G/TBT/GEN/192  
 
17 March 2016  
(16-1567)  Page: 1/1  
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
GOOD REGULATORY PRACTICE (GRP) 
VOLUNTARY MECHANISMS AND RELATED PRINCIPLES 
(JOB/TBT/119/REV.1) 
REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON TO THE TBT COMMITTEE1  
This Report was delivered by the Chairperson of the WTO TBT Committee at the meeting of  
9-10 March 2016. 
_______________ 
 
1.  I would like to briefly report on the informal discussion we had on Monday 7 March 2016 - earlier this week. I have provided Members by fax three options
2 for consideration with the 
objective of moving our work forwards in this area. Option 1 represented a disclaimer similar to 
what we have already considered before; Option 2 a simpler version of the disclaimer coupled with 
the removal of Column 3 of the guidelines; and, Op tion 3 was to restart the negotiation of the text 
(the "reboot" option). 
2.  First, one clear-cut message you all passed on is that there is no appetite to renegotiate the 
document. Much work – more than two years – has gone into the negotiation of this text, and very 
many of you have engaged in a substantive way. At this point, no one wants to go back. So 
Members have effectively ruled out Option 3 of my fax.  So that leaves us with Options 1 and 2. That is: what to put in the disclaimer. And here, I am afraid, while there seems to be no absolute opposition to having a disclaimer text – indeed all Members have engaged in a draft exercise on 
this text – Members positions remain far apart. 
3.  Some Members would like a strong disclaimer (where not even Option 1 would be sufficient). 
These proponents – of a strong disclaimer – argue for a text that would essentially remove any 
interpretative value of the document. One Member makes a link to the SPS Committee in this 
context. Other Members would accept – or could live with – a disclaimer that is simpler, essentially one that would state that the document cannot add or detract from existing rights under the TBT 
Agreement. And yet a third group of Members are flexible either way because they do not want 
this matter to stand in the way of adoption of the document.  
4.  So we are, unfortunately, back to square one. And, at this point, I see no obvious way out.  
This is unfortunate. As some of you have noted, there are potential systemic consequences to this 
stalemate. On the other hand, the reason we cannot adopt this document today is not because of 
disagreement on substance (by "substance" I mean th e body of the text that has been negotiated 
over two years) but, rather, because of concerns  about how the document might be interpreted by 
another body.  We may need some more out-of-the box thinking on how to resolve this issue. 
5.  That was my brief report on the informal meeting held on Monday, 7 March 2016. 6.  At this point I do not intend to pursue any further consultations with Members on this matter. 
Of course, if Members have any further drafting su ggestions – or other ideas on how to pursue this 
work further, I would invite you to approach me.   
__________  
                                               
1 Alana Maria Lanza Suazo (Honduras). This Report is provided on the Chairperson's own responsibility.  
2 The fax was sent to all Members on 1 March 2016; it includes the 3 options.