WT/DS430/19  
 
23 September 2016  
(16-5090) Page: 1/2 
  Original: English  
 
 INDIA – MEASURES CONCERNING THE IMPORTATION OF  
CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS  
COMMUNICATION FROM INDIA  
The following communication, dated 22 September 2016 , was received from the delegation of 
India with the request that it be circulated to the Dispute Set tlement Body (DSB).  
 
_______________  
 
On 19 June 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body ( "DSB") adopted its recommendations and rulings 
in India – Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products (WT/DS430). At 
the following DSB meeting, Ind ia informed the DSB of its intention to implement the 
recommendations and rulings of the DSB with respect to this matter.  
On 8 December 2015, India and the United States informed the DSB that they had agreed on a 
reasonable period of time up to 19 June 201 6 for India to implement the recommendations and 
rulings of the DSB. In this respect, India notified a draft am endment notification to the 
SPS Committee on 20 April 20161 allowing a 60 -day time period for interested parties to provide 
comments to the same.  Further, India vide corrigendum dated 22 June 2016, amended item 8 of 
the aforesaid draft amendment notification, to appropriately reflect the relevant international 
standard.2 
India received comments on its draft amendment notification from only one WTO Member, namely, 
the United States. These comments were taken into consideration by India while issuing the final 
notification, S.O. 2337(E), which superseded the previous notification S.O. 1663(E).3 Thereafter, 
India notified the DSB on 18 July 2016 that i t had adopted measures necessary to comply with the 
recommendations of the DSB.4  
 
Notification S.O. 2337(E) complies with the recommendations of the DSB in this dispute as it:  
 
i) allows imports of poultry and poultry products into India in accordance wit h the 
relevant international standard, i.e. the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code 
("Terrestrial Code");   
ii) recognizes the concept of disease -free areas; and  
iii) provides for the process to be followed for recognition of such disease -free areas, 
zones/ compartments in conformity with the Terrestrial Code and the SPS Agreement.  
 
Further, India has also issued the relevant guidelines referred to in notification S.O. 2337(E) as 
well as the questionnaire for recognizing a part of a country, zone/compartment  in accordance 
with the relevant international standard, i.e. the OIE Terrestrial Code for the purpose of trade in 
poultry and poultry products.  
 
After the publication of S.O. 2337(E), India and the United States entered into bilateral discussions 
to addr ess further concerns of the United States, if any. Pursuant to such bilateral discussions, 
India has further amended notification S.O. 2337(E) vide notification S.O. 2998(E) dated 
                                                
1 Notification of draft S.O. 2337(E) to the SPS Committee, G/SPS/N /IND/143 circulated on 
20 April 2016. 
2 Notification of corrigendum to the SPS Committee, G/SPS/N/IND/1 43/Corr.1 circulated on 
22 June 2016.  
3 See http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2016/170589.pdf  
4 Communication from I ndia, WT/DS430/18 circulated on 19 July 2016.  WT/DS430/19  
 
- 2 - 
 
  19 September 2016, clarifying the concerns of the US.5 The amendment notific ation has also been 
notified to the SPS Committee on 21.9.20166. 
 
Notification S.O. 2337(E) dated 8 July 2016, and the amendment notification S.O. 2998(E) dated 
19 September 2016, the guidelines, and the questionnaire, together form the "revised Avian 
Influenza measures". The notifications have been issued in exercise of the power conferred by 
sub-section (1) of Section 3 and Section 3A of the Livestock Act, 1898 (9 of 1898) and came into 
effect on the date of public ation in the Official Gazette.  
 
In view o f the above, India strongly considers that it has complied with the recommendations of 
the DSB  by bringing its measures into conformity with its WTO obligations . 
 
Lastly, India would draw attention to the fact that despite requests from India, the United S tates 
has not entered into a sequencing agreement in this dispute which is a standard practice among 
the WTO members. A sequencing agreement is entered into in order to ensure that, in the event of 
disagreement between the parties with respect to complianc e with the DSB's rulings and 
recommendations, recourse under Article 21.5 of the DSU should be pursued as the first option.  
 
In India's opinion, if there is a disagreement between the parties with respect to "the consistency 
with a covered agreement of me asures taken to comply with the recommendations and rulings", 
the proper course of action is first to have recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU. In fact, this has 
also been the position of the United States in other disputes.7 Instead, on 7 July 2016, the U nited 
States made a request pursuant to Article 22.2 of the DSU seeking authorization from the DSB to 
suspend concessions under the covered agreements in the amount of US$450 million in 2016, 
which will be updated annually.8 India objected to this request vide its communication to the DSB 
dated 18 July 2016 and at the DSB meeting held on 19 July 2016. Till date, the United States has 
not agreed to suspend the arbitration proceedings  under Article 22.6 of the DSU.  
 
In view of the fact that India has brought itself into conformity with its WTO obligations, India 
would urge the United States to terminate the Article 22.6 proceedings in this dispute . 
 
__________  
                                                
5 See http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2016/171799.pdf . 
6 G/SPS/N/IND/160  
7 US - Measures Concerning the Importation, Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products , Recourse 
to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States, WT/DS381/32 circula ted on 12 April 2016, page 3.  
8 Recourse to Article 22.2 of the DSU by the United States, WT/DS430/16 circulated on 8 July 2016.