WT/REG339/5  
 
2 November  2022 
(22-8206) Page: 1/4 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English  
 
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA AND TÜRKİYE , SERVICES  
QUESTIONS AND REPLIES  
 The following communication, dated 20 and 24 October  2022, is being circulated at the request 
of the delegations of  the Republic of Korea and Türkiye . 
 
_______________  
 
 
Question from Canada  
 
1.1.  Table 3.1, page 10 indicates that both Parties took commitments for durations of 
stay for 1 year, extendable, for the category of ICT under the Agreement.  
 Can Parties please provide the rationale for taking shorter duration of stay 
commitments relative to GATS for the category of ICTs?  
 
Response from Türkiye  
 
 Within the scope of the Agreement, from our perspective, the Parties ' commitments regarding 
duration of stay for the category of ICTs is not sho rter than the GATS. As a matter of fact, we believe 
that it provides a GATS -plus item for this category.  
 
 Türkiye has undertaken a commitment for ICTs (key personnel) for only two years without 
any extension possibility. However, the relevant Turkish leg islation was changed following the 
submission of the it 's GATS commitments.  
 
 In accordance with the Turkish legislation in force, in the first stage, the work permits are 
issued, in accordance with respective laws, regulations and requirements of Türkiye , for a period of 
up to one year. Subsequently, an extension of the work permit period up to two years is granted in 
accordance with respective laws, regulations and requirements of Türkiye. To sum up, total duration 
of stay period can reach three years.  
 
 Therefore, the extendable one -year period is more advantageous for the ICTs. It is a GATS -
plus commitment from our approach.  
 
Response from the Republic of Korea  
 
The differences between the duration of stay for ICTs from the GATS and the Agreement 
reflect changes in the domestic laws of Türkiye --the maximum duration of stay for ICTs stipulated 
in the Agreement is equivalent to the maximum duration of stay for ICTs under the new domestic 
laws of Türkiye , which is one year. However, the Agreement provides  for an extension of this period 
of stay in conformity with the Parties ' domestic laws  (view footnote 15, Annex A of the Agreement) . 
 
1.2.  Table 3.1, page 10 indicates that commitments for Contractual services suppliers 
(CSS) and Independent professionals (IPs)  are to be negotiated within five years from 
entry into force.  
a. Have Parties agreed on the institutional mechanism that will be employed to 
negotiate commitments for CSS and IPs?  WT/REG339/5  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Response from Türkiye  
 
 The Parties have not agreed on the institutional mecha nism yet. However, Article 7.1 (Joint 
Committee) and Article 7.2. (Committees and Working Groups) of the Framework Agreement 
Establishing a Free Trade Area between Türkiye and Korea constitute the legal basis for the 
institutional mechanism. The Joint Comm ittee may designate a committee or working group to 
negotiate commitments for CSS and IPs and also supervise the work of these committee and working 
group.  
 
Response from the Republic of Korea  
 
At the moment, the Parties have not agreed upon what institutional mechanism would be 
employed for negotiating commitments for those two categories. However, under Article 7.1  (Joint 
Committee), the Joint Committee supervises and facilitates the implementation and application of 
the Korea -Türkiye  FTA, and ma y decide to establish and delegate responsibilities to committees, 
working groups or other bodies. The Joint Committee will function as a channel for the Parties to 
start negotiating commitments for CSS and IPs.  
 
b. Have Parties agreed on the instrument that will be employed to amend/modify 
the Agreement to reflect these new commitments?  
Response from Türkiye  
 
 The Parties have not held a special session on amendment process. Nevertheless, Article 1.14 
under the Agreement on Trade in Services b etween Türkiye and Korea and Article 7.1 (Joint 
Committee), Article 7.2. (Committees and Working Groups), Article 7.4 (Amendment) of the 
Framework Agreement Establishing a Free Trade Area comprise a basis for the procedures regarding 
amendment.  
 
 Accordin g to the Article 7.4 "an amendment shall enter into force after the Parties exchange 
written notifications certifying that they have completed their respective applicable legal 
requirements and procedures, or on such other date as the Parties may agree”.  
 
Response from the Republic of Korea  
 
Specific discussions on amending the Agreement to reflect new commitments are yet to take 
place. Nevertheless, the specific procedure for amendments is stipulated in Article 7.4 of the 
Agreement.  
 
1.3.  Paragraph 3.56.d of th e factual presentation states:  
 "A number of Annex II reservations, carving out all related services sectors from 
the disciplines of the Agreement, are common to both Parties. Some of these 
exclusions are not reflected in the GATS schedules, since their sc ope may go beyond 
GATS mode 3. These are the following:  
… 
d. disadvantaged groups, for which the Parties may adopt or maintain any measure 
that grants rights or preferences."  
 
 Can the Parties comment on how they foresee gender being considered within thi s 
reservation?  
 
Response from Türkiye  
 
 The question is giving reference to only GATS mode 3 but the scope of the Chapter of 
Investment is broader than services and covers both services and non -services sectors.  
 
 On the other hand, as a general understanding, the disadvantaged means a body of conditions 
causes to be under adverse circumstances of an individual.  
 
 Türkiye tries to increase participation of the disadvantaged groups to labour market and 
improve their  life standards through employment strategies and action plans. In accordance with WT/REG339/5  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Article 30 of the Labour Act No. 4857, if employers have employees more than 50 people, they have 
to employ proportionately handicapped people to their total employees.  
 
 However, in accordance with Turkish Law, there is not a specific reference to gender under 
the disadvantaged groups. Within the Annex II reservations, emphasizing the disadvantaged groups 
is based on reciprocity principle.  
 
Response from the Republic of Ko rea 
 
Gender has never been included within the reservations of Korea 's existing FTAs. 
Nevertheless, Korea fully recognizes the significance of this issue, and would like to know the 
perspective or experience of Canada regarding the inclusion of gender with in the reservations of its 
FTAs.  
 
1.4.  Article 2.1 of Chapter 2 of the Agreement on Trade in Services indicates Parties 
agreed to promote the development of electronic commerce between them, in particular 
by co -operating on the issues raised by electronic comme rce under this Chapter."  
 Beyond this bilateral cooperation, with what other ways will the Parties promote the 
development of electronic commerce?  
Response from Türkiye  
 Both sides are active parties to the Joint Statement Initiative ( JSI) negotiations on E-
commerce under the WTO umbrella. We believe that these negotiations are quite comprehensive in 
terms of covering all relevant e -commerce issues. Therefore, we are of the view that we should keep 
following these negotiations and reflect on the results of these discussions multilaterally or if 
necessary bilaterally.  
 
Response from the Republic of Korea  
 
Korea and Türkiye  are both participating in the WTO JSI on E-Commerce, engaging in active 
multilateral cooperation beyond the FTA framework.  
 
1.5.  Article 2.7 o f Chapter 2 of the Agreement on Trade in Services, Parties refer to 
"international standards of data protection."  
 Could the Parties provide additional information on the international standards of 
data protection they envisaged ? 
 
Response from Türkiye  
 
 As Türkiye is a candidate country to the EU and considering our Customs Union and very close 
economic relations EU 's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a very important reference 
for us in terms data protection. In fact, our existing la w is based on the previous EU Directive and 
there is on -going legislative work to revise the law to be more in line with the EU GDPR.  
 
 Other than that, there has been no further discussion with South Korea on determining a 
mutual understanding on an inter national standard for basing our data protection legislation.  
 
 If in the future such international standards are discussed and developed in a platform where 
Türkiye is represented, Türkiye would be part of those discussions and follow developments closely . 
 
Response from the Republic of Korea  
 
With data protection being a key principle in the field of electronic commerce, Korea and 
Türkiye  have agreed to reflect it in Article 2.7. Although bilateral discussions regarding specific 
international standards of  data protection are yet to take place between the Parties, the Parties are 
engaging in active discussions in multilateral fora such as the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on E -
Commerce.  
 WT/REG339/5  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.6.  Article. 3(a) of the Annex on Telecommunications Services refers to a  "simplified 
authorization procedure."  
 How does this simplified authorization procedure differ from a regular authorization 
procedure?  
 
Response from Türkiye  
 
 The simplified procedure for authorization of electronic communication services means that 
Parties consider applications as soon as possible without asking for more information and documents 
than necessary.  
 
 For example, in accordance with the Turkish legislation, if supplying of a service requires 
scarce resource utilisation (for example; allocat ion of frequencies), a detailed authorization and 
licensing process is required.  In other cases, service suppliers might notify the regulatory authority 
with necessary information and documents about their service provision and start supplying services 
after the confirmation of those information and documents by the regulatory authority.  
 
 In any case, the obligation is drafted in the flexible language so the Parties might require 
detailed authorization procedures when needed.  
 
Response from the Republic o f Korea  
 
Article 3(a) does not require the Parties to provide a specific type of "simplified authorization 
procedure”. Rather, the Article functions as a general rule  for the Parties to pursue. In this context, 
the term "simplified authorization procedure” should be interpreted as authorization procedures that 
are no more complicated or burdensome than necessary.  
 
Question from the United Kingdom  
 
Liberalization commit ments  
 
1.7.   Can the Parties please confirm if they are planning to review their commitments 
under Article  1.14 and if so, when is this likely to happen?  
Response from Türkiye  
 
 As is known, the Article 1.14 imposes obligation to the Parties to review their sch edules of 
specific commitments every two years, or otherwise as the Parties agree. Additionally, the Parties 
have committed to carry out the first review within the three years after the entry into force of the 
Agreement.  
 
 However, the review issue has n ot been brought to the Joint Committee 's agenda yet.   
 
Response from the Republic of Korea  
 
Under Article 1.14 of the Agreement on Trade in Services under the Korea -Türkiye FTA, the 
Parties committed to themselves to review their schedules of specific comm itments every two years 
or otherwise as the Parties agree.  
 
However, after the entry into force of the Agreement, the reviewing of commitments has not 
yet been brought to the agenda of the Joint Committee.  
 
__________