section of its governmental budget for
domestic subsidies. The basis for data is explained in the methodological note.
Question 115.
(Question 108)  Saudi Arabia was asked to confirm whether it maintains exports controls on
barley, wheat, and wheat flour, and whether su ch controls are in the form of quantitative
restrictions, export licenses, or other measures.  It answered that the GSFMO no longer
exported wheat or barley.  Furthermore, it expl ained that export controls were maintained for
subsidized wheat and barley through export licenses.
Could Saudi Arabia provide a list of recipients of licenses to export wheat and barley since
1995?  Could Saudi Arabia also provide expo rt data for wheat and barley since 1995?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 42
Reply
So far there has been no request for such license.  No wheat was exported by GSFMO since
1995.  No other agency/agencies or private firms exported wheat during this period.  Consequently,
there is no export for wheat and barley since 1995.
Question 116.
(Question 111)  Saudi Arabia noted that it was a net wheat exporter in 1992-1994.  Is this still
the case, (.even though the GSFMO is no longer permitted to export wheat?  Could Saudi
Arabia please provide export data for wheat?
Reply
GSFMO is no longer wheat exporter.  There was no export of wheat after 1994.
Question 117.
(Question 113)  Saudi Arabia was asked to explain why it had not provided a "nil' DS:1
supporting table to WT/ACC/4 even though it does not maintain export subsidies.  Saudi Arabia
responded that Working Party members should refer to the new WT/ACC/4 tables.
We welcome the fact that Saudi Arabia has included supporting table ES: 1 in its revised
WT/ACC/4 tables (WT/ACC/SPEC/SAU/1/Rev. 1).  However, the table is blank.  Therefore,
could Saudi Arabia please complete the table by including the word "nil" if, indeed, it does not
provide export subsidies.
Reply
Saudi Arabia has included supporting table ES:I in its recent revised WT/ACC/4 tables, and
completed the table by including a statement related to its wheat export policy.
Question 118.
(Question 119)  Saudi Arabia was asked to provide a list of those 'prohibited items" that could
be imported by certain state agencies for legiti mate use.  Saudi Arabia replied that 'such a list
does not exist.  Instead, entry of some prohibited items may be allowed on a case-by-case basis,
Could Saudi Arabia please provide a list of the prohibited items that have been permitted entry
on a case-by-case basis over the period 1994-96.
Reply
This information is not available as different agencies do not maintain records of such cases.
Question 119.
(Question 141)  Saudi Arabia noted that "the guaranteed production price to wheat producers
could be considered as a market price for procuring grain from domestic producers."
Furthermore, Saudi Arabia explained that "the consumer/user price established by the GSFMOcan be considered the effective domestic market sale price."
Why does Saudi Arabia consider an administered/g uaranteed/set price to be the same as the
market price?  How do these prices di ffer from the prices of imported wheat?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 43
Reply
The guaranteed price to wheat producers could be considered as a market price for procuring
grain from domestic producers since it represents the price at which farmers sell their production.  The
consumer/user price is the effective domestic market sale price since it represents the price at whichGSFMO sells wheat flour.  In addition there is no other price (no imported wheat).
Question 120.
(Question 233) In Question 45 of WT/ACC/SAU/13, Saudi Arabia was asked to specify the time
frame for completing the Ministerial Committee's examination of agricultural issues and WTO
commitments.  Saudi Arabia replied that there wa s no such time frame, and stated that the
Committee reviews the agricultural policy and meats as often as necessary.  Could Saudi Arabia
provide more detailed information about the work of the Committee and when it has met in the
past?
Reply
The program of work of the Committee is confidential.  The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia can
confirm that it will accept and implement its obligations under the WTO Agreement upon its
accession.
Domestic Support
Question 121.In the Explanatory note to the document WT/ACC/SPEC/SAU/1Rev.1 (point II), it is said that
agricultural subsidies include projects also for fish farms.  We request Saudi Arabia to delete
any subsidy dealing with fishery  from the agricultural supporting tables.
Reply
Item related to fisheries has been deleted from the agricultural supporting tables.
Question 122.
Likewise: in the reply to question 79 in document WT/ACC/SAU/29 it is said that
support to Fish Resources Research centers will not be included in the new WT/ACC/4 tables
(WT/ACC/SPEC/SAU/1 Rev.1 ). But this support is still included.
Reply
Support to Fish Research centers has not been included in the latest revised tables.
Supporting Table DS:1
Question 123.Saudi Arabia included pest and disease control, air spray pest and disease control, and control
of scarlet fever  in its domestic support for agriculture.  Why was scarlet fever included as part
of Saudi Arabia's domestic support for agriculture?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 44
Reply
Scarlet fever is not included as a part of the domestic support in the revised tables.
Question 124.
Saudi Arabia includes a number of programs in its notification such as the Saudi-American
Cooperation, and the Saudi-Chine se Cooperation.  Could Saudi Arabia please provide a
description of these programs and explain how they qualify under domestic support for
agriculture?
Reply
In the context of these programs, specialists from the United States and China are contracted
with in order to work in the Ministry of Agricultur e.  Similarly, Saudis are sent to these countries to
gain experience.  In addition, laboratory equipment is provided to support these programs.
Question 125.
Saudi Arabia included a number of infrastructure services in its DS:1 notification - these
included construction - of dams, maintenance of dams, irrigation and drainage systems,
prevention of moving; sand, and planting and development of forests.  Could Saudi Arabia
please explain how these services solely benefit the agriculture sector?
Reply
These services benefit solely the agriculture sector since no other sector receives support from
these programs.
Question 126.
Saudi Arabia did not provide information about predetermined targets of public stockholding
for food security purposes in their domestic support notification.  Could Saudi Arabia pleaseprovide details of the "predetermined targets in terms of volume and accumulation of such
stocks" as required under Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture?
Reply
Saudi Arabia has a suitable stockholding target to cover its consumption needs of wheat.
V. TRADE-RELATED  INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME
Question 127.Would Saudi Arabia please clarify  how  the answer to question 173 of WT/ACC/SAU/13/Add.1,
that a trademark registration can be open to cancellation after only two years' non-use,
complies with Article 19.1 of TRIPS?
Reply
There is a misunderstanding of the answer  to question 173 of WT/ACC/SAU/13/Add.1. This
answer is related to the rights conferred to an owner of a trademark, which comply with Article 16.1
of the TRIPS Agreement.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 45
Under Article 29.1 of the Saudi Trademarks Law, a trademark registration can be open to
cancellation after an uninterrupted period of five years of non-use, while this period is "at least three
years of non-use" under Article 19.1 of the TRIPS Agreement.
Question 128.
We welcome Saudi Arabia's confirmation that  in accordance with Article 14 of TRIPS and
Article 18 of the Berne Convention  retroactive protection will be provided for sound recordings
still in protection in other WTO countries and made up to 50 years ago (question 247
WT/ACC/SAU/29).  What steps will Saudi Arabia be taking to implement and enforce this and
to what timetable'?
Reply
Saudi Arabia will make the necessary changes in its copyright law but it will be done during
the transitional period.
Question 129.
We welcome Saudi Arabia's confirmation that , in accordance with Article 10 of TRIPS,
computer programs shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention and that
also, compilations will be protected as intellec tual creations.  What steps will Saudi Arabia be
taking to implement and enforce this and to what timetable?
Reply
Saudi Arabia will make the necessary changes in its copyright law but it will be done during
the transitional period.
Question 130.
Who decides on the distinctiveness acquired by a trademark (question 244 WT/ACC/SAU/29):
the trademark office, the judge or someone else?  On what basis is the "distinctiveness"decided: on the basis of a public survey or on what other basis?
Reply
The Trademarks office within the Ministry of Commerce is competent to decide on the
"distinctiveness" acquired by a trademark. The  distinctiveness is decided on the basis of the legal
criteria described in Articles 1.10 of the Trademarks Law, and Article 7 (parag.2) of its Rules ofImplementation.
Question 131.
On question 246 (WT/ACC/SAU/29) It is not relevant that the TRIPS Agreement contains an
MFN clause which obliges TRIPS members  to extend any advantage, favor or privilege granted
to the nationals of any other TRIPS country to the nationals of all TRIPS Members?  Still on
the subject of copyright, when does Saudi Arabia  expect the study by a specialized committee to
be carried out?
Reply
Yes, we agree with the first part of the question.  As for the second part, the study is in
progress, but it is difficult at this stage to give a time frame for its completion.WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 46
Question 132.
In question 252 (WT/ACC/SAU/29) is it not relevant that TRIPS Article 2 obliges all Members
to comply with Articles 1- 1 2 and 19 of the Paris Convention, irrespective of actual accession to
that Convention?
Reply
After joining the WTO, Saudi Arabia will under take the commitment to bring its intellectual
property regime into conformity with the TRIPS Agreement after a transitional period of five years.
Thus, the fact that TRIPS Agreement is mostly based on other international Conventions, including
the Paris Convention, Saudi Arabia will comply  with Articles 1-12 and 19 of this Convention.
Question 133.
We have already stated our general opposition to  transitional periods as well as information
required in order to consider the possibility of an exceptional case.  In WT/ACC/SAU/28, SaudiArabia requests a transitional period of five ye ars fully to apply the provisions of the TRIPS
Agreement.  The same document describes the actions that Saudi Arabia will undertake to
implement the TRIPS Agreement after its accession to the WTO.  It would be useful to know
what Saudi Arabia has already done and/or is cu rrently doing to implement each section of the
above-mentioned agreement.  For any instances where action has not been or is not presently inthe course of being taken it would be useful to have an explanation why no action has been
undertaken so far.
Reply
Please refer to document on the subject circulated to the Working Party.
VII. INSTITUTIONAL BASE FOR TRADE AND ECONOMIC RELATIONS WITH 
THIRD COUNTRIES
Preferential Trading Arrangements
Question 134.Can Saudi Arabia provide the texts of the following agreements:- the Arab free trade area.
- the Agreement facilitating and developing trade exchanges among Arab States.
Reply
Enclosed herewith, please find:
- The program of the implementation of the Agreement Facilitating and Developing Trade 
Exchange among Arab States to create a Free Trade Area.
- The Agreement Facilitating and Developing Trade Exchange among Arab States.
Question 135.
Have the texts of these agreements been notified to the CRTA?WT/ACC/SAU/35
Page 47
Reply
Saudi Arabia is not yet a member and will not notify these agreements upon becoming a
WTO member.
Question 136.
We note that Saudi Arabia is undertaking negotiations with Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar,
and the United Arab Emirates on the establishm ent of a GCC common external tariff.  Could
Saudi Arabia provide inform in these negotiations?
Reply
Please see the reply to question no. 184 in document WT/ACC/SAU/6
Question 137.
We note that there is no institutional link be tween the GCC Free Trade Agreements (or  the
future GCC Customs Union) and the Arab Le ague Free Trade Agreement. Will the  future
GCC Customs Union have common trade and commercial policies towards  other Arab League
FTA countries, or will GCC countries continue to pursue separate  trade and commercial
policies?
Reply
This matter is still under consideration by competent committees within the framework of the
General Secretariat of the GCC.
Question 138.
Will the GCC Customs Union have common trade and commercial policies.  If so,  in which
areas will common policies be pursued?
Reply
This matter is still under consideration by competent committees within the framework of the
General Secretariat of the GCC.
__________