RESTRICTED
WT/COMTD/M/93
26 March 2015
(15-1697)  Page: 1/11
Committee on Trade and Development 
Ninety-Third Session   
 
 NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 16 MARCH 2015 
CHAIRMAN: H.E. MR. PIERRE CLAVER NDAYIRAGIJE (BURUNDI) 
A. ADOPTION OF TH E AGENDA .................................................................................... 2  
B. 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  ...................................................... 2
 
C. 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) ..................................................................................... 2  
- Committee on Trade and Development mandate: focal point for consideration and 
coordination of work on development in the WTO - proposal from Barbados, Belize, 
China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and th e African Group (W T/COMTD/W/208) .................................. 3  
- 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) ......................................................................................................... 4  
- Committee on Trade and Development mandate: review of the application of S&D 
provisions in the Multilateral Trade Agreements and related Ministerial Decisions in favour 
of developing country Members - proposal from Ecuador (WT/COMTD/W/204) ........................... 4  
D. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE .................................................... 6  
- Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) notifica tion of Customs Union – communication 
from China, Egypt and In dia (WT/COMTD/ W/175) ................................................................. 6  
- Notification of the Agreement on Trad e in Goods between the Association of 
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Korea ......................................................................... 8  
- Notification of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement  between India 
and Korea (Goods) ............................................................................................................ 8  
E. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR 
PREFERENTIAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS .......................................................................... 8  
F. REVIEW OF STEPS TAKEN TO PROVIDE DUTY-FREE AND QUOTA-FREE 
MARKET ACCESS TO LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ........................................................ 9  
G. OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................. 10  
H. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON LEAST 
DEVELOPED CO UNTRIES ................................................................................................ 11  
I. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND 
DEVELOPM ENT ............................................................................................................... 11  
 WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 2 - 
 
  A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Chairman said that the draft agenda for the 93rd Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development (CTD) was contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/1 circulated on 6 March 2015. 
He inquired whether any Member wished to add a matter under "Other Business". 
2. The representative of the European Union said th at his delegation, on behalf of a core group 
of donors, wished to inform the Committee under "Other Business" of an upcoming evaluation of 
the WTO's trade-related technical assistance (TRTA).   
3. The Chairman said that he wished to add a matter under "Other Business" concerning the 
CTD's mandate to keep under continuous review the participation of developing country Members 
in the multilateral trading system. He proposed th at the agenda item relating to "Other Business" 
be considered before the agenda items relating  to the elections of the Chairpersons of the 
Sub-Committee on LDCs and of the CTD. 
4. The agenda was adopted as amended. 
B. OBSERVERS 
(i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers 
5. 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. 
6. It was so agreed. 
(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 
7. 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 for any of the applicants, the 
Committee would take note and revert to the requests at the next meeting.  
8. It was so agreed.  
C. 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) 
9. The Chairman recalled that, at the Eighth Mi nisterial Conference (MC8), Ministers had, 
inter alia , reaffirmed the positive link between trad e 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 three submissions 
containing proposals for work under the MC8 mandate. The first submission for discussion was a 
new proposal - by Barbados, Belize, China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group - circulated in document WT/COMTD/W/208. After a consideration of this new proposal, the Committee would 
turn to the remaining proposals in the submi ssion by China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the 
African Group contained in document WT/COMTD /W/192, and in the submission by Ecuador 
contained in document WT/COMTD/W/204. WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 3 - 
 
  - Committee on Trade and Development mandate: focal point for consideration and 
coordination of work on development in the WTO - proposal from Barbados, Belize, China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group (WT/COMTD/W/208) 
10. The Chairman indicated that he wished to provide some background to the new proposal 
contained in document WT/COMTD/W/208. He recalled that the November 2012 submission by 
China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group in document WT/COMTD/W/192 contained a 
proposal for the CTD to report on development work in the WTO. A proposal with broadly similar 
aims was later circulated in October 2013 by Barbados, Belize, Benin, Botswana, Kenya, Lesotho 
and Mauritius in document WT/COMTD/W/202. In light of the similarities in the objectives of these two proposals, Members were informed at the 92
nd Session that the proponents of 
WT/COMTD/W/192 and WT/COMTD/W/202 were working to combine their ideas for the CTD to 
report on development work in the WTO, so as to come up with a new, single proposal on this 
matter. The new proposal was essentially a joint effort by the two groups of proponents. He also recalled that the Committee had had the opportunity to undertake a preliminary consideration of 
the new proposal at the informal, open-ended CTD meeting held on 26 January 2015. On that 
occasion, he had encouraged the proponents to consult with Members in the lead-up to the present meeting. He invited the proponents to introduce the proposal and to brief the Committee 
on the status of the proposal. 
11. The representative of Egypt confirmed that the new proposal was a joint effort by the 
proponents of WT/COMTD/W/192 and WT/COMTD/W /202. The objective of the proposal was to 
enhance intra-reporting among WTO bodies, and thereby operationalize the CTD's mandate as the 
focal point for development issues in the WTO.  He noted that the proponents had tried to 
accommodate some of the concerns that had been raised in earlier discussions, and recalled that 
the proposal had been introduced at the info rmal, open-ended CTD meeting on 26 January 2015. 
His delegation looked forward to a constructive discussion on the proposal, and to satisfying the 
instructions given by Ministers at MC8. 
12. The representative of India associated his dele gation with the intervention by Egypt. He 
recalled the mandate from MC8 and noted 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, Ministers had wanted more from the CTD than its 
annual report. The CTD was a special body in the WTO. It was the focal point for the consideration 
and coordination of development-related work, and therefore had an overarching mandate. His 
delegation believed that it was appropriate for the CTD to report regularly on the development-related work that was taking place in other WTO bodies and  provide the necessary 
recommendations to the General Council on achieving better coordination within the WTO on 
development issues. 
13. The representative of the United States expr essed his delegation's disappointment that the 
new proposal was not substantially different from the earlier proposals. The concerns that the US 
had previously raised therefore remained. 
14. The representative of the European Union shared  her delegation's view that the CTD needed 
to further explore the positive link between tr ade and development in order to implement its 
mandate. This needed to be based on constructive  discussions on clearly identified topics, in line 
with the instructions from MC8 to carry out focused work. With regard to the new proposal, she said that her delegation's previous concerns remained. The proposal, which was to instruct the 
CTD to review development-related activities and issues raised in other WTO bodies and provide 
the General Council with recommendations, would give the CTD an oversight function for development issues in all aspects of the WTO's wo rk. The EU's view was that the CTD must deliver 
on its mandate to act as a focal point on development issues and carry out focused work. Members 
needed to debate what this focused work sh ould be, and not re-open the CTD's mandate. 
15. The representative of Canada said that the language proposed in the new proposal did not 
substantially differ from what had been on the table for several years, and on which Members had 
not been able to reach agreement. In her delegation's view, requiring the CTD to report on the 
development-related work of other bodies fell outside of the Committee’s mandate. She encouraged the proponents to consider these concerns in moving forward. WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 4 - 
 
  16. The representative of Egypt expressed his disappointment with the climate of the discussion 
in the CTD, in particular since there appeared to be a revival of dynamism elsewhere in the WTO. 
He said that when Ministers at MC8 had requested Members to fully operationalize the mandate of the CTD as a focal point for development work, they had been of the view that at least some areas 
of the CTD's work needed to be strengthened. The proponents of WT/COMTD/W/208 believed that 
the CTD's reporting function was one of these ar eas. Furthermore, the proponents did not share 
the view that the proposed reporting went beyond the CTD's mandate. He highlighted his concern 
that some Members were not even willing to discuss  the idea, and noted that if progress could not 
be made on this matter, it would also  be difficult to make progress in the CTD on other issues.           
17. The Chairman encouraged the proponents to continue consulting with other delegations. 
Discussion could then continue at the next formal CTD meeting. 
18. The Committee took note of all interventions. 
- 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) 
19. The Chairman said that, while there were th ree proposals in document WT/COMTD/W/192, 
the first two proposals had already been addressed by the Committee. The first proposal, which 
was for the Secretariat to prepare an update to its paper on the implementation of special and 
differential treatment (S&D) provisions in the WTO Agreements and Decisions, had been agreed to 
by the Committee at its 87th Session. The updated Secretariat paper was circulated in June 2013 
and had appeared on the CTD's agenda for a numb er of meetings. As for the second proposal, 
which was for the CTD to report on development work in the WTO, this idea was now being dealt 
with in the new proposal contained in docu ment WT/COMTD/W/208 which had been discussed 
under the previous sub-item. The remaining prop osal in document WT/COMTD/W/192 was for the 
CTD to make a recommendation for parties to regional trade agreements (RTAs) to submit their 
notification and information requirements jointly. On this proposal, he recalled that he had previously encouraged the proponents to continue their consultations with Members. He invited 
the proponents to brief Members on the status of the proposal. 
20. The representative of Egypt confirmed that there remained only one proposal in 
WT/COMTD/W/192 for the Committee to address, which was for the CTD to make a 
recommendation for parties to RTAs to submit their notification and information requirements 
jointly. He recalled that divergent views remained on the way forward with respect to the three 
RTAs which were notified under both the Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV. The proposal had been put forward in an effort to address this matter. He emphasized that the proposal had been 
drafted in terms of a recommendation, and Member s should therefore not see this as a binding 
obligation. 
21. The representative of the United States said that his delegation's concerns on this proposal 
remained. 
22. The Chairman encouraged the proponents to continue consulting with other delegations, if 
they wished to continue pursuing this idea. Discussion could then continue at the next formal CTD 
meeting.   
23. The Committee took note of the interventions. 
- Committee on Trade and Development mandate: review of the application of S&D 
provisions in the Multilateral Trade Agreements and related Ministerial Decisions in 
favour of developing country Members - proposal from Ecuador (WT/COMTD/W/204) 
24. The Chairman said that the proposal from Ecuador, circulated in document 
WT/COMTD/W/204, was for the Secretariat to periodically update its paper on the implementation 
of S&D provisions. Some questions had been rais ed by Members on the proposal, and Ecuador had 
provided some responses. He recalled that he ha d also encouraged Ecuador to continue consulting 
with delegations. He invited Ecuador to brief Members on the status of the proposal. WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 5 - 
 
  25. The representative of Ecuador informed the Committee that progress had been made in his 
delegation's consultations with Members that had requested greater clarity on the scope and 
purpose of the proposal. In this regard, he indica ted that he wished to share a number of points 
which had emerged from the consultations. He recalled firstly that his delegation had stated on 
previous occasions that it was prepared to be flexible in terms of the frequency of updates to the 
Secretariat paper. In particular, after considering the matter, Ecuador believed that updating the paper every two years would be effective in meeting the information needs of Members, without 
overburdening the Secretariat. Second, his delega tion believed that a permanent agenda item 
relating to this matter might not be necessary. Rather, it could be left to the discretion of Members to place the item on the agenda. Finally, he said that the main potential link between the proposal and the Monitoring Mechanism (MM) on S&D was that the updated paper could serve as an input 
to inform the discussion held in the context of th e MM. A Member wishing to use the paper in this 
way would need to outline in its request the scope and purpose of the proposed discussion. 
26. The representative of Australia expressed appreciation to Ecuador for its flexible approach in 
working with Members on the proposal. He belie ved that bilateral consultations needed to 
continue, and that there was the real possibility of a way forward on the proposal if the spirit of flexibility continued. Australia had no philosophica l objection to the core premise of the proposal, 
and believed that the flexibilities demonstrated by Ecuador thus far were bringing Members closer 
to a resolution. Although his delegation could no t accept the proposal in its current form, he 
believed that there was a form of the proposal that could be acceptable.     
27. The representative of the European Union said that her delegation supported the idea of 
regular updates to the Secretariat paper, although the ideal frequency was something that would 
need to be discussed. She recalled in this regard that her delegation had previously indicated that 
it was not convinced of the need for an annual update. However, an update on a biennial basis 
could be considered, and in this regard she welcomed the indication of flexibility by Ecuador. 
Regarding the format of the paper, she said that the existing format was appropriate and her delegation would not favour any change in this respect. She suggested that this could be indicated 
in the proposal. She added that the EU was wond ering how the Secretariat paper could serve as a 
basis for a general discussion, since it was a very technical and dense document. Her delegation wished to have clarification on this point and to hear views from other Members. In concluding, she indicated her delegation's readiness to continue discussing this proposal.  
28. The representative of the United States said that his delegation continued to have concerns 
with the proposal, including with respect to the proposed annual updates to the Secretariat paper. 
He expressed appreciation for the flexibility Ecuador had demonstrated on this issue. He recalled 
that his delegation had also questioned the rela tionship of the proposal with the MM, and in 
particular whether the proposal would be duplicative. In addition, his delegation had supported the suggestion of postponing the consideration of the proposal until more experience had been gained 
in the MM. He further recalled that the Secretariat paper circulated in June 2013 had not 
generated much discussion in the Committee, and in  this light his delegation was still wondering 
how further updates to the paper would produce a different result. Nevertheless, he indicated that his delegation would be willing to meet in a small group with Ecuador and other interested 
Members to better understand Ecuador's specific objectives and how they would be addressed by 
the proposal. He expressed his hope that this would allow Members to reach an agreement on how to proceed. 
29. The representative of Canada expressed appreciation to Ecuador for the clarifications 
provided on the proposal and the flexibility that had been signalled with respect to the frequency 
of updates to the Secretariat paper. Her delegation saw the Secretariat paper as a useful tool and 
did not object in principle to regular updates, as required. However, she felt that further 
clarifications were needed on two issues. First, it remained unclear as to how such a technical document could facilitate a general discussion on the implementation of S&D provisions. Second, her delegation sought further elaboration from Ecuador on the linkages between the proposal and 
the MM.  
30. The representative of Ecuador said that the comments from Members were constructive. He 
indicated his delegation's readiness to discuss these comments in consultations with Members. WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 6 - 
 
  31. The Chairman noted that there appeared to be a positive evolution with respect to the 
proposal. He encouraged Ecuador to continue consulting with delegations. Discussion could also 
continue at the next CTD meeting. 
32. The Committee took note of all interventions. 
D. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE 
33. 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.  
34. With regard to the agreement between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) 
and India, he informed the Committee that the Secretariat had sent the draft factual presentation to the parties. While comments had been received from India, the Secretariat was still waiting to 
receive comments from ASEAN, which had been requested by 10 January 2014. The draft factual 
presentation on the accession of Rwanda and Burundi to the East African Community had also been sent to the parties, and the Secretariat was still waiting to receive comments, which had 
been requested by 16 June 2014. In additi on, the draft factual presentation on the 
India-MERCOSUR Agreement had been re-sent to  the parties on 12 December 2014, and the 
Secretariat had not yet received comments on the draft, which were requested by 13 February 
2015. He recalled that the consideration of this agreement had been postponed at the request of 
the parties. For a number of other RTAs - namely, RTAs between India and Nepal, India and Afghanistan, India and Bhutan, and Cuba and El Salv ador - the full set of data needed to complete 
the factual presentations had not been submitted by the parties. 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. 
35. The Committee took note of the Chairman's update. 
36. Turning to the listed sub-items under the presen t agenda item, the Chairman said that he 
wished to say a few words on these sub-items. He noted that the three sub-items had been 
appearing on the CTD's agenda for several years, and that divergent views had been expressed on 
the way forward. He informed the Committee that he had held some informal consultations with a 
number of delegations, including on an individu al basis, on the issues surrounding the three 
sub-items. While these consultations had helped him to better understand Members' positions, it 
was clear that further discussions - particularly among the concerned delegations - would be 
necessary before a solution could be found. In this  light, he encouraged delegations to reach out to 
each other and discuss the matter with a view to finding a solution. He expressed his hope that 
Members would soon be able to find an agreeable way forward, and also indicated that he would 
be providing a briefing on this matter to his successor in the Chair.  
- Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) notification of Customs Union – communication from 
China, Egypt and India (WT/COMTD/W/175) 
37. The Chairman said that the first sub-item und er 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 circulated in document WT/COMTD/W/175. 
38. The representative of India indicated that hi s intervention related to the three sub-items 
under the present agenda item, since the three RTAs referenced in these sub-items had been 
"dually notified" under both the Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV. He noted that the systemic 
concerns that were raised by China, Egypt and India over the legal and procedural implications of 
the dual notification of the GCC Customs Union under both the Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV were pertinent even now, but th ey remained unaddressed. Some Members had 
expressed the view that the systemic concerns raised in document WT/COMTD/W/175 were 
outside the scope of the CTD, and needed to be discussed in the Negotiating Group on Rules WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 7 - 
 
  (NGR). The view of his delegation was that the CTD was the appropriate forum to consider the 
questions arising from RTAs with a dual notification.  
39. Pointing to the terms of reference of the CTD contained in document WT/L/46, he noted that 
the CTD was designated to serve as a focal point for consideration and coordination of work on 
development in the WTO and its relationship to development-related activities in other multilateral 
agencies. He added that the Committee could consult with other WTO bodies in addressing the systemic concerns raised in document WT/COMTD/W /175. This was in keeping with paragraph 3 of 
the CTD's terms of reference which entrusted the Committee to review periodically, in consultation 
as appropriate with the relevant bodies of the WT O, the application of special provisions in the 
Multilateral Trade Agreements and related Ministerial Decisions in favour of developing country Members, and in particular least developed country (LDC) Members, and report to the General 
Council for appropriate action. In concluding, he indicated that the three sub-items under the 
present agenda item needed to remain on the CTD's agenda until the systemic and specific concerns arising from "dually notified" RTAs were addressed. He also requested the Chairman to 
hold consultations in this regard. 
40. 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 the 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.
1 
41. He expressed support for the intervention by  India under the present sub-item, and also 
indicated that his delegation's position on this matter was well-known. He requested that the three 
sub-items under the present agenda item remain on the CTD's agenda.   
42. The representative of China expressed support  for the interventions by India and Egypt 
under the present sub-item. He requested that th e three sub-items under the present agenda item 
remain on the CTD's agenda until the issue was satisfactorily addressed. His delegation also encouraged the Chairman to hold more consultations.  
43. The representative of the United States em phasized that the three sub-items under the 
present agenda item were being addressed separately. He explained in this regard that, while 
some Members believed that all three RTA notifications referenced in these sub-items were dual notifications, the view of his delegation was that the GCC Customs Union issue was not an issue of 
dual notification. He added that his delegation continued to have concerns with the present 
sub-item being listed on the CTD's agenda. The present sub-item had fulfilled its purpose of 
informing Members of the notification made, and needed to be removed from the agenda. He 
regretted that this matter had taken up so much of the Committee's time over the past years and 
expressed hope that Members could move forw ard constructively, recognizing that the GCC 
Customs Union was not an issue of dual notification, but rather something to be addressed in the CRTA under the Transparency Mechanism for RT As. His delegation looked forward to the 
transparency review of the GCC Customs Union in the CRTA. Turning to document 
WT/COMTD/W/175, he said that his delegation had not seen any specific issues relating to the 
                                               
1 The points in this paragrap h, made by Egypt at the 90th Session and also reflected in the minutes of 
the 92nd Session, are reflected once again in the minutes of this meeting at the request of the Egyptian 
delegation. WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 8 - 
 
  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. Finally, noting that some delegations had called for consultations on this matter, he expressed his delegation's concern, given that previous cons ultations had not been successful in changing 
Members' positions. Nevertheless, he indicated that his delegation was in the Chairman's hands in 
this regard. 
44. The representative of the European Union said  that the present agenda item served the 
purpose of informing Members of the trade agreem ents and preferential schemes notified under 
the Enabling Clause since the previous CTD meeting. While her delegation agreed that the legal issues arising from an agreement notified under different provisions needed to be further clarified, a clear distinction needed to be made between the notifications of the ASEAN-Korea and 
India-Korea agreements on the one hand, and the notification of the GCC Customs Union on the 
other. The EU was open to discussing a pragmatic solution, if this would allow Members to resolve the matter. However, a more substantive discussion would need to take place in the NGR.  
45. The Chairman noted that this was a complicated issue. Yet, he believed that a solution could 
be found. In this light, he encouraged Members to continue to consult with each other, and also 
encouraged the incoming Chairman to work with Members on this matter.  
46. The representative of Egypt said that his delegation did not see a distinction between the 
three RTA notifications which were listed as sub-items under the present agenda item. He believed 
that it was a prejudgement to claim that the Enabling Clause did not provide the appropriate legal basis for justifying the formation of customs unions. He recalled in this regard that his delegation 
had indicated that it was seeking an interpretation  of the second part of paragraph 2(c) of the 
Enabling Clause in order to determine whether this paragraph could be used as a basis for the notifications of customs unions providing for the reduction or elimination of NTMs.      
47. 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 
48. The Chairman said that the second sub-item under the present agenda item concerned the 
notification of the ASEAN-Korea agreement.  
49. The representative of the United States said th at his intervention related to both the second 
and third sub-items under the present agenda item. He said that his delegation continued to have 
concerns with these sub-items being listed on th e CTD's agenda. The sub-items had fulfilled their 
purpose of informing Members of the notificati ons made, and needed to be removed from the 
agenda. The issue of dual notifications was directly  linked to the functioning of the Transparency 
Mechanism for RTAs and went beyond just the CTD. 
50. The Committee took note of the intervention by the United States. 
- Notification of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement  between India 
and Korea (Goods) 
51. The Chairman said that the third sub-item under the present agenda item concerned the 
notification of the India-Korea Agreement. 
52. No Member took the floor under this sub-item. 
E. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR PREFERENTIAL 
TRADE ARRANGEMENTS 
53. The Chairman said that he wished to pr ovide 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 factual presentation on Chile's duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) scheme for LDCs was circulated on 11 March 2015 in document 
WT/COMTD/PTA/2/1. Members had been requested by fax to submit any written questions on this WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 9 - 
 
  PTA by 15 April 2015. The PTA would be considered at the CTD's 2nd Dedicated Session on PTAs, 
which was scheduled to be held in June 2015. Howe ver, with regard to four other PTAs notified 
since the establishment of the Transparency  Mechanism for PTAs - namely, PTAs being 
implemented by China, India, the Russian Federati on and Chinese Taipei - the Secretariat had still 
not received the full set of data required for the preparation of the factual presentations. He urged 
the notifying Members to provide the data as soon as possible. 
54. The Committee took note of the Chairman's update.   
F. REVIEW OF STEPS TAKEN TO PROVIDE DUTY-FREE AND QUOTA-FREE MARKET 
ACCESS TO LEAST DE VELOPED COUNTRIES 
55. The Chairman said that an item concerning DFQF market access for LDCs had been on the 
CTD's agenda since early 2006. Under this item, delegations had provided information on the steps 
they were taking, or had already taken, to provide DFQF market access to LDCs. Written 
communications by some Members had also been considered. 
56. The representative of Uganda, on behalf of the LDC Group, said that DFQF market access 
was one of the important initiatives taken in favour of LDCs at the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Conference. This was reaffirmed and further streamlined by Ministers in Bali in December 2013. Recalling elements of the decisions taken at Hong Kong and Bali, he noted that DFQF was perhaps 
the most effective policy measure taken in support of LDCs to ensure market access for their 
products and enhance their competitiveness. If DFQF access was complemented by simplified, 
transparent and predictable rules of origin, LDCs could increase their share in international trade and achieve sustainable development through accelerated exports. Referring to the findings of a 
recent WTO report, he noted that most developed countries and a number of developing countries 
had extended DFQF market access to LDCs with various degrees of coverage and range. As a result, the number of dutiable lines for LDCs' products in most developed country markets and 
some developing country markets were gradually narrowing down. However, DFQF implementation 
remained mixed. While some countries had taken the lead by extending the coverage, in other cases many important items of LDCs' export inte rest were still not covered, and some Members 
maintained preferential schemes that discriminat ed among LDCs' products. In addition, stringent 
procedures to meet rules of origin requirements constrained the capacity of LDCs to fully enjoy 
DFQF, resulting in low utilization and further marginalization. 
57. He went on to say that, while LDCs' exports of goods and commercial services had reached 
US$250 billion in 2013, which was the highest ever, th e overall trade deficit of LDCs had increased 
from US$53.6 billion in 2012 to US$60.6 billion in 2013. The LDCs' share in global goods and services trade was only about 1.2%. This called for the full and faithful implementation of 
DFQF-related decisions by all developed Members,  and the provision of accelerated and targeted 
technical and financial support to LDCs to enhance their export competitiveness. He also observed that, while tariffs had significantly come down in many developed and developing markets, NTMs 
had been increasing in recent years. Attempting to meet requirements relating to sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures (SPS) and technical barri ers to trade (TBT) was burdensome for LDCs. 
Furthermore, LDCs dependent on primary agricultural products faced challenges to enhance their exports due to high tariffs and, in some cases, ta riff rate quotas. In concluding, he highlighted the 
importance of enhanced market access for LDCs. He additionally noted that addressing supply side 
constraints and enhancing productive capacity were equally crucial. In the view of the LDC Group, 
making DFQF a legally binding obligation needed to be one of the agenda items at the Tenth 
Ministerial Conference (MC10). The im provement of preferential rules of  origin in line with the Bali 
Decision on this matter, the removal of NTMs, as well as capacity building, the strengthening of the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) and the mo bilization of more Aid for Trade also needed 
focused attention. 
58. The representative of the United States said that the US was considering how to be 
responsive to the Bali DFQF Decision, in line with the timeframes laid out in the Decision.  
59. The representative of China informed the Co mmittee that, as of 1 January 2015, China was 
granting duty-free treatment on 97% of tari ff lines for goods originating from LDCs. WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 10 - 
 
  60. The representative of India updated Members on  India's Duty Free Tariff Preference (DFTP) 
scheme for LDCs. He said that, pursuant to the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, India had been 
the first developing country to announce a comprehensive scheme under the DFQF mandate in April 2008. The scheme – which was notified to the WTO in September 2011 – came into full 
operation in October 2012, providing duty-free acce ss on about 85% of India’s total tariff lines and 
preferential access on about 9% of tariff lines.  Subsequently, the scheme was expanded and - with 
effect from 1 April 2014 - provided duty-free market access on about 96% of India’s tariff lines at 
the 6-digit level of the Harmonized System, as we ll as preferential access on 2.2% of the lines. 
Only 1.8% of the tariff lines had been retained in the exclusion list with no concessions. He went on to say that India had issued revised rules of origin through notification No. 29/2015 - Customs (Non-Tariff) dated 10 March 2015. These rules further liberalized the determination of origin by 
stipulating that a change in tariff heading at the 6- digit level would be one of the criteria to confer 
origin. The verification procedures for the certific ation of origin had also been strengthened in 
order to facilitate the entry of beneficiary countries' exports into the Indian market. He mentioned 
that the scheme was open to all 48 LDCs, and 31 LDCs had so far become beneficiaries. He urged 
the remaining LDCs to finalize their internal processes and to intimate to India their willingness to benefit from the scheme. 
61. He also noted that developed countries had a greater obligation than developing countries to 
provide DFQF market access to LDCs. Referring to the Secretariat report contained in document WT/COMTD/W/206, he noted that one developed co untry provided duty-free access on 82.6% of 
tariff lines, which was about 15 percentage points below the minimum for developed countries 
mentioned in the Hong Kong DFQF Decision. Furt hermore, the Generalized System of Preferences 
(GSP) scheme of that developed country had expired on 31 July 2013, and many imports from LDCs that would otherwise have received  duty-free treatment were subject to 
most-favoured-nation (MFN) tariffs. In concluding , he said that India welcomed feedback from 
LDCs that would help iron out any difficulties they faced in taking advantage of the DFTP Scheme.    
62. The representative of the European Union said that she wished to reiterate her delegation's 
strong attachment to the DFQF commitments made at the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference, as 
well as its support for the Bali DFQF Decision. The EU welcomed the progress achieved on the Hong Kong commitments by both developed countries and developing countries, and in particular the considerable progress achieved by some emerging economies. However, she noted that further 
progress was also possible - both in terms of market access for LDC products, as well as in the 
context of the transparency, reliability and quality of data. The current UN discussions on the Post-2015 Development Agenda and the 3
rd International Conference on Financing for 
Development provided an opportunity to make comm itments in this respect. Members also needed 
to be in a position to show tangible progress at MC10.   
63. The Committee took note of all interventions. 
G. OTHER BUSINESS 
64. The representative of the European Union said that his intervention was being made on 
behalf of a core group of donors to the WTO’s TR TA, which consisted of Austria, Australia, Canada, 
the EU, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Swed en and the US. The group wished to inform 
Members of ongoing work to prepare a comprehe nsive external evaluation of the WTO’s TRTA, 
including as provided through the Doha Developm ent Agenda Global Trust Fund. He noted that 
external evaluations had become routine for technical assistance. In the WTO context, the 
previous evaluation - called the Strategic Review  of the WTO's TRTA - was conducted in 2006. The 
overarching purpose of the present evaluation was to look at how resources were being used, so as to ensure that the WTO's TRTA was geared in a way that had the best possible impact on 
developing countries' ability to make use of the multilateral trading system. The evaluation would 
be funded through extra-budgetary resources from  a number of donors. Planned TRTA activities 
would therefore be unaffected. At this stage, the do nors funding the evaluation were Australia, the 
EU, Finland, Norway and Sweden.  
65. He went on to say that the Secretariat would be involved in all stages of the evaluation. As a 
first step, the Secretariat had been asked to pr epare draft terms of reference. The evaluation 
would be guided by the terms of reference, and an inception report would specify the detailed 
evaluation issues and methodology. He also informed the Committee that the evaluation would be 
carried out by a team of consultants with the required expertise, selected using standard WTO WT/COMTD/M/93 
 
- 11 - 
 
  procurement practices, and would be undertaken in accordance with internationally accepted 
norms and standards. The consultants would involve all stakeholders in their work.  The entire evaluation process, including the preparation and procurement, was expected to take almost a year, with a final evaluation report expected in February 2016. The aspects and scope of the 
evaluation were to be outlined in the final te rms of reference. The scope was expected to be 
broad, covering all the WTO's TRTA in the 2010-2014 period, irrespective of the funding source. The evaluation would be overseen by a steerin g committee, the exact composition of which was 
still to be worked out. He noted that it was im portant for both donors and beneficiaries to be 
represented. The steering committee would regularly update the CTD on progress made. 
66. The Chairman said that a matter was being raised under "Other Business" concerning the 
CTD's mandate to keep under continuous review the participation of developing country Members 
in the multilateral trading system.  It had been the CTD's practice to hold a discussion on this 
subject every two years or so. On previous occa sions when this item was placed on the CTD's 
agenda, the Secretariat had updated its statistical background paper on the participation of 
developing countries in global trade, in order to assist Members in their discussion. The last such 
discussion by the CTD on this subject had taken place in October 2013. He proposed that the CTD have another discussion on the subject at its last  meeting of 2015, for which the Secretariat would 
once again update its background paper using the most recent statistics. 
67. It was so agreed. 
H. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON LEAST DEVELOPED 
COUNTRIES 
68. The Chairman said that, on the basis of consultations, he wished to put forward the name of 
Ambassador Roderick van Schreven of the Netherlands to serve for another year as Chairman of 
the Sub-Committee on LDCs. 
69. The Committee elected Ambassador van Schreven as the Chairman of the Sub-Committee 
on LDCs for 2015. 
I. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND 
DEVELOPMENT 
70. The Chairman said that at the General Council  meeting of 20 February 2015, the names of 
the Chairpersons for 2015 had been announced. He was pleased to inform the Committee that 
Ambassador Bassirou Sene of Senegal had been chosen as the new Chairman of the CTD. He 
invited the Committee to formally elect Ambassador Sene. 
71. The Committee elected Ambassador Sene as the Chairman of the CTD for 2015. 
72. The meeting was adjourned. 
__________