RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7  
 
6 January 2017  
(17-0103) Page: 1/5 
Committee on Trade and Development  
Seventh Dedicated Session on Regional Trade  
Agreements    
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 15 NOVEMBER 2016  
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Christopher Onyanga Aparr (Uganda ) 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA ................................ ................................ ....................  1 
B. CONSIDERA TION OF REGIONAL TRA DE AGREEMENTS  ................................ .............  1 
(i) Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by the Chairman  ..........................  1 
(ii) Preferential  Trade Agreement between Mauritius and Pakistan (Goods) 
(WT/COMTD/N/47, WT/COMTD/RTA/7/1)  ................................ ................................ ...............  3 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 5 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA 
1. The draft agenda as cont ained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/RTA/2 of 4 November 2016 
was adopted . 
B. CONSIDERATION OF REG IONAL TRADE AGREEMEN TS 
(i) Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by the Chairman  
2. The Chairman  said that he wished to provide Members with a brief updat e on the regional 
trade agreements (RTAs) notified under the Enabling Clause that were to be considered in the 
Dedicated Sessions on RTAs of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD)  on the basis of 
factual presentations . With regard firstly to the Agre ement between the Association of Southeast 
Asian Nations (ASEAN) and India, he informed the Committee that the Secretariat had received 
comments from both parties on the draft factual presentation, and that the factual presentation 
would be circulated shor tly. He also noted that there had been one new notification under the 
Enabling Clause since the last update he provided to the CTD in July 2 016. In particular, 
Afghanistan' s accession to the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) was notified on 
29 July 2016 in document WT/COMTD/N/50. The parties had been requested to provide the data 
to the Secretariat by 22 December 2016 for the preparation of the factual presentation. Turning to 
the Agreement between the Dominican Republic and Panama, he recalled that the parties had 
been requested to provide the data for the preparation of the factual presentation by 
9 August  2016. Data had been received from Panama, and some data had also been provided by 
the Dominican Republic. With regard to the Agadir Agreement bet ween Egypt, Jordan, Morocco 
and Tunisia, data had been received from Egypt and Jordan. The Secretariat was still waiting to 
receive data from the other parties, which had been  requested by 15 July 2016.  
3. In the case of the Agreement between the Gulf Coopera tion Council (GCC) and Singapore, 
data had been received from Singapore, and the Secretariat was still waiting to receive data from 
the GCC parties, which had been requested by 23 November 2015. The Secretariat was also still 
waiting to receive comments on  the draft factual presentation relating to the accession of Rwanda 
and Burundi to the East African Community, which was sent to the parties in 2014. For a number 
of other RTAs - namely, RTAs between India and Nepal, India and Afghanistan, India and Bhutan , 
and Cuba and El Salvador - the full set of data needed to complete the factual presentations had WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7  
 
- 2 - 
 
  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 on e 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 ratified by all the parties. The parties to PICTA were urged to inform the 
Secretariat as soon as all ratifications were complete.  
4. He added that he wished to take the opport unity to remind Members of the 
implementation reports which were due under paragraph 15 of the Transparency Mechanism for 
RTAs. According to this paragraph, at the end of the implementation period of an RTA, the parties 
were to submit to the WTO a short wr itten report on the realization of the liberalization 
commitments in the RTA as originally notified. He recalled that, in 2014, this matter had been 
brought to the Committee's attention by his predecessor in the Chair, and the Secretariat had 
been requeste d to prepare a list of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause that were subject to 
implementation reports. This list was circulated in document WT/COMTD/RTA/W/1. It appeared 
that there had been no implementation reports submitted in the CTD to date, and h e believed that 
it was useful for the Committee to keep track of this matter. Since there had been a number of 
new notifications of RTAs under the Enabling Clause since 2014, he suggested that the Secretariat 
could update its list of RTAs notified under th e Enabling Clause that were subject to 
implementation reports.  
5. The representative of Brazil  sought clarification on the background to the list of RTAs 
notified under the Enabling Clause subject to implementation reports that the Chairman had 
referred to. H e also asked how work on this matter was coordinated, and what was the status of 
work on the list of RTAs subject to implementation reports that was circulated in the CRTA.  
6. A representative of the Development Division  said that, in 2014, the CTD Chairman h ad 
brought to the CTD's attention a list of RTAs notified under GATT Article XXIV and GATS Article V 
subject to implementation reports that had been circulated in the CRTA. In light of the CTD's 
responsibilities for RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause,  the CTD Chairman had requested the 
Secretariat to prepare a list of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause that were subject to 
implementation reports. He indicated that he was not aware of the status of work in the CRTA on 
the issue of implementation re ports, but noted that there was some complementarity between the 
CRTA and CTD lists, to the extent that they together provided Members with information on the 
RTAs notified under the various provisions that were subject to implementation reports.  
7. The repre sentative of India said that he wished to also provide information in response to 
the questions from Brazil. He noted in particular that RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause were 
dealt with in the CTD, while RTAs notified under GATT Article XXIV and GAT S Article V were dealt 
with in the CRTA. Implementation reports for RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause were 
accordingly to be discussed in the CTD, while implementation reports for RTAs notified under other 
provisions were to be discussed in the CRTA.  The two Committees carried out their work 
independently.  
8. The representative of Brazil  indicated that his delegation would need to consider the 
matter and was not in a position at the present time to agree to an update to the list of RTAs 
notified under th e Enabling Clause subject to implementation reports.  
9. The representative of the United States  said that it was important for Members to be 
aware of the growing number of non -notified RTAs. He believed that the CTD should pay attention 
to this matter , as ma ny of the non -notified RTAs with a coverage limited to goods were between 
developing countries, and it could therefore be assumed that these might  eventually be notified 
under the Enabling Clause. With regard to the Chairman's report on the status of prepa ration of 
factual presentations, he noted that a number of Members had still not provided the Secretariat 
with the required data for the preparation of the factual presentations. He called on Members to 
fulfil their transparency requirements in a timely ma nner, and indicated his delegation's particular 
interest to receive an update from the GCC with respect to the data required in the context of the 
GCC-Singapore Agreement.  WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7  
 
- 3 - 
 
  10. The representative of Morocco  referred to the Chairman's report on the status of da ta 
provision with respect to the Agadir Agreement. She informed the Committee that Morocco had 
very recently submitted the required data to the Secretariat.  
11. The representative of Nigeria  asked if the Chairman could summarize the discussion that 
had taken p lace under the present sub -item. 
12. The Chairman  said that he had provided a report on the status of the work of the 
Dedicated Session, and some comments had been made. He also indicated  that there had not 
been consensus on his proposal for the Secretariat to  update its list of RTAs notified under the 
Enabling Clause subject to implementation reports under paragraph 15 of the Transparency 
Mechanism for RTAs, and the list could therefore not be updated at the present time. He explained 
that he had suggested an update to th is list because he felt it was important for the CTD to keep 
track of the issue of implementation reports . Members were invited to consider the matter further.  
13. The Committee took note  of all interventions.  
(ii) Preferential Trade Agreement betw een Mauritius and Pakistan (Goods) (WT/COMTD/N/47, 
WT/COMTD/RTA/7/1)  
14. The Chairman  said that the Preferential Trade Agreement between Mauritius and Pakistan 
entered into force on 30 November 2007 and was notified on 30 September 2015 under paragraph 
4(a) of  the Enabling Clause. The notification was contained in document WT/COMTD/N/47. The 
text of the Agreement, together with its annexes, could be found on the parties' official websites. 
The factual presentation on the Agreement – circulated as document WT/CO MTD/RTA/7/1 on 
17 August  2016 – had been prepared by the Secretariat on its own responsibility in full 
consultation with the parties, in accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Transparency Mechanism 
for RTAs. A fax had been sent to Members on 17 August 2016  inviting the submission of written 
questions on the Agreement, for onward transmission to the parties. In this regard, he informed 
the Committee that no written questions had been received by the Secretariat. He proposed to 
organize the consideration of t he Agreement by giving the parties, and then Members, the 
opportunity to provide general comments. Members could then turn to the specifics of the 
Agreement.  
15. The representative of Pakistan  said that the Agreement was Pakistan's ninth RTA and the 
first sign ed with an African country. He highlighted the close relationship between Mauritius and 
Pakistan and indicated that the Agreement would provide an impetus for the mutually beneficial 
growth of relations between the parties. With regard to the content of th e Agreement, he said that 
it contained 25 chapters and three annexes, covering several topics including tariff liberalization, 
rules of origin, dispute settlement, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, standards and 
technical regulations. Noting that all items were WTO -consistent, he indicated that he wished to 
particularly highlight a chapter on transparency, which provided the parties with an important 
enabling environment to trade. Turning to the bilateral trade pattern between the parties, he said 
that a notable decrease in Pakistan' s trade surplus had been witnessed over the 2010 -2014 period. 
In particular, imports from Mauritius rose from less than US $1 million in 2010 to US $22.5 million 
in 2014, while Pakistan's exports to Mauritius over the same  period declined from US $34 million to 
US$28 million. The parties were aware that there was potential to further increase their trade by 
broadening the scope of the Agreement, and bilateral talks had recently been held to consider the 
matter.  
16. The represent ative of Mauritius  summarized the concessions offered by the parties under 
the Agreement and in this context noted, inter alia , that the offer from Mauritius included 
concessions on fresh flowers, vegetables, fruits, cereals, biscuits, tobacco, wood articl es, textiles, 
paint and varnishes. Pakistan's offer to Mauritius comprised fresh flowers, pineapples, cane sugar, 
fish products, pharmaceuticals, soaps, detergents, textiles and garments. He also noted that, since 
2007, Mauritius and Pakistan had signed me morandums of understanding to enhance cooperation 
in a number of areas, including with respect to standards, SPS measures, state trading 
enterprises, trade promotion agencies, customs matters and small enterprises. He believed that 
one of the reasons for t he relatively low level of exports from Mauritius to Pakistan was a lack of 
awareness among the business operators in Mauritius. In this regard, he indicated that awareness WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7  
 
- 4 - 
 
  campaigns would be undertaken in order to encourage the Mauritian business communit y to export 
to Pakistan, and strong marketing drives would also be undertaken in Pakistan.  
17. The representative of Japan  observed that RTAs had greatly risen in number and had 
become an indispensable part of the global trading system. All WTO Members had at least one RTA 
in force. Against this background, there was an increasing need to enhance transparency in, and 
promote understanding of, RTAs – including those notified under the Enabling Clause. The WTO 
played an important role for that purpose, in accorda nce with the Transparency Mechanism for 
RTAs. While taking note with concern of the interval between the entry into force of the 
Mauritius -Pakistan Agreement and its notification, as well as of the imbalance in the liberalization 
rates between the parties,  his delegation nevertheless commended the parties for the 
transparency demonstrated by notifying their Agreement and providing the necessary information 
for the preparation of the factual pres entation.  He also encouraged other Members to notify their 
RTAs as soon as possible.  
18. The representative of the United States  appreciated that the parties had notified their 
Agreement and had undertaken the required transparency review process. He noted that table 4.1 
of the factual presentation listed other RTAs that Mauritius and Pakistan were parties to which had 
yet to be notified. He called on the parties to notify these RTAs, and more generally called on all 
Members to notify their agreements. He next referred to paragraphs 3.6 and 3.7 of the factual 
presentation,  and sought confirmation from the parties that Mauritius had liberalized only 49 tariff 
lines that were not already duty -free on an MFN basis, while Pakistan had liberalized only 75 lines. 
Turning to table 3.1, he observed that ju st over 20% of Mauritius'  lines remained dutiable under 
the Agreement, while according to table 3.2, over 93 % of Pakistan’s tariff lines remained dutiable. 
Furthermore, he noted from paragraph 3.7 that exports from Mauritius to Pakistan in lines covered 
by the Agreement were neglig ible during the period 2004 to 2006. His delegation was not sure 
that a lack of awareness was the primary cause of the low trade volumes under the Agreement, as 
had been suggested by Mauritius. In this regard, he asked the parties why so many tariff lines had 
been left uncovered. He also asked the parties to explain how such large carve -outs were 
consistent with the Enabling Clause, which stated that agreements needed to be designed to 
facilitate and promote the trade of developing countries. The parties we re additionally asked how 
they were benefitting from the Agreement on the tariff side, given the large tariff exclusions, as 
well as the low bilateral trade flows shown in chart 1.1. Finally, while noting that no negotiations 
on product -specific rules of o rigin had taken place, he inquired whether the parties had considered 
that changes to the rules of origin under the Agreement coul d stimulate trade between them.  
19. The representative of the European Union  expressed appreciation to the parties for the 
transpa rency they had demonstrated. While her delegation had not raised any written questions on 
the Agreement, she indicated that she wished to take the opportunity to address the low coverage 
of the Agreement, particularly in the case of Pakista n. She invited t he parties to review their 
concessions with the goal of broadening the coverage in the future and, in particular, to address 
the present asymmetric situation. She noted that, according to the factual presentation, at the end 
of the implementation period fo r Pakistan, 93.1% tariff lines would remain dutiable, representing 
51.2% of imports from Mauritius. For Mauritius, 20.2% of the tariffs would remain dutiable, 
corresponding to 2.2% of its imports from Pakistan. Taking into account the limited coverage of 
the Agreement, she wondered how the parties had assessed the impact it would have on bilateral 
trade.  
20. The representative of Pakistan  said that during the recent visit of the President of Mauritius 
to Pakistan, it had been agreed that discussions would begin  shortly on ways to widen the scope of 
the Agreement. He also indicated that the parties would provide response s to the specific 
questions raised on the Agreement.  
21. The representative of Mauritius  said that the parties had taken note of the issues raised by  
delegations, and would provide responses t o the specific questions posed.  
22. The Chairman  said that oral discussion of the Preferential Trade Agreement between 
Mauritius and Pakistan could be concluded in accordance with paragraph 11 of the Transparency 
Mechanism for RTAs. Further questions by Members would need to be submitted in writing to the 
Secretariat within one week, by 22 November 2016. The parties would then be given two weeks to 
submit written replies, by no later than 6 December 2016. In accordance  with paragraph 13 of the 
Transparency Mechanism, all written submissions as well as the minutes of the meeting would be WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7  
 
- 5 - 
 
  circulated promptly in all WTO official languages, and would be made available on the WTO 
website.  
23. The Committee took note  of all inter ventions.  
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
24. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
25. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________