G/SG/Q2/UKR/ 7 
11 May 2021 
(21-3983) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Safeguards  Original:  Spanish  
 
  
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(B) OF THE AGREEMENT ON  SAFEGUARDS  
ON FINDING A SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT  THEREOF  
CAUSED BY INCREASED IMPORTS  
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE A MEASURE  
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE  9, FOOTNOTE  2 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS  
QUESTIONS POSED BY  ECUADOR REGARDING  
THE NOTIFICA TION OF UKRAINE1 
Fresh cut roses  
The following  communica tion, dated and received on 7 May 2021, is being circulated at the request 
of the delegation of Ecuador . 
_______________  
Ukraine has thus far failed to  provide an adequate response  to the questions posed by Ecuador at 
the meeting of this Committee in October 2020.  
 
Ecuador reitera tes that the queries raised in the investigation o n fresh roses remain  unanswered by 
Ukraine . My country has requested that its questions  be addressed pursuant to  Article 12(b) of the 
WTO Agreement on Safeguards . 
 
In relation to this matter, my delegation wishes to highlight  that Ecuador, through its competent 
authority , was notified that , days earlier,  on 16 April 2021 , the Ukrainian Interdepartmental 
Commission on International Trade adopt ed Decision No.  SP-487/20 21/4411 -03, by means o f which 
it was decided to apply a safeguard measure for the importation into Ukraine of fresh cut roses, 
regardless of the country of origin and export ation, for a three -year period, in the form of a special 
duty. The notice of this D ecision was published in the Ukrainian Official Journal "Uryadovyi Courier " 
on 21 April 2021. This Decision is yet to be  notified to the WTO.  
 
Ukraine's official announcement from days earlier took Ecuador by surprise . Not only has an 
adequate response to the questions posed in October 2020 yet to be provided , but the official 
application of the safeguard measure was also unexpected . In the light of this , in addition to the 
questions posed in October 2020, m y delegation wishes to submit  the following four additional 
questions to the Government of Ukraine at this meeting : 
 
 
1 G/SG/N/8/UKR/10 - G/SG/N/10/UKR/10 - G/SG/N/11/UKR/8 and G/SG/N/8/UKR/10/Corr.1 - 
G/SG/N/10/UKR /10/Corr.1 - G/SG/N/11/UKR/8/Corr.1 . G/SG/Q2/UKR/7  
- 2 - 
  Question  1 
Pursuant to Article 5 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards, "a Member shall apply safeguard 
measures only to the extent necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury and to facilitate 
adjustmen t".  
However , for the first year of application of the measure, Ukraine is applying a tariff surcharge 
of 56% in addition to the current  ad valorem  tariff of  7.5%. This surcharge will lead to  the 
overprotection of the Ukrainian domestic industry due to the increase in the average import price, 
which, in turn, will completely  displace exports from Ecuador and the rest of the countries supplying 
the Ukrainian market . 
In this connection , Ecuador would like to ask Ukraine the following : On the basis of  which parameters 
was the 56% tariff surcharge determined and how is it ensured  that this surcharge does not result 
in the overprotection of the domestic industry,  in breach  of the provisions of the W TO Agreement 
on Safeguards ? 
Question  2 
 
In accordance with Article 4.2(b) of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards , a determination of serious 
injury shall not be made "unless this investigation demonstrates, on the basis of objective evidence, 
the existence of the causal link between increased imports of the product concerned and serious 
injury or threat thereof ." 
 
As is clear  from the information published to date , both the application submitted  by the industry 
and Resolution No. SP-487/2021/4411 -03 of 16 April 2021 of the Commission  lack a comp rehensive  
and objective analysis of the injury variables and of the existence of a causal link .  
 
In this connection , Ecuador would like to ask  Ukraine th e following : In which periods is there a  
coincidence in time between the increase d imports and the variables showing  alleged  serious injury  
under  the WTO Agreement on Safeguards in order to demonstrate the causal link ?  
 
Question  3 
 
With regard to the consultation process and pursuant to Article 12.3 of the WTO Agreement on 
Safeguards, does Ukraine consider that i t has complied with the mandate and the requirement to 
provide an adequate opportunity for prior consultations with those parties having a sub stantial 
interest in the investigation process , with a view to reviewing the information  concerning , for 
example, the increase d imports or to exchanging views on the measure ? 
 
Question  4 
 
In relation to the investigation proc edure  and in accordance with Ar ticle 3.1 of the Agreement on 
Safeguards, could Ukraine  please  explain the reason for which the competent authority neither  
publish ed nor provided parties interested in the process  with a report detailing  all the issues of fact 
and law that provide the tec hnical justification for the decision to adopt the safeguard measure ? 
 
__________