RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/M/90  
 
8 May 2014  
(14-2851)  Page: 1/15  
Committee on Trade and Development 
Ninetieth Session    
 
   
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 2 APRIL 2014 
 
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Pierre Claver Ndayiragije (Burundi) 
 
A. ADOPTION OF TH E AGENDA .................................................................................... 2  
B. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND 
DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................. 2  
C. OBSERVERS ............................................................................................................. 2  
(i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers  ................................................................. 2  
(ii) Further consideration of requests for observer status by the League of Arab States, 
the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Gulf Organization for 
Industrial Consulting, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, the Common Fund for Commodities, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) 
and the Groupe de la Banque Africaine de Developpement  ...................................................... 3
 
D. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT - WORK IN THE COMMITTEE ON THE BASIS OF 
THE CHAIRMAN'S CONCLUDING STATEMENT FROM THE EIGHTH MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE (WT/MIN(11)/11) ..................................................................................... 3
 
(i) Special and differential treatment provisions in WTO Agreements and Decisions 
(WT/COMTD/W/196) - updated note by the Secretariat  .......................................................... 3  
(ii) Proposals by Members  .............................................................................................. 5  
-  Operationalization of the CTD's mandate: a proposal to deliver outcomes based on 
the MC8 mandate - proposal from China, Cu ba, Ecuador, India and the African Group 
(WT/COMTD/W/192) ......................................................................................................... 5  
-  A proposal that the Committee on Trade and Development reports to the 
General Council on development work in the WTO in compliance with Ministers' request 
issued at MC8 - proposal from Barbados, Be lize, Benin, Botswana, Kenya, Lesotho and 
Mauritius (WT/COMTD/W/202) ............................................................................................ 5  
E. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ......................................................................................... 7  
-  Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 (WT/MIN(13)/32 - WT/L/907) - Statement 
by the Chairperson ............................................................................................................ 7  
F. PREPARATORY PROCESS FOR THE  SECOND UNITED NATIONS 
CONFERENCE ON LANDLOCKED DEVELOPING COUNTRIES - STATEMENT BY PARAGUAY ...................................................................................................................... . 8
 
G. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE .................................................... 9  
-  Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) notifica tion of Customs Union – communication 
from China, Egypt and In dia (WT/COMTD/ W/175) ................................................................. 9  
-  Notification of the Agreement on Trad e in Goods between the Association of 
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Korea ........................................................................ 12 
-  Notification of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement  between India 
and Korea (Goods) ........................................................................................................... 12 WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 2 - 
 
  -  Latin American Integration Association - Report to the WTO on instruments signed 
pursuant to the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo, for the period 1 January 2010 – 31 December 2011 (WT/COMTD/82) ................................................................................... 13
 
-  Latin American Integration Association - Report to the WTO on instruments 
concluded under the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo, for the period 1 January 2012 – 
31 December 2012 (WT/COMTD/84) ................................................................................... 13 
H. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR 
PREFERENTIAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS ........................................................................ 13  
I. REVIEW OF THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR PREFERENTIAL TRADE 
ARRANGEMENTS - STATEMENT BY THE CHAI RPERSON .................................................. 14  
J. REVIEW OF STEPS TAKEN TO PROVIDE DUTY-FREE AND QUOTA-FREE 
MARKET ACCESS TO LEAST- DEVELOPED CO UNTRIES ..................................................... 14  
-  Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 (WT/MIN(13)/44 - WT/L/919) - Statement 
by the Chairperson ........................................................................................................... 14 
K. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON LEAST-
DEVELOPED CO UNTRIES ................................................................................................ 15  
L. OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................. 15  
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/4255/Rev.1 of 21 March 2014 was 
adopted. 
B. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND
 DEVELOPMENT 
2. The Committee elected Ambassador Pierre Claver  Ndayiragije of Burundi as the Chairman 
of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) for 2014. 
3. The Chairman indicated his commitment to the work of the CTD and said that he was 
looking forward to working with Members in operationalizing the Monitoring Mechanism (MM) on 
Special and Differential Treatment (S&D), which had been established by a Ministerial Decision at the Ninth Ministerial Conference (MC9) and woul d operate in Dedicated Sessions of the CTD. 
C. OBSERVERS 
(i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers 
4. The Chairman recalled that, at previous sessions of the CTD, Members had agreed to invite 
a number of intergovernmental organizations on an  ad hoc, meeting-by-meeting basis. These were 
the Arab Maghreb Union, the Economic Community of Central African States, the Economic 
Community of West African States, the Economic Cooperation Organization, the Inter-Arab Investment Guarantee Corporation, the Islami c Development Bank, the African Union, the 
Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the South Centre, the Pacific Islands Forum, the United 
Nations Environment Programme, the West African Economic and Monetary Union, and the World Intellectual Property Organization. These organiza tions had been invited to the present meeting. 
He proposed that the same organizations be invited to the next formal meeting of the CTD. 
5. It was so agreed. WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 3 - 
 
  (ii) Further consideration of requests for observ er status by the League of Arab States, the 
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, the Common Fund for Commodities, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) and the 
Groupe de la Banque Africaine de Developpement 
6. The Chairman said that the positions of delegations were on the record. He indicated that 
if there were no changes in positions to extend observer status to any of the applicants, the 
Committee would take note and revert to the requests at the next meeting.  
7. It was so agreed.  
D. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT - WORK IN THE COMMITTEE ON THE BASIS OF THE 
CHAIRMAN'S CONCLUDING STATEMENT FROM THE EIGHTH MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE 
(WT/MIN(11)/11) 
8. The Chairman recalled that, at the Eighth Mi nisterial Conference (MC8), Ministers had, 
inter alia , reaffirmed the positive link between trade and development and called for focused work 
in the CTD. Ministers had called on Members to fully operationalize the mandate of the CTD as a 
focal point for development work. On the agenda  for the present meeting were two submissions 
containing proposals for work under the MC8 mand ate that had been previously discussed by the 
Committee. One submission - by  China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group - was 
contained in document WT/COMTD/W/192. Another submission - by Barbados, Belize, Benin, Botswana, Kenya, Lesotho and Mauritius - was contained in document WT/COMTD/W/202. He recalled that, at the 87
th Session, the Committee had agreed to one of the proposals in document 
WT/COMTD/W/192. The proposal was for the Secretariat to prepare an update to its document on 
the implementation of S&D provisions in th e WTO Agreements and Decisions. The updated 
Secretariat note, circulated in document WT/COMTD/W/196, had been considered at the 88th and 
89th Sessions. It was once again reflected on the CTD's agenda, as the first sub-item under the 
present agenda item. He said that the Committee would address the updated Secretariat note before turning to the second sub-item, which concerned the submissions by Members.  
(i) Special and differential treatment provisions in WTO Agreements and Decisions 
(WT/COMTD/W/196) - updated note by the Secretariat 
9. The Chairman said that this sub-item had b een requested by Ecuador. He invited Ecuador 
to take the floor. 
10. The representative of Ecuador indicated that S&D was a fundamental aspect of the CTD's 
work. However, the subject had not been addre ssed in the Committee for several years, and in 
this light his delegation welcomed the updated Secretariat note contained in document 
WT/COMTD/W/196 and the opportunity it provided to review the application of special provisions 
in the Multilateral Trade Agreements and related Ministerial Decisions in favour of developing country Members, as paragraph 3 of the CTD's te rms of reference mandated the Committee to do 
periodically. He indicated that the updated Secretariat note contained valuable information on the 
manner in which S&D provisions were being implemented, including whether any provisions were not being implemented sufficiently or not being im plemented at all. The six categories of S&D 
provisions that had been identified contained ke y elements that were fundamental to the balance 
that was created at the conclusion of the Uruguay Round. He went on to say that, in the view of 
his delegation, the establishment of the MM did not relieve the CTD of its duty to comply with paragraph 3 of its terms of reference. To strengthen the CTD's work in this regard, Ecuador 
suggested that Members conduct a factual revi ew of S&D provisions on the basis of the 
information contained in the updated Secretariat note. The intention was to maintain an oversight of S&D, which was one of the pillars of the multilateral trading system. 
11. The representative of the United States recalled that Ecuador had made a similar 
suggestion at the 89th Session. He indicated that it was still not clear how the proposed factual 
review would differ from the updated Secretariat note. It was also not clear how the work proposed by Ecuador would be different from th e work of the CTD's Special Session (CTDSS), or 
the work of the MM. He said that his delegation would welcome a written proposal from Ecuador. WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 4 - 
 
  12. The representative of Ecuador indicated that his delegation was willing to submit its 
proposal in writing. 
13. The representative of Uganda, on behalf of th e LDC Group, said that S&D provisions, which 
were an integral part of the multilateral trading system, were meant to provide necessary 
flexibilities to the weakest and most vulnerable countries. However, despite repeated promises, 
the implementation of S&D provisions was weak, voluntary and largely ineffective. No significant headway had been made with regard to the mandate contained in paragraph 44 of the Doha 
Ministerial Declaration to make the provisions more precise, effective and operational. In addition, 
substantial progress had not been made in expl oring new S&D provisions and making them an 
integral and mandatory part of the WTO Agreements . The full and faithful implementation of S&D 
provisions was important to allow the LDCs to benefit from trade liberalization, to use trade for 
sustainable development purposes and to safeguard the interests of their people.  
14. He went on to say that work needed to continue on the mandate in paragraph 44 of the 
Doha Ministerial Declaration. The LDCs also requested the Chairpersons of relevant WTO bodies to 
advance the negotiations in their respective areas and report back to the CTD on the progress 
made regarding the Category II proposals. He welcomed the establishment of the MM and noted that, even though it was not a negotiating forum, the LDCs were optimistic that it would provide 
developing countries with the opportunity to me aningfully and objectively assess and review the 
implementation of S&D provisions in order to facilitate the integration of these countries into the multilateral trading system. He also noted that it was important to distinguish between the MM and the CTDSS, and to develop complementary and co llaborative approaches between the two. In 
concluding, he called for a prioritization of the in terests and concerns of LDCs and for support in 
advancing LDC-specific proposals. 
15. The representative of Australia noted that Uganda had requested that a report on the 
status of the Category II proposals be submitted in the CTD. In this regard, he drew Members' 
attention to the status report on the Category II proposals that had been prepared in 2013 by the Chairman of the CTDSS and suggested that the CTDSS would be the appropriate forum for a 
discussion on the status of the Category II proposals. 
16. The representative of the United States expressed support for the intervention by 
Australia. He recalled that Members had had di scussions on the implementation of certain S&D 
provisions in the past and expressed his hope that the MM would allow Members the opportunity to 
have further constructive discussions. 
17. The representative of Cameroon stressed the importance of S&D for developing countries. 
While pointing to the role that the MM could play in addressing some issues, he indicated that the 
MM could not address all concerns relating to S& D. He highlighted the need for a satisfactory 
conclusion to the negotiations under paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, and for detailed discussions by Members on the subject of S&D. 
18. The representative of the European Union said that her delegation was involved in 
discussions on S&D in various WTO bodies and recognized the need for complementarity in the 
work of these bodies. Noting that Members had in  the past had discussions on the implementation 
of certain S&D provisions, she expressed her delegation's willingness to engage in further detailed 
discussions in the context of the MM. 
19. The representative of Egypt said that the ad option of the MM did not mean that the CTDSS 
had ceased its operations. Negotiations would continue in the CTDSS in the context of paragraph 
44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. He also indicated the need for complementarity in the work 
of the various bodies dealing with S&D issues. 
20. The representative of India expressed his suppo rt for the intervention by Egypt and for the 
points made by Uganda and Cameroon. He stressed that all the concerns of developing countries 
relating to S&D provisions could not be addressed by the MM. He noted in this regard that the CTDSS had a responsibility with respect to paragr aph 44 of the Doha Declaration, and that issues 
relating to S&D could also be discussed in the CTD. WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 5 - 
 
  21. The representative of the United States said that he did not believe there was any 
disagreement among Members on the bodies which had responsibilities relating to S&D. Noting 
that Uganda in its intervention had requested a repo rt in the CTD on the status of the Category II 
proposals, he indicated that his delegation was not in a position to agree to the request at the 
present meeting. He explained that the information had already been prepared in 2013 for the 
CTDSS and it was unclear why the information was being requested in the CTD.  
22. The Committee took note of the updated Secr etariat paper and of all interventions. 
(ii) Proposals by Members 
- Operationalization of the CTD's mandate: a proposal to deliver outcomes based on the 
MC8 mandate - proposal from China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group (WT/COMTD/W/192) 
23. The Chairman recalled that there were three proposals contained in document 
WT/COMTD/W/192 and that the request in the first proposal had already been satisfied through 
the preparation of the updated Secretariat note on the implementation of S&D provisions. He 
invited the proponents to brief the Committee on the status of the remaining proposals in the 
submission. 
24. The representative of Egypt said that the proponents had not had the opportunity since the 
89th Session to consult with other delegations on the remaining proposals. He reminded Members 
that one of the remaining proposals was for the CT D to report on the development-related work of 
other WTO bodies and make recommendations to the General Council on achieving better coordination on development issues. He explained that, through the proposal, the proponents 
wished to establish an institutional linkage between the CTD and other WTO bodies. Such reporting 
would facilitate the work of the CTD as the focal point for the consideration and coordination of work on development in the WTO. The other remaining proposal was for the CTD to make a 
recommendation for parties to regional trade agreements (RTAs) to submit their notification and 
information requirements jointly. This would enable Members to avoid future systemic problems relating to RTAs. He called on Members to consider the two proposals positively. 
25. The representative of the United States indicated that his delegation had the same 
concerns with the two remaining proposals that it had raised in previous CTD meetings. He said 
that he had a question for the proponents on their proposal for the CTD to report on the development-related work of other WTO bodies. In particular, he asked if the proponents could 
elaborate on how this proposal was distinct from the proposal contained in document 
WT/COMTD/W/202, which would be considered under the next sub-item.   
26. The Committee took note of all interventions.    
- A proposal that the Committee on Trade and Development reports to the 
General Council on development work in the WTO in compliance with Ministers' request issued at MC8 - proposal from Ba rbados, Belize, Benin,  Botswana, Kenya, 
Lesotho and Mauritius (WT/COMTD/W/202) 
27. The Chairman recalled that the proposal co ntained in document WT/COMTD/W/202 had 
been discussed at the 89th Session. He invited the proponents to brief the Committee on the status 
of the proposal.   
28. The representative of Barbados said that, according to the CTD's terms of reference, the 
Committee served as a focal point for the consider ation and coordination of work on development 
in the WTO and its relationship to the development-related activities in other multilateral agencies. 
She also referred to the CTD's reporting function to the General Council as described in 
paragraph 3 of the CTD's terms of reference as well as in document WT/L/105 concerning 
procedures for an annual overview of WTO activities and for reporting under the WTO. She 
explained that the proposal was for the CTD to report to the General Council on development work 
in the WTO, in accordance with its mandate and in fulfilment of the instructions from Ministers at MC8 that the CTD fully operationalize that mandate. She indicated that it was unfortunate that Members should find themselves in the position to have to approve something that Ministers had WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 6 - 
 
  already directed. While it had been previously suggested in an intervention that Members should 
wait until the MM was established in order to assess its relationship with the MC8 mandate, she did not believe that the MM could fulfill the MC8 mandate. The MM dealt with S&D provisions, which were only a part of the development work of th e WTO. She noted that MC9 had been successfully 
concluded in December 2013, but Members still had not followed Ministers' instructions from MC8. 
She believed that Ministers' instructions from both MC8 and MC9 needed to be implemented. 
29. The representative of the United States made a distinction between the instructions from 
Ministers at MC8 and the proposal under consideration. Raising questions on the proposal, as had 
been done by his delegation, did not mean that Ministers' instructions at MC8 were not being 
followed. The US was of the view that the CTD was the focal point for development work in the WTO. However, Ministers had not directed the CTD to report on the development work taking place 
in other WTO bodies and the US was not in a position to support the proposal. The CTD reported 
annually on its activities, in accordance with its terms of reference, and his delegation believed that the report was appropriate. Furthermore, in  the view of his delegation, paragraph 3 of the 
CTD's terms of reference did not mandate the Committee to report on the development work of 
other WTO bodies. Rather, this paragraph directed the CTD to review, in consultation with other relevant bodies, the application of S&D provisio ns. The first sub-item under the present agenda 
item was responsive to this mandate, as was the establishment of the MM. 
30. The representative of Australia said that his intervention related to the proposals under 
consideration in both documents WT/COMTD/W/192 and WT/COMTD/W/202. Recalling that the 
Committee had been considering these proposals for some time and that the positions of 
delegations were on the record, he suggested that informal consultations called by the Chairman 
could help to move the process forward.   
31. The representative of the European Union said that, like Australia, her comments would 
relate to the proposals under consideration in both documents WT/COMTD/W/192 and 
WT/COMTD/W/202. She indicated that the Commi ttee needed to work to implement the MC8 
mandate, and not to modify it, which seemed to be what these proposals would effectively do if 
implemented. On the proposals for the CTD to report on development work in the WTO, she 
recalled that her delegation had previously indicated that this was not practicable or appropriate. This reporting would not add value, as it would duplicate existing reporting obligations and risked interfering with the work of other WTO bodies. The view of her delegation was that the CTD should 
explore the positive links between trade and de velopment through constructive discussions on 
clearly identified topics. This would be in line with Ministers' instructions at MC8. Her delegation was open to informal discussions with the proponents. 
32. The representative of Nigeria said that his delegation was open to any ideas as to how the 
Committee could move forward in its discussion on  the MC8 mandate. He believed that it was 
important for Members to have clarity as to what Ministers had instructed at MC8, as well as what 
was contained in the CTD's terms of reference. He suggested that Members could address these 
issues. 
33. The representative of China said that a number of years had passed since MC8 and 
Members had still not been able to agree on mu ch in the CTD in terms of implementing the 
instructions from Ministers. He believed that the various proposals on the table had merit and 
hoped that progress could be made on them. He suggested that informal consultations could help to move the process forward.  
34. The representative of Barbados stressed the im portance of implementing instructions from 
Ministers. At MC8, Ministers had called on Members to fully operationalize the CTD's mandate as 
the focal point for development work in the WTO. However, it was not possible for the CTD to 
report on the WTOs' development work without liai sing with other WTO bodies. She suggested that 
a framework could be prepared as to how the CTD could report on development work in the WTO, on the basis of which Members could assess how to move forward. She indicated her willingness to discuss ways forward on the proposal with interested Members.   
35. The representative of Egypt observed that the only concrete outcome thus far in the 
context of the CTD's discussion on the MC8 ma ndate was the updated Secretariat note on the 
implementation of S&D provisions. He did not believe that this note by itself satisfied Ministers' WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 7 - 
 
  instructions at MC8. He explained that the prop onents of the proposals contained in documents 
WT/COMTD/W/192 and WT/COMTD/W/202 had made their submissions in an effort to communicate what they saw as possible ways to improve the work of the CTD. He expressed his hope that Members would re-consider their positions on these proposals and indicated his 
delegation's willingness to participate in any informal discussions. 
36. The representative of Cameroon expressed su pport for the interventions by Barbados and 
Egypt and suggested that discussions in an informal  setting might be useful to move the process 
forward. 
37. The representative of the United States indicated that his delegation stood ready to 
engage on constructive proposals. However, he expressed his disagreement with the suggestion 
that the implementation of the MC8 mandate re quired the adoption by the Committee of the 
proposals under consideration at the present meeting. 
38. The representative of Pakistan said that she wished to make a suggestion on a practical 
discussion that could be held in the CTD. She referred to the updated Secretariat note contained in 
document WT/COMTD/W/196 and in particular the section on the Agreement on Agriculture. In 
this section, it was mentioned that there was no formal indication of any recourse by developing countries to the flexibilities contained in Article 12.2 of the Agreement. She explained that one of 
the reasons why developing countries had not used this provision was because there was no 
definition of a net-food exporter. If a definition co uld be agreed upon, it was likely that developing 
countries would make use of Article 12.2. In this light, she suggested that the CTD could make a recommendation to the Committee on Agriculture to develop a definition of a net-food exporter. 
She believed that work of this nature would help to make S&D provisions more effective. 
39. The representative of India said that the CTD had been reporting annually to the 
General Council even before MC8, as had other subsidiary bodies of the General Council. 
Therefore, in giving their instructions at MC8 mandate, Ministers had wanted more from the CTD 
than its annual report. The CTD was a special body in the WTO, since it was the focal point for the consideration and coordination of development- related work, and therefore had an overarching 
mandate. He believed that it was appropriate for the CTD to report regularly on the development-
related work that was taking place in other WTO bodies.       
40. The Chairman observed that Members were not in a position to agree to the proposals 
contained in documents WT/COMTD/W/192 and WT /COMTD/W/202 that had been considered at 
the present meeting. He said that he would hold informal consultations to see whether any 
progress could be made. He also encouraged the proponents to consult with other Members. 
41. The representative of Barbados inquired whether discussion on the proposals would 
continue at the next formal CTD meeting. 
42. The Chairman suggested in response that de legations assess the outcome of the informal 
consultations before looking to the next formal CTD meeting.  
43. The Committee took note of all interventions.  
E. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE 
- Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 (WT/MIN(13)/32 - WT/L/907) - Statement by 
the Chairperson 
44. The Chairman said that the CTD was one of the four subsidiary bodies of the 
General Council that was mandated to implement the WTO's Work Programme on E-Commerce. 
The most recent contribution of the CTD to the Work Programme was the Workshop on 
"E-Commerce, Development and Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises", which was held on 8 and 
9 April 2013. The workshop was held in the context of the Ministerial Decision at MC8 to continue 
to re-invigorate the development dimension of th e Work Programme. The report on the workshop, 
which was contained in document WT/COMTD/W/198, highlighted that infrastructure problems 
were a major hurdle for developing countries. Participants in the workshop discussed the need to upgrade power grids to counter the lack of regular electricity supply, difficulties with the physical WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 8 - 
 
  distribution of products bought online and a ge neral lack of electronic payment systems in 
developing countries. Another key handicap that was identified was the lack of a reliable access in many developing countries to broadband, high speed cables. Discussions at the workshop highlighted that the main focus of current and fu t u r e  w o r k  i n  t h i s  a r e a  w o u l d  n e e d  t o  b e  o n  
assisting the least-connected countries.  
45. He said that he was highlighting some of these issues at the present meeting because he 
believed that this could be useful for Members as they considered the way forward for the CTD in 
the e-commerce area. In this regard, he drew Members' attention to the Ministerial Decision of 
7 December 2013 on the Work Programme on E-Commerce taken at MC9, which was contained in documents WT/MIN(13)/32 and WT/L/907. The Decision indicated, inter alia , that any relevant 
body of the Work Programme could explore approp riate mechanisms to address the relationship 
between e-commerce and development in a focused and comprehensive manner. The Decision 
also indicated that the Work Programme woul d take forward the issues emerging in the 
discussions and the evolving application of e- commerce to enhance economic and development 
opportunities, with special consideration of the situation in developing countries, particularly in 
least-developed country Members and least-connected countries. The Work Programme would continue to examine opportunities and challenges for access to e-commerce by micro, small and 
medium-sized enterprises, including small producers and suppliers. 
46. He noted that it was for Members to determine how to take forward the work on 
e-commerce in the CTD, and also to determine whether future work in the CTD could build on the workshop that was held in 2013. He encouraged Members wishing to suggest ways to take forward 
the e-commerce work in the CTD to consider submitting written proposals, as written submissions 
were more conducive to a focused discussion. Finally, he informed the Committee that, as indicated in the Ministerial Decision of 7 Dece mber 2013, the General Council would hold periodic 
reviews on the Work Programme on E-Commerce based on the reports submitted by the WTO 
bodies entrusted with the implementation of the Work Programme. A review would take place at the July 2014 session of the General Council. 
47. The representative of the United States said that his delegation supported the Decision 
taken at MC9 concerning the Work Programme on E-Commerce. An open and competitive trade 
regime would ultimately foster a strong e-commerce environment for all countries. The US looked forward to working with others in exploring ways to help advance e-commerce trade.  
48. The representative of the European Union expr essed her delegation's support for the Work 
Programme on E-Commerce. In terms of next steps in the CTD, she indicated that her delegation 
would welcome concrete proposals from Members, taking inspiration from the workshop that was 
held under the auspices of the CTD in 2013.   
49. The Committee took note of the Chairman's statement and of all interventions. 
F. PREPARATORY PROCESS FOR THE  SECOND UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON 
LANDLOCKED DEVELOPING COUNTR IES - STATEMENT BY PARAGUAY 
50. The Chairman said that this agenda item ha d been requested by Paraguay, on behalf of 
the Group of Landlocked Developing Countries (LLD Cs). He invited Paraguay to take the floor.  
51. The representative of Paraguay, on behalf of the LLDC Group, said that he wished to share 
with Members the status of the UN's Almaty Programme of Action (PoA) for LLDCs. Launched in 
2003, the Almaty PoA had the objective of addressing the specific difficulties of LLDCs and promoting their development. The PoA had a nu mber of components, including components 
relating to transit and infrastructure creation. He said that a lack of infrastructure, combined with 
geographical isolation, were key difficulties that  added to costs and delays, and therefore hindered 
LLDCs' participation in international trade. A review of the PoA was scheduled to take place at the 
Second UN Conference for LLDCs, which would be held in November 2014 in Vienna. Before the 
conference, a number of preparatory meetings were being organized by the UN Office of the High 
Representative for the LDCs, LLDCs and Small Island Developing States (UN-OHRLLS). These included intergovernmental meetings, meetings with specialized agencies, and meetings with the 
private sector. Regional meetings had been held in Addis Ababa, Asunción and Vientiane. Fourteen WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 9 - 
 
  pre-conference thematic sessions had been organized thus far. He expressed appreciation for the 
WTO Secretariat's active participation in the process leading up to the conference.  
52. He went on to say that the preparatory work for the conference began in September 2012, 
when LLDC Ministers noted the strengths and weaknesses of the PoA and expressed their 
expectations regarding future work. As part of their assessment, Ministers had suggested that a 
more holistic approach be taken in the future in order to address the issues of concern to LLDCs, 
which included infrastructure issues, job creation and poverty reduction. Trade would continue to 
play a fundamental role in future work. In this regard, he stressed the importance of policies that 
were designed to add value in production and decrease transport costs and waiting times at border posts. He also stressed the importance that LLDCs attached to foreign investment and to an increased participation in global value chains and in the services sector. On the trade front, he 
believed that an important step forward had been  taken in the WTO with the conclusion of the 
negotiations at MC9 on the Agreement on Trade Facilitation, which contained an Article on freedom of transit. He hoped that there would be an immediate and effective application of this provision. 
He added that the LLDCs were seeking effective market access, which would help in their efforts to 
diversify their production structure. In concluding, he expressed his hope that the international community would continue to support the efforts of LLDCs, and that the outcome document of the 
Second UN Conference on LLDCs would be an effect ive tool in addressing the concerns of LLDCs.   
53. The representative of the United States expr essed appreciation to Paraguay and the LLDC 
Group for the information that had been shared. His delegation broadly supported the elements 
that had been highlighted, including the hope fo r the immediate and effective implementation of 
the provisions of the Agreement on Trade Facilitati on. The US looked forward to continuing to work 
with the LLDCs in pursuing their objectives. 
54. The Committee took note of the interventions.  
G. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE 
55. The Chairman said that he wished to provide Members with a brief update on the RTAs 
notified under the Enabling Clause that were to be considered in the CTD's Dedicated Sessions on 
RTAs. He firstly informed the Committee that the Agreement between Cuba and El Salvador had 
been notified on 27 November 2013 in document WT/COMTD/N/43. The parties had been requested to provide the necessary data to the Secretariat for the preparation of the factual 
presentation by 24 April 2014.  With regard to the Agreement between the Association of 
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and India, he said that the Secretariat had sent the draft factual 
presentation to the parties. Comments had been received from India, but the Secretariat was still waiting to receive comments from ASEAN.  
56. For a number of other RTAs - namely, RTAs between India and Nepal, India and 
Afghanistan, and India and Bhutan - the full set of data needed to complete the factual presentations had not been submitted by the part ies. The Secretariat was also still waiting to 
receive some data relating to the accession of Rwanda and Burundi to the Protocol on the 
Establishment of the East African Community Customs Union. He urged the parties to these agreements to provide the data as soon as possible. He went on to say that there remained one RTA notified under the Enabling Clause that had not been ratified by all the parties. This was the 
Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA).  Following the procedures of the Committee on 
Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA), a factual presentation of an RTA falling in this category would only be drafted after the agreement had been ratifi ed by all the parties. The parties to PICTA were 
urged to inform the Secretariat as soon as all ratifications were complete. 
57. The Committee took note of the Chairman's update.  
- Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) notification of Customs Union – communication from 
China, Egypt and India (WT/COMTD/W/175) 
58. The Chairman said that the first sub-item under the present agenda item concerned the 
GCC Customs Union notification. The sub-item also referred to the communication from China, 
Egypt and India which was circulat ed in document WT/COMTD/W/175. WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 10 - 
 
  59. The representative of Egypt said that systemic concerns had been raised by some 
Members, including Egypt, over the legal and procedural implications of the dual notification of the 
GCC Customs Union under both the Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV. He noted that a number of delegations had previously expressed th e view that the Enabling Clause did not provide 
the appropriate legal basis to justify the formation of a customs union involving the reduction or 
elimination of non-tariff measures (NTMs). However, others had argued that the non-prescription of criteria or conditions for the elimination of NTMs did not exclude customs unions among 
developing countries from the coverage of the Enab ling Clause. The view of his delegation was that 
the CTD was the appropriate forum to consider the questions arising from RTAs with a dual notification. This originated from the CTD's terms of reference, which stipulated that the CTD was 
the focal point for the consideration and coordina tion of work on development in the WTO. In 
addition, paragraph 4 of the terms of reference mandated the CTD to consider any questions with 
regard to either the application or the use of special provisions in the Multilateral Trade Agreements and related Ministerial Decisions in favour of developing country Members, which 
included questions relating to the invocation of the Enabling Clause to notify customs unions 
among developing countries. He hoped that Members could have a substantive discussion on the systemic concerns that had been raised. The pres ent sub-item needed to be maintained on the 
CTD's agenda until a solution was found.    
60. The representative of India said that his inte rvention related to the first three sub-items 
under the present agenda item. He recalled that requests had previously been made by some 
delegations to remove the three sub-items from the CTD's agenda, as these sub-items had 
apparently served the purpose of transparency. He indicated his surprise with this reasoning, since 
the points that had been raised by China, Egypt and India in document WT/COMTD/W/175 remained pertinent and had not been addressed by the Committee. He went on to list a number of 
points which he believed were necessary for Members to consider. These included the need for an 
understanding of the legal and procedural implicatio ns of dual notifications of RTAs under both the 
Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV. Members need ed to consider the roles of the CRTA and the 
CTD in the consideration of RTAs with a dual notification, and also needed to consider whether a 
Member could unilaterally notify an RTA under a specific legal provision, without the consent of the other parties. His delegation also wished to expl ore the implications of a notification of an RTA 
under the Enabling Clause being retained but without a consideration of the RTA taking place in 
the CTD on the basis of a factual presentation. 
61. He observed that there were three RTAs that had been notified under both the Enabling 
Clause and GATT Article XXIV - the GCC Customs Union, the ASEAN-Korea Agreement and the 
India-Korea Agreement - and none of these RTAs had as yet been considered by Members under 
the Transparency Mechanism (TM) for RTAs. Some delegations had made a distinction between the GCC Customs Union and the other two RTAs, and it had been suggested that the GCC Customs 
Union notification under the Enabling Clause was incorrect. His delegation did not agree with this. 
In fact, the issues surrounding the three RTAs were similar. Although the GCC Customs Union was a customs union while the other two were not, the TM for RTAs had the same procedures for customs unions and other RTAs. Moreover, these procedures did not cover any of the three RTAs 
in question, since all three were simultaneously notified under both the Enabling Clause and GATT 
Article XXIV.  
62. He recalled that some Members had suggested that many of the issues raised in document 
WT/COMTD/W/175 should be discussed in the Negoti ating Group on Rules (NGR). In response, he 
said that the mandate of the NGR was limited and could not capture the entire gamut of systemic and specific concerns arising from dual notifications. Members were also unclear as to the future 
work schedule of the NGR and it therefore became  even more important to discuss the matter in 
the CTD. He reminded Members that India had made a proposal in the NGR, which he indicated was supported by many developing countries. The proposal was that Members continue with the existing practice of considering RTAs notified  under the Enabling Clause in the CTD and RTAs 
notified under GATT Article XXIV and GATS Article V in the CRTA. For RTAs with a dual notification, 
the suggestion was that these RTAs be considered in the CTD. There were two reasons for this, the first being that the CTD had a mandate for review and secondly the Enabling Clause was 
lex specialis . He concluded by requesting that the firs t three sub-items under the present agenda 
item be retained on the agenda of the next CTD meeting, since the systemic and specific issues 
arising from RTAs with a dual notification remained unaddressed. He suggested that informal 
consultations held by the Chairman could help to resolve the matter.   WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 11 - 
 
  63. The representative of the United States said that there was a divergence of views as to 
whether the GCC Customs Union was a case of a dual notification. His delegation believed that the 
GCC Customs Union issue was not an issue of dual notification, and was therefore different from the discussion relating to the ASEAN-Korea Agre ement and the India-Korea Agreement. The US 
remained of the view that the GCC Customs Union had been incorrectly notified under the Enabling 
Clause. This was subsequently corrected, and the understanding of his delegation was that the GCC Customs Union was in the pipeline to be considered in the CRTA in line with the procedures of 
the RTAs TM. The US considered this issue closed and continued to request that the present 
sub-item be removed from the CTD's agenda, as it had served its purpose. Turning to document WT/COMTD/W/175, he said that his delegation had not seen any specific issues relating to the 
GCC Customs Union. Rather, the paper appeared to be seeking a systemic discussion on RTAs, 
which was a discussion that was outside the scope of the CTD and belonged in the NGR. He 
indicated that the US was not open to a CTD process to discuss systemic issues concerning RTAs.   
64. The representative of China expressed support  for the interventions by Egypt and India. 
His delegation saw similarities between the three RTAs notified under both the Enabling Clause and 
GATT Article XXIV, and therefore had similar concerns  with the three. He observed that the matter 
was of significance to developing country Members and to the multilateral trading system. The 
communication from China, Egypt and India contained in document WT/COMTD/W/175 was 
designed to help Members enhance their understandi ng of the systemic and specific issues arising 
from dual notifications, with a view to facilitati ng an expeditious solution. It was appropriate for 
the CTD, as the focal point for development work in the WTO, to have a substantive discussion on 
the dual notification issue. He said that his de legation wanted the first three sub-items under the 
presentation agenda item to remain on the CT Ds agenda until the systemic problems were 
addressed.  
65. The representative of Egypt noted that the US had mentioned that the GCC Customs Union 
issue was not an issue of dual notification. He said that he did not understand the rationale behind 
this. He also expressed his surprise with the US' understanding that the GCC Customs Union was 
in the pipeline to be considered in the CRTA. This was of concern to his delegation, since the 
discussion in the CTD of the dual notification of the GCC Customs Union, as well as of the dual notifications of the ASEAN-Korea and India-Ko rea Agreements, had not been exhausted. He 
indicated that he would inform himself of the situation in the CRTA after the present meeting and 
requested that the first three sub-items under the present agenda item remain on the CTD's 
agenda.  
66. The representative of Nigeria said that his delegation, like others, had systemic concerns 
with respect to dual notifications. He suggested that it might be useful for Members to have a 
discussion on the boundaries of the CTD's mandate with respect to issues relating to RTAs. He also indicated his interest in the situation in the CRTA with respect to the GCC Customs Union. 
67. The representative of the European Union expressed disappointment that the same 
arguments were being repeated on this matter. Her delegation did not see the need to maintain on 
the CTD's agenda the first three sub-items under the present agenda item, since these sub-items 
had fulfilled their purpose of informing Members of the notifications made. She added that her 
delegation perceived differences between the GCC Customs Union notification and the notifications 
concerning the ASEAN-Korea Agreement and the In dia-Korea Agreement. If Members wished to 
have a systemic discussion on RTAs, the view of her delegation was that the NGR was the 
appropriate forum. Nevertheless, the EU was open  to informal discussions with other delegations 
to explore how the matter could be resolved.  
68. The representative of India observed that th e discussion in the CTD on the RTAs notified 
under both the Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV had not been exhausted. In this light, he 
indicated his concern with the US' understanding that the GCC Customs Union was in the pipeline to be considered in the CRTA.  
69. The representative of China said that inform al consultations called by the Chairman might 
be useful in finding a solution to this matter. 
70. The representative of the United States said  that the question of when the NGR would 
meet to discuss RTA issues was separate and distinct from the question of whether it had WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 12 - 
 
  jurisdiction on this matter, which the US believed it did. He also indicated that the first three 
sub-items had fulfilled their purpose of informin g Members of the notifications made, and these 
sub-items were distinct from the systemic discussion that some delegations wanted to have. The US did not believe that the CTD was the appropriate forum for a discussion on a systemic issue 
that cut across Committees. 
71. The Chairman said that he would hold informal consultations to see whether a way forward 
could be found on this matter.   
72. The Committee took note of all interventions.   
- Notification of the Agreement on Trade in  Goods between the Association of Southeast 
Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Korea 
73. The Chairman said that the second sub-item under the present agenda item concerned the 
notification of the ASEAN-Korea Agreement. 
74. The representative of India indicated that the systemic and specific issues concerning the 
ASEAN-Korea Agreement had not been addressed. He  requested that the present sub-item remain 
on the CTD's agenda. 
75. The representative of Korea indicated his delegation's awareness of the sensitivities 
associated with dual notifications. He urged Members to find a solution as soon as possible and 
suggested that informal discussions could help to move the process forward.    
76. The representative of the United States said that his delegation continued to have 
concerns with the present sub-item being listed on the agenda. This sub-item had fulfilled its 
purpose of informing Members of the notification made and should already have been removed 
from the agenda. 
77. The representative of Egypt requested that the present sub-item remain on the CTD's 
agenda. He noted that some delegations had shared  the view in the course of the discussion under 
the present agenda item that the purpose of the first three sub-items was to inform Members of 
the notifications made, and that there was no relationship between the sub-items and the systemic concerns. In this regard, he said that he wished to clarify that the problem which existed was that 
the notifications in question had not been discussed.   
78. The Committee took note of all interventions. 
- Notification of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement  between India 
and Korea (Goods) 
79. The Chairman said that the third sub-item under the present agenda item concerned the 
notification of the India-Korea Agreement. 
80. The representative of India indicated that the systemic and specific issues concerning the 
India-Korea Agreement had not been addressed. He  requested that the present sub-item remain 
on the CTD's agenda. 
81. The representative of the United States said that his delegation continued to have 
concerns with the present sub-item being listed on the agenda. This sub-item had fulfilled its 
purpose of informing Members of the notification made and should already have been removed from the agenda.   
82. The Committee took note of all interventions. WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 13 - 
 
  - Latin American Integration Association - Report to the WTO on instruments signed 
pursuant to the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo, for the period 1 January 2010 – 31 December 2011 (WT/COMTD/82) 
- Latin American Integration Association - Report to the WTO on instruments concluded 
under the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo, for the period 1 January 2012 – 
31 December 2012 (WT/COMTD/84) 
83. The Chairman said that the two reports by the Latin American Integration Association 
(LAIA) on instruments signed under the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo appeared on the CTD's agenda 
at the request of Uruguay.1 The first report, contained in document WT/COMTD/82, related to the 
period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2011. The second report, contained in document WT/COMTD/84, concerned the period from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2012. He invited 
Uruguay to take the floor.   
84. The representative of Uruguay said that the first section of the report contained in 
document WT/COMTD/82 analyzed trends in intrar egional trade during the period 1 January 2010 
to 31 December 2011, while the second section described the instruments concluded by the LAIA 
member countries under the 1980 Treaty of Montev ideo during the same period. Turning to the 
report contained in document WT/COMTD/84, she sa id that the first section analyzed trends in 
intraregional trade during the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2012 and the second section 
described the instruments concluded by the LA IA member countries under the 1980 Treaty of 
Montevideo during that period. She went on to sa y that the period covered by the second report 
was marked by the accession of Panama to th e 1980 Treaty of Montevideo. This was a process 
that had been taking shape since 2009. Panama's accession constituted one of the most notable 
events during the period and raised the number of LAIA member countries to 13. As a result of its accession, Panama assumed all the rights and obligations deriving from a number of agreements, 
including the Regional Agreement on the Regional  Tariff Preference, Regional Agreement No. 6 on 
Scientific and Technological Cooperation, Regional Agreement No. 7 on Cooperation and Trade in Goods in the Cultural, Educational and Scientific Areas, Regional Agreement No. 8 for Trade 
Promotion through the Elimination of Technical Barriers to Trade, Regional Market-Opening 
Agreement in Favour of Bolivia, Regional Market -Opening Agreement in Favour of Ecuador, and 
Regional Market-Opening Agreement in Favour of Paraguay. 
85. The representative of the United States said that his delegation did not have any specific 
questions or comments on the two reports. The US wanted to take the opportunity to note, as it 
frequently did in the CRTA, that some LAIA agreements had not been notified to the WTO, as was required under the TM for RTAs. He encouraged the parties to these agreements to notify them as 
soon as possible.  
86. The Committee took note of the two re ports and of the interventions.  
H. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR PREFERENTIAL 
TRADE ARRANGEMENTS 
87. The Chairman said that he wished to provide Members with a brief update on the 
preferential trade arrangements (PTAs) that we re to be considered in the CTD's Dedicated 
Sessions on PTAs. He firstly informed the Committee that the EU's Emergency Autonomous Trade 
Preferences for Pakistan would be considered at the 1st Dedicated Session on PTAs, which would be 
held on 2 April 2014, immediately following the present meeting. With regard to the four other PTAs that had been notified since the establishm ent of the TM for PTAs - PTAs being implemented 
by China, India, the Russian Federation and Ch inese Taipei - there had been no significant 
developments since the last report.  In particular , the full set of data required for the preparation 
of the factual presentations of the four PTAs ha d not yet been provided to the Secretariat. He 
urged the notifying Members to provide the data as soon as possible. 
88. The representative of China said that his auth orities were working to update the required 
information and data, which would be provided promptly. 
                                               
1 The sub-items concerning these two reports are presented together in this Note, as Uruguay 
introduced the two reports in a single intervention. Af ter the intervention by Uruguay, the Chairman opened 
the floor separately on each report. There were no specific  questions or comments on either of the two reports.  WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 14 - 
 
  89. The Committee took note of the interventions.  
I. REVIEW OF THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR PREFERENTIAL TRADE 
ARRANGEMENTS - STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRPERSON 
90. The Chairman said that the TM for PTAs was being implemented by the CTD, as per the 
provisions contained in document WT/L/806, which was the General Council Decision of 
14 December 2010 which established the Mechanism. Paragraph 26 of the TM for PTAs indicated that the Mechanism would apply on a provisiona l basis until Members approved its permanent 
application. The paragraph also indicated that Members would review the Mechanism after three 
years and if necessary modify the Mechanism in light of the experience gained from its provisional operation. He went on to say that three years had elapsed since the General Council Decision which established the PTAs TM. Members would, ther efore, need to consider the question of the 
review of the Mechanism. Whether enough experi ence had been gained yet to conduct a review 
would also be for Members to determine. He informed the Committee that he intended to hold informal consultations to hear views concerning the timing and the nature of a review of the PTAs 
TM.  
91. The representative of the European Union said that her delegation looked forward to the 
Chairman's consultations and to discussing how some momentum could be instilled into the PTAs 
TM.  
92. The representative of India indicated that the Chairman's consultations would be useful in 
addressing issues relating to the functioning of the PTAs TM.    
93. The Committee took note of the Chairman's  statement and of the interventions.  
J. REVIEW OF STEPS TAKEN TO PROVIDE DUTY-FREE AND QUOTA-FREE MARKET 
ACCESS TO LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES  
- Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 (WT/MIN(13)/44 - WT/L/919) - Statement by 
the Chairperson 
94. The Chairman said that an item concerning the Hong Kong Decision of December 2005 on 
duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) market access for LDCs had been on the CTD's agenda since 
early 2006. Under this item, delegations had provid ed information on the st eps they were taking, 
or had already taken, to provide DFQF market access to LDCs. Written communications by some Members had also been considered.  As stipulated in the Hong Kong Decision, the CTD had been annually reviewing the steps taken to provide DFQF market access to LDCs and reporting to the 
General Council for appropriate action.  
95. He went on to say that he wished to draw Members' attention to the Ministerial Decision of 
7 December 2013 taken at MC9 and contained in documents WT/MIN(13)/44 and WT/L/919. The 
Decision indicated, inter alia , that developed country Members that did not yet provide DFQF 
market access for at least 97% of products originating from LDCs, defined at the tariff line level, would seek to improve their existing DFQF co verage for such products, so as to provide 
increasingly greater market access to LDCs, prior to the next Ministerial Conference. The Decision 
also indicated that developing country Members decl aring themselves in a position to do so, would 
seek to provide DFQF market access for products originating from LDCs, or would seek to improve 
their existing DFQF coverage for such products, so as to provide increasingly greater market 
access to LDCs, prior to the next Ministerial Conference. He also pointed out that, according to the 
Decision, Members were to notify DFQF schemes for LDCs and any other relevant changes pursuant to the TM for PTAs. Furthermore, the CTD was to continue to annually review the steps 
taken to provide DFQF market access to the LDCs, and report to the General Council for 
appropriate action. To aid in its review, the Secret ariat would, in close coordination with Members, 
prepare a report on Members’ DFQF market access for LDCs at the tariff line level based on their 
notifications. He concluded by assuring Members that the CTD would undertake the work specified 
in the Decision. 
96. The representative of Uganda, on behalf of the LDC Group, said that, although the MC9 
Decision on DFQF market access for LDCs was non-binding in nature and contained best endeavor WT/COMTD/M/90 
 
- 15 - 
 
  clauses, it was a step in the right direction. At this stage, it was important for Members to 
implement the Decision. He observed that the Decision was not an end in itself, but rather a means to an end with the view to fulfilling Annex F of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, and in line with paragraph 1.11 of the Bali Ministerial Declaration. The LDCs commended those Members 
that had already attained the 97% mark and encouraged others to do so as well. It was important 
for preference-granting countries to fulfill the no tification requirements and make available the 
utilization rates in their DFQF schemes. The LDCs had taken note of the notifications made by 
various developed and developing countries and encouraged Members to provide DFQF market 
access for all products originating from LDCs in a manner that ensured stability, security and predictability. It was essential that developed countries ensured that products of commercial interest to LDCs were effectively included in their schemes. Developing countries in a position to 
do so were encouraged to enhance their market access conditions for LDCs. Finally, he stressed 
the importance of rules of origin in DFQF schemes and called on Members to make their rules of origin transparent, simple and objective, in line with the guidelines agreed to by Ministers at MC9. 
97. The representative of Nepal expressed suppo rt for the intervention by Uganda. His 
delegation appreciated the DFQF initiatives that had already been put in place for LDCs and urged 
Members to implement the Decisions concerning DFQF market access for LDCs that had been 
taken by Ministers.     
98. The Committee took note of the Chairman's statement and of the interventions. 
K. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON LEAST-DEVELOPED 
COUNTRIES 
99. The Committee elected Ambassador Roderick van Schreven of the Netherlands as the 
Chairman of the Sub-Committee on LDCs for 2014. 
L. OTHER BUSINESS 
100.  No matter was raised under "Other Business". 
101.  The meeting was adjourned. 
 
__________