WT/DS555/1  
G/L/1250  
G/ADP/D126/1  
10 July 2018 
(18-4306) Page: 1/3 
 Original:  French  
 
  
MOROCCO – PROVISIONAL ANTI -DUMPING MEASURES ON  
SCHOOL EXERCISE BOOKS FROM TUNISIA  
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY TUNISIA  
The following communication, dated 5 July 2018, from the delegation of Tunisia to the delegation 
of Morocco, is circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.  
 
_______________  
 
 
The Tunisian Republic  hereby requests consultations with the Government of the King dom of 
Morocco pursuant to Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement o n Tariffs and Trade 1994 
("GATT  1994"), Article 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT  1994 
("Anti -Dumping Agreement") and Article 4 of the Understanding on Rul es and Procedures 
Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU") with respect to the imposition of provisional 
anti-dumping measures by the Kingdom of Morocco on imports of school exercise books from 
Tunisia . 
The provisional anti -dumping duties were imposed by the Kingdom of Morocco through Customs 
and Excise Administration Circular No. 5789/211 dated 1 0 May 2018. The provisional anti -dumping 
duties are based on Public Notice No. 03/18 of the Ministry of Industry, Investment, Trade and the 
Digital Economy dated 6 March  2018 and the report on the preliminary determination of dumping, 
injury and a causal link of the Trade Defence and Regulation Directorate of the Secretariat of State  
for Foreign Trade .1 
Tunisia believes  that Circular  No. 5789/211, including  the annex thereto and the other instruments 
mentioned above, imposing provisional anti -dumping duties on school exercise books from Tunisia, 
is inconsistent, among others, with the  Republic of Morocco's obligations under the following 
provisions of the Anti -Dumping Agreement and the GATT 1994 : 
1. Article  5.2, 5.3 and  5.8 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement, because the application does not 
contain sufficient evidence of dumping, injury and a  causal link and because the 
investigating authority did not conduct  a satisfactory examination of the accuracy and 
adequacy of the evidence provided in the application ; 
2. Articles 1, 2.1, 3.1 and  9 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because the determination of  
dumping and resulting injury was not based on relevant and "positive" evidence justifying 
the imposition of the provisional measure at the time of its adoption ; 
3. Article 2.1, 2.2.1.1 and  2.2.2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because the investigating 
authority (a) did not calculate costs on the basis of records kept by the Tunisian producers 
under investigation for the investigation period, even though these records are in 
accordance with generally accepted accounting principl es and reasonably reflect the costs 
associated with the production and sale of the product under consideration ; (b) did not 
determine the administrative, selling and general costs or profits on the basis of data 
pertaining to production and sales of the li ke product in the ordinary course of trade for 
the investigation period ; and (c) arbitrarily excluded sales in the ordinary course of trade , 
despite there being no particular market situation ; 
                                                
1 Report AD -11.17.CAHIER.TUN  WT/DS555/1 • G/L/1250 • G/ADP/D126/1  
- 2 - 
  4. Article  2.4 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because the investig ating authority did not 
make allowance, in particular, for all the physical characteristics affecting price 
comparability and compared the normal value and the export price established for different 
periods ; 
5. Article  3.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because the determination of injury is not 
based on positive evidence and does not involve an objective examination . In particular, 
the period of investigation chosen for examining injury and the causal link does not allow 
for an objective examination of t he situation ; 
6. Article  3.2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because of the failure to properly and 
objectively consider the volume of the dumped imports , in absolute terms and relative to 
national production or consumption, and the effect  of the imports origi nating in Tunisia on 
the domestic industry 's prices . The undercutting margin was, in particular , calculated on 
the basis of a target sales price that does not correspond to the performance of the 
domestic industry ; 
7. Article  3.4 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because of the  failure to properly evaluate all 
relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the  state of the domestic 
industry  and to conduct an objective examination of the impact of the imports on the 
performance of domestic producers . Most factors, including sales, output, market share, 
productivity, employment, wages, and investments, evolved positively  during the 
investigation period ; 
8. Article  3.5 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because of the failure to establish a genuine 
and substantia l relationship of cause and effect between the alleged dumped imports and 
the injury to the domestic industry . The Trade Defence and Regulation Directorate also 
failed to examine the causes of injury other than the imports originating in Tunisia  and, in 
particular, competition between Moroccan producers and the importance of the informal 
market, in respect of the alleged injury, and failed to  ensure that injury caused by other 
factors was not attributed to imports originating in Tunisia ; 
9. Article  4.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement  (and Article  3.1 in a combined reading of the 
two Articles) , because the domestic industry was limited to the applicants ; 
10. Article  5.10, because the investigation was not concluded within one year, despite the 
absence of special circu mstances ; 
11. Article 6.5 and  6.5.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because the investigating authority : 
(a) treated as confidential the information provided by the interested parties without 
showing good cause ; (b) failed to require the applicants to furnish a  non-confidential 
summary thereof ; and (c) where such summaries were provided, they were not in 
sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the info rmation 
submitted in confidence ; 
12. Article 6.1, 6.2 and  6.4 of the Anti -Dumping  Agreement , because interested parties were 
not given adequate opportunities to submit information and make comments ; 
13. Article  7.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because  the necessity  of the provisional 
anti-dumping duties was not established ; 
14. Article 12.2 and 12.2.2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because the Kingdom of Morocco 
failed to provide in sufficient detail the findings and conclusions reached on all issues of 
fact and law considered material  by the investigating authority, and all relevant 
informat ion on the matters of fact and law and reasons which have led to the imposition of 
provisional measures . 
Tunisia  reserves the right to raise additional factual or legal points related to the a bove-mentioned 
measure s during the course of consultations and i n any request for panel proceedings . WT/DS555/1 • G/L/1250 • G/ADP/D126/1  
- 3 - 
  Tunisia  looks forward to receiving in due course a reply from the Kingdom of Morocco to this 
request . Tunisia is ready to consider with the Kingdom of Morocco mutually convenient dates to 
hold consultations . 
__________