RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1  
 
21 July 2014  
(14-4217)  Page: 1/5  
Committee on Trade and Development 
First Dedicated Session on the Monitoring Mechanism 
on Special and Differential Treatment    
   
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 7 JULY 2014 
 
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Pierre Claver Ndayiragije (Burundi) 
 
A.
 ADOPTION OF TH E AGENDA .................................................................................... 1  
B. MONITORING OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL PROVISIONS - 
MINISTERIAL DECISION OF  7 DECEMBER 2013 (WT/MIN( 13)/45 - WT/L/920) ............. 1  
-  Statement by th e Chairman ....................................................................................... 1  
C. OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................... 5  
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/4321 of 18 June 2014 was adopted. 
B. MONITORING OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERE NTIAL PROVISIONS - MINISTERIAL 
DECISION OF 7 DECEMBER 2013 (WT/MIN(13)/45 - WT/L/920) 
- Statement by the Chairman  
2. The Chairman said that a Ministerial Decision was taken on 7 December 2013, at the Ninth 
Ministerial Conference (MC9) in Bali, to establish a Monitoring Mechanism (MM) on Special and 
Differential Treatment (S&D). The Decision was contained in documents WT/MIN(13)/45 and 
WT/L/920. According to the Decision, the MM would operate in Dedicated Sessions of the CTD and 
would follow the CTD's rules of procedure. The Mechanism would meet twice a year, and additional meetings could be convened, as appropriate.  
3. He said that he wished to highlight some points from the Decision concerning the scope of 
the Mechanism, its functions and its operations. Firs t, in terms of scope, he said that the coverage 
of the Mechanism extended to all S&D provisions contained in multilateral WTO Agreements, Ministerial and General Council Decisions. With regard to the functions of the MM, he noted that 
the Mechanism would act as a focal point within the WTO to analyze and review the 
implementation of S&D provisions. The Mechanism would complement, not replace, other relevant review mechanisms or processes in other bodies  of the WTO. The Mechanism would review all 
aspects of implementation of S&D provisions with a view to facilitating the integration of 
developing and least-developed Members into the mu ltilateral trading system. Where the review of 
implementation of an S&D provision under the Mechanism identified a problem, the Mechanism 
could consider whether it resulted from implementation, or from the provision itself.  
4. In carrying out its functions, the Mechanism would not alter, or in any manner affect, 
Members’ rights and obligations under WTO Agreements, Ministerial or General Council Decisions, or interpret their legal nature. However, the Mechanism was not precluded from making 
recommendations to the relevant WTO bodies for initiating negotiations on the S&D provisions that 
had been reviewed under the Mechanism. He went on to say that the Mechanism could, as appropriate, make recommendations to the relevant WTO body that proposed the consideration of WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1 
 
- 2 - 
 
  actions to improve the implementation of an S&D prov ision, or the initiation of negotiations aiming 
at improving the S&D provisions that had been reviewed under the Mechanism. Such recommendations would inform the work of the relevant body, but not define or limit its final determination. He noted that the Decision called on the relevant body to consider a 
recommendation from the Mechanism at the earliest opportunity. The status of recommendations 
emerging from the Mechanism would be included in the CTD's annual report to the General Council. 
5. In terms of the Mechanism's operations, he hi ghlighted that the monitoring of special and 
differential provisions was to be undertaken on the basis of written inputs or submissions made by 
Members, as well as on the basis of reports received from other WTO bodies to which submissions by Members could also be made. Where the substantive matter fell within the purview of another 
WTO body, the Mechanism would bring it to the attention of that body so that the latter was in a 
position to provide input. Finally, with regard to reappraisal, he informed the Committee that the 
Mechanism would be reviewed three years after th e present meeting - which was the first formal 
meeting of the Mechanism - and thereafter when necessary, taking into account its functioning and 
evolving circumstances. In concluding, he noted that the Decision establishing the MM was important for the multilateral trading system, and for the work of the CTD. He recalled that it had 
taken years of negotiations to establish the MM. Now that the Mechanism had been established, he 
encouraged Members to use it fully and take ad vantage of the opportunities that it provided. 
6. The representative of the United States we lcomed the establishment of the MM and noted 
that it would provide Members with a regular oppo rtunity to engage in practical, evidence-based 
discussions. The discussions would highlight challeng es and promote the sharing of best practices 
with regard to the implementation of S&D provisions, so as to make sure that these provisions were properly encouraging the trade and economic growth of developing country partners. In line 
with the operational procedures contained in the Decision establishing the MM, his delegation 
looked forward to constructively engaging when Members submitted written proposals on how a specific S&D provision had been utilized and impl emented. It was by monitoring these submissions 
- based on Members' real experiences in utilizing S&D provisions - that the MM could help to take 
Members' conversation on S&D in a new and more constructive direction. The MM provided a forum to have a different conversation than in the past - one which was not founded on assertions without examples, but which was practical and real-world based. Challenges and success stories 
could be discussed with a view to problem-solving. Since Members were in the best position to 
know how they had - or had not - been able to ut ilize a provision, the US looked forward to the MM 
being a Member-driven mechanism as set out in paragraph 10 of the Decision, and to engaging on 
this basis. 
7. The representative of the European Union said that her delegation was pleased with the 
adoption of the MM as part of the Bali package. This was a significant achievement which had 
brought years of negotiations to a successful conclusion. In a Round with development at its core, 
the membership had shown its determination to deliver on the development dimension of the various areas of the negotiations. An important and tangible step in the development pillar had been taken with the establishment of the MM. The EU was committed to implementing the Decision 
establishing the MM in the same way as all other elements of the Bali package. Referring to 
paragraph 10 of the Decision - which indicated th at the monitoring of special and differential 
provisions in the Mechanism would be undertaken on the basis of written inputs or submissions 
made by Members, as well as on the basis of reports received from other WTO Bodies to which 
submissions by Members could also be made - she appreciated that reflection was underway 
regarding possible submissions. The EU was ready to consider any submissions that were made. 
She hoped that the Mechanism would serve as a practical tool to review all aspects of 
implementation of S&D provisions and recommend ways forward, as appropriate. The EU stood ready to engage constructively and actively to make the MM an effective and productive development instrument of the WTO. 
8. The representative of the Cameroon, on be half of the ACP Group, said that the 
establishment of the MM was to be welcomed. Ho wever, the preference of the ACP Group would 
have been for Members to have first agreed on strengthening S&D provisions in line with 
paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration before putting into place the MM. The ACP Group considered 
that the MM needed to be tested before it could be confirmed as a useful mechanism for developing countries. To this end, he indicated that written submissions would be made. He WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1 
 
- 3 - 
 
  expressed hope that Members would engage constructively in the discussions that would take 
place in the context of the MM. 
9. The representative of Nigeria associated his de legation with the intervention by Cameroon. 
He noted that the monitoring of special and differential provisions in the MM would be undertaken 
on the basis of written inputs or submissions made by Members, as well as on the basis of reports 
received from other WTO Bodies to which submissions by Members could also be made. He expressed hope that the MM would successfully deliver in this regard. 
10. The representative of Uganda, on behalf of the LDC Group, called on Members to work 
proactively to make the MM effective. While it fell short of the LDCs’ original aspirations, the MM 
was nevertheless an important step forward towa rds analyzing and reviewing the implementation 
and related aspects of S&D. The added value of the MM would depend on what it was able to 
deliver for the LDCs. Although the MM was not a ne gotiating forum, the LDCs were optimistic that 
the Mechanism would provide developing countries and LDCs the opportunity to meaningfully and objectively assess and review the implementation of S&D provisions with a view to facilitating their 
integration into the multilateral trading system. 
11. He went on to say 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. The ultimate goal of S&D was to enable LDCs to meaningfully integrate into the 
multilateral trading system so as to derive maximum economic benefits. To that end, the MM had a fundamental role to play. He observed that the effective utilization and implementation of S&D provisions had, in most cases, been unsatisfac tory. No significant headway had been made with 
regard to the mandate contained in paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration to make the provisions 
more precise, effective and operational. In addition, substantial progress had not been made in exploring new S&D provisions and making them an integral and mandatory part of the WTO 
Agreements. He called on Members to preserve the credibility of the WTO by delivering on 
development and ensuring that the benefits of S&D accrued to the LDCs. He in particular urged Members to adopt LDC-specific S&D proposals at the earliest opportunity. He informed the 
Committee that the LDC Group was currently considering and analyzing the S&D provisions for 
which implementation challenges existed, with a view to submitting a proposal for the next meeting of the MM. While the LDCs were commi tted to making the Mechanism functional and 
robust, they were equally conscious of the mandat e of the Special Session of the CTD (CTD SS). 
He stressed the need to develop complementary and collaborative approaches between the two 
bodies. In concluding, he once again called on Members to ensure that the MM was a useful mechanism for reviewing the implementation of S&D provisions. 
12. The representative of Lesotho, on behalf of the African Group, welcomed the establishment 
of the MM. He recalled that the African Group had been actively and constructively engaged in the 
negotiations that led to the establishment of the MM. He said that the MM was not an end in itself, 
but rather was a means to an end. The bigger picture was the fulfillment of the mandate in 
paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration and in this regard he called on Members for the necessary 
engagement. The African Group would do its utmost to ensure that the MM delivered tangible results for the benefit of developing countries. Noti ng that calls had been made for evidence-based 
discussions to take place, he urged Members to be open-minded and to avoid providing 
prescriptions at this early stage as to how the MM should operate. 
13. The representative of Bangladesh associated his delegation with the intervention by 
Uganda. While acknowledging the importance of  the MM, he observed that the gap between 
aspirations and reality was still wide. He confirmed the LDC Group's intention to submit a proposal in the context of the MM. In terms of preliminar y remarks on S&D, he emphasized the importance 
of preferential market access schemes for LDCs, as well as other significant gateway issues that 
were embedded in market access schemes. He ex pressed his hope that discussions in the context 
of the MM would lead to concrete outcomes.  
14. The representative of Nepal associated his delegation with the intervention by Uganda. 
Although the MM fell short of LDCs' aspirati ons, the establishment of the Mechanism was 
nevertheless an important step towards the effective implementation of S&D provisions. While stressing the importance of S&D for LDCs, he also noted that the utilization and implementation of 
S&D provisions was often weak with respect to LD Cs, and therefore inadequate to address the real 
challenges faced by these countries. Many S&D provisions were non-binding. He expressed regret WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1 
 
- 4 - 
 
  that, despite strong calls from Ministers at the Doha Ministerial Conference to address S&D issues, 
Members had not been able to conclude the negotiations mandated in paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration. Against this background, he believed that the MM could play a substantive role by triggering the effective implementation of S&D provisions and providing the necessary impetus for 
advancing the negotiations in the remaining areas of S&D that were of particular interest to LDCs. 
The LDCs were committed to making the MM an effective and constructive forum, and to making the best use of it to address their S&D concerns. He called on Members to make the MM a forum 
that would meaningfully assist LDCs in utilizing S&D provisions. He noted that the reinforcement 
and recasting of S&D was critical for the relevance of the WTO from a development perspective, and for the long-term viability of the organization. The WTO had an obligation to ensure that the intended benefits of S&D accrued to the LDCs. Finally, he stressed the importance of 
complementarity and collaboration between the CTD SS and the MM. 
15. The representative of Egypt associated his dele gation with the intervention by Lesotho and 
also supported the interventions by other developing countries. He said that the MM was a new 
institutional arrangement which needed to be harnessed in order to streamline development into 
the architecture of the multilateral trading system. However, the Mechanism was not meant to replace the CTD SS, which was the negotiating forum with a mandate from paragraph 44 of the 
Doha Declaration to strengthen S&D provisions. In terms of sequencing, he recalled that when the 
African Group had tabled its initial proposal on the MM, the intention had been for the Mechanism to monitor the S&D provisions that would already have been strengthened through the negotiations in the CTD SS. He believed that it was important to highlight this sequencing issue. 
The fact that there were problems with the existi ng S&D provisions had been recognized not only 
in the Doha Declaration, but also in paragraph 4 of the Decision establishing the MM. He referred in particular to the second sentence of this paragraph, which stipulated that, where the review of 
implementation of an S&D provision under the MM identified a problem, the Mechanism could 
consider whether it resulted from implementation, or from the provision itself. He also pointed out that, in paragraph 6 of the Decision, it was mentioned that the Mechanism could make 
recommendations to either improve the implementation of an S&D provision, or to initiate 
negotiations aimed at improving S&D provisions. The African Group had highlighted on several occasions that there were problems with certain S&D provisions. He expressed his hope that the 
MM and the CTD SS would be complementary to each other with the objective of streamlining 
development into the WTO.           
16. The representative of Indonesia indicated that the MM was an important tool for 
monitoring the implementation of S&D provisions. While the MM was not a negotiating forum, the 
expectation was that it would enable Members to focus on the problems and challenges faced by 
developing countries in implementing S&D provis ions. She expressed hope that the discussions in 
the context of the MM would help to facilitate the effective implementation of S&D and the better 
integration of developing countries into the multilateral trading system. 
17. The representative of Nigeria expressed su pport for the interventions by Lesotho and 
Uganda. He highlighted the need for substantiv e discussions in the Dedicated Session on the MM 
to start as soon as possible, and in this light indicated that some clarification on the structure of 
work of the Dedicated Session would be useful. 
18. The representative of China said that his delegation supported the interventions by 
Cameroon, Uganda and Lesotho. While noting that  China would work to make the MM responsive 
to the needs of developing countries, he also drew  Members' attention to the issues that remained 
to be discussed in the CTD SS. Furthermore, Members needed to think of new opportunities for developing countries from the negotiations. In  concluding, he expressed hope that the MM, 
together with other processes such as the negotiations in the CTD SS, would play complementary 
and mutually supporting roles in fulfilling the development objective of the WTO. 
19. The representative of the United States said that he had noted Egypt's remarks concerning 
the sequencing issue and the negotiating position  of the African Group. He observed that his 
delegation had also had an initial negotiating position, but at this point in time Members needed to 
work on the basis of the Decision that had been adopted in Bali. He also noted that it had been suggested in a number of interventions that the im plementation of S&D provisions was filled with 
problems. In the view of his delegation, S&D implementation was not only about problems. There 
were examples of success stories as well. He also explained that the US was looking to the MM as a means of having a better conversation than in the past on the challenges that existed in S&D WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/1 
 
- 5 - 
 
  implementation. He did not believe that there was any intention to provide prescriptions at this 
stage on the operation of the MM. His delegation looked forward to engaging when proposals were 
made.  
20. The representative of Canada said that her delegation, like others, was looking forward to 
constructive engagement in the context of the MM. She believed that the MM provided the 
opportunity to have a more practical discussion than in the past on the issues and challenges that existed with respect to S&D implementation. She shared her delegation's view that progress on 
implementation had been made in some areas, an d also recognized that for many delegations the 
mandate in paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaratio n remained a priority. She expressed support on 
the need for complementarity between the MM and the CTD SS. 
21. The representative of Egypt said that, even though the MM had now been established, the 
CTD SS would continue the negotiations under paragr aph 44 of the Doha Declaration. Recalling the 
African Group's negotiating position on the MM that he had referred to in his earlier intervention, he said that this did not preclude Members from  using the MM to monitor the implementation of 
S&D provisions that were not the subject of negoti ations in the CTD SS. He also noted that some 
delegations had indicated that there were a number of success stories with respect to the implementation of S&D provisions. In response, he said that the WTO was a rules-based 
organization and the objective of Members' deliberations was to institutionalize the rules which 
would streamline development into the architecture of the multilateral trading system. Furthermore, it was a source of frustration that successful outcomes to the negotiations under paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration were not forthcoming. He expressed his hope that the 
mandate in paragraph 44 could be fulfilled soon. 
22. The representative of the United States said that his delegation took a more balanced view 
on the history of S&D implementation than some  other Members. The US was aware of several 
success stories, but also recognized that many challenges remained. The MM could be used to 
discuss both successes and challenges. 
23. The Chairman informed Members that the next  Dedicated Session on the MM would likely 
be held back-to-back with the last CTD meeting of the year.   
24. The Committee took note of the Chairman's statement and of all interventions. 
C. OTHER BUSINESS 
25. No matter was raised under "Other Business". 
26. The meeting was adjourned. 
 
__________