RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/5  
 
15 September  2016 
(16-4882) Page: 1/3 
Committee on Trade and Development  
Fifth Dedicated Session on the Monitoring Mechanism 
on Sp ecial and Differential Treatment    
 
 NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 8 JULY  2016 
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Christopher Onyanga Aparr (Uganda)  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA ................................ ................................ ....................  1 
B. MONITORING OF  SPECIAL AND DIFFEREN TIAL PROVISIONS  ................................ .. 1 
- Statement by the Chairman  ................................ ................................ .........................  1 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 3 
 
 
A. ADOPT ION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/MMSDT/ 3 of 28 June 2016 
was adopted . 
B. MONITORING OF SPECIA L AND DIFFERENTIAL P ROVISIONS  
- Statement by the Chairman  
2. The Chairman  said that, a t the Ninth Ministerial Conference held in  Bali, a Decision was 
taken to establish a Monitoring Mechanism (MM) on Special and Differential Treatment (S&D). The 
Decision was contained in document WT/MIN(13)/45 - WT/L/920. According to the Decision, the 
MM was to act as a focal point within the WTO to analyze and review the implementation of S&D 
provisions. The Mechanism operated in Dedicated Sessions of the Committee on Trade and 
Development (CTD), and was to meet at least twice a year. Two meetings of the Dedicated 
Session on the MM were therefore held in 2014 and in 2015, and the present meeting was the 
Fifth Dedicated Session. He recalled that, in previous meetings, an overview had been provided of 
the Decision establishing the MM, including its scope, functions and operations. He did not intend 
to repeat these points, but wished to take the opportunity to remind Members that, according to 
the Decision, the monitoring of special and differential provisions in the Mechanism was to be 
undertaken on the basis of written inputs or submissions made by M embers, as well as on the 
basis of reports received from other WTO bodies to which submissions by Members could also be 
made. Noting that no written submissions had been received to date, he called on Members to 
make submissions so that the MM could become  operational . In this regard , he invited any 
delegation intending to make a submission soon to inform the Committee. He also  invited 
Members to consider how to proceed with the MM until a submission was made, including whether 
meetings of the Dedicated Ses sion should continue to be held.    
3. The representative of Morocco, on behalf of the African Group , highlighted the importance 
of S&D for developing countries and least developed countries (LDCs). He noted, inter alia , in this 
regard that the ultimate objec tive of S&D was to enable these countries to meaningfully integrate 
into the multilateral trading system so as to derive maximum economic benefits. He also noted 
that, while S&D provisions were an integral part of the system, in most cases they had not bee n 
effectively implemented. He recalled that the African Group had cir culated a communication in 
July 2002 – contained in document TN/CTD/W/3/Rev.2 – which proposed to make several WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/5  
 
- 2 - 
 
  provisions more precise, effective and operational, in line with paragraph 4 4 of the Doha 
Ministerial Declaration. The Group had also proposed the establishment of a monitoring body, 
although  the intention had been for  this body to monitor the provisions after they were 
strengthened. The lack of submissions to the MM could be expl ained by this sequencing issue, in 
particular as there was no progress in the negotiations in the Special Session of the CTD. 
Furthermore, the structure of the MM did not provide the latitude to pursue work as had been 
originally intended. He explained, inter alia , in this regard that the MM did not have a negotiating 
mandate, and could only make recommendations to inform the work of the relevant WTO body. 
The Mechanism was supposed to act as a focal point within the WTO to analyze and review the 
implementa tion of S&D provisions, but Members were still able to avail themselves of other 
relevant review mechanisms or processes in other WTO bodies.  In closing, he said that, unless 
something was done about the scope, functions, terms of reference and operation o f the MM, it 
would continue to give the African Group a chilling effect. He also observed  that the MM and the 
Special Session of the CTD were distinct but mutually supportive and interdependent bodies, and 
in this light emphasized the need to develop compl ementary and collaborative approaches 
between the two.  
4. The representative of Japan  said that his delegation was aware of the importance of S&D 
for developing countries , and hope d to have constructive and meaningful discussions on S&D 
issues, based on the r eal needs of Members. In this respect, analytical work under the MM could 
serve as a first step to further discussions , including in the context of possible negotiations in the 
Special Session  of the CTD . He also pointed out that active engagement in the M M was  in line with, 
and would  contribute to, Members'  collective efforts to reinvigorate the regular work of the 
Committees , as stated in paragraph 29 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration. Japan was ready to 
engage in frank and constructive discussions o n the basis of submissions from the Members in 
need.  
5. The representative of Benin, on behalf of the LDC Group , expressed support for the 
intervention by Morocco and emphasized the importance of S&D to LDCs. The LDC Group believed 
that Members needed to revi sit the mandate of the MM in order to adapt it to the needs of 
developing countries and LDCs.   
6. The representative of the United States  said that his delegation shared the views 
expressed by Japan. He also indicated his delegation's disappointment that the  effort that had 
been put into negotiating the MM had not generated any submissions from Members. It was 
particularly disappointing that those Members that had pushed for the establishment of the 
Mechanism now seemed hesitant to utilize it. The United Stat es (US)  believed that the analytical 
approach envisioned in the Decision establishing the MM held promise, and could help to drive 
more productive and specific discussions on the functioning and possible shortfalls of existing S&D 
provisions. With regard t o the question as to whether meetings of the Dedicated Session should 
continue to be held, he noted that paragraph 9 of the Decision establishing the MM stated that the 
Mechanism would operate in Dedicated Sessions of the CTD, and that it would meet twice a year. 
The Decision did not say that meetings would only be held when a submission was made.  
7. The representative of Canada  said that her delegation would need to give some thought to 
the intervention by Morocco. She noted that the negotiations leading up t o the Tenth Ministerial 
Conference (MC10) had shown that a number of Members had issues concerning the 
implementation of S&D provisions. The negotiations had also demonstrated that there was possibly 
a lack of understanding of some of the underlying proble ms and challenges experienced with S&D 
implementation. In this regard, Canada believed that discussions in the MM had the potential to 
inform Members o f these challenges, and could positively contribute to discussions in other bodies, 
including in the Spec ial Session of the CTD.  
8. The representative of the European Union  said that her delegation had similar views to 
those expressed by Canada , Japan and the US. M uch thought and effort had gone into establishing 
the M M, and it was disappointing that no submiss ions had yet been made. She called on Members 
to make written submissions and thereby test the Mechanism. She also indicated that the 
European  Union (EU)  would need to give some thought to the intervention by Morocco.  
9. The representative of Australia  indica ted that, while the intervention by Morocco needed to 
be considered sombrely, it would still be difficult for him to explain to his Government the views WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/5  
 
- 3 - 
 
  expressed by the African Group on the MM, given that there had been no substantive discussions 
in the D edicated Session on the basis of written submissions.  
10. The representative of Rwanda, on behalf of the ACP Group , expressed support for the 
interventions by Morocco and Benin.  
11. The representative of South Africa  supported the intervention by Morocco. She bel ieved 
that Members needed to find a way to make the MM an effective mechanism that would achieve 
concrete results.  
12. The Chairman  referred to his earlier intervention and in this regard invited Members to 
continue to consider how to proceed with the MM unti l a submission was made.  
13. The Committee took note  of all interventions.  
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
14. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
15. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________