WT/REG333/2  
25 March 2015  
(15-1693)  Page: 1/11  
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English/Spanish  
 
  TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITS MEMBER STATES, 
OF THE ONE PART AND COLOMBIA AND PERU, OF THE OTHER 
(GOODS AND SERVICES) 
QUESTIONS AND REPLIES 
 The following communication, dated 24 March 2015,  is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of the European Union, Colombia and Peru. 
 
_______________ 
  
 This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses 
submitted. 
Question from the delegation of Canada 
 
1.1.  Paragraph 5.7.2: In many comprehens ive free trade agreements, the competition 
provisions are excluded from any form of  dispute settlement. Are the competition 
provisions from this Agreement explicitly ex cluded from dispute settlement? If not, was 
this considered by the Parties? 
 Parties' reply: Article 266 of the Agreement establishes that the competition provisions are 
excluded from dispute settlement. 
 
Question from the delegation of Costa Rica 
 
1.2.  Paragraph 3.66: Chapter 3 of Title III (trade in goods) covers customs and trade 
facilitation. The Parties commit to establish efficient, transparent and simplified procedures. They agree to base their trad e and customs legislations and procedures, 
inter alia , upon international instruments and standards
40; the protection and facilitation 
of trade through effective enforcement of and compliance with the legal requirement, 
which shall be reasonable, non-discriminatory  and fraud preventing; the use of a single 
administrative document or it s electronic equivalent; the a pplication of modern customs 
techniques, including risk assessment, si mplified procedures for entry and release 
of goods, post release controls, and company audit methods; the progressive development of systems to facilitate the electr onic exchange of data; rules ensuring that 
only proportionate and non-discriminatory pe nalties be imposed and that the application 
of which shall not unduly delay the release of goods; the calculation of reasonable fees 
and charges; and the elimination of an y requirement for the mandatory use of 
pre-shipment inspections or their equiva lent (Article 59). The provisions on 
customs-related procedures also contain di sciplines on advance rulings on tariff 
classification, origin, or any other related matters as the Parties may agree (Article 60). 
The provisions covering the development of  systems to facilitate electronic data 
transmissions and the rules on advance rulings  shall apply to Peru two years after the 
entry into force of the Agreement. 
                                               
40 Such as the substantive elements of the Revised Kyoto Convention on the Simplification 
and Harmonization of Customs Procedures, the International Convention on the Harmonized 
Commodity Description and Coding System, the Fram ework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate 
Global Trade of the World Customs Organization (WCO) and the Customs Data Model of the WCO.  WT/REG333/2 
- 2 - 
  Regarding the use of a single administrative  document or its electronic equivalent, 
could you please explain how does it work in the case of Peru and Colombia? If it is not 
yet implemented, when is it  expected to be enforced? 
Colombia and Peru's reply: 
 The single document has not yet been implemented, but it is in the Andean Community's 
workplan for medium-term implementation (2017)  by both countries, along with the other 
members of the Andean Community. 
Questions from the delegation of Malaysia 
Provisions on Trade in Goods 
Liberalization schedules 
1.3.  We take note that the EU has offere d a higher percentage of tariffs that are 
liberalized upon entry into force of this Agreement. However, the same cannot be said at the end period of implementation, whereby the EU would have maintained a higher 
number of exclusions in its tariff lines compared with Colombia and Peru. 
 Given that the majority of exports from Colombia and Peru into  the EU are in the 
goods sector, Malaysia seeks clarification from  Colombia and Peru as to how this can be 
considered as a beneficial outcome? 
  For Colombia and Peru, the tariff elimination under this Trade Agreement is a beneficial 
outcome. By the end of its implementation period  (2023), EU will fully liberalize 95.8% and 97% 
of its tariff lines for Colombia and Peru, respectively. On the other hand, by the end of its implementation period (2028), Colombia will fully libe ralize 96.1% of its tariff lines. In the case 
of Peru, by the end of its implementation period (2 030), Peru will fully liberalize 98% of its tariff 
lines. 
  Colombia and Peru consider that this final outcome is satisfactory and comprehensive in 
terms of trade coverage and export and import interests and sensitivities. It is the product of the 
negotiations between the Parties in order to have a free-trade area in which duties and other restrictive regulations of commerce are eliminated on substantially all the trade between the 
European Union and its Member States, of the on e Part, and Colombia and Peru, of the other. 
 Tariff rate quotas 
1.4.  To the EU: Please explain/give mo re information regarding the 'stabilisation 
mechanism' on the particular TRQ ca tegory (Annex 3) and the particular 
circumstance(s) that allows for suspension by the EU. How is the process administered? 
 Bananas (HS 08030019) are mentioned in Annex 3 of the report by mistake as EU's 
concession to Peru and Colombia on bananas is not a TRQ and therefore should not be mentioned 
in the Annex of the Factual presentation, dedicated to tariff-rate quotas within the Agreement. Please note that, in this respect, the EU has as ked a revision of the FP to the WTO Secretariat.  
 
EU's concession is represented by a phased in reduction in duty (preferential custom duties 
agreed for each year) to 75 EUR a ton by 2020, coupled with a non-automatic stabilisation clause with established trigger volumes, valid until 2019. Regulation (EU) No. 19/2013 (OJ L 17, 
19.1.2013) set up the stabilisation mechanism for bananas from Peru and Colombia, establishing 
the annual trigger volumes, which are foreseen in the Trade Agreement. According to this 
mechanism, and pursuant to Article 15(2) of the mentioned Regulation, once a defined trigger 
volume is exceeded for imports of fresh bananas from Colombia or Peru, the Commission shall 
adopt an implementing act by which it may eith er temporarily suspend the preferential customs 
duty applied to imports of bananas from Colombia or Peru or determine that such suspension is 
not appropriate because the EU market is not at risk of destabilization. 
 WT/REG333/2 
- 3 - 
  Provisions on Trade in Services 
Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)  
1.5.  We note that Chapter 2 of Title IV  (related to investment) does not contain 
provisions on ISDS. Given that the EU ha s now obtained the necessary mandate to 
negotiate investment protection, do Colo mbia and Peru envisage including such 
provisions in the Agreement in the future? 
 At this point, Colombia and Peru do not envision to negotiate provisions on investment 
protection and ISDS, because this Agreement is de signed only to provide national treatment on 
establishment of investments. Currently, the establishment chapter on investment should is complemented with the BITs that  Colombia and Peru have in force with the States Members. 
Performance Requirements 
1.6.  Malaysia notes from the report that "the agreement does not contain any specific 
provision related to performanc e requirements. The parties' re spective lists of specific 
commitments however contain reservations made in that regard". 
 In the absence of specific mention of performance requirements' disciplines, how 
does each Party of the Agreement prepare the reservation list?  
 Parties' reply: The Agreement does not include a specific provision about Performance 
Requirements. Therefore, Peru didn't list an y reservation against performance requirements. 
However, Colombia and the EU decided to list reservation related to performance requirements against the National Treatment obligation, mainly for transparency purposes. 
 
Liberalization Commitments 
1.7.  On Services, we take note that while  Colombia and Peru have opened up their 
markets to all EU Member States in sector s where commitments have been scheduled, 
the EU's services schedule co ntains reservations that excl udes certain Member States 
for certain services sectors. E.g. in the ad ult education services (CPC 924), the EU has 
maintained market access limitations for Au stria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Finland, Malta, 
Romania, Sweden, Latvia and Slovenia. Howe ver, Colombia has removed all market 
access limitations for all EU Member States wa nting to supply adult education services in 
its territory. Similarly, the EU has maintain ed market access limitations for placement 
services (CPC 872) for Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, 
Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Ro mania and Slovak Republic. For the same 
CPC, Peru has removed all market access limitations for all EU Member States. 
Given this scenario, Colombia and Peru would not have gained effective access 
across all EU Member States in certain sector s, despite them providing market access to 
all 28 EU Member States. In this context, ho w do Colombia and Peru view outcomes in 
this area? Can it be said that there is a ba lanced outcome that provides equal gains for 
all Parties to this Agreement? 
 Colombia and Peru view outcomes in services under this Trade Agreement as balanced, 
satisfactory and comprehensive. These outcomes are the product of the negotiations between the 
Parties in order to have an agreement liberalizing trade in services with substantial sectorial 
coverage in terms of number of sectors, volu me of trade affected and modes of supply. 
General Provisions of the Agreement 
Transparency in subsid ies related to goods 
1.8.  Malaysia would like to seek more in formation and examples if possible, on the 
types of 'biennial reports' which need to  be submitted under Article 293 of the 
agreement. WT/REG333/2 
- 4 - 
   Parties' reply: Article 293 of the Agreement sets the transparency rules in the area 
of subsidies related to trade in goods that are the same prescribed under the WTO Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. This article establishes that starting two years after the entry into force of the agreement each Party shall submit a report every two years to the other 
Parties regarding the legal basis, form, amount  or budget and where possible, the recipient 
of subsidies granted by its government or any public  body and that such report is deemed to have 
been provided if the relevant information is made available by the Party concerned or on its behalf 
on a publicly accessible website. Although the commitment is not yet enforceable for the Parties 
thereto and there are no examples or agreed temp lates on the type of "biennial reports", reports 
containing the relevant information have been already made available by the Parties in the WTO website through their biennial notifications in accordance with Article XVI:1 of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994") and Article 25 of the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. Moreover, the EU regularly publishes State aid scoreboard which respond to their international obligations "on transparency" on 
subsidies undertaken in international agreements. Such "State Aid Scoreboard" can be found 
under the following link: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/scoreboard/index_en.html . 
 
Geographical Indications 
1.9.  We take note that Annex XIII provides the list of agreed Ge ographical Indications 
(GIs) that will be protected in the territories of the Parties to this Agreement. Could Colombia and Peru please clarify if su ch protection will be granted automatically 
for these GIs? Or would the GIs be subject to a domestic process, which would among 
others, allow for third party objections, as well as an appeal and review mechanism? 
 Recognition of the protection of geographical  indications under the current Trade Agreement 
between Colombia and the European Union does not include the obligation to provide automatic 
protection for the Parties' GIs.  
 Article 208 of the Trade Agreement establishes that, having completed an objection 
procedure and having examined the geographical indications of the European Union listed in the Appendix 1 of Annex XIII (Lists of Geographical Indications) which have been registered by the EU Party, Peru and Colombia will protect such geographical indications according to the level 
of protection laid down in Section 2 (Geograp hical Indications) of Chapter 4 (Enforcement 
of Intellectual Property Rights) of Title VII (I ntellectual Property). In that sense, automatic 
protection for GIs is not provided under the Agreement. 
 
In Peru, the domestic procedure is established in Peruvian internal law by 
Andean Decision 486
1 and Legislative Decree 10752 (both establishing the industrial property 
regime of Peru, and the procedural and substant ive aspects for the protection of geographical 
indications). In general terms, the procedure star ts with the filing of an application for the 
protection of a geographical indication, which is then published in order to have a period 
(30 working days) for oppositions of interested th ird parties. After such period has elapsed, the 
competent authority conducts an assessment of the application in terms of absolute and relative 
grounds after which a resolution is issued granting or denying the application filed. This decision can be challenged administratively and judicially. 
 
In the case of Colombia, the domestic procedure is also laid down in Andean Community 
Decision 486 of 2000, and includes, inter alia , publication of third-party objections in the Industrial 
Property Gazette, examination of the application and granting of the relevant statutory term, so as 
to give the parties the opportunity to challeng e decisions by the competent authority (for the 
purposes of review or, alternatively, appeal).  
Intellectual property rights 
1.10.  Please clarify whether the discipline s and enforcement provisions cover all types 
of 'intermediary service pr oviders' for all parties. 
                                               
1 Notified to the WTO in document: IP/N/1/PER/I/3 (7 November 2000). 
2 Notified to the WTO in document: IP/N/1/PER/2 (29 July 2010). WT/REG333/2 
- 5 - 
   Parties' reply: The enforcement of intellectua l property rights (in particular copyright and 
related rights in the digital environment), applies to intermediary service providers who provide 
"mere conduit" transmission services, caching and storage services, as provided in the articles 
of 251 to 253 of Chapter 4 of Title VII of the Agreement. 
Questions from the delegation of Mexico 
Provisions on trade in goods 
Technical barriers to trade (TBT) 
1.11.  With regard to the provisions on te chnical barriers to trade that have been 
"reaffirmed" in terms of the WTO Agreement on TBT, does this mean for the Parties that 
no new rights and obligations have been created under the Free Trade Agreement as a result of this "reaffirmation"? 
 Parties' reply: The scope of section 3.4.1. 2 is to improve the implementation of the 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade in Annex 1A to the WTO Agreement (TBT Agreement); it 
means that the Parties reaffirm their rights and obligations under the TBT Agreement but this does 
not mean that the Parties cannot create new rights and obligations under the FTA. By reaffirming, 
the Parties intend to recall the principles of the TBT Agreement and they express their intention 
that the FTA be interpreted consistently with this Agreement. 
 
Article 4. Rules of origin 
1.12.  We would like to know whether the prov isions laid down in Article 4 (Cumulation 
of origin with other countries) have already entered into force and, if so, which are the 
beneficiary countries? If these provisions  have not yet entered into force, has 
a particular country initiated the relevant pr ocedures so that this provision may be used 
with another country? 
 Parties' reply: None of the Parties has so far indicated that it would like to have cumulation 
with the other countries mentioned in Article 4 of Annex II. 
 
General Provisions of the Agreement 
Intellectual property rights 
1.13.  With regard to the Parties' understandi ng of the content of this paragraph, how 
will they establish, as part of the implem entation of the Agreement, the mutually 
supportive relationship between the Conventi on on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the 
TRIPS Agreement? 
 Parties' reply: The Parties have to respect the obligations of the CBD and the 
TRIPS Agreement as is indicated in Article 201(6). In particular, under the Agreement, the Parties 
committed to cooperate to ensure that IPR are supportive of their rights and obligations under the CBD. 
 In this framework, Chapter 2 on the protection of biodiversity and traditional knowledge: 
 - Recognizes the importance and value of biological diversity and recognizes the country's 
sovereign rights over natural resources; 
 - Subjects the use of traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources to prior 
informed consent of communities and fa ir and equitable sharing of benefits; 
 - Recognizes the usefulness of requiring disclosure of the origin or source of genetic 
resources and traditional knowledge in patent applications. 
 Additionally, the Parties will cooperate with a view to: 
 - Clarifying the issue and concept of misappropriation of genetic resources, in order to find 
appropriate measures to address it; WT/REG333/2 
- 6 - 
   - Facilitating the exchange of information about patent applications and granted patents 
related to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge; 
 - Training personnel; and  - Exchanging information on the legal framework. 
1.14.  In respect of the protection of biod iversity and traditional knowledge, how is the 
wider application of prior informed consent from the holders of such knowledge being promoted? 
 Parties' reply: Under the Agreement (Art. 201.3), the Parties reiterated their commitment 
under Article 8 (j) of the CBD. Thus they pledge d to respect, preserve and maintain knowledge 
of their indigenous communities. Likewise, they agreed to promote the widespread use of such knowledge, conditioned to the prior informed consent of the holders of such knowledge, which is 
developed in accordance with the internal laws of the country. 
  In addition, the Parties may maintain or develop their respective domestic law aimed at 
promoting respect for Prior Informed Consent, such as working with communities in strengthening 
registration systems of knowledge, workshops and events dissemination of the relevance thereof, among others. 
 
 For instance, the EU adopted a Regulation (511/2014) on compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilisation in the Union. The EU is now in the process of elaborating 
implementing measures which include registering of collections, monitoring user compliance and 
best practices. These legal instruments and th eir implementation will promote their wider 
application. 
 
Others 
Environment and labour 
1.15.  Concerning Title IX of the Agr eement and the agreements internationally 
recognized by the Parties, what was the reas on for including only the list contained in 
footnote 77? Are there plans to extend this list of international agreements? 
 Parties' reply: The list of international agreements referred to in the footnote of the 
WTO report and in the Title on Trade and Sust ainable Development of the Trade Agreement are 
the outcome of negotiations and reflect the agreements to which the Parties are Parties. They incorporate the fundamental ILO Conventions as well as a number of key multilateral 
environmental agreements relevant to trade.  The Agreement makes provision for the list 
of multilateral environmental agreements to be  expanded, subject to accord of the Parties, 
as follows: 
 
 Article 270.3 states that "The Trade Committee may recommend the extension of the application of paragraph 2 to other multilateral environmental agreements following a proposal by the Sub-Committee on Trade and Sustainable Development." 
 
1.16.  As regards the provisions relating to the CBD, do the Parties consider them to be hortatory in nature or otherwise?  
 Parties' reply: The provisions related to the CBD include both binding and promotional 
(exhortative) elements. 
 
1.17.  What type of information would the Pa rties have to exchange on other concluded 
agreements? 
 Parties' reply: The Parties will exchange information on their ratification of the 
ILO Conventions, as well as other conventions th at are classified as up-to-date by the ILO. 
 WT/REG333/2 
- 7 - 
   Also, Article 272, in which Parties recognize thei r sovereign right of States over their natural 
resources, as well as over their access to geneti c resources, provides that "Parties will take 
appropriate measures, in accordance with the CBD, with the aim of sharing in a fair and equitable 
way and upon mutually agreed terms, the results of research and development and the benefits 
arising from the commercial and other utilisation of genetic resources with the Party providing 
such resources."  
 In Article 286 on Cooperation on Trade and Sustainable Development, the Parties agreed 
that one of the activities in the areas of mutual  interest would be the "exchange of information 
and experiences related to the promotion and im plementation of good practices of corporate 
social responsibility." 
 
Article 13. Direct transport 
1.18.  In accordance with Article 13 (Direct transport), could a product be considered as 
originating if it has been temporarily st ored under the surveillance of the customs 
authorities in a free zone of a non-Party? 
 Parties' reply: Products can be seen as originating if, when transported between the two 
Parties, they are temporarily stored in a third country not party to the agreement providing that 
those products remain under customs supervision in that third country and that they have not undergone operations other than unloading, relo ading or keeping them in good condition. 
 
Article 31. Provisions on verification 
1.19.  Article 31 sets out provisions on the verification of proofs of origin among the 
Parties. What procedures w ill be employed to verify the origin of goods for which 
a tariff preference has been requested thro ugh the cumulation of origin with other 
countries mechanism? 
 Parties' reply: Materials can be considered as originating materials from countries in 
Central America, Venezuela or an Andean Community country not party to this Agreement under 
certain conditions (see Article 3 to Annex II).   Among those conditions, the signatory Ande an Countries, the European Union and the 
non-Party or non-Parties concerned have an arrangement on adequate administrative cooperation 
procedures which will ensure full implementation of Article 15 on certification and of Article 31 on verification of the originating status of the products. 
 
 If this is the case then the proof of origin via an EUR.1 certificate, form A certificate or an invoice declaration should mention "cumulation with [name of country]" and be backed up by 
proof of origin of those materials from th at third country when exported to the EU. 
Any verification, like all claims for preference, will be based on either a random selection or when there are reasonable doubts as to the authenticity of the documents. 
 
Article 60. Customs-related procedures 
1.20.  What is the procedure established by each Party to request an advance ruling on 
the origin of a good, in accordance  with Article 60 (Advance rulings)? 
 EU's reply: The EU has a system of Binding Origin Information (BOI). A business can request 
a ruling from an EU Member State on the origin of the products they intend to export. The ruling 
will be valid as from the date it is issued and the Customs authorities have up to 150 days to issue 
the ruling. The ruling can be used afterwards for im ports or exports provided the holder of the BOI 
proves that it refers to the same goods as covered by the import or export declaration. The holders of a BOI are not exempt from providing the necessary proof of origin. 
 
 More information can be found on the European Commission website including the 
information that should be sent to receive a ruling and where a request should be made.  
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_duties/rules_origin/introduction/index_en
.htm WT/REG333/2 
- 8 - 
   Colombia's reply: The procedure for requesting an advance ruling on origin is laid down in 
Chapter II, Section III, Articles 12 ff. of the draft New Customs Regulations. 
  Further information can be found at the following link: 
 
http://www.dian.gov.co/dian/13Normativida d.nsf/F2732175F8DCCD 8A052572020053CE91/E1F0B
E642E3466A505257DEB007A6C06?OpenDocument 
 
 Peru's reply: In the case of Peru, the procedure to apply for an advance ruling on origin in 
accordance with Article 60 (Advance Rulings) is established through the Single Harmonized Text (TUO) of the Rules of Advance Rulings on Origin and Origin Marking for Goods (Supreme Decree 
No.°001-2011-MINCETUR). 
 http://www.mincetur.gob.pe/newweb/portals/0/tr ansparencia/decreto_supremo_001_2011_mince
tur.pdf 
 
Questions from the delegation of Thailand 
Rules of Origin 
1.21.  Paragraph 3.32: Please give a clar ification regarding the cumulation of the 
materials imported from a non-party in the Andean Community, Central America, 
South America or Caribbean country. Please  also provide the list of countries and 
materials that the Parties agreed to apply su ch cumulation, as well as an administrative 
arrangement or procedures to implement such cumulation. 
 Parties' reply: There are two different types of cumulation: 
 
(1) Under Article 3 to Annex II of the Trad e Agreement between the European Union and 
Colombia and Peru cumulation is provided under clearly specified conditions to Central America 
(Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama), Venezuela and the 
Andean Community not party to the agreement so that materials from these countries are considered as materials originating in Colombia or Peru when further processed or incorporated into a product. This cumulation covers all products. 
 
(2) Under Article 4 to Annex II, there is also the possibility for the EU, Colombia and Peru to use materials, which may be specified, originating in other countries in South America, the Caribbean 
and Mexico at the request of the EU, Colombia or Peru. To date no such request has been made so 
this type of cumulation does not yet apply and ther efore there is no list of countries or materials 
for this cumulation. 
 
To date the parties have not implemented any provision on this matter and any signatory 
Andean country or the European Union has initiated the procedures for use.  
Export duties and charges, an d quantitative restrictions 
1.22.  Paragraph 3.37: Please affirm that, pursuant to Article 25 of the Agreement, 
export duties or taxes are not allowed even if they are in accordance with Article XI 
of GATT 1994. 
 Parties' reply: The parties confirm that export duties are prohibited pursuant to Article 25, 
with only some exceptions provided for in the Agreement (e.g. export of emeralds and coffee by 
Colombia), thereby going beyond the general disciplines of the GATT. The general exceptions 
of the Agreement apply.  
 Transparency 
1.23.  Paragraph 5.1-5.3: Please advise wh ether there is any tran sparency rule which 
goes beyond the transparency requirement prescribed under the WTO Agreements. WT/REG333/2 
- 9 - 
   Parties' reply: The rules on transparency apply to the entire agreement, notwithstanding 
that there are specific provisions in each of th e chapters. Under the Agreement, the Parties ensure 
the right of defence and due process, the ability to review and submit appeals in administrative 
actions such are not so specific in the rules on  transparency of WTO Agreements (example: GATS, 
Art. III and following). Furthermore, Title X sets the rules governing transparency and 
administrative proceedings, thus this section of the Agreement does not only focus on transparency but mainly on the administrative proceedings. Article 293 of the Agreement sets the 
transparency rules in the area of subsidies relate d to trade in goods that are the same prescribed 
under the WTO Agreement on subsidies.  Accession and Withdrawal 
1.24.  Paragraph 5.14: Please advise whet her the Agreement would be terminated in 
case of withdrawal by Colombia and/or Peru. 
 Parties' reply: Article 331 of the Agreement states that any party may withdraw from the 
agreement, but not for that matter the agreement terminates. The agreement will continue to be 
in force between the EU and the other/s signatorie s. However, if the EU withdraws, the agreement 
is terminated. 
Government Procurement 
Paragraph 5.15: Are the market access commi tments for services and construction 
services for the EU, Colombia and Peru under Annex XII related to or complied with their 
market access commitments under the Services  Provisions and commitments under this 
FTA? Please explain. 
 
Parties' reply: The services and establishmen t chapter of the agreement does not contain 
any commitment on government procurement. On the other hand, if commitments exist in the 
government procurement chapter for a specific sector, such sector should be normally open in the services and establishment chapter as well, so that the GP commitment can be fully implemented. 
Thus, the provisions of title VI on "Procurement" and Title IV on "Trade in Services, Establishment 
and Electronic Commerce" apply simultaneously.  Paragraph 5.16 
1.25.  Is Colombia interested to join as  a member of the WTO GPA? If so, when? 
 Colombia's reply: Colombia has not expressed interest in joining the Government 
Procurement Agreement of the WTO. 
 
1.26.  Is Peru interested in joining the WTO GPA either as an observer or a member in 
the near future? 
 Peru's reply: Peru is neither a member of th e WTO GPA nor an observer to the GPA. Peru is 
not considering the possibility of being part of the GPA in the near future. 
 1.27.  Since both Colombia and Peru are not a member to the WTO GPA, and it seems the 
concluded Agreement on Government Procur ement (Title VI and Annex XII of the 
Agreement) is based on the WTO GPA, it is interesting to learn fr om both Colombia and 
Peru as to whether and how Colombia and Peru need to modify their laws, regulations 
and enforcements on government procurement in order to implement this FTA. 
Please identify. 
Colombia and Peru's reply: 
 In the case of Peru, Peru is not a WTO GPA member but it has a very high government 
procurement standard because of Peru's Free Trade Agreements with United States, European Union, Japan, Korea, among others. In that sense, after the entry into force and implementation of the US-Peru TPA, Peru hasn't done any substantial change in its laws, WT/REG333/2 
- 10 - 
  regulations and enforcements on government pr ocurement in order to implement other FTAs, 
including the Trade Agreement with EU.   In the case of Colombia, Colombia has not identified any modifications to be made to its 
government procurement legislation in order to comply with the obligations in Title VI on 
Government Procurement. 
Intellectual Property Rights 
1.28.  Paragraph 5.27: For phar maceutical products covered by a patent, please explain 
in more detail about a mechanism to compen sate the patent owner for unreasonable 
curtailment of effective patent term resu lting from the first marketing approval 
of that product. 
 Parties' reply: Article 230(4) allows for Parties to provide in their national law mechanisms 
to compensate the patent owner for unreasonab le curtailment of the effective patent term. 
 
Pharmaceutical research plays a decisive role in the continuing improvement in public 
health. Medicinal products, especially those that are the result of long, costly research will not continue to be developed unless they are covered by favourable rules that provide for sufficient 
protection to encourage such research. When th e period that elapses between the filing of 
an application for a patent for a new medicinal product and authorisation to place the medicinal product on the market makes the period of effective protection under the patent insufficient to cover the investment put into the research the research will not be continued. All the interests at 
stake, including those of public health, in a sector as complex and sensitive as the pharmaceutical 
sector should nevertheless be taken into account. For this purpose, the certificate cannot be granted for a period exceeding 5 years, but this is  without prejudice to a possible extension of the 
period of sui generis protection by a Party as an in centive or a reward for research in certain target 
populations, such as children. The protection gran ted should furthermore be strictly confined to 
the product which obtained authorisation to be placed on the market as a medicinal product. 
 
It is important to note, that as stated in Article 230.4 of the Agreement, compensation for 
pharmaceutical products, is an optional provision. This mechanism is subject to the domestic legislation. Its purpose is to compensate the patent owner for unreasonable curtailment of the 
effective patent term resulting from the first marketing approval of that product in that Party. 
Such mechanism shall confer all of the exclusive ri ghts of a patent, subject to the same limitations 
and exceptions applicable to the original patent. Peru and Colombia do not provide for such 
compensation, while the EU has in place a system of Supplementary Protection Certificates set out 
in EC Regulation 469/2009.  
1.29.  Paragraph 5.28: Please clarify if a prot ection of data of certain regulated product 
(Article 231) will grant an exclusivity period during which a third party may not 
commercialize a product based on undisclosed te st or other data related to safety and 
efficacy of pharmaceutical products and agricultural chemical products. 
Parties' reply: According to Article 231 of the Agreement, the Parties shall grant an 
exclusivity period over test data or other undi sclosed information on safety and efficacy. Thus, 
during this period of exclusivity a third party may not commercialise a product based on such data 
or information, unless the third party presents proo f of the explicit consent of the holder of the 
protected information or his/her own test data.  
Other 
Environment and labour 
1.30.  Please advise whether Title IX on tr ade and sustainable development is subject to 
the dispute settlement mechanism of the Agreement. 
 Parties' reply: According to Article 285.5 of the Agreement, Title IX is not subject to the 
dispute settlement mechanism, set out in Title XII of the Agreement. Articles 283 – 285 establish 
specific procedures for Government Consultations as well as for Experts to submit conclusions and 
recommendations on matters arising under Title IX. 
 WT/REG333/2 
- 11 - 
  1.31.  Paragraph 5.33: Please  clarify whether the development for domestic mechanism 
to submit opinions and make recommendatio ns on trade and sustainable development 
issues are mandatory or voluntary. 
 Parties' reply: Each Party is required under the Agreement to consult domestic committees 
or groups on matters related to the subject matt er of the Title. The development of domestic 
mechanisms is therefore mandatory; it is described in Article 281 of the Agreement. 
Dispute Settlement 
Paragraph 5.45 
1.32.  Please advise whether an approval from the Trade Committees is required prior to 
the suspension of concessions. 
 Parties' reply: No prior approval of the Trade Committees is required. According to 
Article 310(4) – the complaining Party can suspend benefits 10 days after the notification to the 
Party complained against and to the Trade Committee of its intention to suspend concessions unless the Party complained against initiates arbitration proceedings under Article 310(5) 
challenging the level of suspension. In this latter case, and according to Article 310(5), the 
suspension will only take place once the arbitration panel has notified its ruling to the parties and any suspension must comply with that ruling (para. 5). The Trade Committee may always exercise 
the function provided in Article 13, subparagraph 1 g) to explore the most appropriate way to 
solve the difficulty between the parties in re lation to matters covered by the Agreement. 
 1.33.  Please clarify under which situation the responding Party "may suspend benefits 
at a level equivalent to that applied by  the complaining Party, while such Party 
continues to suspend benefits." 
 Parties' reply: In accordance with Article 310(2) of the Trade Agreement, the suspension 
of benefits should be at a level equivalent to the nullification or impairment caused by the 
violation. The Parties understand that this question refers to the interpretation of Article 311(4) (review of measures adopted after the susp ension of benefits or compensation for 
non-compliance). According to this provision, if af ter the suspension of concessions the responding 
Party has taken a measure to comply with the ruling, it may notify such measure to the complainant and also its request for the complain ant to withdraw the suspension. The suspension 
must be terminated within 30 days from the date of notification (except disagreement on the 
compatibility of the measure with the provisions of the Agreement). In case of disagreement which 
is not resolved within 30 days of the notification, any of the Parties may request the original panel to rule on the matter. If, following these 30 days, none of the Parties has requested the panel to 
decide on the consistency of the measure allegedly taken to comply by the respondent, and the 
complaining Party has not terminated the suspen sion, the respondent can suspend benefits at 
a level equivalent to that applied by the complainant during the period of duration of the 
suspension. 
 1.34.  Paragraph 5.48: Please advise whet her the mediation mechanism is limited to 
non-tariff measures falling under Title III (trade in goods). If the answer is affirmative, 
please explain the reason why such mechanism is not extended to the dispute related to 
other Agreement-inconsistent measures. 
 Parties' reply: The mediation mechanism is indeed limited to NTB of Title III 
(Trade in Goods) as per Article I of Annex XI V (Mediation Mechanism for Non-Tariff Measures). 
It is a policy choice as these measures are more suited than other kind of measures to be dealt with under mediation. The Parties agreed to encompass exclusively to non-tariff measures relating 
to trade in goods and excluding rules of origin. 
 
__________