WT/REG307/2  
 
30 October  2017 
(17-5870) Page: 1/3 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English  
 
INTERIM ECONOMIC PAR TNERSHIP AGREEMENT B ETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND 
THE ESA  STATES (MADAGASCAR, MAURITIUS, SEYCHELLE S AND ZIMBABWE)  (GOODS)  
QUESTIONS AND REPLIES  
 The following communication, dated 27 October  2017, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegations of the European Union and the ESA States (Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles and 
Zimbabwe) . 
 
 
_______________  
 
 
Question from the delegation of Canada  
 
1.1.  Paragraph 2.1 indicates that Article 3 of Chapter  1 of the EU -ESA Economic 
Partnership Agreement aims "to establish an agreement consistent with GATT 
Article  XXIV and to establish the framework, scope and principles for further 
negotiations on the basis of proposals already submitted and for potential ne gotiations 
on other issues as identified in the Cotonou Agreement and of interest to the Parties". 
Considering that the Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific, ACP -EU cooperation 
(the Cotonou Agreement) has been revised to incorporate new challenges such as  
climate change (see article 32A in the Ouagadougou Cotonou Agreement revised on 
22 June 2010):  
 Building on the Cotonou Agreement, should Parties engage in further negotiations, 
would they consider including additional provisions on environment and climate change?  
 
Response from the Parties   
 
 The EU -ESA Agreement includes, in its Chapter 5 - Art. 53, a rendez -vous clause on issues 
for future negotiations, including Agriculture, Development, Sanitary and Phyto -sanitary issues, 
Technical Barriers to Tr ade and Sustainable development. The parties could consider additional 
provisions on environment and climate change, based in particular on their multilateral 
commitments such as the Paris agreement and on the EPA's principle to build on the "acquis of the  
Cotonou agreement" when Parties will engage in further negotiations with a view to reaching a 
comprehensive EPA (art 4.a).  
 
Questions from the delegation of the United States  
 
1.2.  Paragraph 2.1 of the Factual Presentation states that the Agreement was signed  by 
the Parties on 29 August 2009 and provisionally applied since 14 May 2012. Was any 
preferential tariff treatment provided – either by the EU to the ESA states or the ESA 
states to the EU – between the date of signature in 2009 and the date of provision al 
application in 2012? Please provide the date or dates that the European Union began to 
provide preferential tariff treatment to each of the ESA states under the interim 
Agreement, including those ESA states that have not yet signed the interim agreement . 
For each ESA state providing preferential tariff treatment to the EU, please provide the 
date or dates in which that preferential tariff treatment began.  
 WT/REG307/2  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Response from the Parties  
 
The ESA -EU interim EPA was concluded and initialled by six ESA countries, namely Comoros, 
Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles and Zimbabwe, by December 2007, and Zambia did so in 
September 2008. Pending signature and ratification of the agreement, the EPA provided in its 
article 62(6) for a transitional arrangement1, advancing the EPA market access to these countries. 
In 2009, four of them, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles and Zimbabwe, signed the agreement 
and the agreement is provisionally applied since May 2012. Comoros and Zambia as LDCs benefit 
from duty free quota  free system of the Everything But Arms (EBA) regime under the Generalised 
Scheme of Preferences. All the other ESA members that had not taken the steps towards signing 
and ratifying an EPA are also LDCs, and therefore benefit from the EBA preferential reg ime. The 
dates in which each ESA state begun granting preferential tariff treatment to the EU is indicated in 
section 3.1.2 of the Factual Presentation.  
 
1.3.  Paragraph 2.1 states that one of the goals of the Agreement is to support African 
regional integration , yet the African parties to this Interim EPA represent a subset of 
regional economic communities that aspire to have harmonized and even unified trade 
regimes.  Could the parties explain how they believe this agreement accomplishes the 
stated goal of suppo rting African regional integration?  
Response from the Parties  
 
 The ESA -EU interim EPA was initially negotiated by all the ESA members and aims at 
supporting the regional integration of this region. It aims at facilitating meeting the Rules of Origin 
requirement through provisions on cumulation with the broader ACP constituency and with the 
regions within the ACP such as COMESA, SADC, etc. It also aims at facilitating trade, including 
improvements of customs procedures, removal of non-tariff barriers and h armoniz ing standards, 
thus improving the business climate attracting foreign investments, and contributing to growth and 
jobs. This will eventually strengthen and corroborate the regional integration process even if not 
all members are part of the EPA.  
 
Currently, four ESA members are implementing the EPA. Comoros signed the agreement last 
July and informed the EU of its intention to complete its ratification process by the end of this 
year. Zambia and all other ESA members may also decide at a later stage when they are ready to 
join the agreement. The EU cannot impose the EPA on the ESA members that do not want it or do 
not feel ready to join, nor can it refuse to apply it to the ESA members wishing to implement it.  
 
The EPA helps promoting regional soluti ons, which are good for trade and development, by 
harnessing ACP regional integration initiatives already underway. Furthermore, Art. 12(2) allows 
for the Parties to review t he schedules of tariff liberaliz ation in Annex II with a view to harmoniz ing 
them taking into account regional integration processes.  
 
1.4.  Per paragraphs 3.3 through 3.5, under the Interim EPA would the EU be exempt 
from an African Union peacekeeping levy were one to be applied by the ESA states? Do 
the ESA states currently charge any levie s that the EU is exempt from paying? If so, 
please provide a full list of such levies by country.  
Response from the European Union   
 
 The EU is not exempted under the EPA of any levy that the ESA members would apply. To 
the EU's knowledge, none of the signatory ESA countries of the EPA applies such a levy.  
 
1.5.  Related to paragraph 3.4, what is the EU's rationale for the MFN clause in the 
interim EPA that it is entitled to any tariff concession subsequently granted to any major 
trading economy?  Please provi de a complete list of all countries that would, at the time 
of this review, be considered a "major trading economy."  
 
 
 
                                                
1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1528/2007 of 20 December 2007 .  WT/REG307/2  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Response from the Parties   
 
 The EU liberaliz es 100% of its market for the ESA signatory countries of an EPA, whereas 
the development status of the ESA EPA countries is taken into account by giving them the 
possibility to shield their most sensitive products from liberali zation, within the limits of 
Article  XXIV GATT. If these countries decided, however, to liberalise these products for other major 
trading economies, the EU would naturally expect to be treated equally. This is not applicable to 
agreements with ACP countries or regions.  
 
The term "major trading economy" means any developed country, or any country accounting 
for a share of world merchandise exports above 1 percent or any group of countries acting 
individually, collectively or through an economic integration agreement accounting collectively for 
a share of world merchandise exports above 1.5 percent. The countries that can be  considered as 
"major trading economy" can therefore vary over time.  
 
1.6.  Paragraph 4.15 of the Secretariat document notes that, "The Agreement is to 
remain in force until the comprehensive EPA enters into force." What occurs if the 
comprehensive EPA never ent ers into force with respect to certain of the African 
partners?  Does the interim EPA have a termination date?  What domestic approval 
procedures are required by the EU and its partners for an interim EPA to enter into 
force?  
Response from the Parties  
 
 The interim EPA concluded with the ESA partners does not include trade related issues which 
would make it a comprehensive agreement. This is the reason why the interim EPA text refers to 
the comprehensive EPA and includes a rendezvous clause (art 53) to conti nue negotiations on 
these issues. However, the currently implemented EPA is a self -standing international agreement 
that can enter into force irrespective of the discussions on the comprehensive EPA. Furthermore, 
the interim EPA does not include any termin ation date.  
 
The EU and its ESA partner states need to follow their applicable constitutional or internal 
rules and procedures in order to sign, ratify or approve the agreement. The Agreement is currently 
provisionally applied by the EU and four ESA Membe rs (Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles and 
Zimbabwe) in accordance with its article 62(4).  
 
In accordance with the EU rules and procedures, all the ESA signatory countries need to 
ratify the agreement before it proceeds to its ratification by all EU member  states. The agreement 
will then enter into force the first day of the first month following the deposit of the last instrument 
of ratification, acceptance or approval.  
 
****  
 
As a general comment, the EU would like to note that several documents presentin g the 
main characteristics of the EPAs as well as their benefits have been published on the EU 
web-page:  
 
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries -and-regions/development/economic -partnerships/  
 
__________