RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
6 April  2023 
(23-2460) Page: 1/37 
Work Programme on Electronic Commerce  
22 March 2023  Original: English  
 
  
MINUTES OF THE MEETING  
DEDICATED DISCUSSION ON ELECTRONIC COMMERC E 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD AND IN VIRTUAL FORMAT ON 22 MARCH 2023 
Chairperson: H.E. Ms Usha Dwarka -Canabady  (Mauritius) , Facilitator of the  
E-commerce Work Programme and the Moratorium  
1.1.  The Chairperson  welcomed delegations to the third Dedicated Discussion of the year  and 
recalled that, a s indicated in the convening notice of 14 March, the session w ould focus on legal and 
regulatory frameworks. This was one of  the issues identified by Members during the consultations 
held the previous  year. Specifically, delegations had noted the importance of addressing the legal 
and regulatory framework, especially looking at best practices and Members' own experiences to 
create an enabling environment for e -commerce  through their regulatory process . A written 
submission from Singapore  had been received and she would invite them to introduce it  before 
opening the floor to all Members to share their own experiences and views particularly on what the 
WTO c ould do in this area either on its own or in collaboration with other organisations.  
1.2.  First, she wished to emphasise some housekeeping matters , specifically time management. As 
many delegations had  mentioned at the Gener al Council, the sharing of experiences ha d been a 
useful and welcomed exercise and the Chairperson  continue d to urge delegations to participate 
actively so as to enrich the discussion. However,  in her view, there was a  need to manage the time 
wisely to ensure that everyone ha d an opportunity  to speak . In that regard , she urged delegations  
to keep their interventions  as short as possible  and to submit longer statements which w ould be 
fully reflected in the minutes of the meeting. Inclusion was paramount in t hese discussions to ensure 
that everyone had  an opportunity to share their views.  She then invite d the delegation of Singapore 
to introduce its paper titled Experience Sharing from Singapore on E -Commerce Regulatory 
Frameworks Through the Lens of Digital E conomy Agreements , circulated on 15 March 2023 in 
document RD/GC/21.  
1.3.  The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:1  
1.4.  Thank you, Ambassador Usha , I am very grateful for this opportunity to be able to share 
Singapore's perspective on how we could use our digital economy agreements to actually look at 
some of these  e-commerce regulatory frameworks that we deem quite critical and important for 
develo ping Members.  First, we do need to understand why we need digital economy agreements . It 
is apparent that digital globalization has transformed  businesses and the way consumers interact 
with them. So, we do need to address these new trade realities and acc ommodate new ways of 
doing business. For example, the emergence of technologies  like cloud computing has really given 
birth to new business models and these have transformed the way businesses use d to operate . At 
the same time we see that traditional natio nal agreements like our FTAs have failed to keep up with 
these trade realities . It is for this reason we have embarked on negotiating these digital 
economy  agreements.  
1.5.  This brings me to the next question on what are DEAs? It  is essentially a new form of 
international agreements, quite distinct from FTAs and MOUs and focuses exclusively on digital 
issues. It also builds on the existing e -commerce chapters in our FTAs and they are seen as l iving 
agreements, given that the e -commerce issues evolve very rapidl y and we do need to have a very 
 
1 The presentation is attached as an Annex . WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 2 - 
 
  nimble approach to tackle these issues in the international trade -scene. This approach, we believe, 
could actually help us to adapt to the fast pace of development of digital issues and we can then 
even identify new provisio ns or modules that would benefit us as the digital economy evolves. Each 
module within the digital economy agreement  is actually self -standing and we will be happy to 
elaborate on that if there any other questions.  
1.6.  Moving on to the next slide, it is impor tant to have in mind what are some of the target 
outcomes  and we can see three boxes  on the slide. First, we want to be able to facilitate similar end -
to-end digital trade and there are various provisions underneath it that actually support that. The 
secon d box of outcomes that we want to see is to enable open and secure data flows and again, 
similarly, the relevant provisions that are also in the box below. And the last outcome that we really 
want to achieve is to build trust in the digital systems.  
1.7.  This next slide actually fleshes out some of the provisions in terms of how we aim to use them 
to achieve  the target outcome that we have illustrated earlier. The next slide on business benefits 
goes back to why we have the DEAs . We have very extensive industry consultations with big and 
small micro -businesses, trying to understand what will help them the most when we embark on 
digital economy agreement exercise. As Memb ers would know, Singapore is a small country . We are 
heavily reliant on a rules -based trading system and so from the businesses perspective as well, we 
have seen that the DEAs have brought to them certain benefits including reduce d-cost for 
businesses, inc reased efficiency, faster  payments, increased innovation, especially for MSMEs, 
including those i n the start -up scene. More importantly, on the other end of consumers -use, we do 
see businesses wanting a very secure environment that actually facilitates tru st for both consumers 
and businesses. Lastly, we also think that it helps to increase business competitiveness and market 
penetration.  
1.8.  Underpinning all these three core objectives, the Singapore government has taken some 
concrete actions to actually try t o help as many businesses and individuals participate in th ese 
initiatives.  So, you can see that we have a nation -wide invoicing network, we have a payment  
system, which is ou r national payment system which we alluded to at the previous session where 
we co nnected with India's domestic payment  system. On the second pillar we have embarked on 
this APEC cross -border privacy regulations  certification to ensure  that data can be passed through 
border s in a trusted  and secure manner. And the last part, in terms of  building trust in the digital 
system, Singapore would acknowledge that we do  not know as much as certain Members  here, and 
this is something that we are really trying to learn . Which is why we have come up with model 
governance frameworks, but at the same  time, like I said, these are l iving initiatives that we need 
to shape and adjust  over time, as we have more data on them.  
1.9.  As a starting point, it would be useful t o do a deep dive on the pillar of digital trade facilitation. 
There are existing internatio nal frameworks out there, which are useful for Members to take 
reference from. For the case of e -transactions, the UNCITRAL model law on e -commerce , as well as 
electronic transferable records, these are very robust model law frameworks that the UN, consulting 
industry experts and Member governments have actually come up with. The principles are  generally 
quite universal, and these are useful reference  points for Members to think about when they are 
building up some regulatory capacities in these areas. Lastly, it is also important to also emphasize 
that we are not prescribing an approach as to how Members should build regulatory or legal 
capacities, we  are just providing the DEAs as a lens to look at some of these important issues . We 
think that these guiding questions would be useful for discussion later. An important question to ask 
Members  is what does a robust digital legal and regulatory framework that fosters digital connectivity 
between economies look like? What is success? This is something that Members need to ask so that 
we know where we are headed.  On the second question, we have heard some of these issues before 
and we need to flesh them out in more concrete terms so that we know what are the obstacles that 
we are tackling . It is important to know the problems before we can come up with a 
treatment/solution. The last part is to also look at how we can partner with international 
organizations s uch as the WTO and other stakeholders to support this important process of 
digitalization. Thank you.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.10.  The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
1.11.  Firstly, I would like to thank Singapore for this very useful proposal and the very good 
introduction. We believe that ever -advancing technologies and ever -changing landscapes call for 
ever-evolving regulatory frameworks. Singapore is definitely one of the leaders in this endeavour 
both in terms of domestic regulation and international co operation or treaty -making  and a ll of us 
can learn a lot from their proposal and the ir practices.   
1.12.  Now I would like to share our  experiences  on improving the legal and regulatory framework 
on e-commerce, and we look forward to listening  to other Members ' experiences.  China has insisted 
on innovation -driven development on e -commerce in recent years, and continuously accelerated the 
pace of digital industrialization and industrial digitalization. In 2021, the national e -commerce 
transaction volume reached 42. 3 trillion yuan (USD 6.2 trillion), an increase of 19.6% compared to 
2020; online retail sales reached 13.1 trillion yuan (USD 1.9 trillion), increasing 14.1%; cross -border 
e-commerce import and export reached 1.92 trillion yuan (USD 280 billion), an increase of nearly 
10 times in 5 years; the e -commerce -related industries have created employment opportunities for 
more than 67 mil lion people.  Among the national strategies for promoting high -quality development 
in China, it is of great importance to comprehensively advance law -based governance. With the 
continuous optimization of China's legal environment, e -commerce has achieved ra pid development. 
In the past 20 years, China has continuously improved the legislation by fully utilizing the legislative 
practices and experiences of major countries and regions in the world. In balancing development 
and security, China has gradually form ed a scientific and systematic legislative system, ensuring the 
high-quality development of e -commerce and the digital economy. My intervention will focus on the 
following three aspects.  
1.13.  Firstly, China attaches great importance to the construction of a bas ic legal framework for the 
digital economy. The Civil Code establishes the principles for the protection of personal information, 
including the tort liability for online privacy violations, and recognizes that data and online virtual 
property should be pro vided with legal protection. The Criminal Code establishes the protection of 
network security, data security, and the legal rights of human dignity, personal information, and 
property. The Telecommunications Regulations, Administrative Measures for Interne t Information 
Services, Law on the Protection of Minors, Provisions on the Administration of Foreign -funded 
Telecommunications Enterprises, and other laws and regulations continue to improve the level of 
judicial protection in response to new circumstances  and issues that arise in the Internet age.  
In recent years, a specialized digital economy legal system has taken shape in China. 
In November  2016, China introduced the Cybersecurity Law, which laid the security foundation for 
the healthy development of ec onomic and social informatization. In June 2021, the Data Security 
Law was introduced to safeguard data security, promote data development and utilization, and 
protect the legitimate rights and interests of individuals and organizations. In August 2021, th e 
Personal Information Protection Law was introduced to protect the rights and interests on personal 
information, to regulate personal information processing activities, and to promote the reasonable 
use of personal information. The formulation of implemen tation rules are being expedited on the 
basis of public consultation.  
1.14.  Secondly, China launched the legislation work specialized for e -commerce as early as 2013. 
In January 2019, the E -commerce Law was officially implemented. The law is a fundamental and 
comprehensive legal framework for e -commerce. It plays an important role in safeguarding the 
rights and interests of all parties in e -commerce, regulating e -commerce behaviour , maintaining 
market order, strengthening intellectual property protection, and pro moting the sustainable and 
healthy development of e -commerce. Subsequently, a series of laws, regulations, and policies on 
e-commerce have been implemented, contributing to further improvement of the legal and 
regulatory framework of e -commerce. For exampl e, the Electronic Signature Law and the Anti -Unfair 
Competition Law have regulated e -commerce transactions. The Food Safety Law, Drug 
Administration Law, Agricultural Product Quality and Safety Law, and other laws have further 
standardized the online sale of food, drugs, agricultural products, and other products.  
1.15.  Finally, China has been continuously strengthening top -level policy design. In 2021, the 
"14th Five-Year Plan" for the development of e -commerce was released, focusing on the role of 
e-commerce in connecting online and offline markets, linking supply and demand, connecting 
domestic and foreign markets, providing a comprehensive plan for the development of the digital 
economy [during the "14th Five-Year Plan" period ]. In February this year, China rel eased the "Plan 
for the Overall Layout of Building a Digital China", which proposed accelerating the development of WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 4 - 
 
  digital economy and promoting the construction of an open, win -win pattern of international 
cooperation in the digital field, guiding the di gital development in the future.  We have introduced 
some of the measures in previous discussions, such as at the General Council and the Council for 
Trade in Services (CTS) meetings.  
1.16.  The representative of St. Vincent & the Grenadines , on behalf of the O ECS, delivered the 
following statement:  
1.17.  I am making this intervention on behalf of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States  
(OECS)  WTO Members.  Madam Chair, again, we must commend you for giving real meaning to the 
concept of reinvigoration. You have br ought a considerable amount of energy in giving life to our 
ministerial mandate emanating from MC12. We also recognise the support you and the membership 
are receiving from the very able Secretariat team.  
1.18.  Today 's topic – legal and regulatory frameworks, i s a critical one as these constitute 
foundational elements of a thriving ecommerce and digital trade ecosystem. According to the World 
Bank, regulation plays a central role in building the foundations of digital markets.2 The World Bank 
further notes that laws and regulations can either foster or hinder digital trade. In terms of how they 
can help, first, they can provide essential regulatory tools for remote transactions. Second, they can 
improve the conditions for trust in digital markets, by ensuring that consumers are protected and 
that their information is safe and remains private. In terms of how laws and regulations could be a 
hindrance, they can introduce restrictions that hamper the conditions for digital markets. 
For instance, they can restrict the types of goods and services that can be bought online, thereby 
limiting or increasing costs for the transfer of data, or creating burdensome conditions for online 
marketplaces, platforms, and services providers. Altogeth er, these would limit the offer of goods 
and services in digital markets.  Broadly speaking, the laws and regulations governing e -commerce 
include elements of contract law, such as: electronic documentation and signatures, financial law 
concerning e -payment s, consumer protection, intellectual property, cybersecurity, personal privacy 
and data protection.  
1.19.  Currently, the OECS generally lacks comprehensive legal and regulatory frameworks for 
e-commerce.  For example, in the area of data protection, OECS governm ents are either without 
distinct data protection legislation or have a data protection law that predates the current "data 
protection revolution, " arguably precipitated by the European Union 's General Data Protection 
Regulation ( "GDPR "). It is therefore re asonable to conclude that many of these local enactments 
provide insufficient or limited levels of safeguards for the protection of personal data privacy and 
personal data, especially when viewed through the lens of today 's hyper -processing of significant 
volumes of personal data and data flows across borders. Over the years, several challenges, largely 
attributable to resource constraints (i.e., personnel, financial, and tools), have prevented the roll 
out of comprehensive legal and regulatory frameworks f or e-commerce. Our E -readiness assessment 
also revealed considerable gaps in OECS legal and regulatory frameworks to support e -commerce, 
with a gap index of 75%. However, through a World -Bank-financed Caribbean Digital Transformation 
Project, OECS governme nts are aiming to bolster the legal and regulatory environment, institutions, 
and capacity to build trust in online transactions and strengthen the security and resilience of digital 
infrastructure and systems, centred on data protection and privacy.  Among  other things, we intend 
to promote regional harmonization of data protection and privacy legislation, sound enforcement 
mechanisms, and international cooperation protocols in an effort to reduce trade barriers and bolster 
efficiencies in digital and cross -border transactions.  
1.20.  In terms of telecommunications, which is a key component of the legal and regulatory 
environment, five OECS Member States subscribe to a single Telecommunications Regulatory 
Authority. These countries are at varying levels of impleme ntation of a new Electronic 
Communications Bill to replace a much older Telecommunications Act. The new Electronic 
Communications Bill contains, among other things, matters such as mergers and acquisitions, 
preservation of an open Internet with the adoptio n of Net Neutrality provisions, the establishment 
of the national telecommunication regulatory authorities (NTRCs) as body corporates, the setting up 
of a tribunal independent of the NTRC, to hear unresolved disputes between telecommunications 
providers an d customers, and the inclusion of more penalties for breach of the legislation.  
 
2 Jaller, Lillyana; Gaillard, Simon; Molinuevo, Martin (2019). The Regulation of Digital Trade: Key 
Policies and International Trends. The World Bank. Washington, D.C.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.21.  In terms of the role of the WTO, as an example, these discussions which you are facilitating 
today, go a far way in helping to enrich understanding between Members on these cr itical issues. 
As we have mentioned before, and a direction in which you have agreed to guide us, we see 
significant value in broadening the scope of our conversation to include external stakeholders from 
other international organisations, private sector a nd academics. We are particularly keen to hear the 
voice of industry as they will be able to help us to better understand whether our legal and regulatory 
efforts are trending in the right direction, as well as the extent, if any, of any lag between indust ry 
standards and developments, and efforts by governments , bearing in mind that industry tend to 
move ahead  of the State in many instances . Furthermore, in these deliberations, as well as 
deliberations on other topics, based on our interactions with extern al stakeholders, we might be able 
to develop some kind of matrix to help Members with capacity constraints to better identify the 
opportunities which exist to address them. Finally, we express appreciation to Singapore for its Room 
Document and presentatio n today. These kinds of submissions can help us to better identify areas 
of good and best practice  in our own national jurisdictions . We are also aligned with the statements 
to be delivered by Trinidad and Tobago on behalf of  CARICOM Group and Barbados on behalf of the 
ACP Group.  
1.22.  The representative of Korea, Republic of  delivered the following statement:  
1.23.  I would like to begin by joining others in thank ing you, Madam Facilitator,  for organizing this 
meaningful discussion session. I also thank the Singapore delegation for the submission of the room 
document sharing experiences of e -commerce regulatory frameworks. And I also thank China and 
the OECS for sharing their experiences. As Singapore's  document also touches upon the case of 
digital partnership agreeme nt between Korea and Singapore on the aspect of our discussion today, 
I would briefly share Korea's domestic frameworks that helped expedite e -commerce transactions 
and further facilitate digital economy and trade with other Members like Singapore. Korea's legal 
and regulatory frameworks on e -commerce also align with established international laws , such as 
the UNICTRAL Model Laws and the UN Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in 
International Contracts  (ECC). Framework Act o n Electronic Documents and Transactions which 
serves as the basic foundation of the country's e-commerce direction stipulates that the Government 
shall establish and implement basic policies to promote the use of electronic documents and 
electronic transac tions based on four different principles: private sector -led development, minimizing 
regulations, securing the safety and reliability of electronic documents and electronic transactions, 
strengthening international cooperation. Based on the se principles an d also accommodating evolving 
nature of the digital economy, Korea has developed relevant laws and guidelines to create a 
conducive environment beneficial to both consumers and business providers by enabling fast, 
low-cost, and efficient transactions.  
1.24.  Digital Signature Act is one good example of a legal framework that covers electronic 
authentication procedures. The Act recognizes an electronic signature is not denied legal 
effectiveness as a hand -written signature, signature and seal, or name and seal sol ely on the 
grounds that it is in electronic form. To ensure the safety and reliability of electronic signatures as 
well as to facilitate the use of electronic signature, the Act also imposes that the Government 
establishes and implements policies on the re levant matters. With the amendment of the Act in 2020 
which removed the requirement on a certain procedure of authentication and signature, consumers 
and business providers became to enjoy simpler  and expedited electronic transactions that save cost 
and ti me. Considering the benefit of a free and open trade environment through digital means, Korea 
enacted Electronic Trade Facilitation Act which aims to streamline trade procedures and create 
grounds for electronic trade thereby enhancing the international co mpetitiveness of domestic 
industries and contributing to the growth of the national economy. The government established 
uTradeHub, an electronic trade infrastructure and information system that intermediates, keeps and 
certifies electronic trade documents by systemically interlinking traders with trade -related agencies 
through information and communication networks. Along with UNI -PASS, Korea's Single Window for 
electronic customs clearance system, the use of uTradeHub enables genuine paperless trade in tha t 
electronic trade documents applied or approved by any trader or trade -related agency via this Hub 
are deemed to be documents processed according to the procedures set by trade -related Acts and 
subordinate statutes.  
1.25.  As a strong proponent of e -commerce and  trade, we highly value WTO's role to provide 
a forum for the exchange of knowledge and experiences. My delegation, with the aim of 
reinvigorating e -commerce, remains committed to being actively engaged in focused and in -depth WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 6 - 
 
  knowledge exchanges including  briefings by relevant international  organizations or academia on the 
same subject matter.  
1.26.  The representative of Trinidad and Tobago , on behalf of the CARICOM Group , delivered the 
following statement:  
1.27.  Thank you, Madam Facilitator, for the floor and for y our stewardship of this process. I make 
this statement on behalf of the CARICOM Group. We welcome this discussion on legal and regulatory 
frameworks, especially as inadequacies in this regard compound other challenges we face relating 
to the development of  sound e -commerce ecosystems. In recognition of this, and given the 
dynamism of the e -commerce landscape globally, efforts are underway to strengthen and adapt our 
legal and regulatory frameworks to better position CARICOM Member States to harness the bene fits 
to be derived from electronic commerce.  
1.28.  First, it is important to recognise progress achieved in individual CARICOM Member States in 
respect of legislation and regulations relating to electronic transactions, data protection and privacy, 
consumer protection and cybersecurity. UNCTAD 's Global Cyb erlaw Tracker provides a snapshot for 
each country regarding the existence or non -existence of legislation and regulations in respect of 
each of these four areas. Consultation of the Tracker confirms that, to a considerable extent, 
CARICOM Member States ha ve introduced legislation in these key areas for the development of a 
robust electronic commerce system. A closer look indicates, however, that more work is needed in 
this regard. While some have adopted legislation in all four areas, others have no legisl ation in at 
least one area, and some only have draft legislation at this time in some areas.  
1.29.  Another useful tool for visualising the e -commerce -related legislation and regulations 
landscape in a sub -section of CARICOM Member States, namely those of the Eas tern and Southern 
Caribbean, is the Digital Ecosystem Country Assessment of the Eastern and Southern Caribbean 
completed by USAID in 2022. It examines and provides a snapshot of the digital ecosystems of 
eleven  countries of our region and makes observation s relating to the progress of digital 
transformation efforts, the persistent challenge of small markets, trust as it relates to the use of 
digital financial service technologies and recognition by governments of the importance of 
cybersecurity and data pro tection. The snapshots provided in the Assessment suggest that electronic 
transactions legislation can be viewed as an area where the eleven  countries perform relatively well, 
with just one country yet to adopt what is still at this stage draft legislation . Yet, a closer look begs 
the question of whether some of the legislation in place is adequately robust and fit for purpose, 
given the rapid pace of change within the global digital landscape.  An additional means of gauging 
progress in the region with resp ect to the development of regulatory frameworks in individual 
CARICOM Member States is the ITU 's Regulatory Tracker. While it bears noting that the Tracker 
focuses on the mere existence and features of regulatory frameworks without gauging quality, level 
of implementation or performance, it is also noteworthy that, in the period between 2017 and 2022, 
several CARICOM Member States improved their scores on the Tracker. The Regulatory Tracker 
assesses sector regulation on the basis of regulatory authority, re gulatory mandate, regulatory 
regime and competition framework.  
1.30.  Madam Facilitator, on cooperation opportunities, we note that national regulators in our region 
have benefited from support from development institutions for the elaboration of regulatory 
frame works. In this regard, we wish to highlight benefits derived from guidance and 
recommendations from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the Caribbean 
Telecommunications Union (CTU) and the Inter -American Telecommunication Commission. It is 
fitting at this juncture to reference benefits emanating from the Caribbean HIPCAR project of the 
ITU, which was conceptualised with the aim of improving competitiveness and ICT development in 
the region, with a focus on the harmonisation of ICT policies, leg islation and regulatory procedures.  
More recently, and also on the subject of international cooperation, through a collaboration between 
the Commonwealth Secretariat and the Caribbean Telecommunications Union (CTU) in mid -February 
2023, government official s from our region participated in a three -day workshop on the development 
of sound legal frameworks that boost the digital economy.  
1.31.  Madam Facilitator, efforts on a national level relating to the development of adequate legal 
and regulatory frameworks are t o be situated within the context of a 2014 mandate from CARICOM 
Heads of Government relating to the establishment of a Single ICT Space in our region, a mandate 
relating in part to building a robust digital ecosystem and economy. According to the 2017 Visi on 
and Roadmap of the CARICOM Single ICT Space, the Single ICT Space is to feature regionally WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 7 - 
 
  harmonised ICT policy, legal and regulatory regimes and would include, in this regard, the 
establishment of a single regional telecommunication regulator. The Vis ion and Roadmap document 
also addresses action relating to necessary amendments to take into account technological and 
regulatory developments, enumeration and resolution of policy and institutional inconsistencies 
among Member States and strong governance  systems, among other elements. Admittedly, there 
have been delays and challenges relating to adherence to identified milestones for the establishment 
of the CARICOM Single ICT Space, but work continues in this regard.  
1.32.  As outlined earlier, there are evide nt disparities from country to country within the region 
relating to adoption of the relevant laws and regulations that would be a critical element for building 
e-trade readiness. Admittedly, the challenge of fragmentation with respect to e -commerce -relate d 
regulations is a global one and not unique to our region.  Nevertheless, and as referenced previously, 
our leaders have recognised that harmonisation of policies, regulations and legislation would be 
important for the digital transformation of our region and for building out a robust e -commerce 
system region -wide.  Moreover, perusal of some of the provisions being negotiated today on 
electronic transactions, privacy and data protection, consumer protection and cybercrime as they 
relate to e -commerce, for ex ample those provisions under negotiation in the context of some 
bilateral agreements and RTAs, suggests that our region has some ground to cover as far as 
e-commerce -related legislation and regulations well -suited to demands and developments in this 
domain  are concerned. Overall, Madam Facilitator, even as it is important to recognise progress and 
improvements relating to the establishment of fundamental elements of effective and viable 
e-commerce -related legal and regulatory frameworks in our region, the d ynamism of the 
rapidly -evolving global digital landscape and the concomitant regulatory imperatives suggest that 
the region would continue to require support as far as regulatory capacity is concerned. Of note in 
this regard is capacity with respect to com petition and artificial intelligence, for example.  
1.33.  As we continue to contemplate leveraging the WTO 's convening power to facilitate 
engagement with relevant entities, perhaps consideration could be given to engagement with 
UNCITRAL, especially as it is a widely -held view that that the principles outlined in the UNCITRAL 
Model Law on Electronic Commerce 1 996 are instructive as far as a development of a legal framework 
for electronic transactions is concerned. Reference must also be made to UNCTAD and the 
2022-2025 TrainForTrade blended learning strategy to boost the digital economy in small island 
developi ng states of Africa, the Caribbean and Asia and the Pacific. This training -related initiative 
examines, among other elements, the legal aspects of e -commerce. On account of this and other 
pertinent work being done by UNCTAD on e -commerce, including the e -trade assessments that two 
CARICOM Member States are expected to undertake this year, engagement with UNCTAD is expected 
to be particularly useful. ITU 's input on regulatory capacity could be instructive. Engagement with 
other entities such as the World Ban k, ITC and UNIDO could also prove beneficial. We continue to 
hold the view that, given the emphasis in our Dedicated Discussions on the development dimension, 
a focused engagement with the ITTC is in order. Such an engagement would elucidate the existing 
offering of the ITTC as far as e -commerce development is concerned, which would inform 
considerations and proposals relating to possible expansion of this offering.  On Aid for Trade, it is 
fitting that Members identified digital connectivity as a priority f or the Aid for Trade Work Programme 
for the next two years. It would be important for the WTO 's Aid for Trade work to continue to 
spotlight technical assistance relating to building the relevant technical capacity for our meaningful 
engagement in e -commerc e. Perhaps considerations in this regard could include considerations 
relating to legal and regulatory capacity.  
1.34.  Finally, the CARICOM Group wishes to thank the delegation of Singapore for the room 
document contained in RD/GC/21 and for the insights and use ful infographics shared therein relating 
to e-commerce regulatory frameworks and Singapore 's Digital Economy Agreements. We also thank 
the delegation for the brief overview provided earlier. We take good note of the invitation to use 
these Agreements as po ints of reference in seeking to build out regulatory frameworks that promote 
the digital economy and digital trade. The CARICOM Group also acknowledges the considerations 
relating to new and emerging technologies and trade policy that is fit for the digita l era. We are 
reviewing the submission and hope to be in a position to comment more substantially at a 
later stage.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 8 - 
 
  1.35.  The representative of South Africa , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
1.36.  I make this statement on behalf of the African Group. Madam Facilitator, t he Group commends 
your leadership of the Dedicated Discussions which are in line with the instructions of Ministers at 
MC12 to reinvigorate the W ork Programme on Electronic Commerce . We also would like to thank the 
colleagues in the Secretariat that have supported these discussions. The advance schedule and 
promptly circulated minutes have been most helpful.  We also would like to thank Singapore for its 
room document and presentation. [ As late -comers to digitalization and digital transformation 
processes, countries in Africa lag behind in terms of digital development. But while internet 
penetration rates are still at low levels (although the growth rates are considerable) and digital 
divides among and within countries r emain high,3 national governments and regional institutions are 
putting in place policies and strategies to encourage the uptake of digital technologies as drivers of 
development and to foster inclusive digital economies and societies. ] 
1.37.  From a regional perspective, t he African Union (AU) Policy instrument entitled Agenda 2063, 
the Africa We Want, provides that by 2063, the necessary infrastructure will be in place to support 
Africa 's accelerated integration and growth, technological transformati on, trade and development. 
This will include high -speed railway networks, roads, shipping lines, sea and air transport, as well 
as well -developed ICT and the digital economy.4 The AU Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa 
2020-2030 calls on Africa to harness digital technologies and innovation to transform African 
societies and economies to promote Africa's integration, generate inclusive economic growth, 
stimulate job creation, break the digital divide, and eradicate poverty for the continent 's 
socio-economic development and ensure Africa 's ownership of modern tools of digital management.  
Most recently, in February 2020, with the aim of boosting intra -Africa trade, the AU Assembly 
decided to include digital trade within the African Continental Free Tra de Area (AfCFTA). Digital trade 
issues will be constituted into a Protocol that shall, upon entry into force, form an integral part of 
the AfCFTA Agreement. In May 2021, the Council of Ministers established the Committee on Digital 
Trade to coordinate and facilitate the negotiations of the Protocol on Digital Trade under the AfCFTA.  
The Committee consists of all State Parties.  
1.38.  To provide a snapshot of the national situation, UNCTAD has compiled data on legislative 
regimes  of Members.  Out of 54 African  count ries, 33 have ecommerce  legislation,  6 have draft 
legislation, a further 6 have no legislation, while no data is available for 9.  Where data protection is 
concerned, 33 countries have legislation, 6 have draft legislation, and 10 have no legislation while 
no data is available for 5.  One regulatory  area that is increasing  in relevance  is data flows.  The 
UNCTAD  Digital  Economy Report  of 2021 posited  that this area should  not be governed  by binding  
trade rules.  [Some  of the reasons advanced included among others, the following:5 
• the multidimensional nature of data which means that a large proportion of data is not 
associated with trade;  
• since data flows include non -tradeable issues like personal protection, privacy and human  
rights, addressing them in the trade regime would be limiting;  
• the nature of trade negotiations is ill -suited to dealing with sensitive issues entailed in 
data flows such as privacy and human rights especially in the context of digital 
technologies like the facial recognition. ] 
 
1.39.  Such policies  are more aptly addressed  through  national  or regional  instruments  where  there 
are manifold  approaches.  For example,  in Chad,  since 2015,  the Personal  Data Protection  Act and 
the Cybersecurity and Anti -Cybercrime Act have been in force.  The former  Act stipulates  that the 
transfer  of personal  data to a country  that is not a member of the Central African Economic and 
Monetary Community (CEMAC) and Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) can only 
take place if that country ensures an adequate level of protection of privacy and fundamental rights 
and freedoms. By the same token, in the event of any transfer of personal data to a third country, 
the National Agency for  Computer  Security  and Electronic  Certification  must be informed  in advance  
by the person in charge of processing the data.  Lastly , in financial matters, since Chad forms part of 
the CEMAC area, the regulations of the Bank of Central African States provide that personal data 
 
3 See Africa  Group  statement  at 21 February  Dedicated  Discussion in  WT/GC/WPEC/M/2.  
4 AU – Agenda  2063,  aspiration  2.25. 
5 https://unctad.org/publication/digital -economy -report -2021 WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 9 - 
 
  shall be stored by the country 's central bank, which shall ensure their security and confidentiality.  
[There  is a need for an African  framework  on data governance  best practice  for the region  that can 
ensure that data is used to drive continental economic growth and development. A first step  would  
be more economies  ratifying  the African  Union  Convention  on Cyber  Security  and Personal Data 
Protection ( Malabo Convention ). With the emergence of cloud computing, the regulation of online 
content faces new challenges,  notably,  in relation  to its localization,  the nature  and scope  
of different  stakeholder  responsibilities and new challenges relating to intellectual property rights 
of online content and, in particular, the regulation of such content on social networks. ] 
1.40.  Having said this, international cooperation can help developing countries in their digit al 
transformation  initiatives. This can be among other in following areas:  (i) identifying  key principles  
to follow  to facilitate  digital  transformation  process  in terms of building digital skills and capacities of 
developing countries ; (ii) c urbing the gl obal dominance of few digital platforms which have led to  
high market concentration; and  (iii) identifying "digital public goods " which can help countries 
progress towards their SDGs as suggested by the Report of the United Nations High -level Panel on 
Digital Cooperation.6 
1.41.  Finally, Chair, in my national capacity , I have taken good note of your opening remarks. 
Therefore,  I refer yo u to our national statement delivered at the 26 January meeting on consumer 
protection on e -commerce, where our national regulatory regime was extensively discussed . The same 
statement was also diligently reflected in the minutes of that meeting .  
1.42.  The repr esentative of Mauritius  delivered the following statement:  
1.43.  Mauritius would like to commend the work being undertaken under the Work Programme and 
we welcome th e dedicated session of today on legal and regulatory frameworks and the role that 
the WTO can pla y. Over the past two decades, the Government of Mauritius has adopted a whole 
set of measures and strategies for the liberalization of the e-commerce  and telecommunications 
sector. The objective is to enhance digital services towards creating a clear roadm ap for the adoption 
of technology and innovation. The framework for the ICT sector sets out Mauritius ' main digital policy 
strategy and focuses on the four main areas:  (i) creation of an enabling environment for the 
development of the ICT sector ; (ii) connecting Mauritius to the world with an intelligent broadband ; 
(iii) e -government strategy and national data policy ; and  (iii) the digital economy transformation . 
In terms of the legal and regulatory framework to create an enabling environment for e-commerce, 
Mauritius has enacted legislation on  data security , protection of privacy , and intellectual property 
rights  and cybersecurity , and to address issues related to infrastructure, telecommunications, human 
capacity, the legal and regulatory framewo rk, e -governance and investment policies for the 
development of the ICT sector. As noted, the ICT Authority, the ICT Advisory Council, and the ICT 
Appeal Tribunal were all established  pursuant to the adoption of this act.  
1.44.  The e-commerce legal and regulato ry framework in Mauritius  consists of a variety of laws that 
address various aspects of the e -commerce sector.  
Table 1 : The e -commerce legal and regulatory framework in Mauritius  
Thematic areas  Legal and Regulatory Framework  
Electronic 
Transactions 
Framework  Electronic Transactions Act 2000  
Electronic Transaction (Certificate Authorities) Regulation 2010  
Information and Communication Technologies Act 2001  
Cyber security  Cyber security and Cybercrime Act 2021  
Data Protection 
and Privacy  Data Protection Act 2017  
Data Protection Regulations 2009  
 
6 https://www.un.org/en/sg -digital -cooperation -panel   WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 10 - 
 
  Thematic areas  Legal and Regulatory Framework  
Electronic 
Payments  National Payments Systems Act 2018  
Banking Act 2004  
Guideline on Mobile Banking 2013 and Guideline on Internet Banking 
2001 
Guideline on Outsourcing by Financial Institutions 2006  
Logistics  Postal Services Act 2002  
Customs Act 1988  
Telecoms  ICT Act 2001  
1.45.  On the need for assistance , there are specific areas where Mauritius still requires  
improvements. The legal framework on logistics services, for instan ce, will require adjustment to 
better mirror best practices, and to also ensure efficient cross border trade between Mauritius and 
its trade partners. Furthermore,  at the Dedicated Discussion on consumer protection, we also 
mentioned other areas where we n eed some technical assistance.  Mauritius does not have consumer 
protection law crafted specifically for e-commerce with a view to protecting consumers from 
deceptive and fraudulent commercial conducts and to provide redress to traders, among others. 
Maurit ius requirements in some areas pertaining to e -commerce are summarized in the table below.  
Table2 : Assistance required  
Priority issues  Actions needed  
Electronic 
transactions 
Framework  Minor amendments to domestic legal with regards the presence of foreign 
electronic payment service providers in the definitions, rules, and 
procedures under the banking laws of Mauritius : 
- The licensing requirement to be applied on a non -discriminatory basis 
and in a least trade restrictive manner; and  
- The involveme nt of foreign service providers in the consultation and 
decision -making processes  
Personal 
information 
protection/ privacy  - Review international guidelines  
- Assess domestic data protection regime  
- Adjust provisions  
Electronic 
payments  - Align domestic law with requirements on foreign EPS suppliers  
- Apply least trade restrictive licensing requirements  
- Involve foreign providers in consultations  
Open government 
data Increase alignment with international standards and consider some 
amendments a s suggested below.  
- Updating the definition of "government data " so as to allow re -use for 
commercial purpose; and  
- Enacting legal provisions to ensure the free use of open government data  
Online consumer 
protection  We mentioned in the dedicated session on consumer protection.  
Cyber security  The legal framework for such a dynamic area needs to be constantly 
reviewed and revised to remain in step with technological advancements, 
international standards and best pract ices, and regulatory changes. The 
following options could thus be considered:  
- Develop an effective criminal justice framework  
- Build capacity among judicial officers  
- Review domestic law at regular intervals  
1.46.  With respect to the role of the WTO , Mauritius  is in favour of a strong and harmonised , to the 
extent possible , regulatory framework that will enable all Member s, and developing countries and 
LDCs in particular , to fully take advantage of the opportunities that e -commerce provides for their 
sustainable development. We therefore propose the following . Upon request of a developing WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 11 - 
 
  Member, developed Members with the capacity to do so shall provide targeted technical assistance 
and capacity and skill building on mutually agreed terms and condition s to developing Members in 
order to improve their digital ecosystems and to implement WTO rules on electronic commerce.  
WTO should explore ways to establish a development program me for e-commerce under the WTO 
framework to encourage, manage and coordinate the contributions that Members provide, with the 
aim of assisting developing Members, especially those of low income and LDCs , to improve 
development of electronic commerce and implement WTO rules on electronic commerce. This 
programme  shall constitute a f ramework for consultation between Members and the international 
agencies and organizations concerned.  The Secretariat should work with the development banks to 
develop a mechanism to coordinate and facilitate access to funding in this area. Mauritius suppo rts 
the statement made by the Africa n Group . 
1.47.  The representative of Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
1.48.  The Philippines would like to thank you, Facilitator , and the Secretariat for organizing this 
third thematic Dedicated Session on the Work Pr ogramme on Electronic Commerce. We are pleased 
to participate in today 's discussion as the Philippines is keen on learning more about Members ' 
experiences, especially on the increasing relevance of digital economy agreements and domestic 
regulatory reform on digital services, given the hundreds of policies and regulations related to digital 
trade that have been introduced in recent years.  We thank Singapore for sharing its experience on 
its digital economy agreements (DEAs) contained in RD/GC/21, which pose s relevant questions for 
Members to ponder. In the case of the Philippines, we are a party to several agreements with 
provisions on digital trade or e -commerce, namely the ASEAN -Australia -New Zealand Free Trade 
Agreement (AANZFTA), the ASEAN Agreement on E lectronic Commerce, and the Regional 
Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). We believe that these agreements provide useful 
building blocks in the development of a global framework at the WTO. We wish to highlight the 
common elements among these three instruments which are: (i) cooperation;7 (ii) consumer 
protection;8 (iii) personal information protection;9 and (iv) facilitation of cross -border data flows.10 
We believe that these disciplines foster better digital connectivity. In addition, a robust d igital legal 
and regulatory framework should also include interoperability and inclusivity. With respect to key 
obstacles, we consider that these include: (i) rapid development of technological innovation which 
outpace regulatory efforts; (ii) varying nati onal priorities, regulatory approaches and stakeholder 
interests which can hinder harmonization of regulatory frameworks and negatively impact 
businesses; and (iii) resource constraints which hamper effective implementation of policies and 
regulations.  
1.49.  The Philippines also values an exchange on digital taxation, possibly through a workshop, 
given that such regulations could provide additional revenue generation while also giving due 
consideration to the fact that domestic regulations may impose new requirem ents and associated 
costs, which could potentially affect smaller players such as MSMEs. While we are cognizant that 
discussions on digital services tax are ongoing under Pillar 1 of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework 
on Base Erosion and Profit Sharing (BEPS ), we believe that work has relevant implications on the 
discussion related to the e -commerce moratorium. We are also keen to learn more from Members 
about their experience in applying VAT or Goods and Services Tax to e -commerce activities, including 
issues related to scope, registration procedures, and collection regimes. The Philippines is itself 
considering new legislation imposing VAT on digital services.  
1.50.  As regards the role of the WTO, it can leverage its convening power to facilitate dialogue, 
exchang e of best practices and experiences, and cooperation among Members, other international 
organization and stakeholders. It can also provide technical assistance and capacity building, 
through the ITTC, to support developing countries in designing and implem enting digital legal and 
regulatory frameworks.  In closing, we thank you , Chair, once again for this platform to share our 
experience and learn from Members ' practices in their respective regimes and national priorities.  
 
7 All three Agreements emphasize the importance of cooperation among Member Countries in promoting 
the development of e -commerce and sharin g best practices, information, and experiences.  
8 Each Agreement underscores the need for effective consumer protection measures, such as 
regulations to protect consumers from fraudulent or deceptive commercial practices.  
9 The agreements recognize the imp ortance of establishing a legal framework for protecting the personal 
information of users engaged in e -commerce transactions.  
10 AANZFTA and RCEP highlight the significance of facilitating cross -border information flows by 
electronic means while respecting  privacy and data protection regulations.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 12 - 
 
  1.51.  The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
1.52.  Madam Facilitator , at the outset, Canada would like to thank you  for your ongoing leadership 
under  the Work Programme on Electr onic Commerce. We are pleased to see the reinvigorated 
discussions taking place this year. Today, Canada welcomes the opportunity to share its domestic 
experiences on the legal and regulatory frameworks to support e -commerce and digital trade.   
1.53.  Canada 's approach to digital trade is made up of three pillars: facilitating digital trade; 
removing barriers to digital trade; and, creating an atmosphere of trust and confidence for people 
or businesses who use digital trade.  These three pillars are reflected in Ca nada's practice in our free 
trade agreements and comprehensive economic and trade agreements.  It is the approach we are 
also promoting here at the WTO, including within the Work Programme and the JSI on E -commerce.  
Within these three high -level objectives,  Canada seeks and offers reciprocal commitments to have 
legal and regulatory frameworks in place.  Such commitments are not inherently detailed or 
prescriptive.  Rather, they aim to create a shared understanding and agreement between trading 
partners on the right legal and regulatory framework needed to manage key features of digital trade.  
For instance, in order to facilitate digital trade, Canada asks its partners to have a legal framework 
that ensures that electronic signatures are not unjustly discriminat ed against. Once implemented, 
such commitments facilitate the use of electronic transactions, which are a key component of digital 
trade.  Another example is consumer protection. Canada 's federal laws against false or misleading 
representations and deceptiv e marketing practices, including the Competition Act, are 
technology -neutral , which means that they are applicable offline as well as online.  This is a point 
worth repeating: legal and regulatory frameworks need not be designed specifically for the online 
world. They can be designed in a technologically neutral way that encompasses both the online and 
offline worlds. It may be advantageous for governments to consider adopting technologically neutral 
laws, as it serves to limit the total amount of laws. This  would therefore constitute a gain in efficiency , 
which helps keep transaction costs even lower.  
1.54.  Canada welcomes and strongly supports the principles laid out in document RD/GC/21 from 
the delegation of Singapore.  We see these principles as similar to Cana da's and will, in our view, 
create an effective framework to enable the continued growth of digital trade.  Furthermore, we see 
a role for the WTO, given that it is at the core of the multilateral, rules -based trading system. 
In Canada 's view, the fundament al purpose of the WTO is to establish and maintain trade rules. 
Agreeing to have certain regulatory frameworks in place to support digital trade, and implementing 
this commitment in good faith, creates an enabling environment that will foster the continued  growth 
of digital trade around the world. This is one of the reasons Canada is a proponent of the Joint 
Statement Initiative on E -Commerce and having a WTO agreement that creates ambitious disciplines 
for digital trade. We recognize not all Members are pa rticipating and we welcome the opportunity to 
discuss the importance of these issues covered today through the Work Programme as well.  So, we 
do see a role for the WTO in continuing sharing experiences and best practices. Once again, we wish 
to thank you, Madam Facilitator, for your stewardship of the Work Programme  and thank all the 
other Members that are sharing their experiences, including on the specific challenges faced by 
developing Members .  
1.55.  The representative of  the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
1.56.  I would like to thank you, Facilitator, for organising this session in the context of your 
workplan for the reinvigoration of the E-commerce Work Programme. In the European Union 's view, 
these discussions on the challen ges and opportunities of e -commerce – for developing countries in 
particular – are extremely important. I would also like to express our gratitude to Singapore for its 
communication on e -commerce regulatory frameworks through the lens of digital economy 
agreements that is helpful to shape the discussion  on the very broad topic on our agenda . 
In response to the Facilitator 's invitation, I will provide a brief summary of the EU 's regulatory 
approach, focusing on some of the different opportunities and challen ges that are posed by 
e-commerce, and how these are addressed in the EU 's legal and regulatory framework  that seeks  
to promote and foster the development of e -commerce within the European Union and with our 
international partners.  
1.57.  The EU regulatory framew ork for e -commerce sees its roots in the horizontal, dedicated 
e-commerce directive, that was adopted in the year 2000. This is the foundational legal framework 
for online services and a fully functioning digital market in the European Union. The directive  sought 
to address challenges at that time,  which were triggered by the ever -faster progress of digitalisation. WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 13 - 
 
  It aimed to speed up market integration, by tackling areas creating legal uncertainty, e.g., by 
facilitating the conclusion of online contracts and limiting the liability of service providers. In addition, 
this regulatory framework aimed to ensure that every provider of digital services is given access to 
the market without prior authorisation or similar obstacles.  The technological advancements t hat 
have taken place since its adoption, however, have redefined the economic and societal 
circumstances in which e -commerce functions. The new market situation has necessitated new 
legislative action.  Another recent example of horizontal legal frameworks  within the EU  is the Digital 
Services Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA) that were adopted in 2022, establishing a set 
of rules that apply across the EU to online platforms, with the objective to create a safer digital space 
in which the fundament al rights of all users of digital services are protected.  
1.58.  These horizontal frameworks are complemented by a range of other legislative acts. 
In preparing these, we have found that a number of different approaches are possible , including 
(i) adopting dedica ted horizontal rules for e -commerce that apply across all sectors of economic 
activity, (ii) adapting horizontal rules that are applicable to offline activities, by adjusting these 
offline rules to the online world, or (iii) developing sectoral legislation , such as for instance specific 
rules for the financial sector which include rules on e -commerce.  In our view, there is no one -size-
fits-all solution. This is why , in the European Union, we combine all these approaches across the 
relevant areas of law. To illustrate, let me focus on two important aspects of a well -functioning 
e-commerce framework, namely measures to facilitate electronic commerce  and promote trust in 
the online environment, and a set of measures that ensure data flows and the protection of privacy. 
Consumer protection is another important priority in the regulatory framework of e -commerce. But 
as we already had a Dedicated Discussion on this issue, I will not refer to priorities/examples in 
those areas.  
1.59.  In terms of f acilitation of electronic trade and trust , specific legislation has been developed  in 
the EU. The 2014 Regulation on trust services and electronic identification (eIDAS) sets the legal 
framework for tools and methods central for digital trade such as electronic documents, electronic 
signatures, electronic seals, electronic authentication methods etc. It notably defines who can use 
electronic signatures and in what context. The Commission h as recently proposed a revision of the 
regulation, and we are working towards a European -wide digital ID wallet . On data flows and 
protection of privacy , the European regulatory framework applies across the board . The EU's General 
Data Protection Regulatio n was adopted in 2016, replacing a previous regulation from 1995. The  aim 
of the GDPR is to be technologically neutral. So, it applies to the processing and transfer of both 
digital data and paper records of personal data. The aim of the GDPR is to establi sh a framework for 
the protection of personal data that applies across the EU, ensures the free movement of such data 
across the EU and establishes mechanisms to facilitate cross -border flow of personal data outside 
the EU.  As a result, the EU has achieved  a strong protection for individuals, while at the same time 
becoming the biggest exporter of data in the world.  While clear domestic rules provide the framework 
to enable digital trade on paper, it is necessary to complement these rules, with a robust sys tem for 
their enforcement  and implementation . Courts of law can provide the ultimate safeguard for the 
protection of the rights of individuals and businesses in the application of rules relating to 
e-commerce. But in many cases, due to the need for expert technical assessments and the balancing 
of interests, it may be appropriate to give the first -line responsibility for applying the rules to an 
administrative body, whose decisions are subject to appeals to the courts.  It is important to ensure 
that this ad ministrative body takes the form of an independent regulator to ensure fairness.  
1.60.  As we had a chance to discuss at the last meeting, the European Union has strongly stepped 
up its international digital cooperation. We  have launched a number of initiatives that promote 
conducive regulatory frameworks and support digital governance in developing countries  and LDCs, 
for example in designing data policies (jointly with the African Union Commission and Smart Africa) 
or in the development and use of e -services su ch as digital financial services, e -governance services 
or systems of electronic identification (within the Horn of Africa Initiative). You will find more such 
examples in our last meeting 's written statement. This is an important part of our work with our  
partners , that we expect to develop further  and also strengthen legal and regulatory frameworks in 
digital economies that we believe are key in delivering on the promise of digital trade or e -commerce 
for all Members  and their citizens . 
1.61.  We believe that the WTO can offer a forum to exchange best practices, understand needs and 
discuss how these regulatory needs and challenges of the digital economy can be tackled . We are 
doing it today and we are open to continue these exchanges in the fut ure. We also look forward to 
advancing negotiations on regulatory principles in digital trade in the context of the e -commerce  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 14 - 
 
  JSI. We look forward to our exchange next month, and continuing our work after April, within the 
same broad themes, but possibly on more focus elements that emerge as priority issues for Members  
in our discussions between January and April . Thank you, Facilitator, for your efforts and I also thank 
other Members' engagement in this discussion.  
1.62.  The representative of  the United Kingdo m delivered the following statement:  
1.63.  I would like to start by thanking  Singapore for their room document and presentation 
this morning. It has also been very interesting to hear the experiences of other Members. I would 
like to inform Members that the UK is working on a communication on trade digitalisation, with a 
focus on how to make legislative and regulatory frameworks more inclusive, transparent and 
efficient. This communication builds on a panel we hosted together with the ITC last year during 
UNCTAD  E-commerce Week. We will circulate this to Members shortly.  Our paper talks about the 
importance of moving away from a world where trade is dominated by paper -based, manual, and 
fragmented processes to one which is digital, automated, and more interoperab le across borders. 
This evolution will unlock new opportunities for MSMEs, including those in developing countries and 
those run by women, which in turn will make  global trade more inclusive. Our paper will set out 
some of the economic benefits of this shi ft, particularly in the context of COVID -19. 
1.64.  Trade digitalisation requires enabling legislative and regulatory frameworks to be inclusive, 
transparent, efficient, as well as globally compatible. Singapore  and Trinidad and Tobago  have 
already illustrated this morning some of the global best practice  in this space , including the 
UNCITRAL Model Laws on Electronic Commerce and Electronic Transferable Records (2017).  In our 
paper, and in the context of sharing national experiences, we will also provide further i nformation 
on the UK 's Electronic Trade Documents Bill, which we introduced in October 2022. This will place 
digital trade documents on the same legal footing as their paper -based equivalents, giving 
businesses more choice and flexibility in how they trade . I regret that we were  not in a position to 
share our communication in advance of this meeting, but we look forward to circulating  it shortly, 
and we would welcome further discussion on it  as well as comments from Members in due course.11  
1.65.  The representat ive of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
1.66.  Good morning colleagues and many thanks to Singapore for the very useful paper to stimulate 
our discussion this morning. A clear, stable and comprehensive legal and regulatory framework is 
the back bone of all e -commerce activities, whether conducted domestically or transcending abroad.  
Hong Kong, China  is committed to creating a more transparent and facilitating e -commerce 
environment to promote digital trade. In administering our domestic regime, we strike a delicate 
balance between maintaining the necessary regulatory control and providing facilitatio n to 
e-commerce users.  
1.67.  First and foremost is Hong Kong, China 's enactment of the Electronic Transactions Ordinance 
(ETO) since the year 2000. Modelled on the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, our 
Ordinance provides a clear legal framework for the conduct of secure electronic transactions by 
giving electronic record and electronic signature the same legal recognition as that of their 
paper -based counterparts. E -signatures are key enablers for trusted e -commerce, the Ordinance 
has set a good foundati on with legal certainty for ensuring authenticity of digital transactions, 
preventing fraud and boosting confidence in e -commerce.  The Ordinance  has, together with other 
general laws, formed the basis of a comprehensive legal and regulatory framework to go vern other 
aspects relevant to the conduct of e -commerce, including online consumer protection, protection of 
personal data and intellectual property, electronic payments and the combat against cybercrimes. 
By according equivalent legal protection to onlin e activities, our robust legal system encourages 
businesses to venture into e -commerce and take advantage of the unlimited opportunities online. 
To establish common and interoperable standards for cross -border digital trade, an e -commerce 
chapter is one of  the common features in Hong Kong, China 's high -quality free trade agreements 
with trading partners. For instance, in the HKC -Australia FTA, both Parties have agreed to a wide 
range of commitments covering important issues in the dedicated chapter on Elect ronic Commerce, 
such as electronic signatures, electronic transactions framework, consumer protection, paperless 
trading, unsolicited commercial electronic message, protection of personal information, movement 
 
11 The UK document was s ubsequently circulated  on 24 March 2023  in WT/GC/W/870  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 15 - 
 
  of information, to name a few. These commitmen ts help build critical frameworks for cross -border 
e-commerce with our FTA partners.  
1.68.  Obstacles and difficulties are bound to arise during the course of establishing an overarching 
legal and regulatory framework addressing e -commerce. Given the complexity a nd diversity of 
pertinent issues, as well as the  technical nature of the discussions, it may be overwhelming for 
certain Members, in particular  developing countries  and LDC Members, to identify the most pressing 
issues to address under their unique domesti c circumstances, and how to kick start the process. It  is 
therefore important to find an equilibrium between achieving rigorous and comprehensive regulatory 
coverage and leaving room for innovation and technological development. Digital technologies 
advanc e at an astonishing speed and it is important for our regulations to be technology neutral so 
as to cater for technological breakthrough. For instance, sand box regulatory models could be helpful 
to address cutting -edge areas with little precedence for ref erence while providing space for 
regulatory experiments.  Given the technical nature of e -commerce, guidance and support from 
expert organisations at international, regional and national levels would be instrumental in the 
making of e -commerce regulatory fr amework. First -hand field experience and chokepoints 
encountered by businesses, especially MSMEs, are most relevant.  
1.69.  At the WTO, participants of the Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on E -commerce have been 
actively discussing common principles and rules co nducive to digital trade. We encourage Members 
to join the JSI to find consensus and update the rule -book in response to trade realities. Exchange 
of experience, standards and best practices among Members would certainly be thought provoking 
and useful for  policy makers.  
1.70.  The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
1.71.  Indonesia would like to thank you , Madam Facilitator, and the Secretariat for organizing 
today 's meeting. We also thank Singapore for the submission of its room document a nd presentation.  
We believe our topic of discussion today is imperative to recognize the role of WTO in addressing 
the challenges faced by Members, especially developing countries and LDCs, and its role to play in 
supporting Members to overcome legal and r egulatory framework problems related to e -commerce.  
As a rapidly growing digital economy, Indonesia recognizes the importance of e -commerce in driving 
economic growth and improving the livelihoods of its people. The government has been proactive in 
promoti ng the growth of the sector, recognizing its potential to drive economic growth, create jobs, 
and improve the livelihoods of the people. Nonetheless, the legal and regulatory framework of 
e-commerce in Indonesia is still evolving, with several challenges t hat need to be addressed.  We 
believe many Members are experiencing similar difficulties with regulations governing e -commerce. 
While we recognize the crucial role that e -commerce plays in driving economic growth and creating 
jobs, particularly for SMEs, on e of the most pressing challenges is the lack of consistency and clarity 
in the regulations governing e -commerce.  This has created significant barriers to entry for SMEs 
looking to participate in the e -commerce market. Additionally, the lack of clear guide lines on issues 
such as data protection, consumer protection, and intellectual property rights has created 
uncertainties and legal risks for e -commerce businesses.  Moreover, the absence of a regulatory 
framework may result in unscrupulous actors engaging i n unethical practices, which may undermine 
consumer confidence in e -commerce.  
1.72.  To address these challenges, the Indonesian Government has taken several steps to not only 
improve the legal and regulatory framework of e -commerce, but also formulating new procedures 
and previously -unthought -of regulations on e -commerce, as we all become increasingly aware of 
the benefits and at the same time, the threats that e -commerce can pose to national security and 
social stability.  In 2019, the Indonesian Government issued a regulation on e -commerce, which aims 
to streamline the regulatory framework and promote the growth of the sector.  The regulation 
provides guidelines on issues such as data protection, consumer protection, and intellectual property 
rights . Additionally, the regulation requires e -commerce platforms to cooperate with the Government 
to prevent illegal activities.  The Indonesian Government has also been working to create a level 
playing field for all businesses. In 2020, the Government issued a regulation requiring e -commerce 
businesses to register with the government and obtain a business identification number. 
This regulation aims to ensure that e -commerce businesses operate on an equal footing with 
traditional retailers.  Moving forward, Indo nesia is committed to improving the legal and regulatory 
framework of e -commerce. We believe that this will require a collaborative effort between the 
government, the private sector, and other stakeholders. The Government will continue to work with 
stakeho lders to develop clear guidelines and regulations for e -commerce businesses. We will also WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 16 - 
 
  promote dialogue between e -commerce businesses and traditional retailers to ensure a level playing 
field for all.  On that note, Indonesia continues to do its part of this global homework in shaping the 
multilateral legal and regulatory framework for e -commerce. We continue to work on interpreting, 
among other things, the extent of scope, definitions, mechanisms and exemptions that are 
appropriate to our domestic needs and share the results with the WTO as case studies and additional 
food for thought that can be referenced to help this forum go further in determining the appropriate 
scope, definitions, mechanisms and exemptions at the multilateral level - and other issue s that we 
have not yet agreed on in this forum.  
1.73.  One of the key roles that the WTO can play is to facilitate the sharing of best practices and 
experiences among Member s. E-commerce is a rapidly  evolving  sector, and it is essential for 
Members to learn from one another to develop and implement effective legal and regulatory 
frameworks. The WTO can act as a platform to bring Members together to share their experiences 
and learn from one another, as we have done today through this forum.  Moreover, the WTO can 
provide technical assistance and capacity building to Members that may lack the resources to develop 
and implement effective legal and regulatory frameworks for e -commerce. Developing and 
implementing legal and regulatory frameworks can be a complex and res ource -intensive process, 
particularly for developing countries and LDCs. The WTO can provide technical assistance and 
capacity building to help Members to develop and implement effective frameworks that meet 
international standards. Furthermore, the WTO ca n support Member s in addressing the challenges 
related to data protection, consumer protection, and intellectual property rights, because the general 
problem is not just the lack of clarity of e -commerce regulations, but also because there is no 
previous r egulation, and we cannot necessarily have each country adopt international formulations 
that are practically incompatible with the character of problems in each country.  These issues are 
critical for the growth of e -commerce, and it is essential for Member s to develop effective legal and 
regulatory frameworks to address them. The WTO can provide technical assistance and capacity 
building to help Members develop effective frameworks that protect consumers and businesses while 
promoting innovation and growth in the sector.  Finally, we call on the WTO to continue its efforts to 
support member states in developing and implementing effective legal and regulatory frameworks 
for e-commerce, and we look forward to working with the WTO and other Member to promote the  
growth of e -commerce while protecting consumers and businesses.  
1.74.  The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
1.75.  I would like to t hank Singapore for its presentation and other Members for sharing their 
experiences. As Malaysia progresses  toward the digital economy, the e -commerce ecosystem in 
Malaysia necessitates a legal framework that (i) enables and facilitates businesses and consumers 
to take advantage of the opportunities presented by digitalisation ; as well as (ii) creates an 
enviro nment of trust and confidence for businesses and consumers to engage in e -commerce 
transactions.  Hence, for the benefit of today 's meeting, I would like to share the following:  
1.76.  Firstly, Malaysia has enacted various laws, to enable and facilitate businesses  and consumers 
to engage in e -commerce transactions, including: (i) the Electronic Commerce Act 2006 to accord 
legal recognition for the use of electronic messages in commercial transactions based on the 
UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996);  (ii) the Digital Signature Act 1997 that 
provides for the use of a signature generated using an asymmetric cryptosystem that is verified by 
reference to the public key listed in a valid certificate issued by a licensed certification authority; 
and (iii) the Financial Services Act 2013 that regulates the use of electronic money as a payment 
instrument for purchases of goods and services.  Secondly, Malaysia has put in place laws that seek 
to build the trust and confidence of businesses and consumers in adopting  e-commerce and 
conducting e -commerce transactions, mainly:  (i) the Computer Crimes Act 1997 to provide for 
offences relating to the misuse of computers;  (ii) the Consumer Protection Act 1999 which provides 
for, inter alia, protection of consumers engaging in transactions conducted through electronic 
means;  (iii) the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 that regulates the processing of personal data in 
commercial transactions;  (iv) the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 to establish a licensing 
and regulatory framework in support of national policy objectives for the communications and 
multimedia industry; and  (vi) the Payment Systems Act 2003  which  provides for the licensing and 
regulation of payment systems operators. The Central Bank of Malaysia (Bank Negara Malaysia) 
regulates payment systems in the country and has also issued guidelines on electronic payments, 
which set out the requirements for electronic payment systems, including security, reliability, 
and accessibility.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 17 - 
 
  1.77.  Finally, it is importa nt to note that Malaysia recognises and really appreciate WTO 's supportive 
role in Malaysia's e -commerce regulatory framework by providing standards, facilitating discussions, 
and offering technical assistance and capacity building. We hope these programme s and assistances 
will continue, and to be reviewed and improved from time to time, in ensuring no one is left behind 
in embracing digital economy. Thank you.  
1.78.  The representative of Barbados , on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
1.79.  I am delivering this intervention on behalf of the ACP Group. We have appreciated the robust 
dialogue and exchanges of experiences and information in the previous Dedicated Discussion under 
the Work Programme. Today's meeting is no exception,  and we thank Singapore and others for 
enriching today's discussions on legal and regulatory frameworks. The regulation of e -commerce for 
the sake of regulation should not be our objective in discussions under the Work Programme.  
However, where regulation and legal regi mes are assisting our integration and development in 
e-commerce, we need to take stock of experiences and lessons learnt  across all WTO Members.  
The ACP Group therefore takes this opportunity to provide some snapshots of information on the 
e-commerce relat ed regulatory regimes that some of our members have introduced. This information 
is not intended to be comprehensive or the most up to date.  We are awaiting further reactions from 
our member capitals for information and updates and may therefore revert in later sessions, as 
appropriate. Our different regional member States may intervene as well in their own right.  First, in 
the African region, UNCTAD in its 2021 Digital Economy Report, has recorded that 33 countries have 
electronic transaction legislation, 28 with consumer protection legislation, 33 with privacy and data 
protection laws, and 39 with cybercrime laws. In the case of SIDS, the report notes that there is 
legislation in 23 countries for electronic transactions, 14 for consumer protection, 14  for privacy and 
data protection, and 24 for cybercrime.   
1.80.  Our research conducted in 2021, based on information from regional sources and the ITU, 
showed evidence of legislation facilitating electronic transactions in the ACP countries in Antigua and 
Barbuda, Ba hamas, Barbados, Belize, Cabo Verde, Dominica, Fiji, Grenada, Jamaica, Mauritius, 
Namibia, Seychelles, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Vanuatu, for 
example.  Members with online consumer or data protection regulations include among others, 
Angola, Antigua & Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Cabo Verde, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, 
St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Mauritius, Namibia. We would have 
benefitted from hearing from the  OECS regarding the regulatory areas arising from their recent 
E-readiness assessment prepared by the Commonwealth Secretariat and the gaps that continue to 
exist in this sub -grouping. While the Pacific Island Forum has noted that overall the Pacific is in  
nascent stages of ICT regulatory development, it is worth noting that Vanuatu, Samoa, Fiji, Papua 
New Guinea, Nauru, Tonga, Kiribati, Solomon Islands and others have registered at various ranking 
levels with regulatory regimes and competition frameworks. [Earlier data reveal that ten out of 
fourteen Forum Island Countries have at least one piece of e -commerce legislation. Consumer 
protection and cybercrime is reported to have been more widely adopted in the Pacific. Electronic 
transaction laws have only be en established in about three countries (Fiji, Samoa, and Vanuatu). In 
the Pacific, UNCTAD has tracked notable mobile banking services and policies were launched 
particularly Fiji, Tonga, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and others. ] 
Notwithstanding these and other initiatives, the legislative and regulatory regime in the Region needs 
to be advanced.  
1.81.  Whether it is in an effort to enhance scale, bolster or regional integration efforts, or to enhance 
to interregional trade, regional initiat ives have also been established, and are underway in ACP 
regions. Notwithstanding these indications of progress in the development of regulations to facilitate 
e-commerce, more adaptation of regulations to suit specific needs as well as proper readiness or  
gap assessments are needed. Here we would wish to stress the importance of e -readiness 
assessments and e -commerce strategies in assisting developing countries in enhancing their 
participation in the  e-commerce ecosystem, and to better empower our members  to effectively 
participate in the e -commerce discussions in the WTO. International organisations like UNCTAD 
should be better supported so as to complete a greater number of these technical cooperation 
products for developing countries.  Since 2018, some of  our members  have been on a waiting list to 
be matched to donors for e -readiness assessments.  
1.82.  We think the WTO Secretariat can play an important role in preparing an information note on 
all of the records of information on laws and regulations across deve loping countries, including ACP WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 18 - 
 
  member States. This will not only help us to gauge, at least on the face of it, our level of regulatory 
and legislative e -commerce readiness but to assess the fundamental question that we have been 
asking : what is the WTO's role on e -commerce ? 
1.83.  The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
1.84.  We appreciate  you, Madam Chair, for convening today 's dedicated session. As we see the 
development of the Internet, we recognize the continuous worldwide expansion of digit al economies. 
WTO has established and implemented a variety of international trade -related rules, and also has 
kept trying to deal with new trade -related issues. In this regard, today 's topic, regulatory framework 
of electronic commerce, is an important th eme for WTO as the centre  of the multilateral trading 
system. We thank Singapore for the submission of the proposal prior to this session. We will briefly 
make comments based on the guiding questions.  Regarding the first question, which asks about a 
digita l legal and regulatory framework that fosters better digital connectivity, we see three important 
elements in rulemaking  of this area, namely (i) trade facilitation; (ii) openness and liberalization; 
and (iii) trust. For the first element, trade facilitati on means some measures that support the legal 
validity and interoperability of various factors in digital trade and economy and it includes electronic 
transaction framework, electronic authentication and electronic signature, paperless trading, and 
electro nic invoicing, and many of the areas are introduced in Singapore 's paper. For the second  key 
issue, it would be important for us to ensure an open and liberalized business environment in the 
digital economy. The m oratorium on customs duties, as well as the Reference Paper on 
telecommunications , which we referred to in the previous  session, could be under this category. 
For the third element, as we discussed consumer protection in the previous session, we recognize 
the importance of ensuring consumer and business trust in  the digital ecosystem. In light of these 
three key factors, it would be important for us to harmonize Members ' domestic regulatory regime , 
as much as possible, through international rulemaking or information sharing, so that we could avoid 
excessive regulatory fragmentation among Members and foster digital connectivity all over 
the world.  
1.85.  Regarding the second  question , we need to consider the obstacles in establishing digital 
regulatory and legal frameworks. While laws and regulations could be recognized as playing an 
important role in fostering digital connectivity,  the digital sector has rapidly developed and changed  
compared to other sectors, so digital regulatory and legal framework s might perhaps tend to be 
easily outdated, even once established. For this reason, generally, digital regulatory and legal 
framework s might need to be reviewed frequently, or revised if needed, and designed in as 
technologically neutral manner as possible. In addition, there are various forms of regulatory 
regimes in terms of who establish es the  rules and how the rules are implemented and enforced, 
including (i)  hard law , such as laws and  regulations by government s; (ii) soft law , such as guidelines 
by government s; (iii) self -regulation by industrial sectors; and (iv) co -regulation by governments 
and industries. Moreover, potentially (v) some authentication schemes based on international 
standards could sometimes play similar roles to regulatory and legal framework s. It would be 
important to use these various tools organically depending on issues and situations and  establish 
norms and disciplines on digital trade and economy.  
1.86.  With respect t o the third question about the role of  the WTO and other stakeholders in digital 
regulatory and legal framework s, one of the biggest advantages that WTO has would be broader 
membership, and we have the largest platform on international trade rule. In this regard, the rules 
established or discussion s here at the WTO would be definitely important to avoid excessive 
regulatory fragmentation among Members and support worldwide digital connectivity. Furthermore, 
as we have discussed, the WTO is expected to colla borate with other inter -government al 
organizations by making full use of its convening power and to play a substantive role in capacity 
building and technological transfer specialized in the establishment or the implementation of 
regulatory framework. We a lso anticipate that input s from industrial sectors will enable us to discuss 
regulatory and legal matters in a more effective and timely manner.  As we mentioned at the 
beginning, we believe it an important issue how the WTO could face the issue of regulato ry and legal 
framework in the area of electronic commerce and digital trade that will be further developed toward 
the future. We are delighted to contribute to further discussion s on this issue.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 19 - 
 
  1.87.  The representative of Chad delivered the following statement:   
1.88.  Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Chad aligns itself with the statement made by 
South  Africa on behalf of the African Group and with that to be delivered by Djibouti. Madam Chair, 
my delegation thanks you for your leadership and also thanks the  Secretariat for its support. The 
process that you have initiated, which involves the identification of relevant issues, is unquestionably 
helping us to make headway within the WTO on the matter of electronic commerce. South Africa 
referred to the informat ion compiled by UNCTAD on legislative regimes on the African continent. 
Although progress has been observed, much remains to be done in terms of the legal and regulatory 
provisions implemented. We are of the view that the sharing of experiences and good pr actices is 
useful for stimulating our economic growth and strengthening our trade flows. Madam Chair, you 
have raised a matter that is extremely important for LDCs in particular, which is the issue of technical 
assistance. This is crucial for us, as we fac e major challenges relating to the use of digital tools in 
our country. Such assistance is essential to support us in tackling these challenges. We have heard 
a number of Members, including Singapore, the European Union, Canada, the United Kingdom and 
China, address the issue of technical assistance. We are interested in such assistance and have 
extremely significant needs on which  we hope that our partners can help.  
1.89.  In terms of strengthening consumer confidence, the protection of their data is essential w hen 
considering regulations to facilitate the use of electronic commerce. In our country, and in LDCs in 
particular, the informal sector is extremely important. States are working to restructure this informal 
sector but, unfortunately, many consumers are r eluctant to use digital tools. Occasionally, there are 
even concerns about opening bank accounts. The banking system is not widely used. Consumers 
sometimes lack confidence due to the shortage of information on electronic commerce. Awareness 
must therefore  be raised to enable consumers to use electronic commerce and take all of the 
opportunities potentially created by the digital economy. We need support from our partners to help 
us make headway in this area.  
1.90.  We need to update and adapt our legislative and  regulatory regimes in the area of electronic 
commerce and any related activities. LDCs have often reiterated that an evidence -based systematic 
approach could be crucial. With regard to legislation on electronic transactions and online consumer 
protection,  it is essential for us to adopt laws on electronic transactions that recognize the legal 
equivalence of paper and electronic exchanges, so that commercial transactions can be carried out 
online. We are of the view that the regulatory framework can promote  our effective participation in 
electronic commerce. For LDCs, other regulatory aspects of electronic commerce may include: 
regulations on the registration of companies, taxation, tax registration, information technology, 
payments and sectoral regulations.  These are a few aspects that are of interest to us and we hope 
that Members will address them and demonstrate their willingness to support us in such areas.  
1.91.  The WTO should collect more information on LDCs' regimes and on the way in which certain 
regulati ons promote the participation of LDCs in electronic commerce. We are also of the view that 
we should identify the key principles to follow in order to facilitate the digital transformation process 
through digital capacity -building in our country. To conclu de, Madam Chair, we consider the process 
that you have initiated to be very important to us as a country that is lagging behind in terms of 
electronic commerce and the use of digital tools. In order for us to be able to take full advantage of 
electronic co mmerce, it is important to first address the issue of energy. Our consumers sometimes 
face difficulties in accessing the Internet to perform online transactions. There may be power cuts 
when they are carrying them out. They are sometimes required to wait s everal hours, or even several 
days, to continue the transactions. Given that this occurs in the centres of major cities, you can 
imagine the situation in medium -sized cities or villages. It is therefore important for us to first 
address this infrastructure -related issue. Accordingly, if we wish to use electronic commerce to boost 
our economic growth, it is our view that we must first resolve this issue or, at least, receive support 
from our partners in this area as well.  
1.92.  The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:   
1.93.  Thank you, Madam Facilitator. We reaffirm the urgent need to integrate new technologies and 
to digitize all sectors of socio -economic development. An appropriate legal and regulatory framework 
in the areas of cybersecurity, data and consumer protection, capacity -building and cooperation 
between States is the sine qua non for proper integration into the e -commerce market. The explosion 
in trade in goods and services through e -commerce has opened up many opportunities for the global 
economy, by creating new drivers of growth, fomenting new ways of doing business and new trade WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 20 - 
 
  patterns, setting new consumer trends and creating new jobs. Yes, it is essential to create a legal 
environment that promotes o nline business security and economic well -being, and thus to develop 
the most appropriate legal, institutional and policy frameworks to build trust in e -commerce.  Most 
LDCs need to update, introduce and adopt a regulatory framework for e -commerce and relat ed 
activities. An evidence -based, systematic approach might be needed. Given the close link between 
regulations and implementation capacities, a needs assessment would allow the regulatory, 
infrastructure, institutional and human resource capacities and ne eds of LDCs to be identified, among 
other things. On the whole, LDCs tend to adopt standards with respect to regulatory aspects of 
e-commerce. It is important to understand the different contexts in LDCs.  
Data and privacy protection  
1.94.  In 2023, according to t he United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), 
48% of LDCs had adopted legislation, 9% had draft legislation and no data was currently available 
for the others. With regard to online consumer protection, 41% of LDCs have legislation, 7% ha ve 
draft legislation, 13% have no legislation and 39% have no data.  These statistics allow many 
conclusions to be drawn. Regulatory gaps impede the integration of LDC enterprises into the global 
e-commerce value chains. This may occur in particular where r egulatory systems do not meet the 
standards of other jurisdictions.  
Electronic transaction and online consumer protection legislation  
1.95.  To carry out online commercial transactions, it is essential to adopt laws on electronic 
transactions that recognize the legal equivalence between paper -based forms of trade and electronic 
forms of trade. It is necessary to promote coherence between existing and future digital policies and 
strategies at the regional and national level, and to mobilize effective cooperation a mong institutions.  
Ensuring the international compatibility of electronic transactions laws remains a challenge for our 
countries.  It will be essential to adopt an evidence -based approach to provide LDCs with the 
capacities needed to take advantage of e -commerce.  Regulatory developments in LDCs will vary 
depending on each country.  The WTO should collect more information on LDCs' systems and on how 
certain regulations promote the participation of LDCs in e -commerce.  
1.96.  The UNCTAD programme of eTrade Readiness Assessments of LDCs should be supported, 
continued and expanded. Discussions in the framework of the WTO Work Programme on E -
Commerce may contribute to the monitoring of e -commerce regulatory needs in LDCs, in 
collaboration with other international institutions.  There are many international frameworks in which 
countries  cooperate to facilitate international e -commerce. It would be useful to disseminate them, 
to share them within the WTO.  Sharing experiences among the  different regulatory systems of LDCs 
can also be useful for compiling information that LDCs can share with their capitals.  
1.97.  The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
1.98.  Thank you, Ambassador, for convening this third thematic session of the Dedicated Discussion 
on e-commerce under the Work Program me. Brazil would like also to thank Singapore for the 
experience -sharing document, as well as for their presentation, on the de velopment of regulatory 
frameworks using digital economy agreements as reference points, which provides an insightful and 
useful overview of the type of disciplines that are part of these agreements and of their benefits for 
the promotion of cross border d igital trade.  With regards to the development of its legal and 
regulatory framework in the area of e -commerce, Brazil has not enacted a comprehensive or 
overarching legislation for electronic transactions. Instead, different pieces of legislation establish  
principles, rights, obligations and standards in key areas for building trust in and facilitating digital 
trade, such as the (i) Civil Framework for the Internet (2014) for online consumer protection, net 
neutrality, privacy protection, and civil liabilit y for internet service providers; (ii) the Civil Code, the 
Consumer Protection Code, and Decree 7962/2013 for online consumer protection; (iii) General Data 
Protection Law (2018) for privacy and personal data protection, as well as cross -border data flows;  
and the (iv) Provisional Measure 2200 -2 (2001) for electronic signatures and electronic certification, 
among others.  
1.99.  Brazil also shares the view that e -commerce provisions in FTAs and digital economic 
agreements may become important components of Member 's legal and regulatory frameworks. With 
the aim of improving the predictability and legal certainty of its regulatory frameworks for cross WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 21 - 
 
  border digital trade, Brazil has signed, in the past few years, a bilateral FTA with Chile with 
e-commerce provisions  and a regional e -commerce agreement with the other MERCOSUR Member 
States. In the area of digital economy, Brazil and other MERCOSUR Member States have also signed 
a mutual recognition agreement for digital signature certificates, a trade facilitation agr eement with 
provisions on paperless trading and single windows interoperability, among others, and adopted a 
decision (through resolution GMC n. 37/2019) to set common regional standards for online consumer 
protection. In the WTO, Brazil is actively engage d in the Dedicated Discussions under the Work 
Program me on E-commerce as well as in the negotiations under the JSI on E -commerce. Finally, on 
the role of the WTO, Brazil supports, like others, the proposal to organize workshops with other 
relevant intergov ernmental organizations  and external stakeholders on the specific trade -related 
aspects of the topics that we have been discussing under these thematic sessions of the 
Work Program me. 
1.100.   The representative of Jamaica  delivered the following statement:   
1.101.   Thank you, Madam Facilitator, for giving me the floor. Jamaica appreciates your efforts in 
engaging members and ensuring continued discussions on this file. The last two sessions have 
proven useful in not only hearing the experiences of members but also concrete  proposals on the 
role of the WTO. As the world becomes increasingly digital with more transactions conducted online 
and via different electronic media, the need for legislation and regulatory frameworks is becoming 
more apparent. Countries must therefore prioritize formulation and implementation of laws that 
support electronic commerce, including but not limited to legislation on privacy, cybercrime and 
consumer protection. Jamaica thanks Singapore for sharing its national experience as well as 
providing a n overview of digital related bilateral agreements as contained in document RD/GC/21. 
This will be shared with Capital for further review.  
1.102.   Madam Facilitator, in Jamaica, the rate and propensity of electronic transactions and online 
ecommerce related activi ties have increased especially during the pandemic. The Government of 
Jamaica has always been conscious of the evolving ecommerce and digital landscape and has sought 
to ensure there is adequate legal and regulatory framework. While there is no single over arching 
e-commerce policy, one of the main pieces of legislation is the Electronic Transactions Act of Jamaica 
(ETA Jamaica) 2007. This Act seeks to set out some parameters on how e -commerce is governed, 
encouraging the conduct of business online and enhan cing the integrity of and confidence in 
electronic documents and electronic transmissions. Other relevant pieces of legislations included: 
the Consumer Protection Act 2005, Cybercrimes Act 2010 and more recently the Data Protection 
Act 2020.  
1.103.   While we reco gnize that as a developing country, we have made significant strides in our 
legal and regulatory framework, we also see the importance of a greater holistic and coordinated 
approach in developing of a comprehensive regulatory e -commerce framework. It is al so becoming 
increasingly important that legislations are periodically reviewed and amended to ensure that they 
keep apace with the developments in the digital environment.  In this connection, the WTO can 
collaborate with UNCTAD to support members like Jama ica in reviewing existing legislations through 
the UNCTAD's eCommerce and Law Reform Programme which has supported developing countries 
in Africa, Asia and Latin America in their efforts to establish legal regimes for e -commerce. This 
exercise must be comp limented with the necessary training sessions with the support of the ITTC 
for policymakers, lawmakers, technocrats and other trade officials. The training activities should be 
designed to assist officials to understand e -commerce in the context of the WTO  and trade, as well 
as enhance their capacity to engage on and negotiate ecommerce issues in multilateral and 
bilateral  agreements.  At the regional level, there is also need for greater harmonization of legal and 
regulatory frameworks to enable greater int eroperability and promote cross regional ecommerce 
activities. In this regard, there is scope for the WTO to also collaborate with regional organizations 
to organize technical workshops to support harmonization efforts and build capacity.  
1.104.   Madam Facilitato r, as would have been mentioned by some delegations, we cannot engage 
in a discussion on the legal and regulatory framework on e -commerce without acknowledging the 
role of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). UNCITRAL plays a 
central and coordinating role within the United Nations system in addressing legal issues related to 
the digital economy and digital trade.  The principal global text on the law of electronic commerce is 
UNCITRAL's Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996),  supplemented by the Model Law on 
Electronic Signatures (2001). Jamaica, therefore, sees merit in consideration being given by the 
Secretariat to organizing a briefing session with UNCITRAL with particular focus on the Working WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 22 - 
 
  Group IV: Electronic Commerce . This session would give members a better sense of the ongoing 
work of UNCITRAL in the area to guide capitals on the current landscape and highlight areas for 
further work and attention.  
1.105.   As was stated in previous sessions, we fully acknowledge the conveni ng role of the WTO as 
well as the cross -cutting nature of the issues we are discussing. The UNCTAD e -trade for all12 is an 
existing mechanism of which the WTO is a member that acts as a consortium of partners including 
other international organizations, re gional development banks and civil society. Through such a 
mechanism there could be tailored support for developing countries including bolstering their legal 
and regulatory framework. This would avoid any potential duplication of efforts and ensure a 
coordinated response to the needs of members states particularly developing countries.  Jamaica 
looks forward to the continued engagement amongst members and tangible steps to be taken by 
the WTO to support member states in developing a robust digital legal and  regulatory framework. 
Jamaica aligns itself with the statement delivered by Trinidad and Tobago on behalf of the CARICOM 
Group and Barbados on behalf of the ACP Group. I thank you.  
1.106.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
1.107.   Thank you, Facilitator, and the Secretariat for the very efficient and helpful way you have 
supported these discussions. We also want to thank  Singapore for its communication  and 
intervention this morning  on the role of its digital economy agreements in fa cilitating 
interconnectivity and interoperability between economies . Indeed, Australia is one of the countries 
whose businesses and consumers have benefitted from the opportunities that have arisen from our 
DEAs. In terms of our regulatory approach, Austra lia has generally not sought to create a 
comprehensive  e-commerce specific legislative  framework. Rather, we have taken the approach of 
adhering to general principles in the development of our broader legislative framework to ensure 
it is also fit for purp ose for e-commerce , as well as for more traditional forms of commerce . 
One example of our approach has been making sure that laws and regulations that relate to digital 
trade are consistent with the three key principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electro nic 
Commerce.  These three principles , non-discrimination, technological neutrality and functional 
equivalence , have informed how e -commerce is factored into legislative design in Australia . The 
principle of non -discrimination ensures that a document will n ot be denied legal effect solely on the 
grounds that it is in electronic form.  The principle of technological neutrality provides that rules are 
neutral with respect to technology used . And the principle of functional equivalence sets out criteria 
through which electronic communications may be considered equivalent to paper -based 
communications.  This principles -based approach has been effective in ensuring that our 
domestic  legislation can accommodate and meet the ambitious standards we have agreed in 
international  agreements.   
1.108.   To Singapore 's question about what role the WTO can play in this area , we can identify  a 
number of  ways the WTO can contribute:  (i) the technical assistance and capacity building element, 
which many others have spoken about this morni ng; (ii) the t hematic discussions , such as this one , 
can provide a platform for the sharing of Members ' experiences in the regulation of the digital 
economy , both in our domestic experiences as well as the work that we are doing internationally on 
that front ; (iii) t he WTO 's transparency function , which is underscored by the various existing 
notification provisions in WTO Agreements, can help other Members and businesses gain an 
understanding of domestic regulatory changes affecti ng the operation of the digital economy;  and 
(iv) finally, w here groups of Members see mutual advantage in agreeing to digital trade rules 
between themselves, the WTO can serve as a forum, as it is occurring through the Joint 
Statement  Initiative . 
1.109.   The repr esentative of India delivered the following statement:  
1.110.   Chair, we thank you for organizing this session with a special focus on legal and regulatory 
frameworks . Clarity on legal and regulatory frameworks is critical for ensuring e -commerce trade, 
especiall y because these frameworks have deal t with the complexities and uncertainties arising out 
of rapid technological change as well as the international character of trade flows.  For this session, 
we have not presented any papers like we did for the first two sessions on consumer protection and 
digital divide . Based on the discussions today, we may consider presenting our views in further 
 
12 https://etradeforall.org/about/partners/  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 23 - 
 
  details later. However, we believe that the following six aspects are important considerations for 
legal and regulatory fram eworks in e -commerce.  
1.111.   First, managing market concentration, which may arise from a small number of large 
platform players, with price differentiation capabilities. This concentration risk is also driven by the 
business model itself – an inventory -led model  or a model where the platform owns or promotes 
preferred sellers, is likely to disturb a level -playing -field. A pure marketplace model on the other 
hand may pose lesser concentration risk.  Second, data flows, which form the backbone of 
e-commerce, should not create barriers to entry and innovation in the market. Access to large 
quantities of consumer data provides established online platforms with a competitive advantage. 
This data can be used for a variety of commercial purposes, such as precision marketi ng, targeted 
advertisements and credit worthiness assessment, enabling these large digital companies to target 
consumers with tailor -made marketing content.  Third, managing predatory pricing is a key 
consideration for regulators. Digital markets are often subject to predatory pricing whereby the 
dominant firm provides goods/services below cost price, in an effort to undercut rivals and 
outcompete them. In fact, claims of predatory conduct have been one of the most frequent critiques 
levelled against e -comme rce businesses in developed as well as developing countries.  
1.112.   Fourth, algorithmic transparency and ensuring that small sellers, especially MSMEs do not 
lose out is a critical regulatory objective. Customers of e -commerce platforms are often required or 
incentivised to buy two or more distinct products as a combined sales package. Influencing search 
and ranking preferencing often impacts competition conditions in e -commerce markets. Algorithms 
can be used to introduce bias in favour of sponsored products, or orders fulfilled by the marketplace 
itself. Such practices adversely affect competition through the extension of market power from one 
market segment to another. Fifth, regulations are required to ensure that margin squeezing is 
avoided. Digital markets le ad to margin squeeze wherein the dominant firm with vertical integration 
has the ability to "squeeze " the profit margins of its downstream competitors, through a combination 
of high access prices and low retail prices.  Sixth and most significantly, regulat ors have to ensure 
that innovation is not stifled by the incumbents. Monopolistic or oligopolistic business practices by a 
few large platform players may hinder upstream as well as downstream innovation.  We continue to 
be informed by these considerations t o ensure that anti -competitive practices are avoided. We are 
focusing on providing regulatory certainty and a trust -based business environment, so that the 
benefits of digital industrialization are reaped by the society at large, including by small busines ses. 
We welcome the paper submitted by Singapore, which provides a view into what works for the m 
and their trade partners ' specific context. Gaining insights into similar perspectives of other Members 
can create a comprehensive picture of trade policies fo r an evolving digital era.  
1.113.   The representative of Uganda  delivered the following statement:  
1.114.   I join others in thanking you , Facilitator , for steering the discussions on this important file. 
We also thank Singapore for its document and others for sharing their experience and thoughts.  
We align ourselves with the statement s of the Africa, ACP and LDC Groups.  E-commerce is a growing 
component  of Uganda 's economy and has been factored in government 's efforts to respond to the 
pandemic 's economic fallout, including through working with mobile phone operators to reduce fees 
for digital services and offering complementary internet data packages to  consumers to help facilitate 
cashless transactions.  This growth of e-commerce is largely due to the widespread use of 
telephone -based financial transfers or 'mobile money ' and the rapid growth of mobile phone usage. 
Uganda 's demographic structure is also stimulating demand for digital development, with 
approximately 50 % of Uganda 's 43 million nationals falling within the 0 -14-year-old age group.  
Ugandan commercial banks are also implementing the Mobile Money service, which allows mobile 
phone users to elec tronically transfer funds to retailers or individuals. There are about 19 million 
bank accounts in Uganda and 32 million mobile money accounts. According to the Central Bank, 
between 2015 and 2019, mobile money transactions in Uganda more than doubled in v alue, from 
about USD 9 billion to USD 20 billion.  
1.115.   In order to further facilitate this growth, several laws and regulations governing e -commerce 
and e -government, and more generally the digital economy were enacted. Uganda has , however, 
taken a regional approach as Partner State of the East African Community (EAC), and is following 
the EAC e -government and e -commerce Framework since 2006, together with the other partner 
states for better coordination and more effective implement ation of e -government and e -commerce 
strategies at national and regional levels. As a result of this EAC approach, Uganda set up the legal 
and regulatory framework for e-commerce by enacting the following laws: Access to Information WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 24 - 
 
  Act, 2005; Establishmen t of the National IT Authority Act, 2009; Interception of Communications 
Act, 2010; The Central Bank Financial Consumer Protection Guidelines, 2011; Computer Misuse Act, 
2011; Electronic Transactions Act, 2011; Electronic Signatures Act, 2011; Uganda Commu nications 
Act, 2013. The Electronic Transactions Act gives legal recognition to data messages and electronic 
contracting with provisions following the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, 1996. It  also 
contains rules on consumer protection and on lia bility of Internet Service Providers. Under this Act 
(section 24 on Consumer Protection), consumers are given 14 days after the delivery to complain. 
We also have the Central Bank Financial Consumer Protection Guidelines of 2011 which provide the 
requireme nts for the fairness, reliability and transparency of financial transactions to safeguard 
consumer protection. Through the Electronic Signatures Act, 2011, Government recognizes 
electronic signatures by law, thereby boosting its efforts to offer ICT -based services to the general 
public and the business community. Also, by preventing unlawful access and misuse of information 
systems, the Computer Misuse Act, 2011 provides protection to users against potential abuse of ICT 
services in the country. Additionall y, the Data Protection and Privacy Act was passed in 2017 to 
protect the privacy of individuals and of personal data by regulating the collection and processing of 
personal information among others.  
1.116.   As I conclude, although we now have all these laws in pla ce, the enforcement of this legal 
and regulatory framework remains a challenge when it comes to e -commerce due to a skills and 
capacity deficit in the relevant enforcement agencies. Additionally , the threat of cybercrime is 
growing rapidly and disruptive, as well as abuse by IT providers not officially licensed but still 
operating on the domestic market. We therefore would welcome discussions to thresh out technical 
cooperation  arrangements  in the  area of  enforcement of the e -commerce regulatory framework.  
In the meantime, efforts continue by the Government of Uganda to provide information to the 
population about the legal framework in place in order to protect the consumers and the businesses 
engaged in e -commerce. The Government has also made it a priority  to facilitate the start of new 
e-commerce firms and to allow existing MSMEs to open online channels through the National 
Development Plan for 2021 -2025.  
1.117.   The representative of Argentina delivered the following statement:   
1.118.   Thank you, Madam Facilitator, for giving us the floor and for convening this meeting. To 
begin with, we would like to note that in 2022 the Argentine e -commerce market established itself 
as the fastest growing in Latin America and the fifth fastest growing in the world, wi th a 25.3% 
increase in transactions compared to 2021, according to private consultancy studies.  We mention 
this because it is closely linked to today's topic of discussion, as the growth of e -commerce in 
Argentina did not occur in a vacuum. On the contrary , it occurred in the context of a sound regulatory 
framework, focused on instilling confidence in consumers in order to promote online trade 
operations. Within Argentina's legislative framework, it is important to mention the Personal Data 
Protection Law, the Digital Signature Law, the Cybercrime Law, the Grooming Law and the Consumer 
Protection Law.  According to Argentine law, personal data are information of any kind relating to 
identified or identifiable natural persons or legal entities. The ownership o f personal data corresponds 
to natural persons or legal entities domiciled in Argentina. The Law establishes the rights of data 
owners, detailing in each case those rights and the obligations of data controllers or users. 
Accordingly, owners have the right  to be informed, of access, to rectification, to update and/or 
of erasure.  
1.119.   The general principles laid down by the Law provide that personal data collected for 
processing purposes must be true, adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the scope and 
purposes for which they were collected; cannot be collected by unfair or fraudulent means; cannot 
be used for purposes other than or incompatible with those for which they were obtained; must be 
accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date; are store d in such a way that the data are accessible 
by their owner; and must be destroyed when they are no longer necessary for or relevant to the 
purposes for which they were collected. Without prior consent, data processing is considered 
unlawful under Argentin e regulations. That consent must be freely given, express and informed, and 
recorded in writing or other comparable means.  The controller or user of databases must take the 
necessary technical and organizational measures to guarantee the security and confi dentiality of 
personal data, which can only be disclosed to achieve purposes directly related to the legitimate 
interests of the person disclosing the data and with the prior consent of the data owner.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 25 - 
 
  1.120.   While Argentina was at the forefront of personal data protection in the region, the law is now 
more than 20 years old and therefore needs to be updated. To that end, a public consultation was 
held in 2022, from which a new draft personal data protection law emerged, which is being discussed 
in Congress.  The D igital Signature Law recognizes the use of an electronic signature and digital 
signature, and that their legal effect is equivalent to that of a handwritten signature.  The Cybercrime 
Law, which was adopted in 2008, amended the Argentine Criminal Code to in clude certain 
computer -related offenses, partially updating the regulatory provisions of the criminal code for the 
digital era. This law criminalizes computer -related offences against sexual integrity; freedom; 
property; public security; and computer -related offences against the public administration.  The 
Grooming Law stipulates that any contact with a minor by means of electronic communications, 
telecommunications or any other data transmission technology for the purpose of committing any 
offence against t he sexual integrity of the minor is punishable by imprisonment.   
1.121.   With regard to consumer protection in e -commerce, in 2019 Argentina incorporated into 
domestic legislation the decision we adopted in MERCOSUR, which provides that, in e -commerce, 
consumers' right to clear, sufficient, true and easily accessible information on the supplier, product 
and/or service, and the transaction made, must be guaranteed throughout the whole transaction 
process. It also provides that consumers may exercise their right to c hange their mind, and that the 
supplier must provide an efficient customer inquiry and complaints service. It also encourages 
suppliers to adopt agile, fair, transparent, accessible and low -cost online mechanisms to resolve 
disputes, so that consumers who complain may receive a measure of redress, with special 
consideration given to complaints made by vulnerable or disadvantaged consumers.  In addition, 
MERCOSUR has a technical consumer protection committee, the objectives of which are regulatory 
harmonizati on, information sharing, analysis of shared problems in the region, and the adoption of 
common consumer protection policies by all the countries.  
1.122.   In line with its gender mainstreaming policy and in recognition of the different impacts the 
progress in digit al technology and e -commerce has on male and female consumers, Argentina has 
developed a handbook for good consumer relations practices with gender and diversity perspectives, 
which seeks to promote a cultural shift among suppliers to build more equitable and egalitarian 
consumer practices. This handbook contains recommendations on information, conditions of 
treatment, advertising, labelling, forms and contracts, among other matters, allowing sexist 
practices that are evident throughout the consumer relatio nship to be identified, debunked 
and corrected.  
1.123.   This same topic is addressed at the regional level in the Ibero -American Forum of Consumer 
Protection Agencies, where, in 2020, Argentina proposed the creation of a working group on gender 
and consumption. Th e group is composed of representatives from Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, 
Ecuador, Spain, Mexico, Peru and Portugal, and is led by Argentina. The group's work plan comprises 
two stages: the first was to design a questionnaire for data collection and a call for contributions. 
The second stage is currently being carried out with the analysis of the data received and drafting 
of conclusions and recommendations.  
1.124.   With regard to the role of the WTO on the subject of regulatory frameworks, we believe that 
this Orga nization is the appropriate forum in which to share experiences, identify good practices 
and, where appropriate, adopt measures to harmonize regulatory frameworks, while bearing in mind 
the interests of consumers, especially the most vulnerable, and the ne ed for a gender perspective.  
1.125.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
1.126.   Thank you, Madam Facilitator, for organizing these Dedicated Discussions, which so far have 
been very constructive . Thailand would also like to thank Singapore for submitting a paper , which  
we found highly relevant to our discussion today and useful for Members ' consideration for 
strengthening existing regulatory frameworks and enhancing conducive environment for the digital 
economy.  As the digital economy now co nstitutes a significant and growing part of the economy, 
Thailand has set up the National Digital Economy Masterplan outlining digital policy goals and 
direction with a 20 -year time frame which includes laying the digital foundations, achieving digital 
inclusion, and finally moving to full digital transformation and digital leadership. [Updating laws and 
regulations is one of the strategies to achieve such goals in addition to the development of digital 
infrastructure which we already discussed in previous meeting. ] Over the past years, the Thai 
Government has updated existing and launched various new laws and regulations to support the 
implementation of its digital economy policy and ensure a favourable  digital environment. Thailand WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 26 - 
 
  believes that building a secure and trusted digital environment is the necessary condition to promote  
digital trade. Therefore, key regulations are in placed to ensure the protection of online consumer s 
as well as a complete registration of online businesses , that was presented i n the consumer 
protection session . In addition to that, the Personal Data Protection Act is also implemented to secure 
the confidentiality and prevent the abuse and unauthorized access use , while the Cyber Security Act 
is set to secure security in cyberspace, governing both public and private sector databases and 
information.  Also, Thailand has set out its priority for facilitating digital trade, the Electronic 
Transactions Act, which covers e -document, e -signature, digital ID, and e -service, as wel l as the 
e-payment law  are among the list aiming to mitigate or eliminate obstacles and  increase efficiency 
in online activities and transactions. While digital laws and regulations in Thailand involve many 
authorities, government agencies are well -coordin ated and encourage d to streamline the work to 
avoid duplications. Most importantly, international principles and standards are also taken into 
account for harmonization and interoperability and to support the development of digital trade 
cooperation.  Curre ntly, Thailand has many trade agreements which include e -commerce provision s, 
such as the ASEAN E -commerce agreement and RCEP.  
1.127.   Regarding the question on what the WTO can do in this area, we are of view that 
fragmentation of digital regulatory regime would undermine economic opportunities of digital trade. 
In this respect, WTO provides a viable platform to deliver new rules, leveraging synergies without 
creating regimes fragmentation in the global trade system. We also see that the ongoing JSI 
Ecommerce nego tiation is a useful building block  to achieve concrete results which should finally be 
integrated into the multilateral setting. Lastly, recognizing that Members have different level s of 
regulatory development as well as economic development, WTO is well -placed for Members to 
discuss common challenges and explore the possibility how they should be addressed under the 
existing WTO assistance programs. Additional collaborations with other relevant international 
organizations and stakeholders would be also wel come.  
1.128.   The representative of  the United States  delivered the following statement:  
1.129.   The United States welcomes today 's discussion on legal and regulatory frameworks,  and 
we thank the delegation of Singapore for their written submission and presentation . We fo und last 
month 's session on the digital divide to be interesting and benefited from learning from the broad 
range of efforts around the world.  We look forward to an engaging exchange of experiences and 
views today and thank the delegation of Singapore for their written submission and presentation 
that will help inform today 's discussion.  It is critical that governments adopt sound legal and 
regulatory frameworks to enable digital trade. A supportive enabling environment ensures that 
businesses, consumers, a nd workers are able to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the 
digital economy, while also encouraging the development of digital infrastructure that will enable 
inclusive participation.  My comments today will focus on the areas where the United States has 
developed legal or regulatory frameworks that help facilitate digital trade. However, I should also 
note that in US FTA practice, many of our digital trade rules, while respecting the ri ght to regulate, 
call for governments to avoid establishing barriers that could thwart digital trade and domestic digital 
economic development. It is critical that governments carefully calibrate their legal and regulatory 
regimes to support robust trade a nd growth.  
1.130.   I will first briefly describe how the United States enables sound legal and regulatory 
frameworks for digital trade in our trade agreements and then share a few of our capacity building 
efforts. Through our trade practice, including the WTO Joi nt Statement Initiative on E -commerce, 
the United States ensures the adoption of disciplines for digital trade that align with relevant 
international principles and guidelines that facilitate regulatory alignment among our trade partners 
and ensure workers , businesses, and consumers are able to participate in cross -border digital trade. 
Another joint statement initiative, on Services Domestic Regulation, increases transparency, 
predictability, and efficiency of authorization procedures for services supplier s, including those 
critical to digital industries.  To offer a few examples, in the area of facilitating electronic transactions, 
our trade disciplines ensure that Parties to the agreement adopt measures that are consistent with 
the UNCITRAL Model Law on E -commerce. The Model Law along with other relevant guidelines ensure 
legal predictability in areas of importance to digital trade, such as electronic signatures and 
authentication, electronic contracts, and electronic transferable records. Next, our discipl ines in the 
area of ensuring trust in the digital economy through online consumer protection, cybersecurity, and 
the protection of personal information are drawn from international principles and guidelines 
developed by international bodies such as the UN,  OECD, and ISO. By  aligning domestic legal and 
regulatory frameworks with international best practices, Parties adopt approaches that promote WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 27 - 
 
  interoperability, where appropriate, and do not adopt measures that are unnecessarily trade 
restrictive.  Finally, the United States places great importance o n inclusive stakeholder engagement 
in the development of legal and regulatory frameworks.  Inclusive engagement is a key component 
to ensuring that our resulting trade policies facilitate cross -border digital trade , enable opportunities 
and address emerging challenges, remain durable and equitable, and account for previous common 
policy shortfalls of failing to engage with communities that will be affected by those decisions.  
1.131.   I will now briefly highlight some US pr ogrammes under USAID . Helping developing countries 
develop legal and regulatory frameworks to facilitate digital trade and strengthen domestic digital 
enabling environments is a key component of US technical assistance and capacity building 
initiatives.  For instance, in December 2022, the United States announced the Digital Transformation 
with Africa (DTA) initiative which intends to invest over USD 350 million and facilitate over 
USD 450 million in financing for Africa in line with the African Union 's Digi tal Transformation Strategy 
and the US Strategy Toward Sub -Saharan Africa.  As part of the DTA, one key goal is to "strengthen 
the capacity of authorities and the independence of regulators to develop, implement, and enforce 
sound policies and regulations. " The US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is 
committed to supporting private sector investment in projects that expand access to affordable 
internet and telecommunications, as well as projects that leverage technology to fuel economic 
growth, such as financial technology and online education. DFC is improving mobile connectivity 
across Africa through, for example, USD 100 million of financing for Africell to support mobile 
network upgrades and expansions in the Democratic Republic of the C ongo, The Gambia, and Sierra 
Leone to make mobile internet services more affordable and widely available. Power Africa is a 
US Government initiative that works to increase access to power in sub -Saharan Africa and has 
helped deliver first -time electricity to nearly 159 million people.  Power Africa will engage the private 
sector to expand digital access and strengthen the business enabling environment for trade and 
investment.  For example, as part of its Health Electrification and Telecommunication Alliance,  Power 
Africa will invest USD 10 million to improve internet access in rural health clinics and regional 
health  facilities.  
1.132.   Another program that has been in place since 2019 is the ProICT initiative. This program is 
aimed specifically at legal and regulat ory frameworks for ICT policy, telecom regulation, 
cybersecurity policies, and digital trade, and operates by providing medium - to long -term expert 
advisors to provide direct advice and assistance to developing country governments.  Broader efforts 
undertak en by USAID prioritize the development and implementation of legal and regulatory 
frameworks to promote digital tools and economic growth, while keeping in mind the importance of 
interoperability. This work often includes expanding the cross -border privacy  rules (CBPR) system 
to ensure data is used responsibly and supports a marketplace in which consumers are confident 
that data privacy and protection rules are being abided by.  Through USAID 's work, we have found 
that "if our digital programmatic investment s are siloed or unsustainable, we risk undermining the 
digital ecosystems we should be trying to build, and ultimately the people and countries with whom 
we work. " 
1.133.   There are also a number of Department of Commerce, Commercial Law and Development 
Program (C LDP) initiative s. The US CLDP works directly with governments and other stakeholders 
in emerging markets around the world to strengthen legal and regulatory frameworks for the digital 
economy. Technical assistance takes many forms, including inputs on draft laws out for public 
comment, organizing public -private dialogues, peer -to-peer exchange with other Governments, 
technical working sessions, and capacity building for government officials and regulators.  
For example:  in 2022, CLDP launched a regional,  multistakeholder, Working Group on Digital Trade 
that includes government, private sector, and civil society representatives from across Central Asia 
(Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan). The Working Group 
provides a reg ional platform and mechanism for ongoing multi -stakeholder cooperation and 
engagement on trade -related legal and regulatory reform. So far the Working Group has developed 
35 actionable, practical regional recommendations to improve the legal environment fo r digital trade 
across five key areas: (i) trustworthy digital trade (including cybersecurity, consumer protection, 
data protection and privacy); (ii) cross-border e -payments; ( iii) e-commerce logistics; ( iv) open 
government data; and ( v) stakeholder engag ement for effective digital trade related law reform. 
The Working Group will now meet twice a year, and CLDP will also facilitate regular, in person 
technical engagements throughout the year to support implementation of Working Group 
recommendations on are as of digital trade related legal reform.   WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 28 - 
 
  1.134.   In 2022 in the Maldives, CLDP coordinated with UNICTRAL to help move forward an 
eTransactions law (including eSignatures), by providing capacity building workshops to help 
government and private sector stakeholder s understand the contents and effects of the new law. In 
2023, CLDP has proposed further assistance on implementing regulations.  In 2020, CLDP assisted 
with inputs into to Nepal 's draft legislation on e -commerce by providing initial comments and 
identifyin g experts within the United States Government to contribute to a further review. This was 
followed CLDP 's participation in the December 2020 Nepal Trade and Investment Framework 
Agreement (TIFA) bilateral trade talks led by USTR.  CLDP provided technical as sistance to Tunisia 
in 2018 -2019 to help it develop a regulatory environment conducive to eCommerce. CLDP brought 
government and private sector officials to two international events – the Internet Governance Forum 
(2017) and United Nations Conference on Tr ade and Development (UNCTAD) "eCommerce Week ") 
(2019) – and organized two activities in Tunis.  Tunisia 's participation in 2019 eCommerce Week led 
to an eTrade Readiness Assessment, funded by the German government 's Federal Ministry for 
Economic Cooperation  and Development. In Tunis, CLDP organized a major conference of 
stakeholders, followed by interactive consultation among stakeholders, which included extensive 
recommendations on how to best improve the legal and regulatory context for the development of 
e-commerce.  
1.135.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
1.136.   Nigeria wishes to commend you , Madam Chair,  for your tireless efforts in advancing 
discussions under the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Digital Trade has become an 
important determinant of the distributional effects of trade and growth. We believe given our large, 
young, and entrepreneurial  population, digital entrepreneurship has the potential to become an 
engine of economic transformation in Nigeria and set the country on a new growth trajectory. 
In order to optimize our gains from global digital trade, Nigeria is undertaking reforms towar ds 
structural transformation, improving digital regulatory frameworks and digitization. Our goal is to 
attract digital investments, improve competitiveness and create job.  
1.137.   Africa has also taken some significant steps towards addressing some of its developm ent 
challenges with the adoption of the AfCFTA a framework that underpin the integration of African 
economies as well as ongoing efforts towards the actualization of Agenda 2063. Towards optimizing 
Africa 's gains from digital trade, the A frican Union has d eveloped a Digital Transformation Strategy 
for Africa 2020 -2030. There are ongoing efforts to foster the negotiations of the Protocol on Digital 
Trade under the AfCFTA. These laudable efforts notwithstanding, Nigeria believes that only by scaling 
up invest ments in "connectivity" infrastructure – ports, transport corridors, telecommunications 
networks – could African countries participate in, and benefit from, today's integrated and digital 
global economy. It is therefore of critical importance that we prior itize reforms and international 
cooperation geared towards creating a more transparent, efficient, and predictable environment that 
will underpin cross -border flow of digital investments. We are also of the view that the harmonization 
of digital regulatory  frameworks at the regional and global level would unlock enormous 
opportunities for MSMEs and drive growth. It  is for this reason that we are participating in the 
ongoing negotiations on e -commerce under the Joint Statement Initiative.  
1.138.   Some of our regulat ions that seek to promote the development of our digital economy 
include: (i) Guidelines for Nigerian Content Development in Information and Communication 
Technology (ICT), (ii) Cybercrime Act 2015, (iii) Nigeria Cloud Computing Policy, (iv) Nigeria Data 
Protection Regulation 2019, (v) Standards for Data Interoperability, (vi) Telecommunications 
Networks Interconnection Regulations, and (vii) Consumer Code of Practice Regulations.  These are 
just few of the regulations that we have in place  to seek to promot e the development of our digital 
economy . We believe the exchange of information on regulations and standard s would foster the 
development of requisite regulatory frameworks in developing countries . We also believe 
international cooperation is crucial for the development of the digital economy in developing 
countries . The WTO should also work in close coordination with UNCTAD, ITC and other development 
partners to provide technical assistance towards the development of appropriate and effective digital 
regulatory framework in developing countries . Nigeria would certainly welcome support towards 
identifying gaps in our existing legislations that need to be bridged to enable a vibrant digital 
economy. We  wish to seize this opportunity to once more thank the UK for their efforts towards 
connecting  our women digital entrepreneurs to global digital market through the She Trade 
initiatives. Today increasing numbers of Nigeria 's women traders are applying digi tal solutions in 
informal trade. We will welcome more of such support from our development partners , especially in WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 29 - 
 
  the areas that the delegate from the United States mentioned earlier on . In conclusion, we wish to 
join others in thanking Singapore for thei r presentation.  
1.139.   The Chairperson  gave the floor to Singapore for any additional comments based on what 
they had heard from Members.  
1.140.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
1.141.   I would just give my thoughts in three points. First, thi s session has been very helpful. 
Singapore is very humbled and grateful that we had this opportunity to share our experience, as 
well as hearing on best practices that exist elsewhere  and the challenges that Members face . Second, 
these conversations are ve ry illuminating and have reveal ed some issues of interest to Members and 
we think there is scope for us to distil the list of issues further and perhaps address  them in future 
meeting s. UNCITRAL has been mentioned by a wide spectrum of the Membership, deve loped and 
developing and across regions in Asia, Africa, Caribbean. We believe the submission by the UK will 
further shed light on this issue. Third, going back to the question about the WTO's role, our 
opportunities are two -fold. The first part is really about rulemaking. The digital economy is evolving 
very quickly, and the WTO does have a role to play in this very important area. This has been cited 
by Australia, Canada, Thailand, US an d many others. The second point  is that the WTO has an 
exceptionally strong convening power  and it is important that we see the digital economy as an issue 
that really straddles across many international organizations as well as the private sector. It is 
therefore important, when we have these conversations, to bring them to the table as well , so that 
they can contribute their perspective s, so that we do not work in silos and actually tap on the 
synergies that exist elsewhere.  
1.142.   The issues raised by Djibouti  on behalf of the LDCs and by many other Members on capacity 
building and technical assistance is something we need to see how to optimize resources across 
organizations. The WTO cannot do everything, but we know that there are resources out there, 
includi ng with bilateral projects like th ose mentioned by the US. These are things that we need to 
see how we can put together so that we can really optimize our resources and not duplicat e 
workstreams. These are just some quick thoughts on, and take -aways from , the conversation today. 
Some Members indicated that they are still studying ou r submission, such as Trinidad and Tobago 
and Jamaica. We would be happy to have further conversations on our submission.  
1.143.   The Chairperson  thanked the 28 delegations who had intervene d. She noted that s ome of 
them had spoken  on behalf of large cross-sections  of the Members hip. This was noteworthy as it 
showed continued engagement in these conversations across the developmental and geographical 
divide . As Facilitator, she shared some thoughts on what she had heard. She believed that there had 
been a fundamental question , raised by Singapore , regarding trust and security. The question was 
how to build  trust in the digital system so that it could be used wi thout any fear , and how to develop 
a legal and regulatory framework that ensured security without hindering development . This was a 
question that many  delegations had  tried to answer. In sharing their experiences, most delegations 
seemed to say that they h ad an existing framework . They felt that their existing framework generally 
served its purpose and had tried to adapt it in line with  developments in the global arena, so that 
they would not be  left behind and remain competitive. There had also been  reques ts for technical 
assistance , and a lot of information had been provided , particularly by the EU and the US , on the 
kind of technical assistance that c ould be provided by some countries to help others.  Delegations 
had also shared the experiences of different regions trying to create their own harmonized regional 
system s. She did not know whether there could be a harmonized system across the world . While 
recognis ing that this would be an ideal situation , she quoted the EU's remarks that a one -size-fits-all 
approach would not  necessarily work . However, she emphasized the need for Members to try and 
see how close they could get to it and what would be t he basis on which to move forward, keeping 
in mind that most countries, or at least a large bulk of cou ntries, ha d a fairly sound legal and 
regulatory framework in place . She added  that some delegations also tried to answer the question 
on the role of the WTO. She quoted Australia's mention of technical assistance , experience  sharing 
and the WTO's transpare ncy function. She also recalled that Japan and others had mentioned rules. 
This was something on which she wished to invite Members to reflect further. She highlighted the 
need to narrow down what Members were thinking of in terms of this theme  and what they wanted 
to put forward to Ministers. She recognized that it would be impossible for her to capture the full 
details of the discussions, but she wanted to encourage delegations to think a bit further, a little  
deeper, and see how the discussions could move forward , what the WTO could do beyond convening 
power  and technical assistance, and what it could contribute to this discussion.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 30 - 
 
  1.144.   She recalled that Members had held discussions on three topics , thus far . As she had 
mentioned at the General Council , she was hoping to be in a position to provide details of a workplan 
following the April discussion on the moratorium. She had been giving some thought on  the next 
steps . In that regard, s he intended  to invite  relevant intergovernmental organizations ( IGOs) 
sometime in late May  or early June to see how they c ould contribute to the work under the Work 
Programme . She also thought  that it would be useful for delegations to start reflecting on MC13 . 
What recommendations would Members wish to make and what messages would they wish to convey  
to Ministers ? On a practical level, she proposed holding small  group consultations that would be 
followed by an informal open -ended meeting to further refine and reflect on how to move forward. 
The idea would be to focus on the areas of convergence on the issues that had been  discussed – 
namely , what were delegations saying? What c ould the WTO do in these areas , alone or in 
collaboration with others ? What concrete outcomes  were Members  expecting ? She hoped that t he 
consultations would also provide an opportunity for delegations to converge on a further list of 
thematic sessions for discussion. In that regard, she would circulate , by the end of the following 
week, the non -exhaustive list of issues Members had identified the previous  year. She recall ed that 
delegations had all agreed to address the development perspective and  that all the thematic issues 
went in that  direction. In terms of timing, she was thinking of holding the small group consultations 
shortly after the Easter break and to convene an open -ended informal meeting after the April 
Dedicated Discussion on the moratorium. This would allow her to report on  the consultations as well 
as on the workplan to the G eneral Council  meeting  scheduled for  8-9 May. These were some of her 
ideas and thinking on how to move forward. She noted that ultimately, i t would be up to the Members 
to determine the pace of work and drive the discussions towards concrete outcomes. The  idea was 
to try and identify  specific  issues, hold dedicated discussions on these issues, and then , after the 
summer holidays, Members could delve deep er into th e kind of recommendations that they might 
wish to make to Ministers . She asked if there were any objections to the plan she had outlined.   
1.145.   The representative of Dominican Republic  delivered the following statement:  
1.146.   Thank you, Chair, for organizing these m eetings. We have a suggestion regarding the time 
of the next thematic meeting on the moratorium. Could we begin later so that our experts from 
Capital can participate? We have done this in market access meetings where we started at 11:00 or 
12:00, for exam ple.  
1.147.   The Chairperson  confirmed that the meeting on 20 April would start at 15:00.  
1.148.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
1.149.   Thank you, Madam Facilitator, for providing your views on how to move this forward. I think 
we just wanted t o add a point about your proposal to invite international organizations. As you may 
recall when we submitted our document with a group of developing Members proposing  ideas for 
the Dedicated Discussion, we had also suggested to engage international organiz ations for the 
moratorium. We have been see ing the four topics we have planned for this semester as completing 
each other so we would suggest that in this proposal to invite international organizations we include 
the four topics, i.e., that we include the moratorium .  
1.150.   The Chairperson  took note of Canada's statement and noted that she was waiting for the 
discussion on the moratorium to take place for Members to indicate what they wished to do. In the 
absence of any objection, she propose d convening the consultations. She thanked delegations for 
their useful comments and suggestions . She recalled that the following Dedicated Discussion w ould 
focus on the moratorium  and be held on 20 April . She once again invite d delegations to submit 
paper s in advance of the discussion in April and note d that Indonesia had previously submitted a 
paper titled Indonesia's Perspective on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmission  (WT/GC/W/859).  
As already mentioned , her intention was to consult following the Ea ster break and to convene an 
Informal open -ended meeting before the General Council in May, probably on Friday, 5 May . In 
closing, she reminded delegations to send their statements to the Secretariat so that they c ould be 
included in the record of this mee ting.  
1.151.   The Chairperson  thanked Members for their participation and closed the meeting .  
_______________   WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 31 - 
 
  ANNEX  
EXPERIENCE SHARING FROM SINGAPORE ON E -COMMERCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS  
THROUGH THE LENS OF DIGITAL ECONOMY AGREEMENTS (DEAS)  
 
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 32 - 
 
   
 
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 33 - 
 
   
 
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 34 - 
 
   
 
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 35 - 
 
   
 
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 36 - 
 
   
 
WT/GC/WPEC/M/3  
 
- 37 - 
 
   
 
 
__________