RESTRICTED  
  
S/CSC/M/8 4 
 
18 Decem ber 2020 
(20-9194) Page: 1/5 
Committee on Specific Commitments    
 
  
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 2 DECEM BER 2020 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
The Committee on Specific Commitments (CSC) held a meeting on 2 Decem ber 2020 chaired by 
Mr. Toshihide Aotake from Japan . The Chairperson stated that under Other Business  of this meeting , 
he would inform the Committee  of a joint presentation to be made by the Secretariat and the UN 
Statistics Division on the new classification website . The agenda for the meeting, contained in 
document WTO/AIR/CSC/1 3, was adopted  as modified . 
 
1  ITEM A – ADOPTION OF THE ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN 
SERVICES  
1.1.  The Committee adopted t he draft annual report  as contained in document S/CSC/W/71 . 
2  ITEM B – IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS  
2.1.  The Chair person  recall ed that this item had been  included in the agenda upon a communication 
(S/CSC/W/69, dated 5 March 2020 ) from the United States, which  propose d that the Committee 
examine  GATS schedules with conditional commitments with a view to improving transparency of 
commitments. At the last meeting, the Committee had agreed on a step -by-step approach whereby 
the Secretariat would first prepare a factual compilation of conditional com mitments contained in 
Members' schedules , after which  the Committee would consider the next steps of the proposed 
exercise . Accordingly, the Secretariat ha d prepared the Compilation of Conditional Commitments, 
contained in document S/CSC/W/70, which was ci rculated on 13 November 2020 . Meanwhile, the 
Chairperson  had held consultations with some delegations . He encourag ed delegations  to share 
thought s on the proposed exercise, including on how to proceed further. He also welcomed  Members 
to update the Committ ee on their commitments referred to in the Compilation, if they were willing  
to do so . He first invited the Secretariat to introduce the Compilation.  
2.2.  The representative of the Secretariat  stated that the Compilation had been  prepared upon the 
request of the Committee , which  was factual and self -explanatory. For the purpose of this 
Compilation, conditional commitments refer red to the entries in Members' schedules which contain ed 
certain conditions attached to the entry into fo rce, implementation or updating of the commitments. 
For the sake of completeness,  the Compilation  also include d entries containing vague  conditions. 
Aware that Members m ight have different understanding of how conditional commitments should be 
defined , the Secretariat welcomed c larifications from Members . The Compilation  include d 42 entries 
made by 24 Members, most of which were related to telecommunications. Also i ncluded were the  
entries in other sectors, such as professional services, distribution servic es, hospital services and 
transport services.  This Compilation did not include the  entries on financial services given the 
mandate of the Committee . The Secretariat reiterate d that the Compilation was to serve 
transparency purposes only and was without pre judice to the positions of Members and to their 
rights and obligations under the WTO. It was up to the Committee to consider and decide how to 
examine conditional commitments within its mandate . 
2.3.  Referring  to Mauritius' entry included in the Compilation, wh ich was the additional commitment 
on telecommunications, t he representative of Mauritius  sought clarification on  the footnote "The 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  S/CSC/M/8 4 
 
- 2 - 
 
  Reference Paper is not attached to the Schedule". Noting that the Reference Paper was a WTO 
document, he wondered what else needed to be done.  
2.4.  The representative of China  thank ed the U nited States for the communication and the 
Secretariat  for the Compilation of Conditional Commitments in GATS Schedules, w hich was 
extremely helpful for China to better understand  the issue. China support ed more technical 
discussions in the CSC meeting s. However, any modification of schedules was a complex task, which 
might involve not only technical modifications but also cl arification of a Member 's existing 
commitments. For most Members, to initiate any  modification of schedule s of specific commitments 
would involve domestic consultation s, authorization and other due legal procedures. China was of 
the view  that this issue co uld not properly be resolved only in the context of CSC meetings . China 
therefore suggested that  the issue  be tackle d in the future in a broader context, such as market 
access negotiations, or through other procedures mandated by the CTS or the WTO . 
2.5.  The representative of Canada  noted value in a step -by-step approach focus ing on information  
exchange and the usefulness of the factual Compilation. Canada supported a dialogue within the 
CSC which aim ed at having  more information on the state of play of the measures included in the 
Compilation.  Canada  encourage d Members to provide update s to the Committee on their 
commitments or the measure s referred to in the Compilation . Canada was particularly interested in 
an update on telecommunications as  most of the measures in the Compilation were related to that 
sector . Canada looked forward to engaging in the discussion.  
2.6.  The representative of Russia  stated that the exercise was an important contribution to 
strengthening the transparency principle of this Organization. T he Compilation  provide d an excellent 
snapshot of conditional commitments, which le d to certain conclusion s. Noting that 
telecommunications was the most relevant  sector  which was a systemic issue , Russia sought 
comments from the Secretariat in this regard. Russia would like to know  whether  the WTO had 
provided technical assistance to implement  conditional comm itments and whether there was a ny 
such request from Members . Further, Russia asked  whether  the Secretariat had considered the 
option of adding a separate column in the Compilation to provide information on the further 
development of conditional  commitments  by referencing documents or materials such as Trade 
Policy Reports or related services notifications.  
2.7.  The representative of Hong Kong, China  noted  that the Secretariat Note was more of a simple 
cataloguing exercise , which included  an entry on Hong Kong, China. That commitment of Hong Kong, 
China was  not "conditional" as it did not  contain any commitment -related "promise" or "conditions" 
but simply a description of the regime at tha t time which was subject to review.  In fact, regarding 
the commitment itself, whether it would be relaxed or enhanced would be subject to further 
negotiation s. Hong Kong, China  had offered to remove the said limitation during the Doha Round 
negotiation s, which were not  completed . Hong Kong, China  had also fulfilled its transparency 
obligation by submitting a notification (S/C/N/312 dated 28 Jan uary 2005) under  Article III:3 of the 
GATS to notify that local fixed telecommunication network services ha d been fully liberalized since 
January 2003. Hong Kong, China  was open-minded so far as the current exercise could help improve 
transparency, but it would not support if any suggestions for updating m ight involve a change in 
commitment and amount to negotia tions, which  would go  beyond a technical exercise. Hong Kong, 
China  would continue to engage and listen to views of Members and proponents on what the 
appropriate next steps would be . 
2.8.  The representative of Saudi Arabia  stated that while her capital was sti ll assessing the proposal 
of the United States , she wished  to share some preliminary thought s. One of the Article XII Members, 
Saudi Arabia had undertaken extensive commitments, especially in telecommunication services. 
Noting an entry of Saudi Arabia in t he Compilation, she echoed the statement of China and suggested 
more consultations and further discussions. Her delegation was flexible about the venue for such 
discussion. She agreed with Russia that the work of the Secretariat was useful for information 
sharing and transparency. She shared China's view that the modification of commitments would 
involve internal consultations in capital. This might require  technical assistance and capacity building 
for developing countries.   
2.9.  The representative of Jamaica  thanked the Secretariat for the Compilation and appreciated the 
consultations conducted by the Chair. Taking note of the discussion in the Committee , Jamaica was 
not in a position at this time to provide updates on the specifi c commitments identified by the 
Secretariat as the internal consultations were still ongoing.   S/CSC/M/8 4 
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.10.   The representative of South Africa  observed that the Secretariat Note classified South Africa's 
additional commitments for telecommunications as "conditional" . South Africa did not concur with 
this. The entries referenced in the Secretariat Note were included in South Africa's Schedule to 
provide additional information for transparency on aspects of licensing that South Africa was 
considering  to examine in the con text of possible policy reviews at the time of making the 
commitments. As such, there was no undertaking in the Schedule that revising telecommunication 
commitments would follow . While thanking the United States for proposing the exercise, South Africa 
was of the view that it could not take it further to provide impetus to mandate progressive 
liberalization. There was no provision for a ratchet under the GATS. South Africa's additional 
commitments were not conditions related to  entry into force , implementat ion or improvement based 
on the adoption of new legislation or review of the pre -existing regime. As such , there was no 
undertaking to automatically bring commitments up to date. While there had been many positive 
regulatory developments in South Africa re lated to licensing, South Africa did not plan to or attempt 
to update its Schedule of S pecific Commitments based on the CSC exercise.   
2.11.   On behalf of the ACP Group, t he representative of Barbados  noted that the document 
contained in S/CSC/ W/70 was prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and was without 
prejudice to the rights of Members. However, the Secretariat titled the document "Compilation of 
Conditional Commitments" and defined "conditional commitments " as "those entries wh ich contain 
certain conditions attached to the  entry into force , implementation , or updating of specific 
commitments". Some entries refer red to "intend to review" without any guarantee or prospect that 
commitments would follow. She recalled that t he ACP Gr oup was among the Members that had 
requested addition al time to  consider the proposal and had asked some questions during the July 
meeting . She recalled that the ACP Group had indicated that it did not want to put the Secretariat 
in a position of interpret ing Members' schedules of specific commitments and asked for assurances 
that the delegations identified by the Secretariat would be consulted on their willingness to 
participat e in the exercise and whether they were comfortable with any characterization of  any 
elements of their schedules of specific commitments as conditional commitments . The ACP Group's  
understanding from  the participation in consultations , however, was  that Members would not have 
opportunities  to make such indication s given that the Secre tariat's compilation was a factual  listing . 
She was u nsure of the usefulness of inviting Members to consultations if the ir concerns were not 
addressed. The ACP Group was of the view that information -sharing and transparency were core 
aspects of  the regular  work of the WTO and  augured well  for the institution and the multilateral 
trading system . The ACP Group believed  that it was the prerogative of  every  WTO Member to 
enhance its schedule of specific commitments if it chose to do s o. The GATS allow ed for this as well 
as for progressive liberalization  of Members' services sectors . The GATS also allow ed for flexibilities 
for developing countries and LDCs in the process of  such a liberalization. She caution ed that the CSC 
was not the venue to seek or dis cuss making market access commitments. While t echni cal 
information and clarification about the  result s of reviews were useful , Members seeking liberalization 
should  do so  in other services bodies .  
2.12.   The representative of Turkey  noted that Turkey’s commitmen t captured in the Compilation  
was for "voice telephone services" and "packet -switched data transmission services" and that the 
commitment read “Türk Telekomünikasyon A.Ş. is the exclusive operator. Exclusive right will end by 
31.12.2005, subject to adoption of the relevant legislation by the parliament.”  The exclusive right 
of Türk Telekominikasyon AŞ ended on 3 1 December 2003 as stipulated in the Law No. 4502 
governing the telephony and telegraph services. As such, in line with its commitment, Turke y had 
lifted the exclusive right before the promised deadline in the quoted commitment. Like Hong Kong, 
China , Turkey  considered its  commitment not to be  conditional. It was more about a reflection of 
the state of the play of the time and the sector and at  most a signa lling for Doha Round negotiations. 
Turkey  also echo ed Hong Kong, China that it would not support any decision that would  amount to 
the modification of schedules without a full -fledged market access negotiation . 
2.13.   The representative of the Europe an Union  thanked the Secretariat for its Note (S/CSC/W/70 ) 
compiling Members’ conditional commitments in GATS schedules. It was very useful to have this 
factual overview . Without prejudice to any further steps  in the exercise , noting  the importance of 
ensuring transparency and legal certainty  of Members’ schedules , the European Union  welcome d 
exchange of information and update s by Members on the state of play of  their conditional 
commitments , including  any domestic legislative development, policy reviews or reforms mentioned 
therein. The European Union  appreciate d the information already provided by  some Members at the 
meeting . S/CSC/M/8 4 
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.14.   The representative of the United States  stated that the spirit with which his delegation had  
made the proposal was for improving the technical accuracy of schedules, as well as enhancing 
coherency to those conditional commitments by getting updates on particular policy reviews in 
certain sectors, mainly telecom.  This exercise was not a finger -pointing one, but was a matter of 
enhancing this organization 's functioning at a technical level . With this exercise, the United States  
was seeking updates from those Members that had indicated that various sectors were undergoing 
a policy review.  In some instances , Members'  schedules were conditional upon them submitting a 
revised schedule  after such a review . The United States  thus sought information on  when such 
revised schedules might be produced.  In other instances, Members simpl y schedule d that a review 
would take place upon the expiration of exclusivity for certain services.  The membership would then 
benefit by getting an update from the Members concerned on those policy reviews . In cases where 
the conditional schedules referenc ed submitting a revised schedule, the United States  would seek 
an affirmative response that those schedules would  be updated as promised . Thailand, for example, 
in its recent T rade Policy Review , had already responded to this exercise.  In response to a que stion 
about introducing a new schedule , Thailand  stated that it was in the process of internal consultation s 
to revise its telecommunication s commitments of the Uruguay Round to be consistent with the 
Telecommunications Act.  It was at the public hearing st age, then to be presented to the cabinet and 
parliament for approval.  After approval, it would proceed to the notification process. Thailand 
expect ed to submit the revised schedule of commitment s to the WTO by 2021 . In cases where the 
conditional schedules merely referenced a government review, the United States  would propose that 
this update process be voluntary , without prejudice to existing commitments or future 
negotiations.  However, if this voluntary process d id not yield updates, the United States  would 
reconsider the suggested approach and m ight propose a more formal request for an update from 
Members.  But as a first approach, the United States  would simply encourage those Members in a 
position to do so, to upda te the Committee at the next CSC meeting in 2021 .  
2.15.   The representative of Australia  thanked the Secretariat for the Compilation and considered it 
to be a useful transparency exercise. Australia was open to continuing discussions in the Committee 
and hearing  updates from Members on the status of their conditional commitments.  
2.16.   In response to the questions raised by Russia, the representative of the Secretariat  noted 
that most conditional commitments were indeed  related to  telecommunications. Another sector wit h 
an important number of such commitments was financial services which was not included in the 
Compilation . These commitments were mostly undertaken during the extended negotiations after 
the Uruguay Round from 1996 to 1998. While each Member concerned ha d its own reason s to subject 
its commitments to certain conditions, the dynamics of the extended negotiations had probably 
played a certain role  therein. The Secretariat was not aware of technical assistance specifically  
provided to address conditional comm itments, but there had been  requests from Members for 
technical assistance on telecommunications and financial services in the past, given the importance 
of these sectors . Regarding the option of adding a separate column in the Compilation to provide 
information on the further development of conditional  commitments , the Secretariat would follow 
the decision of the Members.  
2.17.   The Chairperson  thanked Members for their interventions , which were useful and informative. 
Noting s ome concerns raised, he assured Members that the CSC was not a venue for market access 
negotiations. He also noted the request for exchange of information on the commitments referred 
to in the Note. It was his understanding that some Members might provide more information in this 
regard at the next meeting. He took note of some Members ' statements that their commitments 
should not be considered as conditional commitments  and would welcome this type of information 
as well. He understood that the broad defini tion of conditional commitments in the Secretariat's Note 
was meant to increase transparency. He suggested that the Committee continue to exchange 
information based on the Note at the next meeting. To this end, he encouraged those Members 
concerned to prov ide information on their commitments as they saw appropriate . Meanwhile, he  
would continu e to make himself available for  consultations. He then suggested that the Committee 
take note of the statements made  and revert to this agenda item at its next meeting .  
2.18.   It was so agreed .  
3  ITEM C - SCHEDULING  ISSUES  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled two topics that had been  briefly addressed under this item at the last 
meeting. One concern ed some scheduling issues under mode 4, initially identified in a S/CSC/M/8 4 
 
- 5 - 
 
  Communication from the Kyrgyz Republic (contained in JOB/SERV/287). Another was about the 
desirability to revisit "Unbound*" entries (i.e. "no commitments due to lack of technical feasibility" ) 
under mode 1 in GATS schedules given recent technological developments . 
3.2.   No intervention was made under this item.  
3.3.  The Chairperson  suggested that the Committee revert to this agenda item at its next meeting.  
3.4.  It was so agreed .  
4  ITEM D – CLASSIFICATION IS SUES  
4.1.  The Chairperson  noted that t here had been  no discussion under this item at the last meeting. 
He thought that t his did not mean  there was a  lack of interest in classification issues. It was well 
known that the services classification system under the GATS was facing challenges as trade 
conditions ha d evolved significantly . 
4.2.  No intervention was made under this item.  
4.3.  The Chairperson  suggested that the Committee revert to this agenda item  at its next meeting.  
4.4.  It was so agreed . 
5  ITEM E – OTHER BUSINESS  
5.1.  The Chairperson recalled that the website of the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) had 
stopped providing access to the Provisional Version of the Central Product Classification which was 
the basis of the classification system under the GATS. Upon New Zealand's request, the Secr etariat 
had been in regular and repeated contact with the UNSD on that matter. As indicated by the 
Secretariat at the last meeting of the Council for Trade in Services, the entire series of CPC was now 
available in a new format on the UNSD classification w ebsite. At the next meeting, t he Secretariat 
and the UNSD w ould provide a joint presentation on the new functionalities of the website and help 
Members navigate between the different CPC versions and other classifications, in particular the 
correspondences  between the Provisional Version and the later versions of the CPC. This presentation 
was in line with the agreement adopted at the Committee's meeting of 16 November 2010 that the 
Committee should be informed on a regular basis of changes and developments  in services 
classification .  
5.2.  The meeting was then adjourned . 
__________