RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/ 12 
 
14 January 2020  
(20-0371) Page:  1/3 
Committee on Trade and Development  
Twelfth  Dedicated Session on the Monitoring Mechanism  
on Special and Differential Treatment  
   
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING O F 22 NOVEMBER  2019  
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Chad Blackman (Barbados)  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA ................................ ................................ ...................  1 
B. MONITORING OF SPECIA L AND DIFFERENTIAL P ROVISIONS  ................................ . 1 
- Statement by the Chairman  ................................ ................................ ........................  1 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 3 
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA 
1. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/MMSDT/10 of 
25 Octobe r 2019 was adopted . 
B. MONITORING OF SPECIA L AND DIFFERENTIAL P ROVISIONS  
- Statement by the Chairman  
2. The Chairman  said that, at the Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference (MC9) held in Bali, Ministers 
decided to establish the Monitoring Mechanism (MM) on Special and Differential Treatment (S&D). 
The Decision establishing the MM was contained in document WT/MIN(13)/ 45 - WT/L/920. According 
to the Decision, the MM was to act as a focal point within the WTO to analy se and review the 
implementation of S&D provisions. The Mechanism was to review all aspects of implementation of 
S&D provisions with a view to facilitating the integration of developing and least developed Members 
into the multilateral trading system (MTS). The Mechanism operated in Dedicated Sessions of the 
Committee on Trade and Development (CTD), and was to meet at least twice a year. Accordin gly, 
two meetings of the Dedicated Session on the MM had been held every year since the Bali Ministerial 
Conference. The present meeting was the Committee's 12th Dedicated Session on the MM, and he 
regretted to say that the situation remained unchanged fro m the last meeting held in June 2019 . 
For one thing, the monitoring of S&D provisions in the Mechanism was to be undertaken on the basis 
of written inputs or submissions made by Members, as well as on the basis of reports from other 
WTO bodies to which sub missions by Members could also be made. However, as Members were well 
aware, no written submissions had yet been made in the MM. Furthermore, paragraph 12 of the 
Decision establishing the MM stated that "The Mechanism shall be reviewed three years after it s first 
formal meeting, and thereafter as necessary, taking into account its functioning and evolving 
circumstances". He recalled that he had previously mentioned  that delegations had expressed 
different perspectives on the question of the review . In this regard, he  once again  urged Members 
to come to a common understanding on how to proceed with the review, and more generally on how 
to move forward with the MM. He indicated that he would continue to reach out informally to 
Members in order to explore what could be done to help find a way forward , and that Members 
should also feel free to contact him to discuss any issues they wished relating to the MM – including  
any ideas they might have to advance the work.  WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1 2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  3. The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that the MM had been waiting for a written  
submission in order to begin its operation. She observed that the credibility of the WTO was being 
undermined by not implementing a Ministerial Decision for almost six years. At MC9, Ministers had 
recognized  the need for a mechanism to review all aspects of the implementation of S&D provisions , 
with a view to facilitating the integration of developing and least develop ed Members into the MTS. 
The MM was the result of many years of discussion among Members, an d needed to be viewed as 
essential to the system . Furthermore, by not implementing the Mechanism, there was a gap in 
Members' understanding o f the effectiveness of S&D provisions , which could have negative 
implications for the functioning of the organizati on. She recalled that, at the last meeting, Norway 
and Hong Kong, China had informed Members that they were working on an example to show how 
a written submission could be prepared and reviewed in the MM. The two delegations had since 
reached out to other Members for informal discussions. During these discussions, it was noticed that 
there were  some doubts about the work of the MM vis-à-vis the work in other WTO bodies, including 
the Special Session of the CTD (CTD SS). In this light, she wished to recall some elements of the 
Decision establishing the MM. She noted in this regard that the MM was to complement, and not 
replace , review mechanisms or processes in other WTO  bodies . This meant that Members had th e 
discretion to avail themselves of the MM , as well as relevant review processes in other WTO bodies. 
She observed that a  possible way to make  use of the MM was to start with the more than  100 S&D 
provisions which were currently not being reviewed or discu ssed in any WTO bod y. According to the 
Decision establishing the MM, the MM could recommend  to the relevant WTO body either the 
consideration of actions to improve implementation, or the initiation of negotiations.  The status of 
such recommendations would be tracked , and would be included in the CTD's report to the General 
Council.  
4. She went on t o say that the example of a written submission prepared by Norway and 
Hong Kong, China aimed to show how the MM could complement, but not prejudice, the work of 
other WTO bodies. She invited interested Members to participate in small group discussions, in order 
to explore ways to prepare a written submission for the MM. She added that the MM could also 
operate on the basis of reports received from other WTO bodies, and suggested that this avenue 
could be explored  as well . For example, the Chairman could consider writing to other WTO bodies  in 
order to draw their attention to the Decision establishing the MM, and invite them to provide the 
CTD with reports on Members' submissions regarding the implementation of S&D provisions under 
the relevant Agreements. Finally, she noted that the Decision establishing the MM had designated  
the Mechanism as a focal point within the WTO to analy se and review the implementation of S&D 
provisions. As a first step in this regard, she suggested that the Dedicated Session on the MM could 
get an overview and update, or have a general discussion, on the overall implementation of S&D 
provisions. This could be done on the basis of the Secretariat paper  on the implementation of S&D 
provisions in WTO Agreements and Decisions – contained  in document WT/COMTD/W/239 – which 
listed the various S&D provisions, and which was regularly updated by the Secretariat. In closing, 
she observed that the MM could serve as a process to build trust among Members, and could benefit 
the WTO's work on all fronts. With another Ministerial Conference approaching, she believed that 
this was a good time for Members to reflect  deeply  on the Decision establishing the MM, and work 
together to implement it as soon as possible.    
5. The representative of Norway  appreciate d the update from Hong Kong , China, which he 
believed  summarized  common reflections  and the recent work undertaken. His delegation was of 
the view  that there was potential for concrete and practical discussions on trade and development  
in the MM . Although no Member had yet made a submission, h e noted that conversations among 
Members had shown that there was some interest to utilize the  Mechanism. His delegation stood 
ready to engage in small group discussions on the matter . 
6. The representative of Japan  agreed  with Hong Kong, China that Members had an obligation  
to implement Ministerial Decisions , and expressed regret in this regard that the MM had not been 
used.  She rec alled that her delegation had previously expressed support for the example drawn up 
by Norway and Hong Kong, China . Her delegation was also supportive of the idea of small group 
discussions  – as well as the suggestion to use reports received from other WTO  bodies  – and was 
generally open to any constructive ideas to operationalize  the Mechanism. She went on to say that, 
in order to strengthen S&D provisions and make them more precise, effective and operational, 
Members needed to know what the problems and constraints were. While the MM would serve as a 
useful tool in this regard , she observed that Japan and other developed Members did not use S&D 
provisions . In this light , she indicated the need for the input of developing Members in order to 
implement the Decision establishing the MM . WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1 2 
 
- 3 - 
 
  7. The representative of Australia  regretted that the MM had not been utilized as yet. His 
delegation believed that the MM could ser ve as a useful tool for examining the implementation of 
WTO Agreements. He added that the Secretariat paper on the implementation of S&D provisions in 
WTO Agreements and Decisions, contained in document WT/COMTD/W/239, could be good reference 
in this regar d. He encouraged Members to  look for ways to  come forward with written submissions . 
8. The representative of the United States  recalled that the MM was established as a focal point 
within the WTO to analy se and review the implementation of S&D provisions. It was created to 
analy se the application of S&D provisions in order to drive more productive and specific discussions 
on thei r operation and possible shortfalls. She urged Members to submit in writing their concerns 
with respect to the implementation or utilization of specific S&D provisions, and to use the MM for 
that purpose . 
9. The representative of Singapore  said that his deleg ation recognized the importance of 
moving discussions forward on development at the WTO, in light of current and future challenges . 
He thanked Hong Kong, China for outlining the history and background of the MM, and how the 
Mechanism could complement but n ot prejudice the work of other WTO bodies. He was pleased to 
note that discussions in the CTD SS would progress further with recent developments relating to the 
G90 proposals. His delegation would participate actively in those discussions. He hoped that pr ogress 
could also be achieved in relation to the work of the MM, and looked forward to working with other 
Members in this regard . 
10. The representative of the European Union  emphasized the need to operationalize the MM, 
and urged Members  experiencing any issues with the implementation of S&D provisions to bring this 
to the attention of the MM .  
11. The representative of South Africa  requested that Norway and Hong Kong, China provide 
their ideas in writing to delegations , so that Members could  make a proper assessment of what was 
being proposed . She believed that Members needed to keep in mind that the MM had a specific 
mandate, which included the review ing of all aspects of impleme ntation of S&D provisions , with a 
view to facilitating the integration of developing and least developed Members in to the MTS. The MM 
was not a forum for negotiations  to strengthen S&D provisions , and it could not alter, or in any 
manner affect, Members’ rights and obligations under WTO Agreements. While the MM was able to  
ask other WTO bodies to review the implementation of S&D provisions,  it could not give specific 
instructions to improve a provision , since it could not define or limit the final determination of other 
bodies. She explained that  her delegation needed to see something in writing before it  could agree 
to any proposed way forward . A written document would allow her delegation to  make a proper 
assessment , and see if the suggestions  would serve the purpose for which the MM was established.  
12. The Chairman  urged Members to come to a common understanding on the way forward  for 
the MM .  
13. The Committee took note  of all interventions.  
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
14. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
15. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________