RESTRICTED  
  
G/C/M/128  
 
19 September  2017 
(17-4949) Page: 1/58 
Council for Trade in Goods    
 
 MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF THE COUNCIL FO R TRADE IN GOODS  
6 APRIL  2017  
CHAIRPERSON: H .E. MR. DACIO CASTILLO  
The meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG, or the C ouncil) was convened by 
Airgram  WTO/AIR/CTG/7; the proposed agenda for the mee ting was ci rculated in 
document  G/C/W/737.  
 
The Deputy Director -General (DDG) Xiaozhun YI, when opening the meeting,  reminded delegations 
that Rule  12 of the Rules of Procedure for Meetings of the Council for Trade in Goods provided that 
the election of the Chairpers on of the CTG should take place at the first  meeting of the year , and 
take effect at the end of that meeting. However, the then current Chair of the Council, 
Ambassador Hamish McCormick (Australia), had been reassigned to his Capital and was not 
available to complete his mandate. For such situations, Rule  14 of the Rules of Procedure for 
Meetings of the CTG provided that, if the Chairperson could no longer perform the functions of the 
office, the Council should designate the Vice -Chairperson referred to in Rule 12 or, if no 
Vice-Chairperson had been elected, it should elect an interim  Chairperson to perform those 
functions pending the election of a new Chairperson.  
 
Given that the Council had not elected a Vice -Chairperson, that the election of the incoming 
Chairperson had not yet been finalized, and in line with the aforementioned rules, the CTG could 
elect an interim  Chairperson to perform those functions pending the election of a new Chairperson. 
He therefore proposed that the Council elect H.E.  Mr Dacio C ASTILLO (Honduras) as its interim  
Chairperson. Ambassador Castillo was very experienced, had chaired the Council in 2013 , and had 
kindly agreed to make himself available in the event that  Members decide d to appoint  him as 
interim  Chairperson . 
 
The Council so agreed . 
 
Ambassador Castillo thanked delegations for having appointed  him as the CTG  interim  
Chairperson. Before the agenda was adopted, the delegations of Afghanistan and China indicated, 
respectively, their intention to raise under "Other Business" an  issue about  Pakistan's Closure of 
Corridors and Transit and an issue about  Certain Trade Restrictive and Distorting Practices by the 
United States. The interim  Chairperson indicated that , under the same agenda item , he would 
raise the matter o f the date o f the next meeting.  
 
The Council so agreed  and the meeting proceeded on the basis of the following agenda:  
 
1   ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON OF THE COUNCIL F OR TRADE IN GOODS  ........................  3 
2   NOTIFICATION OF R EGIONAL TRADE AGREEM ENTS  ................................ ....................  3 
2.1   FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COSTA RICA AND COLOMBIA 
(WT/REG376/N/1)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  3 
2.2   THE PACIFIC ALLIANCE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT (WT/REG377/N/1)  ................................  3 
2.3   FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TURKEY AND THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA 
(WT/REG378/N/1)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  3 
2.4   FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TURKEY AND MALAYSIA (WT/REG379/N/1)  .................  3 G/C/M/128  
 
- 2 - 
 
  3   STATUS OF NOTIFICATI ONS UNDE R THE PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENTS 
IN ANNEX  IA OF THE WTO AGREEM ENT (G/L/223/REV.24)  ................................ .............  3 
4   APPOINTMENT OF OFFIC ERS TO THE SUBSIDIAR Y BODIES OF THE COUN CIL 
FOR TRADE IN GOODS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 6 
5   ACCESSION OF THE  KYRGYZ REPUBLIC TO T HE EURASIAN ECONOMIC  
UNION: PROCEDURES UN DER ARTICLE XXVIII:3  OF GATT 1994 – REQUEST 
FROM THE KYRGYZ REPU BLIC  ................................ ................................ ..........................  7 
6   ACCESSION OF THE REP UBLIC OF ARMENIA TO THE EURASIAN ECONOMI C 
UNION: PROCEDURES UN DER ART ICLE  XXVIII:3 OF GATT  1994 – REQUEST 
FROM THE EUROPEAN UN ION ................................ ................................ ..........................  9 
7   ENLARGEMENT OF THE E UROPEAN UNION: PROCE DURES UNDER 
ARTICLE  XXVIII:3 OF GATT  1994 (G/L/1051/ADD.7 ) ................................ ...................  10 
8   JORDAN – REQUEST FOR A WAIVER RELATING TO T HE TRANSITIONAL 
PERIOD FOR THE ELIMI NATION OF THE EXPORT  SUBSIDY PROGRAMME FO R 
JORDAN (G/C/W/705; G /C/W/705/CORR.1; G/C /W/705/REV.1; AND 
G/C/W/705/REV.2)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 11 
9   CROATIA – REGULATION OF IMPORT  AND SALE OF CE RTAIN OIL PRODUCTS 
– REQUEST FROM THE RUS SIAN FEDERATION  ................................ ...............................  12 
10   UNITED STATES OF AME RICA - MEASURES RELATED TO IMPORTS OF FISH 
AND SEAFOOD PRODUCTS  – REQUEST FROM THE RUS SIAN FEDERATION  ......................  13 
11   NIGERIA – IMPORT RESTRICTING M EASURES – REQUEST FROM THE 
EUROPEAN UNION, NORW AY, THE UNITED STATE S OF AMERICA, AND UR UGUAY ..........  14 
12   EGYPT – MANUFACTURER REGISTR ATION SYSTEM – REQUEST FROM THE 
EUROPEAN UNION AND T HE UNITED STATES  OF AMERICA  ................................ ............  17 
13   INDONESIA'S IMPORT A ND EXPORT RESTRICTIN G POLICIES AND 
PRACTICES – REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, JAPAN, AND THE UNITED 
STATES OF AMERICA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 20 
14   TURKEY – MEASURES REGARDING ADDITIONAL CUSTOMS D UTIES ON 
IMPORTED TYRES – REQUEST FROM JAPAN  ................................ ................................ ... 24 
15   INDIA – IMPORT RESTRICTING M EASURES – REQUEST FROM THE 
EUROPEAN UNION, JAPA N, AND THE UNITED ST ATES OF AMERICA  ...............................  25 
16   IMPO RT LEVY BY WTO MEMBE RS OF THE AFRICAN UN ION – REQUEST FROM 
JAPAN AND THE UNITED  STATES OF AMERICA  ................................ ...............................  28 
17   CHINA – TRADE DISTORTING MEA SURES – REQUEST FROM THE UNI TED 
STATES OF AMERICA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 30 
18   THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION – TRADE RESTRICTING PR ACTICES – REQUEST 
FROM THE EUROPEAN UN ION ................................ ................................ ........................  33 
19   BRAZIL – MEASURES RESTRICTING  SHRIMP IMPORTS – REQUEST FROM 
ECUADOR  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  35 
20   WORK PROGRAMME ON EL ECTRONIC COMMERCE  ................................ ...................  36 
21   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 55 
21.1   Pakistan – Closure of Corridors and Transit – Request from Afghanistan  .......................... 55 
21.2   United States – Certain Trade Restrictive a nd Distorting Practices – Request from 
China  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 56 
21.3   Date of the next meeting  ................................ ................................ ........................... 58 
 
 G/C/M/128  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1  ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON OF THE COUNCIL F OR TRADE IN GOODS  
1.1.  The Chairperson  indicated that he would like the Sec retariat officially to record in the minutes 
of this meeting that , in the absence of the outgoing Chairperson, Ambassador Hamish McCormick 
(Australia), and given that the Council did not have a Vice -Chairperson , and in line with Rules  12 
and 14 of the Rule s of Procedure, he had been appointed as interim  Chairperson to conduct this 
meeting. He proposed that the Council take note of this information and also proposed that, as 
soon as a consensus emerge d in the General Council on Chairs of the General Council subsidiary 
bodies, whose appointments were still pending, inter alia  the incoming Chair of the Goods Council, 
the Secretariat would send a fax to all delegations indicating the name of the next Chairperson of 
the Council for Trade in Goods and , if there we re no objections to this appointment communicated 
to the Secretariat within the time -frame established in the fax, it would be understood that the 
Chair appointed by the General Council had been formally elected by the Council for Trade in 
Goods as its Cha irperson for the period 2017 -2018.  
1.2.  The Council so agreed . 
2  NOTIFICATION OF REGI ONAL TRADE AGREEMENT S 
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, under the working procedures agreed by the Committee on 
Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA), and following adoption by the Gener al Council of the 
Transparency Mechanism, the CTG was to be kept informed of Members' notifications of new 
regional trade agreements.1 He informed the CTG that the following agreements had been notified 
to the CRTA:  
2.1  FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COSTA RICA AND COLOMBIA 
(WT/REG376/N/1)  
2.2  THE PACIFIC ALLIANCE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT (WT/REG377/N/1)  
2.3  FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TURKEY AND THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA 
(WT/REG378/N/1)  
2.4  FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TURKEY AND MALAYSIA (WT/REG379/N/1)  
2.2.  The delegate of the United States  thanked the parties to these agreements for their 
notifications, and took the opportunity to again encourage those Members that had not yet notified 
Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) to which they were signatories  to do so as quickly as possible so 
that Members could all benefit from the tran sparency mandated under the WTO  Transparency 
Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements.  
2.3.  The Chairperson  proposed that the Council take note of the statement made and of the 
information provided.  
2.4.  The Council so agreed . 
3  STATUS OF NOTIFICATI ONS UNDER THE PROVIS IONS OF THE AGREEMEN TS IN 
ANNEX  IA OF THE WTO AGREEM ENT (G/L/223/REV.24)  
3.1.  The Chairperson  drew Members' attention to document  G/L/223/Rev.24, containing the 
status of notifications under the provisions of the Agreeme nts in Annex  1A of the WTO  Agreement, 
and reminded delegations that , at the meeting in November  2016, the delegation of New Zealand 
had announced that it would like , under this agenda item, to foster a discussion on Members ' 
notification performance. He su ggested that the Council consider first the document prepared by 
the Secretariat and then engage in a discussion on transparency.  
3.2.  The delegate of Brazil  informed the Council that his delegation had requested the Secretariat 
to correct the table on page  28 of document  G/L/223/Rev.24, regarding notifications of subsidies 
and countervailing measures. The document read as if Brazil had not submitted its semi -annual 
                                                
1 See documents  WT/REG16, WT/L/67 1, and G/C/M/88.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 4 - 
 
  report on the measures in question for the period January -June 2015, when in fact Brazil had 
subm itted its notification in document  G/SCM/N/289/BRA.  
3.3.  The Chairperson  proposed that the Secretariat take note of the statement by Brazil and issue 
a corrigendum to document  G/L/223/Rev.24. He also proposed that the Council take note  of the 
said document.  
3.4.  The Council so agreed . 
3.5.  The Chairperson  invited New Zealand to take the floor to introduce the issue of Members ' 
notification performance.  
3.6.  The delegate of New Zealand  stated that the November CTG  meeting had provided a good 
opportunity for Members to start dee pening their regular discussion of Members' notification 
performance following on from the Ministerial Declaration at MC10. New Zealand considered it 
crucial for Members to work on and make efforts to improve their notification performance and to 
ensure th at Members' awareness of notification performance improved . New Zealand 
acknowledged that there were a number of different processes and conversations under way in the 
WTO relating to transparency. It was not its intention to duplicate that work but to ens ure that the 
CTG engage d in a deeper discussion as to how Members met their obligations regarding their 
notification obligations. In this regard , she thanked the Secretariat for its complete report on the 
annual notifications and for the time provided to  Members for its consideration.  
3.7.  New Zealand welcome d any ideas as to how the Secretariat could perhaps present its report 
in a more user -friendly way so that Members could  extract maximum value from it. For example, 
might it  be possible to identify or summar ize the best and worst -performing Members such that 
the exercise would include also a diagnostic element enabling Members better to understand why 
they were not always meeting their notification requirements. New Zealand was fully aware that 
no Member was perfect and that there would always be implementation challenges. Nevertheless , 
it was important to acknowledge that in some cases notification performance was particularly 
egregious and persistent ly poor . Members should be interested in thinking about and  discussing 
how to incentivize other Members to improve their notification records. This was a core issue in the 
WTO so as to improve Members ' mutual understand ing of  their trade policies. In other words , New 
Zealand wished  to continue the discussion o f how Members could improve their notification 
performance and what information was needed so as to ensure that the notification reports would 
be most useful . Undoubtedly, the CTG had an important role to play in working with the 
Committees on this matter . The  CTG should play a constructive role in helping its subsidiary 
Committees improve overall notification performance.  
3.8.  The delegate of the European Union  thanked the Secretariat for document  G/L/223/Rev.24 
and the efforts made by the Secretariat to submit the document in a sufficiently timely manner so  
as to allow Members adequate time for its consideration . Notifications were essential to the work 
of the WTO; nevertheless , there were areas, like subsidies, where Members did not comply with 
their notification obligations and where the record of notifications was subsequently meagre . It 
was therefore imperative to ensure that all Members abide by their obligations in order to provide 
full transparency to the subsidies granted worldwide and allow the WTO  membersh ip to 
understand the impact of such subsidies on the international trade in goods. In this vein , she 
reminded delegations that the next subsidy notification was due by 30  June 2017, and urged 
Members to fill the gaps in the record of notifications. Other a reas where compliance with 
notification obligations was low were import licensing and quantitative restrictions. The 
EU recognized that sometimes it could be challenging to comply with notification obligations, and 
therefore welcomed New Zealand's proposal  to discuss how to incentivize Members to improve 
transparency. She finally indicated that her delegation would contact the Secretariat to upda te the 
information about the EU  notifications contained in document  G/L/223/Rev.24.  
3.9.  The delegate of Canada  also t hanked the Secretariat for the report; the information 
contained therein was very useful and important. He also thanked New Zealand for raising the 
need to further reflect on why not all Members were fulfilling their notification commitments , and 
to do so  with a view to improving Members' collective performance. Transparency was a key 
element for the proper functioning of the multilateral trading system and was as important for 
exporters as it was for importers. An inclusive system beneficial to all Members  relied on G/C/M/128  
 
- 5 - 
 
  transparency, and compliance with notification commitments was the first step to wards  such 
transparency. Canada would engage in constructive discussion s as to how to improve Members' 
notification performance. Canada would revert to  New Z ealand's  ideas in this regard.  
3.10.   The delegate of Australia  indicated that transparency was an important feature of the 
multilateral trading system and that timely and complete notifications supported that goal. 
Australia encouraged the regular committees to share th eir approaches to addressing compliance, 
and for Members to share their experience s with notifications.  
3.11.   The delegate of Singapore  appreciated the comprehensive report prepared by the 
Secretariat and welcomed New Zealand's initiative to discuss notification  performance at the 
Goods  Council. Singapore attached high importance to adherence to notification obligations and 
recognized the value of complete and timely notifications, particularly in light of their contribution 
to the predictability and transparency  of the multilateral trading system. Singapore would continue 
to engage in discussions with New Zealand and other Members on this issue with a view to 
improving Members' notification performance ac ross the CTG  subsidiary bodies.  
3.12.   The delegate of the United States  thanked New Zealand for its initiative in placing the issue 
of the status of Members' notifications on the  agenda  of the meeting . In previous meetings , her 
delegation had already emphasized that there continued to be a numbe r of countries that eithe r: 
(1) did not make the ir notifications at all; (2)  did not do  so in a timely fashion; or (3)  submitted 
notifications that were significantly incomplete. Transparency did not have a substitute and all 
WTO work relied upon it. The US urged developing Member s that might be behind on their 
notifications to approach the WTO  Secretariat should they have questions or need assistance in 
order to comply with their notification obligations.  
3.13.   The delegate of Costa Rica  also thanked New Zealand for bringing  this matter  to the 
Council's attention , and at the same time thanked the Secretariat for its report. Costa Rica also 
believed that there was a need to improve notifications performance in the CTG  subsidiary bodies. 
Like others, Costa Rica believed that transparency w as a fundamental pillar that ensured the 
proper functioning of the WTO. He encouraged further discussion of this issue and took note of the 
examples that New Zealand had provided; these constituted a basis on which to encourage 
discussions that should cont inue at future meetings of the Council.  
3.14.   The delegate of Japan  thanked the Secretariat for its report and echoed New Zealand's 
initiative about the improvement of notification performance and the importance of transparency. 
Japan believed that timely and ap propriate notifications, in accor dance with the relevant 
WTO Agreements, were essential for the correct functioning of the WTO, for Members to monitor 
other Members' trade -related activities, and to examine whether or not a Member was fully in 
compliance  with the WTO  Agreements. Japan was ready to engage in the discussion proposed by 
New Zealand with interested M embers and at future CTG meetings.  
3.15.   The delegate of Switzerland  supported New Zealand's initiative to further discuss ways to 
encourage  delegations accurately to identify the reasons behind the variable notification 
performance between Members and committees. Notifications were important not only in 
quantitative terms but also in terms of quality. Indeed, some notifications fell short of 
requirements and this deserved further discussion . 
3.16.   The delegate of  the Republic of Moldova  thanked the Secretariat for having prepared the 
Annual Report , and New Zealand for its initiative. Moldova remained committed to WTO  principles, 
including the transparency mechan ism established to increase Members' understanding of their 
obligations and commitments and their impact on world trade. Moldova also highlighted the 
importance of the subsidies notifications with respect to paragraph  31 of the N airobi Ministerial 
Declarat ion. With regard to the Annual Report , she indicated that her delegation would contact the 
Secretariat in order to include in the report some notifications that appeared to have been omitted.  
3.17.   The delegate of Norway  thanked the Secretariat for its report an d New Zealand for sharing 
its views and ideas on how to improve Members' compliance with notification obligations. Norway 
would follow fur ther discussions on this topic.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 6 - 
 
  3.18.   The delegate of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia  indicated that it would cont act 
the Secretariat bilaterally because not all of the notifications submitted by his delegation had been 
reflected in the report . 
3.19.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  thanked the Secretariat for its comprehensive report and 
echoed New Zealand's statement articu lating the need to enhance transparency in the 
CTG subsidiary bodies. His delegation looked forward to a discussion with other Members about 
how to improv e the transparency obligations.  
3.20.   The delegate of Brazil  thanked New Zealand for having rai sed this issu e. At the 
November  2016 meeting , Brazil stated that transparency obligations were an essential pillar of the 
multilateral trading system and that, like New Zealand,  it considered that notifications could form a 
part of discussions for the implementation of  paragraph  29 of the Nairobi Declaration on the 
strengthening of the work of regular Committees. However, more time was needed to reflect on 
some of the suggestions and on the best way s to address the concerns  that had been  raised. Brazil 
considered that t he annual report prepared by the Secretariat for the CTG's consideration was a 
good opportunity for an overview of compliance performance in various areas. For Brazil,  it was 
not so obvious that the structure of the report needed to be changed, as well as its content and 
presentation. Brazil suggested that each Committee take a closer look at the notifications situation 
in its subject area, bearing in mind the particular circumstances that existed in each Committee , 
before resuming a discussion of this subj ect at CTG  level.  
3.21.   The delegate of Kazakhstan  thanked New Zealand for its proposal and also indicated that it 
would approach the Secretariat in order to update the information regard ing Kazakhstan's 
notifications.  
3.22.   The Secretariat  thanked delegations for the ir statements regarding the efforts made to 
circulate the annual report on the status of notifications early in 2017 and, in response to those 
delegations that had indicated their wish to meet the Secretariat to obtain an update on certain  
information seem ingly missing in the report,  the Secretariat  informed the Council that the report 
was a result of a compilation of information received from different Divisions, namely from the 
Secretaries of the CTG  subsidiary bodies. He therefore invited those delegatio ns to indicate in 
written form which tables, agreements , and provisions , they were referring to, so as to coordinate 
a meeting or a clarification from the officers r esponsible for each relevant Committee.  
3.23.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their inter ventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
3.24.   The Council so agreed . 
4  APPOINTMENT OF OFFIC ERS TO THE SUBSIDIAR Y BODIES OF THE COUN CIL FOR 
TRADE IN GOODS  
4.1.  The Chairperson recalled that t he Guidelines for the Appointment of Officers to WTO  bodies 
contained in document  WT/L/510, adopted by the General Council on 10  December  2002, provided 
that the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods would conduct consultations on the 
appointment of the Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies of  the Council for Trade in Goods. 
However, given the departure of Ambassador Hamish McCormick, Chairman of the Council, and 
the lack of agreement at the General Council level with regard to the next Chairperson of this 
Council and the other WTO  bodies, the consultation process for the appointment of the Chairs of 
subsidiary bodies of the Goods Council had not yet begun. He therefore proposed that the Council 
suspend this agenda item and reconvene a meeting to deal with this issue once a decision had 
been tak en at General Council level, following which the CTG  would  undertake its customary Chair 
consultations.  
4.2.  The Council so agreed . G/C/M/128  
 
- 7 - 
 
  5  ACCESSION OF THE KYR GYZ REPUBLIC TO THE EURASIAN ECONOMIC UN ION: 
PROCEDURES UNDER ART ICLE XXVIII:3 OF GAT T 1994 – REQUEST FROM TH E KYRGYZ 
REPUBLIC  
5.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in a communication dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegation of the Kyrgyz Republic had requested the Secretariat to include this item on the 
Agenda.  
5.2.  The delegate of the Kyrgyz Republic  updated the Cou ncil on the processes under 
GATT  Articles  XXIV:6 and XXVIII following modification of the Kyrgyz Republic's concessions as a 
result of  its accession to the EAEU. The Kyrgyz Republic was continuing its informal consultations 
with those Members that had rese rved their negotiating rights, clarifying and analysing  statistical 
as well as other relevant data submitted in their claims of interest. The Kyrgyz Republic was 
currently undertaking an inter-governmental coordination exercise in order to finalize its res ponses 
to the claims of interest that had been submitted and would be in a position to respond to those 
claims subject to  internal approval . 
5.3.  The delegate recalled that , at a previous meeting, the Council had approved the extension of 
the deadline for inter ested Members to withdraw substantially equivalent concessions until 
12 February  2018 so as  to ensure that Members ' rights remained preserved pending the 
communication to the WTO  Secretariat of the agreements reached in the context of 
GATT  Article  XXIV:6 negotiations . His delegation stood ready to communicate further with relevant 
partners so as to proceed on the basis of a mutually beneficial cooperation.  
5.4.  The delegate of Ukraine  stated th at, according to Articles  42 and 45 of the Treaty of the 
Eurasian Eco nomic Union, it was the Common External Tariff, approved by the Eurasian Economic 
Commission, which  applied to the common territory of the Union, while the Eurasian Economic 
Commission established the import customs duty rates.  
5.5.  Consequently, Ukraine wished  to minimize the risks in its trade with the Kyrgyz Republic by 
seeking reliable and predictable trade and economic relations. Nevertheless, the Agreement on the 
Free Trade Area between the Commonwea lth of Independent States of 18  October  2011 had been 
suspended with respect to Ukraine, and restrictive measures applied on traffic in transit from the 
territory of Ukraine to the Kyrgyz Republic and the Republic of Kazakhstan on the E AEU member's 
initiative had dramatically affected Ukrainian exports to the co untries of Central and Eastern Asia. 
These developments posed a high risk to the predictability of trade with the Kyrgyz Republic.  
5.6.  Trade  between Ukraine and the Kyrgyz Republic took place  on a preferential basis under the 
Agreement on the Free Trade Area b etween the Commonwealth  of Independent States , dated 
18 October  2011, and under the Agreement on Free Trade between the Cabinet of Ministers of the 
Kyrgyz Republic and the Government of Ukraine,  dated 26 May 1995.  However, bearing in mind 
the above -mention ed risks, and taking into account the provisions of paragraph  3 of the 
Understanding on the Interpretation of Article  XXVIII of GATT  1994, Ukraine had requested the 
Kyrgyz Republic to consider Ukraine's claim of interest and to begin an  appropriate process  of 
consultations.  
5.7.  The delegate of the European Union  stated that, while acknowledging that Armenia's  and the 
Kyrgyz Republic's Article  XXIV:6  submissions were separate procedures, the EU had at the same 
time understood them to be  interlinked and wished , both for practical and for legal reasons , to 
negotiate a global compensation settlement with all the EAEU m embers that were also Members of 
the WTO.  
5.8.  She recalled that , in March  2016, the EU had sent its initial request for compensation to 
Armenia, Kazakhsta n, the Kyrgyz Republic, and the Russian Federation. Such compensation would 
have to be provided by Armenia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz  Republic , and the Russian Federation, 
and must be bound in those Members' respective Schedules.  
5.9.  At the meeting of th e Working  Party on Belarus' WTO  accession , last January, it was clarified 
that this compensation would also have to be reflected in Belarus' WTO  accession schedule. Her 
delegation urged the Kyrgyz Republic not to delay the negotiations an y longer and to reply to th e 
EU claims of intere st that had been submitted to it already one year ago. Her delegation looked G/C/M/128  
 
- 8 - 
 
  forward to resuming negotiations in earnest , on that basis, and was available also for an 
immediate b ilateral round of negotiations . 
5.10.   The delegate of Turkey  welcomed the progress reported on by the Kyrgyz Republic and also 
appreciated the Kyrgyz Republic's cooperation in the process . Turkey wished  to maintain an 
ongoing dialogue and cooperat ion with the Kyrgyz Republic on this matter . 
5.11.   The delegate of Switzerland  informed the Council that it had submitted its lists of 
negotiating lin es to the Kyrgyz Republic on 24  February. He thanked the Kyrgyz Republic for their 
updates and looked forward to receiving their further response s as soon as possible. He also 
thanked the Kyrgyz Republic for its continuing discussions with Switzerland.  
5.12.   The delegate of China  stated that , since submitting their claim of interest, China had , on a 
bilateral basis, been working constructively with the Kyrgyz Republic on the GATT  Article  XXVIII 
renegotiations. His delegation would continue with this bilateral discussion so as to further clarify 
any outstanding technical issues and to advance the renegotiation process.  
5.13.   The delegate of Japan  stated that his authorities had a systemic interest in  this issue and 
were looking forward to an initial compensation offer from the Kyrgyz Republic. His delegation 
wished also to engage in negotiations and consultations with the Kyrgyz Republic and other 
interested Members, and members of the EAEU  in particu lar, for the purpose of agreeing on an 
appropriate level of compensation under GATT  Articles  XXIV and XXVIII.  
5.14.   The delegate of Ecuador  thanked the Kyrgyz Republic for the bilateral meetings that had 
taken place. Her delegation was awaiting further consultat ions with regard to Ecuador's earlier 
request.  
5.15.   The delegate of  the Republic of  Moldova  expressed her delegation's interest in the 
consultation process and wished to initiate bilateral negotiations under GATT  Article  XXVIII:3 on 
the issue of the accession o f the Kyrgyz Republic to the E AEU. 
5.16.   The delegate of the Kyrgyz Republic  stated that trade between the Kyrgyz Republic and 
Ukraine was based on preferential treatment as set out  in the bilateral trade agreement within the 
Commonwealth of Independent States a nd the CIS Free Trade Agreement , signed in 2011. 
Consequently, in line with the provisions of the Understandin g on the Interpretation of 
GATT  Article  XXVIII and the Guidelines on the Procedures for Negotiations under 
GATT  Article  XXVIII , the Kyrgyz Republi c had no legal ground on which to recognize Ukraine's 
claim of interest in this issue.  
5.17.   With regard to the EU's intervention, the Kyrgyz Republic explained that it had been 
engaged in an informal process of exchanging technical issues and clarifying technic al questions 
with those Members that had submitted claims and been recognized as party to the negotiations, 
including the European Union. For this reason , the Kyrgyz Republic would currently neither confirm 
nor deny the possibility of a joint offer from the EAEU member States. The issue would be decided 
internally and communicated to interested Members in due course.  
5.18.   All comments would be transmitted to capital and the responses communicated to  
interested Members. He went on to thank delegations for their i nterventions and to thank those 
countri es that had provided support.  
5.19.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Counci l 
take note of the statements  made . 
5.20.   The Council so agreed . G/C/M/128  
 
- 9 - 
 
  6  ACCESSION OF THE REP UBLIC OF ARMENIA TO THE EURASIAN ECONOMI C UNION: 
PROCEDURES UNDER ART ICLE  XXVIII:3 OF GATT  1994 – REQUEST FROM THE EUROPEAN 
UNION  
6.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Council that , in a communication dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegation of the European Union had requested the Secretar iat to include this item on the agenda 
of the meeting.  
6.2.  The delegate of the European Union  informed the Council that they had received a technical 
offer from the Republic of Armenia on 31  March  2017. She referred back to the points that she had 
already made , under the previous agenda item, and went on to say that the EU considered that 
the offer made was unsatisfactory. What had been presented as a compensation offer did not meet 
the legal cri teria for such as set out in  WTO Article s XXIV:6 and XXVIII, and nor did it satisfy  the 
EU's request . 
6.3.  In fact, what Armenia had described as  compensation referred to  certain tariff lines that had 
been reduced at accession to the E AEU. These tariff lines were considered to compensate for tariff 
lines where tariffs had bee n increased at accession to the customs un ion. However, the EU was of 
the view that this was not the way that Article  XXIV:6 worked . For this reason, the EU urged 
Armenia to present to it an offer in the strict legal sense  of the aforementioned provisions . The EU 
would prefer the compensation to be part of a joint compensation offer from Armenia and the 
Kyrgyz Republic, which should appear  in all the schedules of the EAEU  Custom Union's members  
and likewise be bound by all . The  EU requested that the offers be presented without delay and 
added that her delegation was available for discussions. Finally, if any  delay be came  too long, the  
EU would bring the issue to the attention  of the General Council . 
6.4.  The delegate of Ukraine  thanked the EU for including this item on the agenda. He referred to 
his earl ier intervention , under agenda item  5, regarding foreign trade risks, and a dramatic 
decrease in Ukrainian exports to Central and Eastern Asia . The risks for the FTA  regime with 
respect to Ukraine built upon its  trade relations with the E AEU, and also took into account the 
provisions of paragraph  3 of the Understanding on the Interpretation of Article  XXVIII of 
GATT  1994. For these reasons , Ukraine requested the Republic of Armenia to consider their claim 
of interes t and to start the appropriate process  of consultations and negotiations . 
6.5.  The delegate of Chinese Taipei  thanked Armenia for its draft response to  their request from 
June 2016. In July  2016, his delegation had already provided preliminary comment s on the d raft 
response . He urged Armenia to engage in negotiations and consultations with Chinese Taipei and 
other interested Members with a view to Armenia provid ing appropriate c ompensation under 
GATT  Articles  XXIV and XXVIII.  
6.6.  The delegate of Canada  stated that t hey looked forward to advancing discussions with 
Armenia regarding Canada's claim of interest in response to Ar menia's modification s to its 
WTO commitments under Article  XXVIII. He encouraged Armenia to respond to Canada's claim of 
interest and stated that  they stood ready to hold bilateral consultations as necessary.  
6.7.  The delegate of Japan  expressed his delegation's appreciation for Armenia's respons e of 
November  2016 to Japan's additional questions. The responses would enable them to confirm the 
status of current technical issues.  
6.8.  Japan had a systemic interest in the issue and for this reason wished  to engage in the 
negotiations and consultations with Armenia and other interested Members, in particular members 
of the EAEU, for the purpose of seeking appropriate compensation under GATT  Articles XXIV and 
XXVIII.  
6.9.  The delegate of Armenia  informed the Council that , following the last G oods Council meeting, 
Armenia had undertaken a number of useful and productive consultations and communications 
with interested Me mbers, as well as discussions and an exchange of information on the issues 
concerned. These meetings had been positive and his delegation had appreciated the efforts and 
inputs of other delegations. Meanwhile, a number of requests had been received from in terested 
Members concerning technical issues with regard to the statistics already provided by Armenia, as 
well as clarifications with regard to certain tariff line adjustments. Most requests had been G/C/M/128  
 
- 10 - 
 
  addressed and Armenia was currently working on the rema ining issues so as to provide replies and 
clarification to the relevant de legations as soon as possible.  
6.10.   Concerning the request received from the EU, Armenia had already provided its reply  to the 
EU delegation the previous week.  This reply had been agreed with all other E AEU members . They 
hoped that the proposal submitted would serve as a good basis for making progress in the ongoing 
negotiations , and Armenia was ready to continue its communications with its partners in a 
pragmatic and constructive way. He thanked delegations for their interventions and comments ; 
these would be forward ed to Capital in due course.  
6.11.   With regard to Ukraine's statement, he reiterated Armenia's position as stated at their 
bilater al meeting with Ukraine in June  2016. Armenia could not formally accept a claim of interest 
and enter into GATT  Article  XXIV and XXVIII procedures with Ukraine since , within the framework 
of acting bilateral and multilateral treaties, Armenia had already agreed an operational . 
non-exclusion, free -trade regi me with Ukraine. In light of that, Armenia considered that it would 
be irrelevant to enter into negotiations on tariff reduction or compensatory adjustment with a 
country with whom Ukraine had already been trading at a zero tarif f rate for more than 
three  decades.  
6.12.   Armenia would continue to inform the Council , and all interested Members, on a regular 
basis, about its ongoing negotiations on compensatory adjustment.  
6.13.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and Armenia for the information 
it had provided. He proposed that the Council ta ke note of the statements made.  
6.14.   The Council so agreed . 
7  ENLARGEMENT OF THE E UROPEAN UNION: PROCE DURES UNDER ARTICLE  XXVIII:3 OF 
GATT  1994  (G/L/1051/ADD.7)  
7.1.  The Chairperson  drew Members' attention to document  G/L/1051/Add.6 on the accession of 
Croatia to the EU on 1  July 2013. In this document, the European Union had indicated that 
Members who had submitted a claim pursuant to Article  XXIV:6 of GATT  1994 were not precluded 
from withdrawing substantially equivalent concessions under Article  XXVIII:3 of GATT  1994, 
provided that the claiming WTO  Member withdrew those concessions not later than 46  months 
after the EU's modification of concessions. He recalled that the CTG had extended the deadlines on 
seven  occasions, n amely at its meetings of 27  November  2013, 9  April and 17  November  2014, 
26 March and 10  November  2015, 15  March  and 10  N0vember  2016.  
7.2.  The delegate of the European Union  considered that the negot iations following the EU's 
2013 enlargement were finalized. A greements with China and Uruguay were already in force and 
had been implemented. An agreement with Brazil, signed in November  2016, was likewise about 
to be concluded since the European Parliament had given its consent. The EU was looking forward 
to initia lling the agreement with New Zealand in the very near future. The compensatory 
adjustments provided on an erga omnes  basis as a result of these agreements already addressed 
the interests of other countries that had participate d in the compensation exercise . 
7.3.  In light of  the time that would be required to finalize all the procedures and to ensure the 
entry into force and implementation of the last agreement with New Zealand, another extension to 
the period in which Members were allowed to withdraw substantial ly equivalent concessions was 
necessary. As soon as the agreement with New Zealand had entered into force, the EU would 
circulate to the Council a report on the conclusions of the negotiations.  
7.4.  The delegate of Costa Rica  thanked the EU for its transparency  during this  process. Costa 
Rica was aware of the importance of a robust and effective multilateral trading system and of the 
need to maintain and foste r trading relations between WTO  Members. Costa Rica had informed the 
EU, on 29  March  2017, of the liftin g of Costa Rica's specific reservation on the modification of 
Croatia's schedule of concessions resulting from Croatia's accession to the European Union. With 
that, Costa Rica had concluded its process of negotiations and consultations under 
GATT  Articles  XXIV and XXVIII. In the interests of transparency, he informed Members that there 
had been no compensation resulting from this decision. Nevertheless, Costa Rica would continue to G/C/M/128  
 
- 11 - 
 
  maintain a constructive dialogue with the EU on this and other matters, in t he framework of the 
activities of the Council , on a bilateral basis, and in the framework of the Association Agreement 
between Central America and the EU.  
7.5.  The delegate of New Zealand  confirmed that they had concluded their consultations with the 
EU on comp ensation for Croatia's accession to the EU . New Zealand looked forward to swift 
implementation once the relevant domestic procedures had been completed.  
7.6.  The Chairperson  proposed that the Council take note of the statements made , and of the 
EU comm unication  contained in document  G/L/1051/Add.7, and that the Council agree on the 
extensi on of the deadline to 1  January  2018.  
7.7.  The Council so agreed . 
8  JORDAN – REQUEST FOR A WAIVER  RELATING TO THE TRAN SITIONAL PERIOD FOR 
THE ELIMINATION OF T HE EXPORT SUBSIDY PR OGRAM ME FOR JORDAN (G/C/W/70 5; 
G/C/W/705/CORR.1; G/ C/W/705/REV.1; AND G /C/W/705/REV.2)  
8.1.  The Chairperson  drew Members' attention to document  G/C/W/705/Rev.2 , containing a 
waiver request and a draft waiver decision , submitted by Jordan in respect of the transition al 
period for the elimination of the export subsidy programme for Jordan.  
8.2.  He recalled that , at the November  2016 meeting , it had been agreed that the Council would 
revert to this matter so that Jordan could inform the Council of recent developments with re gard to 
the implementation of a new programme.  
8.3.  The delegate of Jordan  thanked Members for their understanding of the exceptional 
challenges facing the Jordanian economy due to regional instability. He updated Members on the 
progress made towards developing  a WTO-consistent replacement program me. In line with the 
timetable submitted by Jordan in November  2015, Jordan had completed the data collection and 
revision process and , with the assistance of USAID  experts, a final report had been developed that 
includ ed recommendations for the new WTO -consistent program me. The relevant experts would be 
undertaking their third  mission to Jordan on 5 and 6  April 2017, and a meeting was taking place 
with the high -level team on 6 April, in Amman, to take a decision regardi ng the design of a new 
program based on the final report.  
8.4.  Following the outcome of that meeting, Jordan would be providing information on the new 
program me for interested Members and would also provide an update to the Council at its next 
meeting. Jordan w ould conduct consultations with stakeholders, including interested Members, and 
the new program me would then be submitted for legislative approval . Once approved, the 
programme would enter into force and thereby terminate the current subsidy program me. He 
reiterated Jordan's commitment to terminating the current export subsidy program me once it 
could be replaced by  a new program me. In any case , the current export subsidy program me would 
be automatically terminated by end-2018. 
8.5.  He requested that this agenda item be included on the agenda of the next Council meeting so 
that Jordan could provide a further update to Members.  
8.6.  The delegate of the United States  thanked Jordan for its comprehensive report. The US had 
been actively involved in providing technical ass istance to Jordan in the context of its reform 
efforts and understood that con crete progress was being made. They hoped that Jordan would 
continue to move forward and implement the necessary programme changes as soon as possible.  
8.7.  The delegate of Australia  thanked Jordan for the update on progress made so far, and for its 
transparent and open approach. They welcomed the news that a decision on the new 
WTO-compliant program me to replace the export subsidy program me was imminent. They 
requested Jordan to outli ne next steps ; for example, whether the new programme would be an 
administrative or a legislative program me. 
8.8.  The delegate of Japan  welcomed Jordan's updated report. Japan understood the challenges 
faced by Jordan and appreciated its further efforts to refo rm its subsidies program me in order to G/C/M/128  
 
- 12 - 
 
  make it WTO -consistent. Japan expected Jordan to eliminate its current subsidy program me as 
soon as possible and by end-2018 at the latest, as set out by Jordan at the  Council's previous 
meeting . 
8.9.  The delegate of New Z ealand  thanked Jordan for its efforts to bring its ex port subsidy 
programme into WTO  conformity and for its confirmation that it would in any case terminate the 
programme at the latest by end-2018. New Zealand remained ready and willing to support Jordan 
in its efforts and looked forward to further detail on the matter.  
8.10.   The delegate of Pakistan  thanked Jordan for its report. Given the extenuating circumstances 
facing the Jordan ian economy, Pakistan added its voice to those of other Members in supporting 
Jordan's request for a waiver.  
8.11.   The delegate of China  expressed appreciation for Jordan's  detailed report. China reaffirmed 
its support for Jordan's waiver request relating to the transitional period for the elimination of its 
export subsidy program me, until 3 1 December  2018.  
8.12.   The delegate of Jordan  thanked delegations for their interventions and support and also 
thanked those Members that had expressed their support at previous meetings. Jordan renewed 
its commitment to implementing a new and WTO -compliant prog ramme. It would also provide 
more information regarding the outcome of the meeting taking place at that time in Amman, as 
well as on the necessary next steps.  
8.13.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take no te of the statements made and, as requested by Jordan, that the Council agree to revert to 
this matter at its next meeting.  
8.14.   The Council so agreed . 
9  CROATIA – REGULATION OF IMPORT  AND SALE OF CERTAIN OIL PRODUCTS – 
REQUEST FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION  
9.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in a communication dated 23  March  2017, the 
delegation of the Russian Federation had requested that the Secretariat include this item on the 
agenda of this meeting.  
9.2.  The delegate of the Russian Federation  recall ed the repeated  calls for Croatia to repeal its 
regulation on the import and sale of certain oil products. The measure at issue openly 
discriminated between countries of origin and restricted shipments from many supplying partners. 
As a result of market trends , the situation had become  dispropo rtionally burdensome to Russia.  
9.3.  The Governmental Decree that established this regulation's legal framework divided 
WTO Members into two  categories: (i) one category that included the European Union, European 
Economic Area membe rs, and Turkey,  and these Members were set free from compliance with the 
regulation; and (ii)  all other Members, which were obliged to follow the specific additional 
requirements under the decree that the Russian Federation co nsidered to violate the basic 
WTO principles of MFN and National Treatment , and which unlawfully diminished the rights and  
privileges of those WTO Members  affected by the regulation . 
9.4.  The measures included: (i) a requirement to own storage facilities in the Croatian territory; 
(ii) evidence of permission from the relevant national authorities to establish such facilities; (iii) a 
requirement to channel supplies only to those storage facilities. The Russian Federation strongly 
believed that Croatia's regulation ran contrary to t he GATT an d clearly defied GATT  Articles  I and 
III. Indeed, the Croatian administrative barrier heavily distorted and limited true competition. 
Statistics and private sector data showed that the measure itself brought Russian gas exports to 
zero and rendered liqu efied gas deliveries almost non -existent.  
9.5.  Sadly, the Russian Federation's efforts to settle the matter through the WTO -relevant 
platforms, namely the Committee of Market Access and the Goods Council, as well as through 
bilateral consultations with the Europea n Union, had failed to achieve  progress. Russia saw 
regional integration as a means to reinforce  the multilateral rules-based system and therefore G/C/M/128  
 
- 13 - 
 
  hoped that Croatia's membership of the EU would be a helpful factor when reconsidering the 
current trade regime in certain oil products and abolishing discriminatory elements. Russia 
considered that the situation was unacceptable and invited Croatia and t he EU more fully to 
embrace WTO  values and to demonstrate a more cooperative approa ch in dealing with this 
problem.  
9.6.  The delegate of the European Union  stated that , at the previous meeting of the Council, her 
delegation had not been able to  give a proper reply because it was still examining the situation 
with regard to Croatia. They had now completed their assessme nt of the Russian Federation's 
complaints regarding Croatia's legislation and regulation s on conditions for wholesale  trading and 
trading with third  countries of certain goods. They were now in a position to inform the Russian 
Federation that the Croatian authorities planned to revise their regulation and that the revised 
regulation would be WTO -consistent.  
9.7.  The delegate of the Russian Federation  thanked the European Union for this information.  
9.8.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and  proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
9.9.  The Council so agreed . 
10  UNITED STATES OF AME RICA - MEASURES RELATED TO IMPORTS OF FISH AND 
SEAFOOD PRODUCTS – REQUEST FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION  
10.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council th at, in a co mmunication dated 23  March  2017, the 
delegation of the Russian Federation had requested that the Secretariat include this item on the 
agenda.  
10.2.   The delegate of the Russian Federation  stated that they wished to revert to the issue of the 
"Seafood Import Monit oring Program " of the United States. The final rule of the program me had 
been pub lished in the Federal Register of 9  December  2016 and had becom e effective in 
January  2017.  
10.3.   The program me consisted of two  major elements: (i) reporting  at the point of entry into 
US commerce ; and (ii) record keeping of chain on custody information for two  years – traceability 
requirement. As set out in the proposed and final rules, the main goal of the programme was t he 
exclusion from entry into US  Commerce of misrepresented  products and products from 
IUU fishing.  
10.4.   While Russia appreciated the intention of all countries to fight IUU  fishing, they were also of 
the view that any corresponding  measure should comply with WTO  rules and be as trade 
non-restrictive as possible in achie ving its objective. In that context, the Russian Federation 
wished to highlight two  issues of concern. The first  issue was the selection of species that the 
United States considered to be subject to IUU  fishing. The criteria for electing certain fish speci es 
were not transparent and there was no clear justification as to why some species were considered 
subject to IUU  fishing and others not. This raised certain questions as to the programme's 
compliance with the MFN  principle, especially when species of seafood mostly imported from 
certain countries were subject to new measures, while similar species from other countries were 
not. The second  issue was the traceability requirement, which seemed to be applied to imported 
products only. A traceability requireme nt was a policy instrument sometimes used  for combatting 
IUU fishing, but in order to achieve its objective and be consistent with WTO  rules it should apply 
to both imported and like domestic products. Finally, the measure should not be more trade 
restrict ive than necessary in seeking to achieve its objective.  
10.5.   Information reporting and record keeping alone could not address the probl em of 
IUU fishing. Without a proper verification scheme, such requirements could not be considered to 
be fulfilling the progra mme's objectives. In the absence of such a verification  scheme , new 
requirements would be burdensome for trade, importers, exporters, and processors of seafood, 
especially in small and medium -sized enterprises  (SMEs) . Trade -related measures on combatting 
IUU fishing should be adopted in accordance with WTO  principles and implemented in a fair, 
transparent, and non -discriminatory manner. The Russian Federation looked forward to receiving G/C/M/128  
 
- 14 - 
 
  further clarification of these issues and invited the United States to enter into bilateral 
consultations concerning the provisions and implementation of the Seafood Import Monitoring 
Program.  
10.6.   The delegate of China  echoed the statement made by the Russian Federation. They also had 
significant concern s about this issue, which they would raise under "Other Business ". 
10.7.   The delegate of the United States  thanked the Russian Federation for its continued interest 
in the "Seafood Import Monitoring Program ". NOAA  Fisheries had published the final ru le in the 
Federal Register on 9  Decemb er 2016, with a  mandatory compliance date of 1  January  2018. The 
final rule had been developed through a transparent process of public notice and comment 
involving stakeholders located both in  the US  and elsewhere , as well as through direct outreach to 
exporting nations. NOAA and USTR had met with Russia on several occasions to discuss the rule.  
10.8.   Notable aspects of  the final rule included a one -year implementation time -frame, 
streamlined requirements for small -scale fishers, and an indefinite suspension of t he requirements 
for shrimp and abalone. With regard to comments about the rule applying only to imports, 
comparable reporting and record -keeping requirements for domestic fish already existed for the 
species in question through federal and state regulation . The rule therefo re did not cover domestic 
fish. 
10.9.   USTR worked closely with NOAA and other US  agencies to ensure that the rule would be 
consistent with US  international trade obligations. The intent ion of the rule was also to limit data 
collection to only t hat necessary to achieve the objective of the rule, namely, to prevent illegally 
caught and fraudulently marketed fish and fish  products from entering into US  commerce.  
10.10.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Counc il 
take note of the statements made.  
10.11.   The Council so agreed . 
11  NIGERIA – IMPORT RESTRICTING M EASURES – REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN 
UNION, NORWAY, THE U NITED STATES OF AMER ICA, AND URUGUAY  
11.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in communications dated 24  March 2017, the 
delegations of the European Union, Norway, the United States of America, and Uruguay, 
respectively, had requested the Secretariat to include this issue on the agenda.  
11.2.   The delegate of the United States  noted that this was the fifth  meeting of t he CTG over the 
past year and a half in which a number of governments had expressed concern regarding trade 
barriers imposed by Nigeria, including restrictions on the use of foreign exchange for imports of a 
wide range of products, local content requirem ents, and outright import bans.  
11.3.   The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) had publicly stated that a key rationale for the foreign 
exchange restriction measure was to stimulate local production of the targeted products. Nigeria 
had yet to notify the measure to the W TO or to provide WTO  Members with any justification for its 
consisten cy with WTO  rules. Although the CBN had allowed the exchange rate to adjust to some 
extent, it had continued to maintain its policy of prohibiting importers from using official foreign 
exchange  institutions for imports of 41  categories of products. In practice, Nigerian Customs was 
generally interpreting and enforcing the policy as an import ban on those 41  product categories, 
regardless of the source of the currency used for payment.  
11.4.   In addition, the  US noted once again its concern with Nigeria's local content requirements in 
certain sectors, such as oil and gas , and information and communications technology  (ITC), as well 
as with its lon g list of official import bans.  
11.5.   The United States therefore continued to encourage the Nigerian government to identify 
other policy tools and to work with its trading partners to address its policy objectives. Measures 
that would foster greater competitiveness for Nigerian producers through an open trade re gime 
and attractive investment climate would be more effective in helping Nigeria achieve 
transformative growth and job creation.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 15 - 
 
  11.6.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated that her authorities had noted the changes 
announced in the Economic Recovery and  Growth Plan of Nigeria. While welcoming these changes 
the EU also considered them to be a very small sign of recognition by the authorities that the 
measures in place for more than two years had not achieved  the desired result , but rather the 
contrary. In  particular, regarding import restrictions, the measures in place had had significant 
consequences on the national economy (impact on port activities, the car sector, and many other 
sectors), on the very people's nutrition, on people's standards of living,  and on Nigeria's trade 
partners. The Economic Recovery and Growth Plan recently released by the Federal Government 
provide d certain remedies, but the situation and perspectives were not clear. The plan stated that 
the measure to subject 41 items to a forex restriction list was temporary. Nigeria had also 
committed to using a market -driven exchange rate. The EU therefore wanted to know what 
concrete measures were under consideration by Nigeria in order to achieve a market -driven 
exchange rate, and wished at  the same time  to receive clarification regarding the timing for the 
suppression of the forex restriction list. The EU shared the US  view that notification and 
compliance with WTO  rules were essential , and that the current situation had gone on too long.  
11.7.   The issue of oil and gas local content requirements had been on the CTG agenda for an even 
longer period, as well as for  a number of years in the TRIMS  Committee. The EU was still awaiting 
answers to the questions they had raised, and wished  to receive info rmation on the position of the 
new Nigerian Government regarding the expected date of entry into force and the implementation 
of the Amendment Bill to the Local Content Act. She asked if the Nigerian delegate could confirm 
that the Act had indeed passed th e National Assembly but was still awaiting the assent of the 
President. The EU also shared the US view that a more open and transparent trade regime would 
serve  the Nigerian population and economy far better than the current situation.  
11.8.   The delegate of Norway echoed the concerns raised by the EU and the US. Norway had 
raised the issue repeatedly and unfortunately had again to do so at CTG level. Constructive 
meetings had been held recently with the Nigerian authorities at a political level. However, Norway  
still considered it important to address Nigeria's import -restricting measures. The issue of currency 
restrictions had been duly raised by Norway and several other Members , at the WTO and on other 
occasions , since July  2015. These r estrictions were limiting  the importers of specified goods access 
to currency , and Norway questioned whether the restrictions were in conformity with Nigeria's 
WTO obligations.  
11.9.   Lately, the matter of customs valuation in Nigeria was reported to be an issue for trade in 
stockfish. M ore specifically, it seemed that the value that served as the basis for the calculation of 
the customs value of fish imported to Nigeria had been higher than the price agreed on the 
invoice, which meant additional duty and value added payments on imports. A transparent, 
predictable, and rules-based system had to be the basis for trade. Norway encouraged Nigeria to 
solve its problems relating to customs valuation, and called on the Nigerian authorities to make 
sure that , in all cases, the methods defining cu stoms value were in accordance with 
WTO methodology.  
11.10.   Norway would continue its bilateral dialogue with Nigeria  given that Nigeria  was an 
important seafood market for them. Norway  reiterated the importance of providing Members with 
an update and clarificati on regarding applicable import regulations, both in terms of currency 
restrictions and fish importation policy in general. She also requested Nigeria to provide an update 
and clarification with regard to the issue of customs valuation.  
11.11.   The delegate of Uruguay echoed the statements made by previous speakers. As detailed at  
previous Council meetings, exports of fish products from Uruguay to the Nigerian market had been 
affected by a series of different measures restricting imports, and Nigeria had not yet provided any 
explanations or clarifications to justify such measures. Uruguay's exporting sector face d many 
difficulties in accessing the Nigerian market, which was one of the main destination markets for 
shipments from Uruguay of frozen fish. To date, they h ad received no news about nor any sign of 
improvements in the market access conditions with regard to the Nigerian market and , therefore, 
wished to meet bilateral ly with Nigeria within a few weeks in order to receive  a response to their 
concerns.  
11.12.   The deleg ate of Thailand  echoed the concern of previous speakers regarding Nigeria's 
restriction s on imports, and especially with regard to access to the foreign exchange market for 
41 import ed products, which consisted of agricultural goods and construction materi als, to name a G/C/M/128  
 
- 16 - 
 
  few. The measure had been in effect since mid -2015, limiting access to foreign currencies for 
certain imported items , and it had been brought to the attention of the Council  at several previous 
meetings.  
11.13.   It had now been over 18 months  since Thailand had submitted a letter to Nigeria outlining 
their concern s, and Thailand believed that not enough progress had been made on this issue. 
Since 2015, Thailand had witnessed a sharp decline in its exports to Nigeria and , in this regard, 
requested Nig eria to provide its notification and justification for the measure  in question . Thailand 
believed tha t the measure was inconsistent with GATT  Article  XI since it appeared to be a 
restriction on imports within the meaning of that Article. The measure was co unterproductive to 
both trade and development and Thailand therefore urged Nigeria to remove it and instead to 
promote the conservation of foreign reserves and the resuscitation of its domestic industry 
through non-trade -restrictive measures.  
11.14.   The delegate of Chile supported the statements made by other Members and reiterated 
Chile's concerns about the lack of transparency and justification for the restrictive measure, and 
for a lack of information that would allow Chile greater market predictability. The me asures had 
resulted in  significant loss es in terms of Chile's fish exports and Chile therefore requested once 
again that Nigeria eliminate the measure.  
11.15.   The delegate of Australia  sought Nigeria's explanation as to how the preferential treatment 
accorded to local goods and services in the Nigerian Oil and Gas I ndustry Content Development 
Act 2010 was consistent with N igeria's WTO national treatment obligations. His delegation would 
like to follow up on Nigeria's review of the measure and on issues raised by s takeholders, and 
enquired as to how Nigeria proposed to address their concerns.  
11.16.   The delegate of Japan  shared the concerns raised by other speakers. Regarding restriction s 
on access to foreign exchange for certain imported products, the measure had been put  in place 
by the Central Bank of Nigeria and had become a de facto  import restriction. It had been having a 
significant adverse impact on the businesses of WTO  Members, including those of Japan. Japan 
believed that the measure was possibly inconsistent wit h the WTO  Agreements , and urged Nigeria 
to provide updated information on a domestic review process for import restriction measures, 
regarding which other WTO  Members had also raised concerns. Japan urged Nigeria to revise the 
measures so as to ensure that  they would not adverse ly impact upon Members' exports.  
11.17.   The delegate of Argentina  shared the concerns of other  Members in relation to the foreign 
exchange limitation measures adopted by Nigeria and reiterated, in  particular, the impact that 
those measures were having  on Argentinian fishing sector  exports , which had led to a significant 
drop in volume over the last few years. Although  the Nigerian Central Bank had adopted measures 
in mid -2016 that had somewhat improved the situation, those measures still did not address 
Argentina's systemic concerns. Argentina reiterated its interest in knowing whether or not Nigeria 
was considering to eliminate the measure, or perhaps to introduce further amendments to the 
measures in question.  
11.18.   The delegate of Iceland  stated  that her delegation was very concerned by the import 
restricting measures that continued to be imposed by Nigeria and that had once again been taken 
up at the Council. The measures in question were causing damage both to Icelandic exporters and 
to Nigeria n importers and consumers, and were seriously harming Iceland and Nigeria's  
long-standing trade relationship. Like other concerned Members, Iceland had repeatedly raised this 
matter at the Council and other appropriate fora to urge Nigeria to refrain from imposing import 
restricting measures on fish products and at the same time to exercise full transparency 
concerning any changes made to Nigeria's import regime.  
11.19.   Iceland's previous Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade had visited Nigeria last 
year to explore with her Nigerian counterpart how the issue could be brought into conformity with 
WTO principles, and yet the situation remained unchanged. Nigerian importers of key food 
products , such as fish, continued to face currency restrictions. Those m easures had not been 
properly notified to the WTO, despite a clear requirement to do so. No corrective measures had 
been taken with regard to Nigeria's import licensing regime and it remained unclear what the exact 
requirements were.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 17 - 
 
  11.20.   His delegation joined Norway in raising concerns regarding customs valuation and the 
practice of using a value that may appear to have been set higher than the price given on the 
invoice for calculating the custom s value of fish imported to Nigeria. In addition, Nigeria had not  
rolled back on its increase d tariffs on fisheries products. Those restrictions, and the lack of 
transparency about the precise content of the measures  in question , continued to have a strong 
negative impact on exports of fish products to Nigeria. For deca des, Nigeria had been Iceland's 
most important export market in Africa. Icelandic fish products had provided Nigerian consumers 
with a healthy, high quality , and affordable source of food.  
11.21.   Exports to Nigeria were at the centre of an important economic acti vity in many vulnerable 
coastal communities in Iceland. Unfortunately, the Nigerian measures currently being discussed 
had had serious consequences for Iceland's trade. Exports to Nigeria had fallen dramatically, from 
approximately $130 million in 2014 to approximately $50 million in 2016. In 2014, Nigeria had 
been the 8th biggest export county market for Iceland,  with 2.5% of overall exports, but in 2016, 
Nigeria was ranked in only 16th place among Iceland's main exporting counties , with only 1% of 
overall  exports.  
11.22.   Iceland once again joined others in encouraging Nigeria to respect its WTO  obligations, 
including the obligation to notify its measures. Her delegation also called upon the Nigerian 
authorities not to introduce any further trade barriers.  
11.23.   The del egate of Nigeria  thanked the delegations of the EU, Norway, US, Uruguay, Thailand, 
Chile, Australia, Japan,  and Argentina, for their statements. She assured the Council of Nigeria's 
commitment to the WTO, regardless of the enormous challenges currently bei ng faced by her 
country. For these reasons, Nigeria requested the continued cooperation and goodwill of all 
Members.  
11.24.   The Government of Nigeria was continuing in its engagement with critical stakeholders in 
Nigeria's  economy regarding the measures and polic ies in question. The ongoing consultations 
were expected to take into consideration the inputs  received from those stakeholders , including 
the various concerns expressed by delegations. This discussion was taking place in the overall 
context of the Federal  Government's agenda for rapid diversification of the Nigerian economy, as 
well as the economic recovery and growth plan, which was intended to revamp the Nigerian 
economy following a period of high inflation and recession. The economic recovery growth pla n 
had three  broad strategic objectives: (1) restoring growth to the economy; (2) investing in the 
Nigerian people; (3) building a globally competitive economy. Consequently, Nigeria wished to  
appeal for more time to allow the ongoing consultation process t o be concluded.  
11.25.   Nigeria looked forward to further constructive bilateral engagement from and the 
understanding of those  delegations  concerned  in light of the difficult and challenging situation 
currently facing the country. Nevertheless, Nigeria would cont inue to uphold and respect the 
fundamental principles of the Multilateral Trading System. In response to the specific question 
posed by the EU regarding the status of the plan in the National Assembly, her delegation would 
need to consult with capital rega rding the current status  given that consultations were still 
ongoing . 
11.26.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
11.27.   The Council so agreed . 
12  EGYPT – MANUFACTURER REGISTR ATION SYSTE M – REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN 
UNION AND THE UNITED STATES OF AME RICA  
12.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council t hat, in communications dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegations of the United States and the European Union , respectively,  had requested the inclusion 
of this item on the agenda.  
12.2.   The delegate of the United States  explained that, after having raised the issue multiple 
times in the TBT  Committee, they were elevating it to the Council in the hope that Egypt would be 
more responsive to their concerns.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 18 - 
 
  12.3.   Egypt's Ministerial Decree No.  43 of 2016 required that impo rts of listed products in 
25 HS categories , including apparel, toys, chocolate, cosmetics, milk and dairy products, 
motorcycles, and washing machines , would only be allowed into Egypt if they were produce d by 
manufacturing facilities, or imported from companies owning trademarks, that were registered 
with the Ministry of Trade's General Organization for Export and Import Control (GOEIC).  
12.4.   It was unclear whether Egyptian manufacturing plants and companies we re subject to 
similar registration, surveillance , and inspection requirements, or whether some companies or 
countries were in fact receiving exemptions from t he requirements of the Decree. Moreover, 
Decree  No. 991 of 2015 , requir ed the preshipment inspecti on of 23  listed products, which largely 
overlapped with Decree No. 43's products  list, to ensure conformity of the products with relevant 
Egyptian quality standards and regulations , as also managed under the GOEIC.  
12.5.   As previously noted in the TBT  Committee,  the decrees in question raised concerns about 
National Treatment and the fulfilment of Egypt's obligations under the WTO  Technical Barriers to 
Trade (TBT) Agreement , which required that there be non -discrimination in the application  of 
technical regulatio ns, and that technical regulations should be no more trade restrictive than 
necessary in order to achieve their legitimate objectives. The US also remained concerned by 
Egypt's level of transparency during the adoption and enforcement of both these measure s, of the 
burdensome and possibly duplicative nature of the requirements to be fulfilled, and that the 
registration process lacked transparency because the list of registered companies had not been 
made available to the public, not even to the companies directly involved. For example, in their 
written response to the US  question asking why Egypt had not allow ed an adequate period of time 
to consider stakeholder comments, Egypt had stated that the registration requirements were 
administrative in nature and d id not impose additional burdens on producers or companies in 
exporting markets. But one of the key reasons for inviting  stakeholder comments was to 
understand potential burdens and how these could be mitigated in a manner that nevertheless 
allowed a Membe r to fulfil the requirement in a timely manner.  
12.6.   As a result of the se decrees, overall US  exports to Egypt for the covered products were 
down 32% for the period from January to December  2016. In view of Egypt's backlog in 
processing applications, and the ne gative impact of the measures on trade in goods, the US had 
made efforts to address the issues on a bilateral basis as well as at TBT Committee meetings . Her 
delegation now wished to register the following US priority requests: (i) that Egypt suspend 
imple mentation of the measures until all stakeholder comments were taken into account , and th en 
to re-notify the measures under the  TBT Agreement; (ii) that Egypt would continue to engage with 
the US and other trading partners with a view to address ing their co ncerns; (iii)  in light of the 
numerous detailed questions and requests  from the US , that Egypt would continue working with all 
stakeholders to ensure that its approach was not more trade restrictive than necessary while still 
accomplish ing its regulatory objectives.  
12.7.   If Egypt had specific concerns over the importation  of counterfeit products, a concern that 
the US also took very seriously, the US would welcome an opportunity to consult with Egyptian 
customs on other trade facilitative and effective methods for controlling counterfeit products and 
counteracting the illegitimate use of intellectual property.  
12.8.   The delegate of the European Union  supported the statement made by the US. It was the 
first time that the issue had been elevated to the Goods Council , and this was because the EU had 
tried unsuccessfully for a year, on a bilateral basis and at the TBT  Committee , to convince Egypt to 
suspend the measures and to take the stakeholders' comments into account by reviewing the 
legislation and notify ing the measu res again. Above all, the EU wanted Egypt to suspend this and 
other recently adopted measures that were unclear. They overlapped with existing requirements in 
a number of sectors  and, in addition, were not transparent. For example, the EU would appreciate 
prompt authorizations from the Minister of Foreign Trade for mandatory registration of foreign 
companies wis hing to export to Egypt (Decree  No. 43/2016) if their files had already been 
accepted and processed by GOEIC.  
12.9.   The EU and many other Members were con cerned that the measures in place created 
disproportionate obstacles to trade that were detrimental to Egypt's economy, and that for more 
than a year the measures had hampered EU  exports to Egypt. The  EU called on Egypt to suspend 
the measures without dela y and actively to reconsider them. Any revised arrangement should be 
carried out in consultation with stakeholders and notified in due course to the TBT  Committee prior G/C/M/128  
 
- 19 - 
 
  to enforcement. The measures should meet their objectives without having a disproportio nate 
impact on trade , and they should be WTO-compliant and notified in conformity with WTO rules. In 
addition, sufficient time should be allowed for consultation before adoption and entry into force of 
the measure s. Her delegation hoped for a quick resolut ion of the situation.  
12.10.   The delegate of Ukraine  supported the statements made by the US and the EU regarding 
the manufacturer registration system of Egypt. Ukraine was seeking further clarification on the 
matter following meetings held with Egypt.  
12.11.   The delega tion of Turkey  also expressed its concern regarding Egypt's Manufacturer 
Registration System. Despite their previous attempts , at both bilateral and multilateral levels, 
Turkey had not seen any improvement and many Turkish companies were still awaiting 
registration by the so-called GEOIC, even when the required files had all been completed. The 
Egyptian Registration System procedures were lengthy, costly, and complicated. For example , 
after preparing the documents listed in the Decree, a company was require d to go both to the 
Chamber of Commerce and to the Governorship for approval. The documents had to be translated 
into Arabic by an accredited translation agency , and each document, both the original and the 
translation, had to be approved by the local Egyp tian consul. Such requirements significantly 
complicated access to the Egyptian market and diminished exporters' competitiveness. In addition, 
the process of application evaluation was unclear and without any indication of the time typically 
taken for a fi le to be processed and by when a response could reasonably be expected . 
12.12.   The pre -application requirements and evaluation stage were non-transparent and created 
unnecessary obstacles to trade. There had been a decline in Turkey's exports to Egypt since the 
registration system had been put in place. Turkey held concerns with regard to Decree s No. 43 (on 
the Registration System) , and No.  991, which also stipulated registration , as well as preshipment 
inspection , as requirements to import a product into Egypt. This double registration made trade 
with Egypt even more burdensome and costly.  
12.13.   Turkey was deeply concerned about Egypt's mandatory registration system and believed 
that it created barriers to trade and acted as a quantitative restriction. Therefore, Turkey  
requested Egypt to consider withdrawing the measures and reviewing them in light of 
WTO principles and obligations.  
12.14.   The delegate of Switzerland  stated that , despite having already expressed it s concerns 
regarding Decree No.  43/2016 in the past, including at previous meetings of the TBT  Committee, 
Swiss manufacturers still faced difficulties when exporting products to Egypt. Therefore, 
Switzerland encouraged Egypt to consider a less trade restrictive approach and to bring its 
legislation and implementation into compliance with the principles and rules of the TBT  Agreement 
and the WTO. Switzerland did not understand how Decree No.  43 could contribute to the 
objectives of the Egyptian authorities, and nor could they determine whether the circumstances 
that had  given rise to the adoption of the measure still existed. Despite several bilateral meetings, 
the lack of clarity in the registration process, the requirements to be fulfilled, and the actual 
implementation of the measures, continued to be matters of conce rn. Therefore, his delegation 
echoed the suggestions and requests made by the US and the EU to suspend the measure until 
greater clarity had been achieved.  
12.15.   The delegate of Egypt  thanked the delegations of the EU, US, Ukraine, Turkey, and 
Switzerland, for t heir interest in the matter. The Minister of Trade and Industry  had issued Decree 
No. 43 of 2016, which  required the registration of manufacturing plants and trademarks eligible to 
export their products to Egypt. The new decree had been notified to the TBT  Committee in 
document  G/TBT/N/EGY/114 and was currently being  examined by Members in the 
TBT Committee. Since its entry into force, Egypt had held a number of constructive consultations 
with its trading partners . Egypt had also provided written responses to comments received through 
its TBT enquiry point.  
12.16.   He took note of the concerns raised at the meeting and thanked Members for their 
previous constructive engagement. He urged Members to approach his delegation bilatera lly within 
the scope of the TBT  Commi ttee so as to continue consultations and to discuss any obstacles 
regarding the implementation of Decree  No. 43. Egypt respect ed its WTO  commitments and G/C/M/128  
 
- 20 - 
 
  strongly believed that the registr ation requirements under Decree  No. 43 were no more trade 
restrictive  than necessary and also complied with both the TBT  Agreement and WTO  rules.  
12.17.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
12.18.   The Council so agreed . 
13  INDONESIA'S IMPORT A ND EXPORT RE STRICTING POLICIES A ND PRACTICES – 
REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, JAPAN, AND THE UNITED STATES OF AME RICA  
13.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council t hat, in communications dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegations of the European Union, Japan, and the United State s, respectively, had requested that 
the Secretariat i nclude this issue on the agenda.  
13.2.   The delegate of Japan  appreciat ed Indonesia's introduction of measures to relax regulations 
and simplify administrative procedures. However, while having raised the issue  at previous 
meetings of th is Council and other Committees, Japan, together with other WTO  Members, once 
again expressed significant concerns about a protracted series of laws and regulations, namely, 
the Mining Law, the Law on Trade, and the Law on Indust ry, and also restrictions in the retail 
sector, l ocal content requirements on 4G  mobile phones, and local content requirements for 
investment in the telecommunication sector. It was deplorable that those measures had not yet 
been rectified, despite the fac t that most of them clearly went against WTO  rules. Japan strongly 
urged Indonesia seriously to review those laws and regulations and to implement the measures in 
a manner consistent with the relevant WTO  Agreements.  
13.3.   With regard to the Mining Law, Japan un derstood that Indonesia's Government Regulation 
No. 1 of 2017 , and its relevant ordinances, allowed mining c ompanies to export several 
semi-processed mineral ores. As concerned copper concentrates, the current provisional measures 
of the export license sys tem had b een extended for a further five  years under certain conditions, 
including the requirement that mining companies convert their contracts of work (CoW) into 
special mining licenses (IUPKs). In terms of low grade nickel ore, mining companies would be  
allowed to export their ores for a period of five  years on condition that they would build  their own 
smelters , and that ores would be supplied to domestic smelters so that at least 30% of the 
capacity of domestic smelters would be satisfied.  
13.4.   Japan appreci ated the reforms that had been made to partially lift the complete prohibition 
of nickel ore exports that had previously been in place. At the same time, Japan also understood 
that the exportation of nickel had not yet been resumed and hoped that it soon would be. Japan 
urged Indonesia to further revise the measures that it considered to be inconsistent with 
WTO Article  XI and which were based on Indonesia's laws to prohibit or restrict exportation of the 
minerals  in question.  These measures had caused econ omic injury to Japanese industry . Japan 
would continue closely to monitor the situation surrounding the exportation of nickel and copper. 
He again urged Indonesia to share updated information on those measures with WTO  Members , as 
had already been requeste d at previous m eeting s of the Goods Council and TRIMs  Committee.  
13.5.   The delegate of the United States  recalled that her delegation had raised concerns with 
regard to a broad range of sectors , including agriculture, energy, information and communications 
techn ology, and consumer goods , in previous meetings of the Council. The measures in question 
included import licensing requirements, trading rights limitations, pre shipment inspection 
requirements, standards requirements, local content and domestic manufacturi ng requirements, 
and export restrictions, including taxes and prohibitions.  
13.6.   An increasing number of regulations restrict ing market access and impos ing localization 
requirements across a range of sectors, including mining, oil and gas, franchising, retail, and 
telecommunications , had continued to be issued. For example, in 2016, the Ministry of Trade had 
adopted import licensing requirements that conditioned the iss uance of import licenses for 
4G LTE-enabled devices on the fulfilment of local content require ments. Those measures had also 
prohibited the importation of finished 4G  LTE-enabled devices. It was yet another example of 
Indonesia's restrictive and complex import licensing reg ime, which the US and other G/C/M/128  
 
- 21 - 
 
  WTO Members had consistently raised  as an issue  both in the Import Licensing Committee  and in 
this Council . 
13.7.   The US was deeply concerned about recent changes to Indonesia's ban on the export of 
unprocessed mineral ores that appeared to make those restrictions even more onerous than they 
had been before. Indonesia now appeared to be extending its use of such types of localization 
requirements, which were already widespread across the mining, oil and gas, retail , and high -tech 
sectors, to also the renewable fuel sector , and agriculture. For instance, the In donesian Ministry of 
Agriculture was in the process of developing new requirements for the importation of dairy 
products that would include domestic content requirements, among others.  
13.8.   The US was also concerned  about numerous measures issued by Indonesian ministries in 
recent months, including measures issued by the Ministry of Communication and Information, and 
the Financial Services Authority, which required companies to store their data in local data centres 
in Indonesia, and also to have disaster recove ry centres in Indonesia. The US also continued to 
monitor the devel opment of regulations for "over -the-top" companies that appeared to require 
those companies to register as permanent businesses in Indonesia. Although the stated goal of the 
measures in que stion was to develop Indonesia's E -Commerce and ICT  sector, such localization 
policies could actually hinder Indonesia's efforts.  
13.9.   The US continued to be concerned by  Indonesia's trend of adopting unique technical and 
testing requirements, particularly for consumer goods and food products. Her delegation 
understood that Indonesia's Food and Drug Control Agency had been developing measures that 
would implement restrictive requirements for infant formula , for example . They were also closely 
observing the evolu tion of implementing regulations for the Halal law.  
13.10.   Her delegation also remained concerned about an overall lack of transparency in 
Indonesia's trade regime. While some minor improvements  had been made , there continued to be 
a lack of consistency when issuing draft measures and consulting with a broad range of 
stakeholders, in particular foreign firms, as well as very short comment periods even when such an 
opportunity was provided. The US also urged Indonesia to submit notifications of its preshipment 
inspection requirements and subsidy program mes, and noted that Indonesia had not provided a 
notification of its subsidy program mes since 1995.  
13.11.   The Council was well acquainted with the breadth of concerns that the US had raised over 
the last several years, and her delegat ion would continue to raise thos e concerns bilater ally and at 
the appropriate WTO  Committees. They looked forward to continuing to work with Indonesia both 
to support its reform agenda and to address those long-standing concerns.  
13.12.   The delegate of  the European Union  supported the comments made by other Members. 
The EU had also been raising this issue for a long time, to no effect. Despite certain reforms 
introduced in 2015 -2016, the high number of restricting measures applied by Indonesia had not in 
fact decreased. Rather, additional barriers had been recently issued or reinstated. The persistently 
high number of restrictive and protectionist trade and investment measures and the lack of 
predictability and transparency adversely affected trade and i nvestment. For example:  
– Use of local content requirements persisted, in telecoms, retail, energy construction 
and public procurement;  
 
- The discriminatory capital requirement for freight forwarders was unacceptable 
(USD4 million versus USD150,000 for lo cal companies);  
 
- a very far -reaching Halal law affected food and beverages, pharmaceutical, cosmetic 
and leather goods exports. Its implementing measures, once finalized, could bring 
trade to a halt;  
 
- the complex, time -consuming, and burdensome import requirements in wide ranging 
sectors continued to apply, for instance, in meat and dairy products, fresh plants, 
horticulture, wood, forestry products, and cosmetics. The measures were  often further 
amplified with the implementation of quantitative restric tions, for instance in meat, 
alcohol products, and steel;  G/C/M/128  
 
- 22 - 
 
   
- export restrictions continued to be imposed on certain raw materials;  
 
- burdensome and discriminatory conformity assessment procedures as well as growing 
and proliferating mandatory technical st andards were becoming real barriers to trade 
that could not be maintained because these were measures that disrupted 
international markets, increased input costs for producers, and led to uncertainty in 
terms of supply.  
 
13.13.   The EU had raised these issues in t he relevant committees of the WTO and continued to be 
concerned that , instead of reversing the trend, Indonesia had also been issuing new trade 
restrictive measures. Such examples included the new Regulation  No. 77/2016 , which reinstated 
limitations on imp orts of tyres, and the new draft rules in the dairy sector, which included a 
stipulation that "imports of milk would only be conducted if domestic production was not able to 
fulfil national demand". Her delegation urged Indonesia to eliminate the existing trade barriers in 
conformity with its G20  commitments , and to promote transparency, predictability, and ease of 
doing business, in contrast to the current economic and business environment , which  was 
becoming very unfriendly. The  EU would continue to addre ss these issues.  
13.14.   The delegate of Norway  shared the concerns expressed by other speakers. Norwegian 
exporters had reported difficult ies with the Indonesian import regime and, in particular, with 
regard to import licensing and customs procedures, which serve d as barrier s to trade. The 
measures were affecting a broad range of sectors, including the seafood industry. At the same 
time, Norway hoped that developments in Indonesia might lead to greater progress and looked 
forward to working together with Indonesia  on these issues.  
13.15.   The delegate of Canada  shared the concerns of other Members with regard to Indonesia's 
persist ent import -restricting policies, and for this reason his delegation had also engaged in 
bilateral discussions  with Indonesia . He encouraged Indo nesia to respect its WTO  obligations, and 
in particular with regard to import licensing.  
13.16.   The delegate of Australia  stated that his Government continued to share the concerns of 
other WTO  Members about Indonesia's import and export restricting policies in r ecent years, 
particularly as they affected agricultural trade.  
13.17.   The delegate of  the Republic of Korea  shared the concerns expressed by previous 
speakers, and recalled that his delegation had reiterated those same issues at previous Council 
meetings. Many tr ade restrictive measures were still in place and no meaningful and substantial 
progress had been made on them. Korea requested the Indonesian Government, once again, to 
address in a WTO -consistent manner the issue of pre-paid corporate income tax on import ers. 
Under Indonesia's current tax regime, importers were required to pay 10% of pre -paid tax, on 
which they could claim a refund at the end of the taxable year. That tax placed an unfair and 
serious financial burden on importers and , in spite of Korea's c oncern, the tax had been increased 
from 2.5% to 7.5% in 2014 , and raised again to 10% in 2015. It was quite clear that the tax was 
not consistent with GATT  Article  III on National Treatment and should be reformed as soon as 
possible.  
13.18.   He reiterated Korea's concern s regarding the Law on Trade and the Law on Industry of 
Indonesia, which contained a number of trade -restrictive articles and local content requirements. 
Korea requested the Indonesian Government carefully to review those laws in light of relevant 
WTO rules and to provide consultation opportunities for WTO  Members while the implementation 
regulations were being formulated.  
13.19.   The delegate of Brazil  reiterated the Brazilian statements previously made in the Council  
on this issue . Brazil shared the concer ns voiced by previous speakers with regard to Indonesia's 
import restricting practices, which violated a range of WTO  disciplines and undermined the access 
to the Indonesian market  of several products , which in Brazil's case  comprised exports of poultry 
and bovine meat. Some of the restrictive measures were under examination in several proceedings 
in the dispute settlement mechanism. Brazil therefore  urged Indonesia to reverse its trade 
restrictive measures, which adversely affected Brazilian interests and those of other Members.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 23 - 
 
  13.20.   The delegate of Switzerland  welcomed any additional information that the Indonesian 
delegation could provide regarding its new draft regulation on the supply and distribution of dairy 
products.  
13.21.   The delegate of New Zealand  echoed the  concerns raised by other Members. As his 
delegation had noted in previous meetings of the Council, New Zealand believed that Indonesia's 
restrictions on agricultural imp orts undermined core WTO  principles and were inconsistent with key  
obligations in the various WTO  agreements. New Zealand continued to be significant ly concerned 
about a range of import restrictions in Indonesia's laws and regulations that affected trade across 
a range of agricultural products, including horticultural and animal products. I ndonesia's 
restrictions did not just hurt exporters; Indonesian consumers, processors , and producers , had 
also been affected because Indonesia's measures had contributed to rising food prices in 
Indonesia, including for basic foodstuffs and for materials for the domestic manufacturing sector. 
New Zealand hoped that Indonesia would be able to implement its reform plans through policies 
that were consistent with its WTO  obligations.  
13.22.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  echoed once again the concerns voiced by previ ous 
speakers with regard to Indonesia's import restricting practice s. Indonesia's restr ictions 
undermined core WTO  principles and were inconsistent with key provisions in the WTO  Agreement, 
in particular with regard to requirements on imported fish and fis h products, the import licence 
regime for cell phones, computers, and tablet s, local content requirements for mobile phones, and 
restrictions on entry ports. Chinese Taipei hoped that the recent developments in Indonesia would 
lead to greater progress , and urged Indonesia to improve their policy. His delegation looked 
forward to working with Indonesia on solving the se issues.  
13.23.   The delegate of Indonesia  thanked the EU, Japan, and the US for raising their concerns. 
The issue had been on the Council agenda for s ome time and Indonesia had replied to some of the 
concerns at previous Council meeting s. Accordingly, Indonesia requested the Council to 
incorporate Indonesia's previous responses into the minutes of the meeting .2 Her delegation also 
took note of new conce rns that had been raised by some Members and requested those Members 
to submit their concerns in writing. Indonesia had not intended to create any barriers to trade for 
other Members. Import and export policies had been created for justifiable reasons, suc h as 
safety, health, environment, and public moral protection. Indonesia always tried to ensure that 
trade -related policies and regulations were consistent with its WTO obligations. The current 
administration was taking bold steps to wards  further streamlin ing the export and import process; 
currently, they had established a regulations programme consisting of 13  packages. The 
programme aimed to create better conditions for investment, to improve purchasing power, and to 
ensure Indonesia's commitment towards sustainable development. The programme was 
implemented through a process of harmonizing regulations, simplifying bureaucracy , and 
implementing efficient legal enforcement. Indonesia had eliminated local regulations , which had 
been seen as hampering trade a nd ease of doing business. The number of days to process various 
licences had also been significantly  reduced . Indonesia had tried to address the concern s of some 
Members by revoking or amending measures that were deemed to be inconsistent with Indonesia's  
WTO obligations, and such efforts would continue. Indonesia remained  committed to working wi th 
other Members within the WTO  framework , as well as in other fora, in order to address Members' 
concerns, while at the same time maintaining a balance with  regar d to addressing Indonesia's 
development challenges.  
13.24.   The delegate of Japan  thanked Indonesia for the explanation and for its efforts to address 
the concerns that Members had raised. With regard to Indonesia's explanation that its policies had 
been justified  on the grounds of safety, health , and environment, he noted that not all measures 
relating to health or the environment were justified under GAT T Article  XX because 
GATT  Article  XX imposed strict conditions. Japan had no intention of denying Indonesia's r ight to 
adopt  investment promotion measures and industrial development measures , but Japan 
nevertheless believed that the measures should always be implemented in a manner consistent 
with the WTO  Agreements. His delegation looked forward to receiving Indon esia's further 
explanation s. Japan would continue to engage with Indonesia bilaterally or in the Council and other 
relevant WTO  committees.  
                                                
2 See document  G/C/M/125, paragraphs  8.21–8.23; document  G/C/M/126, paragraphs  11.30 –11.31; 
and document  G/C/M/127, paragraph  14.24.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 24 - 
 
  13.25.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and Indonesia for its 
responses and proposed that the Co uncil take note of the statements made.  
13.26.   The Council so agreed . 
14  TURKEY – MEASURES REGARDING A DDITIONAL CUSTOMS DU TIES ON IMPORTED 
TYRES – REQUEST FROM JAPAN  
14.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in communications dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegations of  the European Union, Japan, and the United States, respectively, had requested the 
Secretariat to include this issue on the agenda.  
14.2.   The delegate of Japan  informed the Council of its bilateral meetings with Turkey in their 
respective capitals. However, Japa n considered that there was a possibility that the measures on 
imported tyres were inc onsistent with the relevant WTO  Agreements, such as GATT  Articles  II and 
VII, plus Article  1 of the Agreement on Customs Valuation  (CVA) . In particular, they considered 
that Turkey's calculation of the customs valuation of imported tyres was inconsistent with the CVA 
and GATT  Article  VII because it was not based on the actual transaction value of imported tyres 
but appeared rather to be based on a minimum customs value or arbitrary or fictitious values, 
which were not the appropriate basis on which to calculate customs value.  
14.3.   Japan requested that Turkey revise the measures in light of Japan's concern over the 
negative effects that the measures had been having on Japan's trade relationship with Turkey. His 
delegation hoped to continue holding discussions with Turkey on the issue.  
14.4.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  associated his delegation with th e statement made by Japan. 
GATT  Article  VII and Article  1 of the CVA provided that t he customs valuation of imported 
merchandise should be based on the actual value of the imported merchandise, and regrettably 
Turkey did not determine the customs valuation of imported tyres on the basis of the transaction 
price. Turkey used reference pric es instead of actual values in certain situations , which necessarily 
result ed in duties in excess of those set forth in Turkey's Schedule of Concession s. The result was 
a less favourable treatment than that provided for in Turkey's Schedule of Accession an d was 
consequently inconsistent with Article  II(1)(a) and II(1)(b) of GATT  1994. His delegation urged 
Turkey to ensure that its practice was consistent with WTO  obligations.  
14.5.   The delegate of Turkey  thanked the delegations of Japan and Chinese Taipei for the ir 
interest. According to Communiqué  2 of 2016, importers of tyres under 
HS Codes  4011.10.00.90.12 and 4011.20.10.00.19 were required to apply to the Ministry of 
Economy for a "surveillance certificate" if the declared border value of the products concerne d was 
less than USD 5 per kg. The surveillance certificate was an attempt to monitor import trends and 
figures and had nothing to do with cust oms valuation. In fact, Article  6.2 of the communiqué 
clearly stated that the USD 5 per kg benchmark to determine th e need for a surveillance certificate 
provided no basis for determining the customs value itself. Therefore, the customs value of these 
products was not determined according to the Communiqué, but according to the relevant 
provisions of the Customs Law.  
14.6.   In the case of a proper application by an importer, a surveillance certificate would be issued 
without imposing any import restriction or increasing any customs value or customs duties. 
Therefore, the surveillance measure on import ed tyres was in compliance with the provisions of 
the CVA. If Japan and Chinese Taipei could forward the names of the companies that were 
experiencing difficulty in receiving a surveillance certificate after declaring the customs value at 
less than USD 5 per kg, then Turkey would better understand the alleged difficulty faced by 
importers. With regard to customs duties for the products under discussion, Turkey had increased 
its applied rates on those products to the level of its bound rates in September  2016; those rates 
were applied on an MFN  basis and were totally in compliance with Turkey's WTO commitments.  
14.7.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
14.8.   The Council so agreed . G/C/M/128  
 
- 25 - 
 
  15  INDIA – IMPORT RESTRICTING M EASURES – REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, 
JAPAN, AND THE UNITED STATES OF AME RICA  
15.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in communications dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegations of the United States, Japan, and the European Union, respectively, had request ed the 
Secretariat to once again include this issue on the agenda.  
15.2.   The delegate of the United States  reiterated her delegation's concerns regarding India's 
import duties on certain telecommunications products that were covered by the Information 
Technology  Agreement  (ITA). The US, along with several other Members, had sent a 
communication to India on 4  April 2016 that raised a number of questions and provided a detailed 
explanation of their serious concerns with regard to the 10% MFN  tariffs  that India had imposed on 
four categories of telecommunications equipment, and which were reflected in India's most recent 
MFN tariff schedule.  
15.3.   Eight months later, in December  2016, her authorities had finally received a reply from 
India. However, they were still awaitin g a response to their specific question , namely: did India 
consider that the products fell within the HS  codes identified in the US  communication. Her 
delegation had now been requesting this clarification for a year. Apart from the question of 
classificati on, the issue was most fundamentally about India's ‎binding tariff commitments ; namely, 
the apparent inconsistencies between India's WTO  bound commitments to provide duty -free 
access for certain products, and the non-zero import duties reflected in India's  MFN tariff schedule, 
which were being charged at the border.  
15.4.   Unfortunately, there appeared to be cause for additional concern as other information and 
communication technology (ICT) products  had raised similar concerns for US  traders. Several 
additional e xamples of tariff subheadings where the US had identified apparent inconsistencies 
between India's bound and applied tariff rates included the following:  
- HS 8529.10 -[Aerials or antennae of a kind used with app aratus for radio -telephony and 
radio-telegraph y] 
 
- HS 8529.90 - [Parts and accessories of the machines of heading  84.71]  
 
- HS 8538.90 - [Certain types of printed circuit assemblies]  
 
- HS 9030.90  - [Parts of instruments appliances for measuring or checking semiconductor 
wafers or devices]  
 
15.5.   In each of these tariff subheadings, there did not appear to be any duty -free national 
applied tariff lines in India's MFN  tariff schedule, despite the fact that India's WTO  bound schedule 
reflected zero duty concessions in those same subheadings. Her delegation question ed how India 
justified applying import duties across each of these subheadings in light of its bound concessions, 
and which, as in the case of telecom products, were pursuant to its ITA  commitments.  
15.6.   It was important also to consider this issue from a comme rcial perspective, since ICT was a 
key enabling sector and a powerful catalyst for other sectors and industries across the Indian 
economy, such as transportation, tourism, manufacturing, and the services sector. When those 
sectors had to pay higher prices for critical ICT  inputs due to tariffs, it damaged their 
competitiveness and potential for growth.  
15.7.   Her delegation requested India to provide substantive responses, and as soon as possible, 
to the questions raised by the US regarding the telecommunications products and the 
four additional tariff subheadings.  
15.8.   The delegate of the European Union  stated that the EU had raised this issue several times in 
the Council as well as in the ITA and Market Access Committees in order to express their concerns 
about the 10 % import duty applied by India on ICT  products covered by the ITA  Agreement (those 
under HS  code 8517) and India's GATT  duty-free concessions. She thanked India for their detailed 
replies given in November  2016, which the EU had carefully examined. In its response, India had 
confirmed that it was not an issue of classification and that the 10% duty was applied on a number G/C/M/128  
 
- 26 - 
 
  of ICT  items that India did not consider were bound by its ITA -1 commitments, given that the 
products that were now covered by the HS  codes had not existed at the time of the commitment.  
15.9.   The EU remained unconvinced by India's responses. In particular, the fact that India 
considered these products as "new" products and t herefore not covered by the ITA  Agreement did 
not stand up in light of p ast WTO  case law, and in li ght of the fact that the ITA  Agreement covered 
all products that were classified in the WTO  Model List of items (JOB  (07)/96). These products 
were identified through their HS  classification , which was regularly updated to take in to account 
different HS  revisions. Therefore, they all fell under the scope of the agreement, whatever their 
description. Moreover, the 0%  duty had also been bound in India's GATT  commitments.  
15.10.   In addition to the ICT  items already raised  by her delegation , the EU had found 
two additional ICT  products for which the applied tariff rate was not in conformity with India's 
0% binding commitments in its GATT  Schedule and under the ITA1  coverage: (1) "digital still video 
cameras" , classified under HS  code 8525 80 2 0 in India's tariff schedule; and (2) "other electronic 
integrated circuits (EICs)" , classified under HS  code 8542 39 00. It was a similar case with regard 
to certain pharmac eutical products in Chapter  30. 
15.11.   Her delegation regretted having to raise the issue  again, following several previous 
attempts to solve it bilaterally as well as in different committees. However, given the importance 
of such products both for the US and for India's own economy, her delegation again called on India 
to proceed rapidly with  the elimination of those tariffs, which constituted not only a violation of 
India's WTO  commitments but also a barrier to trade in total contradiction with the G20 call to roll 
back protectionism. The EU would continue carefully to monitor India's complia nce with its 
commitments.  
15.12.   On another item, although her delegation welcomed the suppression of minimum import 
prices (MIP) for steel products , they remained at the same time concerned regarding India's 
certification requirements , imposed since 2012 , on a n umber of steel products. Moreover, these 
requirements had continued to be ext ended ; they were extended to 15  additiona l steel products in 
2014, to 21  additional steel products in 2015 , and to three  stainless steel products in August  2015. 
Steel products pr oduced in the EU conformed to internationally recognized standards and fulfilled 
the quality requirements and technical specifications of buyers around the world. Therefore, she 
invited India to allow steel products originating in the EU to be imported into India without having 
to pass specific testing and certification requirements. The EU considered these conformity 
assessment procedures to be duplicative, burdensome, costly , and of no added value.  
15.13.   The delegate of Japan  echoed the concern s of the US and E U regarding the ICT  products 
that they had identified. Japan appreciated India's response to their questions, in which India had 
confirmed that all four  products  listed in Customs Notification No.  11 of 2014 were subject to 
10% Basic Customs Duty. Since th e customs duties of the four  products were bound to zero, with 
the exception of a certain type of receiver, the imposition of 10%  basic customs duties on the 
four products in question was inconsistent with GATT  Article  II. He requested clarification from 
India with regard to that situation. In addition, he requested an explanation regarding the 
tariff-line classification of the four  products listed in Customs Notification No.  11/2014, taking into 
account the new technologies mentioned by India a t the previo us Council meeting.  
15.14.   In addition, following the argument of the US and EU, Japan was particularly interested in 
the issue of digital cameras and printed circuit assemblies . He requested India to provide detailed 
information regarding t he HS  codes cited by the EU. 
15.15.   The delegate of Norway  registered her delegation's continued interest in the matter , which 
for Norway was of systemic as well as economic importance.  
15.16.   The delegate of Australia  joined other Members in expressing Australia's continuing 
concern regardi ng the restrictive trade practices  and measures that had been introduced by India, 
especially on iron and steel products; in particular, the introduction of a n MIP in addition to a 
safeguard measure , on steel imports , which appeared to have been designed t o curb steel imports 
competing on India's market. Given that discussions and reviews had already taken place in the 
relevant committees, Australia was interested to know how India saw the MIP interacting with the 
requirements for justifying and imposing tr ade remedies. India had indicated at the G/C/M/128  
 
- 27 - 
 
  November  meeting of the Council that the MIP measure had been extended for 66  tariff lines until 
4 December  2016. Australia remained concerned that India had extended this measure rather than 
removing it. His delega tion would appreciate an update as to whether the MIP continued to be 
imposed on those 66  tariff lines.  
15.17.   The delegate of Thailand  thanked the US, EU, and Japan for raising this issue once again. 
They also registered their systemic concern given that  they held commercial interests in the 
products under heading  8517, covered under the ITA. They hoped for a speedy solution to the 
issue.  
15.18.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  shared the concerns raised by other delegations.  His 
delegation also wished to raise its concer n with regard to India's increased tariffs on certain 
products that were already covered by the ITA, as Chinese Taipei held strong commercial interests 
in those products. Therefore, he urged India only to adopt measures that were consistent with the 
WTO Agreement.  
15.19.   The delegate of Canada  shared the concerns raised by other Members in relation to duties 
maintained by India on certain IT  products . Canada had already raised its concerns a number of 
times in the ITA  Committee as well as in the Committee on Marke t Access. The increase of applied 
rates over India's bound rates for various tariff items under heading  8517 was inconsistent with 
India's bound commitments pursuant to the ITA and also ran contrary to the objectives of 
multilateral tariff liberalization. In addition, Canada had a commercial interest in exporting the 
specific goods subject to the increased applied rates under heading  8517 and was concerned that 
those tariffs might already have had an adverse impact on Canada's exports of those products to 
India. Canada would study the products raised by both the US and EU in terms of examples of 
additional increases to rates above the bound level. His delegation looked forward to receiving 
further information from India in response to some of the co -sponsors ' questions regarding those 
applied rates and he encouraged India to ensure that it was meeting its WTO  commitments.  
15.20.   The delegate of China  reiterated their concern  about import restricti ng measures on 
apples. She appreciated India's efforts in taking measu res to reopen some of its ports. 
Nonetheless, China expected India to provide more information on the administration of apple 
imports. They would be grateful if India would clarify for how long the port measures in question 
would be maintained , and wished also to be provide d with India's  justification for maintaining 
them.  
15.21.   The delegate of the Republic of Korea  thanked the US, EU, and Japan,  for once again 
drawing attention to India's import duties on ITA  products. Korea had a commercial concern with 
regard to this  matter because the duties in question risked to  harm the interests of Korean 
industry. Korea's  concern was also systemic , for which reason Korea considered that the import 
duties should be explained very clearly. His delegation would closely monito r the issue and seek 
further clarification.  
15.22.   The delegate of Singapore  registered its interest in this issue and would continue to 
monitor it.  
15.23.   The delegate of New Zealand  reiterated their systemic interest in this issue. She also 
welcomed the reopening of m ost of the ports to which imports of apples were closed last year. 
However, New Zealand had noted that two  ports remained closed to imports of apples. Limiting 
port access in such a way was likely to cause undue delays and costs that c ould affect the stabi lity 
of supply and increase price volatility.  
15.24.   The delegate of India thanked the delegations of the US, EU, Japan, Norway, Australia, 
Thailand, Chinese Taipei, Canada, China, Korea, Singapore, and New Zealand, for their interest in 
certain trade measures of  India, namely the imposition of customs duties on certain ICT  goods; 
minimum import price s and standards for certain steel products; and port restriction s on imports 
of apples. In respect of the imposition of customs duties on certain IT and telecom goods , India 
had already clarified its position in the CTG meetings of 14 July and 17 November  2016.3 India had 
                                                
3 See document s G/C/M/12 6 and G/C/M/12 7. G/C/M/128  
 
- 28 - 
 
  also submitted written replies to the questions raised jointly by the EU, US, and Japan. Those 
replies had been circulated in documents  G/MA/W/128 an d G/IT/W/45.  
15.25.   Concerned Members had requested an accurate and precise customs classification of the 
goods covered under Notification No.  11 of 2014, dated 11  July 2014. However, as India had 
stated  previously , the main issue for them was not the classificat ion but the tariff binding 
commitments. The goods in question were not covered under India's ITA  commitments; India had 
signed the ITA -1 in 1997 and had presented its schedule of concession  at that time , which had 
subsequently been certified in document  WT/Let/181.  
15.26.   India had already explained in previous meetings that IT and telecom technologies had 
evolved over the years. New technologies, applications , and equipment , had since been developed 
that were neither existent nor even conceived of at the time of signing the ITA -1. Further, during 
the ITA -1 negotiations, HS  Code 8517 for telecom equipment referred to telecommunication s 
apparatus for "carrier current line systems and digital line systems". However, in the last few 
years, several new technologies had  been developed and subsequently, the said code had been 
expanded to include new technological developments. Since India's ITA -1 obligations were limited 
to those items that conformed to the 1996  definition of products for "carrier current line systems 
and digital line systems", new products that had lately been classified under that category could 
not be considered as part of the ITA-1 agreement.  
15.27.   India did not intend to make any new commitments on goods for which it did not sign up 
in the ITA -1, and which had subsequently evolved. Some participants had concluded ITA -2 in order 
to take care of new developments in technologies and new products , but India was not a signatory 
to ITA -2. In addition, he requested those delegations that had raised concerns for the  first time 
relating to specific tariff lines , such as 852910, 852990, 853890, 903090, 852520 , and 854239 , to 
provide his delegation with their written statements so that their concerns cou ld be examined in 
detail.  
15.28.   With regard to the issues relating to ste el, the requirement of a n MIP for 19  national tariff 
lines had not been renewed after the lapse of the two-month period outlined in Notification 
No. 31/2015 -2020, dated 3  December  2016. Therefore, MIP had not been in operation since 
5 February  2017. Regard ing the concern raised on technical standards relating to steel, and the 
requirement for t esting in order to grant a BIS  mark certification licence, the BIS (Certification) 
Regulations  1988 required evidence that the products conformed to relevant Indian S tandards 
through testing procedures in a BIS or BIS-recognized independent laboratory to assess 
conformity to the relevant standard before granting a licence. The matter was currently under 
deliberation in the TBT Committee.  
15.29.   The final issue raised was in r egard to port restriction s on apples, which had also been 
discussed at previous meetings. India had informed the Council that the importation of apples was 
allowed through one  port, in accordance with the DGFT  Notification No.  2/2015 -2020, dated 
14 Septemb er 2015. After detailed review, the Government o f India had issued Notification 
No. 30/2015 -2020, dated 12  January  2016, amending policy condition s so as to  allow the 
importation of apples through sea ports and airports in Kolkata, Chennai, Mumbai, and Coc hin, as 
well as land ports and airports in Delhi, and also across India's land borders. The Government was 
constantly monitoring the situation and the matter was being further examined in Capital among 
the relevant authorities.  
15.30.   The Chairperson  thanked dele gations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
15.31.   The Council so agreed . 
16  IMPORT LEVY BY WTO M EMBERS OF THE AFRICA N UNION – REQUEST FROM JAPAN 
AND THE UNITED STATES OF AME RICA  
16.1.   The Chairperson  recalled that , in communications dated 24  March  2017, the delegations of 
the U nited States and Japan, respectively, had requested the Secretariat  to include this item on 
the agenda of the meeting.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 29 - 
 
  16.2.   The delegate of the United States  appreciated the opportunity to discuss the trade-related 
aspects of the African Union's (AU) Decision, which had been unanimously a dopted by member 
states in July  2016 in Kigali, for AU  members to finance 100% of the AU's operational budget, 
75% of the pr ogram budget, and 25% of the AU  Peace Fund by  2020.  
16.3.   In order to generate funds to implement the Kiga li Decision, some AU  members may 
apparently implement new country specific import levies. For the US, the 43 AU  members that 
belonged to the WTO , and the nine  countries that were in the process of acce ding needed to apply 
any funding mechanism, including an import levy, in a transparent manner , and in a manner  that 
also adhered to all their WTO commitments. In particular, it was essential that AU  WTO Members, 
as well as accession candidates, applied the  levy in a manner that would be consistent with 
MFN obligations , which was a bedrock WTO  principle that must be adhered to by all current and 
prospective Members.  
16.4.   At the same time, AU  Member States and accession candidates must also seek to address 
potenti al concerns that might arise under other WTO  obligations, such as GATT  Article s II and  VIII, 
and to the extent that any WTO  issue could not be fully addressed, it would be n ecessary for the 
particular AU WTO Members  to obtain, by consensus, a WTO  waiver un der Article  IX:3 of the 
Marrakesh Agreement.  
16.5.   The US  understanding was that a group of AU  member countries was already providing 
funding according to the Kigali Decision , although they did not know if trade measures were being 
used to do so. Those countries  included Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic 
of the Congo, and the countries of the Southern African Customs Union (Botswana, Lesotho, 
Namibia , South Africa, and Swaziland).  
16.6.   The US requested that those African WTO  Members and accession candidate countries , and 
any others , that were contemplating implementing a levy or any other trade measure , provide 
detailed, country specific implementation plans to the Council as soon as possible, particularly as 
WTO waivers could be necessary where co untries were not in compliance with WTO  rules. 
Collection of any import levy or implementation of any other trade measures intended to fund the 
Kigali Decision should not occur prior to an assessment of WTO  compliance.  
16.7.   The US also strongly encouraged A U Member States that were also WTO  Members and 
WTO accession candidates immediately to begin discussing the issue with other WTO  Members in 
Geneva, as well as with the WTO  Secretariat, so as to allow  a more complete sense of the timing 
and implementation plans  for the Kigali Decision.  
16.8.   The delegate of Japan  echoed the statement made by the U S. Japan understood that the 
AU assembly had decided to impose a 0.2% levy, from 2017, on all eligible goods imported into 
the African continent . If WTO  Members of the AU imp osed customs duties on imported goods from 
other WTO  Members without imposing the same duties on African Members, it would be 
inconsistent with WTO MFN obligation s. It would  also be inconsistent with GATT  Article  II to 
impose customs duti es higher than bou nd rates.  
16.9.   Japan requested all AU  members that were also WTO  Members to provide further 
information on the following issues: AU  members that had already implemented the decision; 
concerning those members that had not already implemented the decision, when t hey intend ed to 
do so; and how the total amount equivalent to the import levy  was to be collected . Japan expected 
that the decision would be implemented in a manner consistent with all relevant WTO obligations, 
including the obligations relating to MFN and  bound rates.  
16.10.   The delegate of the European Union  supported the purpose and cause of the measure, 
which aimed at enabling the AU to finance its activities and to support African countries. Currently, 
there was a lack of information regarding the practical m eans of implementation of such a 
measure and any clarification regarding the measure would be appreciated. Pending further 
information, she underscored that the designed mea sures should be WTO  compatible.  
16.11.   The delegate of Canada  thanked the US and Japan for  raising the issue. Canada supported 
the efforts of the AU to increase African resource mobilization to fund the operations and 
program mes of the African Union Commission. And, like African states themselves, Canada would G/C/M/128  
 
- 30 - 
 
  like to see sustained, predictable , and flexible funding mech anisms identified to support 
AU peace -keeping  operations. His delegation was encouraged by Africa's efforts to provide more 
sustainable funding, including for African Union led peace -keeping  operations. While Canada was 
also plea sed to support Africa's regional integration and free trade efforts, it was also keen to 
continue to develop its own trade with Africa, and so encouraged AU  members that were also 
WTO Members to maintain trade -friendly policies and regulations with fo reign partners, such as 
Canada.  
16.12.   Canada encouraged AU  member states at the WTO to b egin discussions with other 
WTO Members to ensure that any import levy would be WTO -consistent in its implementation. 
Such discussions could help to identify any possible issues r egarding the implementation of the 
proposed import levy. Canada stood ready to eng age in such discussions with AU  Members and 
other interested WTO  Members on this important issue.  
16.13.   The delegate of Rwanda , the African Group Coordinator, stated that the African Group  had 
not coordinated on this issue and that there was therefore no group statement to be delivered to  
the Council. On behalf of the African Group he took note of the statements made and indicated 
that they would consult individual members in relati on to the transparency issues raised. He 
requested Members to subm it their statements in writing.  
16.14.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
16.15.   The Council so agreed . 
17  CHINA – TRADE DISTORTING MEASUR ES – REQUEST FROM THE UNI TED STATES OF 
AMERICA  
17.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in a communication dated 25  March  2017, the 
delegation of the United States had requested that the Secretariat inc lude this issue on the 
agenda.  
17.2.   The delegate of the United States  raised two  specific concerns with regard to China's trade 
practices that had already been expressed by several Members in various committees. When 
concerns reached a critical point, it became appropriate to take the discuss ion to the Council and 
Members had taken similar action with respect to other Members  in the past . 
17.3.   WTO Members had repeatedly expressed their concerns with regard to the timeliness and 
completeness of China's notifications for subsidies and state trading e nterprises. Last year was the 
first time China had reported on its subsidies at the sub -central level. However, China's 
notifications did not cover all provinces and omitted important sectors, such as steel, aluminium, 
and fisheries. This was significant g iven the important role sub-central governments had played in 
keeping failing firms afloat, especially in sectors experiencing overcapacity.  
17.4.   With respect to state trading enterprises, the US was concerned that China's recent 
submission did not follow the a greed  upon format for notification and identified even less entities 
than at its WTO  Accession . China had also refused to answer any substantive questions about the 
subsidies or state trading enterprises that had been identified. The US urged China to addr ess 
these problems promptly. China's practice to date had inhibited Members from gaining crucial 
information about the programmes in question, which would have allowed Members better to 
understand the operation of state trading enterprise s and to engage wi th China on reform. Second, 
WTO Members had continually expressed their concerns about China's government intervention in 
several key industrial sectors, such as steel and aluminium. China's practices had led to severe 
overcapacity, with the surplus Chines e product s being dumped around the world.  
17.5.   Members had repeatedly urged China to take concrete steps to stop its harmful government 
intervention. Instead, China appeared to be set on increasing its intervention in other sectors, as 
evidenced by the "Made in  China  2025" plan. In response to China's unwillingness to resolve the 
issues on its own, Members had had no choice but increasingly to adopt anti -dumping measures to 
address the resulting injury to their industries. For example, of the 20  Members that had  reported G/C/M/128  
 
- 31 - 
 
  anti-dumping activity in the last six  months, 16 had done so vis -à-vis China. Of those 16, 15 had 
involved steel or aluminium exports from China.  
17.6.   The US urged China to change course and truly to commit itself to the market -based 
reforms it had pr omised when it joined the WTO. Until that occurred, industries injured by dumped 
imports must be able to continue to seek relief, and their governments must be able to provide 
that relief in a manner commensurate with the nature of Chinese government inter vention. The US 
hoped that it could work with China to address the issue.  
17.7.   The delegate of the European Union  thanked the US for putting this delicate and important 
issue on the agenda. The EU firmly believed in the importance of a strong and rules -based 
multilateral trading system providing a level playing field for traders, and in which benefits were 
shared among all WTO  Members. Practices that undermined the level playing field and that tilted 
the balance in terms of benefits could end up undermining Memb ers' confidence in the system. 
Calls for protectionist practices were becoming more and more frequent. Members must avoid 
going down such a dangerous road . In this regard, the EU highlight ed its concerns about the 
existence and rapid growth of overcapacity  in multiple sectors, which was fuelled by the internal 
policies of certain Members.  
17.8.   The problem had been clearly recognized by G20  leaders in 2016; at that time, the Global 
Forum on Steel Excess Capacity had been established, but so far little progress ha d been made in 
addressing the issue. The question of how and to what extent subsidies acted as a contributor to 
overcapacity was complex; the EU was particularly concerned by non -market -oriented decisions 
that drove industrial policy and had a negative imp act on third  countries. For example, an 
extensive number of support measures had been granting benefits to certain sectors of the 
Chinese economy. That support was provided by both central and local governments as well as by 
other bodies implementing publi c policy objectives. A predominant number of the beneficiaries 
were state -owned enterprises. Thanks to those measures, beneficiaries could build up or increase 
their capacity with little or no basis in global demand, and could sell their products at prices  which 
were below their normal cost. Such policies created extraordinary pressures on producers in other 
WTO Members and were ultimately and directly responsible for the current backlash against free 
trade.  
17.9.   The EU called on Members : (1) to address the core  of the problem, namely an 
unprecedented level of government support to domestic companies in pre -defined strategic sectors 
of their economies; and  (2) to address its negative consequences, namely, excess capacities 
created in the sectors concerned, which led to subsidized exports globally. These issues  should be 
addressed in the WTO  committees and councils but if WTO  Members were effectively to address 
them, an indispensable first  step was to know about and understand them. As noted by previous 
speakers, i t was deeply worrying that the number of WTO  Members that had failed to make the 
required notifications was continuously rising , with an alarming 65% of Members having failed to 
submit their legally required notifications for the 2015  cycle. Equally worryi ng was the fact that , 
while the SCM  Agreement required WTO  Members to notify subsidy programmes implemented at 
both central and sub -central level, some Members did not notify sub -central subsidy programmes 
at all. This was particularly troubling where a go vernment's industrial policy objectives were 
crafted at central level but subsequently implemented by pr ovincial and local governments.  
17.10.   The EU welcomed China's recent pledges on free trade  and multilateralism and  shared the 
objective of strengthening the m ultilateral rules based trading system. It was time collectively to 
show leadership and to translate international calls into substantive domestic policies.  
17.11.   The delegate of  the Republic of Korea  stated that , as China had a major influence on world 
trade, t hey hoped that China's trade policy was being implemented in a transparent and 
reasonable manner. The issue of customs clearance was the biggest concern for Korean exporters, 
especially SMEs, regarding their trade with China. In particular, traders had rai sed the issue of the 
Chinese authorities' growing tendency toward arbitrary and overly strict application of customs 
clearance procedures in recent months. For instance, Korean companies had complained that the 
same products were classified differently by customs officers in different regions, or sometimes 
even by the same customs office. They also claimed that products could not make it through 
customs simply because of a minor marking issue, for example, a hyphen or dash between month, 
day, and year of th e departure date marked on products. In addition, they claimed that the time 
period for customs clearance had recently extended from a few days to a few weeks.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 32 - 
 
  17.12.   In consideration of Article  VIII of GATT , which stated the need for minimizing the incidence 
and complexity of import and export formalities, and Article  7 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement , 
which stipulat ed the measures for low documentation and data requirements, low rate of physical 
inspections and examinations, and rapid release time, Korea hop ed that the Chinese Government 
would pay close attention to the customs valuation issue and take the appropriate measures.  
17.13.   The delegate of Canada  thanked the US for drawing attention to such important issues. 
Canada agreed that urgent action was required t o address the problem of global excess 
manufacturing capacity, including through meaningful engagem ent in the Global Steel Forum. 
Such actions should be aimed at addressing the underlying cause of excess capacity, including 
government intervention in key s ectors such as steel and aluminium. His delegation took note of 
the data shared by the US with respect to the use of trade remedies, which provided a legitimate 
tool to address the injurious effects of dumped and subsidized imports. It was essential that t rade 
remedies continued to be effective and take into account underlying trade practices and market 
distortions. Canada reaffirmed the importance of the rules -based WTO  framework in responding to 
those issues, including WTO  transparency provisions.  
17.14.   The del egate of Japan  shared the concerns raised by other Members. As had been 
recognized at the G20 and G7  meetings, measures such as the granting of subsidies based on 
non-market oriented policies distorted the market and were one of the causes of the problem o f 
global overcapacity. The need to strengthen the market function in response to those issues had 
also been recognized at those meetings.  
17.15.   In that regard, Japan had made a joint proposal , together with the EU,  Mexico, and the 
US, at the SCM  Committee meetin g of last October , to point out the need to tackle subsidies that 
contributed to overcapacity in certain industries, including the steel and aluminium industries , and 
it was beneficial to de epen the discussion among WTO  Members in response to that issue. A s had 
been discussed at previous SCM  Committee meetings, Japan requested China to make the relevant 
notifications given that they considered China's subsidy notifications currently to be unsatisfactory, 
particularly regarding subsidies provided at the sub -national level.  
17.16.   The delegate of China  took note of the comments made by the delegations of the US, the 
EU, Korea, Canada,  and Japan. The item was unlike other issues on the agenda and its title too 
broad and vague. His delegation had been unable to anticip ate the specific contents of the topic. 
Therefore, his delegation could only provide some preliminary responses to the points raised. 
However, China considered that certain issues raised, in particular the issue of overcapacity, did 
not fall under the term s of reference of the Council, and that the Council was therefore not an 
appropriate forum for discussing the issue. Certain  previous speakers had already mentioned that 
a particular forum had been established to discuss this issue.  
17.17.   Right now, swayed by an  undercurrent of deglobalization and confronted with a rising call 
for protectionism, certain Members' trade policy stances were under pressure to take an inward 
turn. However, China remained committed to its policy of further opening up and deepening 
reform. President Xi Jinpin, in his visit to the World Economic Forum in Davos in January  2017, and 
also at the UN  headquarters in Geneva, had made a clear statement that the Chinese government 
firmly advocated multilateralism. China would continue to promote trade and investment 
liberalization and facilitation, to commit unequivocally to anti-protectionism , and to continue to 
provide consistent and strong support for the open, transparent, inclusive, and non -discriminatory 
multilateral trading system.  
17.18.   Since th e third  plenum of the 18th CPC  meeting, China had carried out measures aimed at 
deepe ning reform and further opening up, as highlighted by the following three  examples . First, 
the push forward of supply -side structural reform. In the past three  years, Chin a had eliminated 
steel capacity by 90  million tons, cement capacity by 230  million tons, plate glass capacity by over 
76 million weight cases, and electrolytic -aluminium capacity by over one  million tons. As a result 
of such efforts, energy consumption per  unit GDP had decreased by 13.5 %. Second , the further 
opening up to foreign investment. In January of the current year, the State Council or the Central 
Government had issued the "Circular on Several Measures for Expanding Opening Up and Actively 
Using For eign Capital", that provided measures to boost foreign investment, including further 
opening up in the service , the manufactur ing, and the mining sector s. Third, the further efforts 
made to improve the rules-based and facilitating business environment. In September  2016, the 
National People's Congress revised four  laws regulating inbound investment, which provided for a G/C/M/128  
 
- 33 - 
 
  regime of a negative list for the establishment of foreign invested enterprises. The types of 
investment that were outside the negative lis t were not subject to pre-establishment registration 
and approval, and were only r equired to be filed for the record.  
17.19.   Regarding the other concerns raised, China had already provided explanations and 
clarifications on a number of occasions, including in the  subsidiary committees. On notification s, 
China had made every effort and had notified the support measures provided by local 
governments. On the issues relating to state trading, China had also updated its notification and, 
at the last meeting of the Stat e Trading Enterprises Working Group, his delegation ha d responded 
orally to around 16  questions from the US  delegation and had explained the current status of the 
state trading administrative regime concerning a series of those products.  
17.20.   China's policies were non -discriminative and liberal. The relevant regulatory measures 
aimed at striking a balance between domestic policy objectives and the need for free trade and 
treating domestic and foreign invested enterprises, domestic and imported products , on an eq ual 
footing. The subsidy measures mentioned were generally aimed at encouraging environmental 
protection and energy conservation, supporting technological research, development, and 
innovation, or facilitating industrial structural adjustment. None of thos e policies was contingent 
upon export performance or intended for import substitution.  
17.21.   The statement made by the delegate of Korea did not reflect the facts. China was a 
responsible member of the WTO , and it had joined the Trade Facilitation Agreement . China 
Customs had long been committed by law to creating a more equitable and fair environment for 
import and export enterprises in order to effectively improve customs clearance efficiency and to 
promote trade facilitation . Since 2014, China' s Customs had st arted a series of Integrated 
Customs Clearance Reform s aimed at simplification of customs procedures, which had benefited 
import and export enterprises.  
17.22.   Lastly, concerning the figures for trade remedy measures, China concluded that trade 
remedy measures to  a certain extent were being abused ; in particular, the anti -dumping 
measures. His delegation had been very consistent regarding its position, and they would continue 
to discuss the issue with relevant WTO  Members.  
17.23.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for t heir interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
17.24.   The Council so agreed . 
18  THE RUSSIAN FEDERATI ON – TRADE RESTRICTING PR ACTICES – REQUEST FROM 
THE EUROPEAN UNION  
18.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in a communication d ated 24  March  2017, the 
delegation of the European Union had requested that the Secretariat include this item on the 
agenda.  
18.2.   The delegate of the European Union  raised several issues on standard s requirements, 
standardization, and export restrictions. Regar ding cement standards, the  EU had raised the issue 
under the a genda item "Other Business " during the last Council meeting; however, the  EU had 
upgraded the item because the situation had not progressed and had been far from improving. The 
situation had bee n discussed three  times in the TBT  Committee, without result. Her delegation 
deplored the fact that the Russian Federation resorted to certification requirements and enforced 
them without prior consultation nor even noti fication (for example, the 2017  amen dments to the 
GOST  standard on cement certification, the standard GOST  R 56836 -2016 had not been notified). 
She requested Russia immediately to make public the content of the legislation. Russia had not 
consulted prior to the adoption of the first GOST  Standard in 2016 and notified it only after its 
enforcement. The current system was such that all imports were made impossible except for a few 
white cement shipments for which it seemed that Russia was not self -sufficient , which could have 
explained why the authorization was made on a piecemeal basis for EU  exports. There was no 
rationale for such disproportionate certification requirements and controls, such as the strength 
tests to be carried out exclusively at the border, or the quality controls to be issu ed by bodies that 
were not nominated and that were announced as being in small quantities to further complicate G/C/M/128  
 
- 34 - 
 
  the import process. These technical questions had also been raised by the EU in the 
TBT Committee . 
18.3.   The second  issue concerned the requirement of  "good manufacturing practice" certificates 
for pharmaceuticals. That requirement had not yet been notified to the WTO, although it had been 
adopted in December  2015 and had entered into force on 1  January  2016 for new products, 
requiring them to have mark eting authorization. It entered into force on 1  January  2017 for 
renewal of marketing authorization. In addition, her delegatio n had indicated at the last 
TBT Committee meeting that that requirement implied a high number of controls abroad , which 
was hardl y compatible with the existing Russian resources in terms of trained and available 
inspectors. For that reason, the EU had called for several measures, including an appropriate 
transition time, to be taken by the Russian Federation. Finally, they had also requested that the 
specific issue of veterinary products of double inspection of sites manufacturing "Active 
Pharmaceutical Ingredients" and final products be reconsidered by the Russian Federation.  
18.4.   The third  issue related to the ban on exports of skins an d hides introduced by Government 
Decree No.  826 of 19  August  2014, initially for a period of six  months but which had subsequently 
been several times  extended . As a result, the export ban would be in place for approximately 
three  years, if one considered t hat it had been introduced in August  2014 and had been recently 
renewed up to 18  August  2017. Therefore, the EU no longer considered it as a temporary ban but 
rather as a ban that had been in place for three  years. Her delegation had raised the issue sever al 
times in the Market Access Committee and the replies received from Russia had not been 
convincing , since the latest renewal of the ban, already in place, would invalidate 
GATT  Article  XI(2)(a). Her delegation would appreciate further details and explana tions regarding 
the latest renewal of the ban.  
18.5.   The fourth  issue concerned the updated list of goods that could be subject to export bans. 
Government Decree  No. 19 of 18  January  2017 introduced amendments to the list of goods that 
were essential to the inte rnal market of the Russian Federation and in respect of which temporary 
restrictions or export bans could be imposed in exceptional cases. Her delegation would appreciate 
knowing what Russia's intentions were in that regard and if Russia planned to adopt e xport 
restrictions/bans on that basis for birch logs HS  code 4403 95 0001, for example.  
18.6.   The delegate of Ukraine  shared the concerns raised by the EU and urged the Russian 
Federation to comply fully with its WTO  notification commitments in order to ensure p redictability 
and transparent conditions for trade, and to remove unjustifiable bans and discriminatory barriers 
to trade.  
18.7.   The delegate of the United States  echoed the concerns raised by the EU with regard to 
various measures and practices adopted by the g overnment of Russia that were having an adverse 
impact on US  exports. The US had noted Russia's failure to notify TBT  measures, and the resulting 
lack of transparency. It was a fundamental principle of the WTO that measures should be notified 
prior to thei r adoption in order to allow interested Members time to provide comments, and for 
those comments to be taken into account. Like the EU, the US had raised concerns about the 
"good manufacturing practice (GMP)" certificates for pharmaceutic als, most recently  in the 
March  TBT Committee meeting.  
18.8.   The US was also concerned  about the inadequate resources for conducting inspections; the 
likelihood of significant delays in the registration of new medicines, putting Russian patients' lives 
at stake; the possibility o f a shortage of veterinary medicines; and the shortness of the transition 
period. Her delegation had raised a number of questions in the TBT  Committee about Russia's 
good manufacturing practices, and looked forward to timely and fulsome respons es from the 
Russian government.  
18.9.   With regard to Russia's continued reliance on a "temporary" ban of exports of skins and 
hides, the US echoed the concerns raised by the EU regarding the lifespan of that ban. Export bans 
were generally prohibited by the WTO, but were al lowed on the basis that they were necessary in 
order to address a critical shortage, and that they would be of temporary duration. Her delegation 
looked forward to receiving Russia's explanation as to the continued need for that export ban.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 35 - 
 
  18.10.   The US had also  viewed with concern Russia's expansion of the list of products that could 
be subject to export restrictions, as contained in Government Decree  No. 19 of 18  January  2017. 
Among the products listed were ferrous steel and non -ferrous scrap – commodity inputs  that were 
very sensitive to the slightest changes in market conditions. The inclusion of those products on the 
list had contributed to the uncertainty of the availability of Russian ferrous scrap for export to 
global markets and raised concerns of possibl e market distortions for that important steel input. 
Her delegation was also interested in hearing about Russia's intentions with regard to the 
possibility of export restrictions on any of the products on the list. She asked Russia to confirm if 
any such r estrictions would be imposed , consistent with its WTO  obligations?  
18.11.   The delegate of the Russian Federation  thanked the delegations of the EU, Ukraine, and 
the US for their interventions. Unfortunately, while the agenda item was too broad to have 
prepared a special statement regarding those concerns, she had some preliminary comments 
regarding the rules for certification of cement. The necessity for inclusion of cement in the list of 
goods subject to mandatory certification had been determined by a sharp decr ease in cement 
quality in the Russian Federation and by urgent problems of safety, health, and environmental 
protection. The measures were applied in a non -discriminatory manner. The list of documents and 
tests required to obtain a certificate for cement, as well as the requirements, were equal for all 
manufacturers. Since 8  March  2016, 294  certificates for different types of cement had been issued, 
including 51  certificates that had been issued for cement produced by foreign companies.  
18.12.   A second  concern of the EU was linked to resolution No.  1214 of 3  December  2015 of the 
government of the Russian Federation. That resolution approved the rules of pharmaceutical 
products manufacturers' inspections, in order to implement a compulsory requirement that the 
produ ction of pharmaceutical products should comply with the good manufacturing practice 
provisions. The aim of the measure was to adequately protect human life, health, and safety. The 
resolution did not contain provisions discriminating foreign operators, inc luding with respect to 
fees and rules of inspections. They were equal for domestic and foreign manufacturers. The 
schedule of inspection of foreign manufacturers was publicly available on the official website of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Ru ssian Federation. The quantity and frequency of 
inspections depended on the number of requests for inspections but not on the location of a 
production site.  
18.13.   With regard to the export ban on raw hides and skins, the Russian Federation had notified 
that meas ure. They had provided some explanation to the EU, but they understood that further 
discussions were to be organized in order to understand the concern and the rationale for those 
measures.  
18.14.   Finally, regarding the concern of the EU and the US with regard to  the list of goods that 
could be subject to export bans, it was the first time that her delegation had heard about this 
legislation, and she requested delegations to provide their statement in writing so that the matter 
could be considered properly in Capital. The Russian Federation was always ready to consult with 
their trade partners bi laterally regarding all issues.  
18.15.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
18.16.   The Council so agreed . 
19  BRAZIL – MEASURES RESTRICTING  SHRIMP IMPORTS – REQUEST FROM ECUADOR  
19.1.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that, in a communication dated 24  March  2017, the 
delegation of Ecuador had requested that the Secretariat include this ite m on the agenda of th e 
meeting.  
19.2.   The delegate of Ecuador  stated that , as had been explained by her delegation in several 
meetings, in particular in the SPS  Committee meeting s, the restrictions on the imports of shrimp 
from Ecuador imposed by Brazil with normative instructions  No. 39/99, on 4  November  1999, did 
not have the necessary scientific justification to back it up, nor a proper justification of the risk for 
life and health of people and animals, or for the preservation of plants in virt ue of the provisions of 
Article  2.2 and 5.1 of the SPS  Agreement.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 36 - 
 
  19.3.   The restrictions did not consider the provisions of Article  3.1 on the general obligation to 
impose SPS  measures in line with the guidelines and recommendations of international scale. 
Despite those circumstances, Ecuador had given all the information required by Brazil, including to 
the Brazilian delegation s of technicians that had carried out inspections in several shrimp factories 
and laboratories in Ecuador. In parallel, Ecuador had adopted a series of measures to guarantee  
even further the quality of its shrimp. Nevertheless, despite these measures, to date there had still 
been no risk analysis of imports that would have enabled the renewed export of shrim p from 
Ecuador to Brazil. Annex  C(1)(a) of the SPS Agreement provided  that Members of the WTO mus t 
conclude without undue delay.  
19.4.   Brazil's risk assessment of shrimp from Ecuador should have been initiated in 1999, in line 
with Rule No.  39. Nevertheless, 17  years had already passed and 17  years did not constitute a 
reasonable  time-frame in which to conduct the evaluation to obtain a risk assessment. Ecuador 
had heard Brazil's statement that the process to allow the entry of shrimp from Ecuador into its 
territory was in its final stage but they would prefer to have a definitive  date so that they could 
begin exporting properly. Ecuador trusted that Brazil's announcement of the transfer from the 
Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Industry, Foreign Trade , and Services , would not create a 
new and unjustified delay in the pro cess. 
19.5.   The delegate of Brazil  took note of Ecuador's statement and thanked Ecuador for raising the 
issue before the Council. He requested Ecuador to provide its statement in writing so that it could 
be forwarded to Brasilia in order to provide a more detail ed reaction. Currently, he could inform 
the Council and Ecuador that the risk analysis conducted by the competent Brazilian agencies 
regarding shrimp imports from Ecuador was indeed in its final stages and its conclusions would be 
conveyed to Ecuador in as  short a time -frame as possible.  
19.6.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
19.7.   The Council so agreed . 
20  WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE  
20.1.   The Chairperson  noted that, at the pre vious three  meetings of the Council, of 15  April, 
14 July, and 17  November  2016, respectively, the Chairperson had recalled that Ministers in 
Nairobi had adopted the decision contained in documen t WT/L/977 on the "Work Programme on 
Electronic Commerce". In  that Decision , Ministers had reaffirmed not only the mandate of the 
"Work Programme on Elec tronic Commerce", adopted on 25  September  1998 and contained in 
document  WT/L/274, but also the subsequent Ministerial Declarations and Decisions on the Work 
Progra mme. Therefore, Ministers decided to continue the work under the Work Programme on 
Electronic Commerce (Work Programme, or WPEC) since the last session, based on the existing 
mandate and guidelines and on the basis of proposals submitted  by Members in the relevant 
WTO bodies , as set out in paragraphs  2 to 5 of the Work Programme. To this end, they had 
instructed the General Council to hold periodic reviews in it s sessions of July and December  2016 
and July  2017, and to report to the next session of the Mini sterial Conference based on the reports 
that might be submitted by those WTO  bodies entrusted with the implementation of the Work 
Programme. In this vein, and in order to fulfil the mandate, he invited delegations to express their 
opinions and to make sugg estions as to how to work on the preparation of the periodic reviews to 
be held in the General  Council at its session of July  2017.  
20.2.   Before opening the floor he recalled that , during the last meeting of the Council , a very 
positive discussion had taken place on the proposal put forward by China and Pakistan on 
Electronic Commerce (JOB/GC/110 – JOB/CTG/2 – JOB/SERV/243 – JOB/DEV/39); and informed 
delegations that , since that last meeting of the Council , three  new documents had been distributed 
by various Memb ers, in various WTO  bodies, including this Council. These propos als were 
contained in documents  JOB/GC/115  – JOB/CTG/3 – JOB/SERV/247 – JOB/IP/20 – JOB/DEV/41; 
JOB/GC/116 – JOB/CTG/4 – JOB/SERV/248 – JOB/IP/21 – JOB/DEV/42; and JOB/GC/117 – 
JOB/CTG/5 – JOB/SERV/249 – JOB/IP/22 – JOB/DEV/43. He therefore invited those delegations 
that had circulated proposals and submitted them to this Council, as well as other delegations, to 
express their opinions on these communications and on any other relevant matter that they 
believed to be important in the context of electronic commerce and trade in goods.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 37 - 
 
  20.3.   The delegate of China  recalled that , in November  2016, China and Pakistan had submitted a 
communication on the Work Programme to the General Council (GC) , the CTG, t he Council for 
Trade in Services (CTS), and the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD), indicating that, at 
the curr ent stage, discussions on E -Commerce at the WTO should be focused and based on the 
existing mandate, should uphold the development dimensi on, should focus on areas of common 
interest to Members, and should reflect the inclusiveness of the multilateral trading system. China 
had also stated that discussions should not involve the issue of market access.  
20.4.   Since 1998, WTO  Members had been authori zed to di scuss trade issues related to 
E-Commerce. Thanks to the rapid development of E -Commerce globally, Members' discussions on 
this topic had gradually gained momentum. However, the degree of participation and depth of 
discussion among Members on the c ross-cutting issues concerning E -Commerce varied from 
committee to committee ; for instance , the development dimension had not been emphasized 
enough, and the concerns of an important numbe r of developing Members and LDC  Members had 
not yet been sufficientl y address ed. In the context of China's E -Commerce development and 
experience, cross -border trade in goods played a critical role. However, cross -border exchange 
among Members had been relatively inadequate. China hoped that its joint communication with 
Pakistan would inspire Members to engage in a more ample discussion of E-Commerce issues so as 
to help to identify a landing zone of common interests. The joint communication was aimed at 
focusing the current discussions on how to promote and facilitate internet-enabled  cross-border 
trade in goods , and on directly related payment and logistics services. Such discussions should 
move forward in a step -by-step approach starting  first with the easier elements . Emphasis was 
also placed on the existing mandate of th e WPEC as the basis for relevant discussions. According 
to that mandate , Members were encouraged to share development experiences, to exchange 
information, and to compare best practices, so as to learn from each other and to draw on each 
other's success cases. 
20.5.   China was pleased by the positive response received fr om many Members at the 
November  2016 meeting of the CTG , where many questions had been raised and clarification had 
been requested both at and after the meeting. In order to enrich the discussion a nd in response to  
the questions posed at CTG  level, China referred to its development experience, the moratorium, 
and facilitation issues. On development aspects, China indicated that its experience had shown 
that, if the infrastructure and capacity -buildi ng issu es were appropriately addressed in the 
E-Commerce advancement of developing Members, it would be easier to advance more quickly in 
the development of developing Members, particularly with regard to their micro, small, and 
medium -sized enterprises (M SMEs), to narrow the digital divide that was of great concern 
especially to various developing Members, and live up to the development connotation that China 
had consistently adhered to and to which China would continue to adhere. Only on such a basis, in 
China's view, would it be possible to advance further in exploring how to make tangible progress at 
MC11 in line with the common interests of all Members, including the development needs of 
developing Members. On the moratorium, China indicated that the di scussions that had taken 
place reflected the different views that Members held on this issue. Given future technological 
developments and the resulting uncertainty  introduced by such changes , a number of developing 
Members, including China, were not yet re ady to make permanent the moratorium on customs 
duties on electronic transmissions. Hence, for the majority of Members it would be more 
appropriate to maintain the current practice of extending the moratorium. With regard to the 
facilitation issues on cross-border trade in internet -enabled goods, some Members had noted that 
certain elements in China and Pakistan's communication had already been reflected in relevant 
WTO agreements, especially the TFA. China believed that E -Commerce in the internet age would  
drive new development s in traditional business models; therefore, it was only natural that 
E-Commerce discussions involve d some content already enshrined in the WTO, but that this 
involvement was without prejudice to Members' continuous efforts to explore  and share more 
facilitating practices in the field of E -Commerce, so as to further promote E -Commerce 
development and embody the inclusiveness of trade.  
20.6.   China's development experience had shown that promoting and facilitating cross -border 
internet -enabled  trade in goods helped MSMEs and individuals more fully to participate in 
international trade, to reach customers beyond the local market , and more easily to achieve 
operations of scale. In the same way, such trade provided more choices to consumers in ter ms of 
quality and variety of goods originating across the world and at lower cost. Since 2015, C hina had 
set up 13  cross-border E -Commerce pilot zones in Hangzhou and other cities . It had also promoted 
an industrial and ecol ogical chain for cross -border E -Commerce through management and service G/C/M/128  
 
- 38 - 
 
  innovation . Finally, China had gradually framed a set of practices for cross -border E -Commerce, 
which would pave the way for their duplication and spread in China.  
20.7.   According to China, in the E -Commerce environment fo r cross -border internet -enabled trade 
in goods, E -Commerce participants could be classified into two  types, namely, third party 
E-Commerce platforms and E -Commerce business op erators. To date, many third  party 
E-Commerce platforms had stepped into the area  of cross-border E -Commerce, while more and 
more traditional enterprises had also begun to sell their products overseas via cross -border 
E-Commerce. In the operation and development processes of these enterprises , China's 
experience had shown that , if the positive role of bonded areas was brought full y into play, the 
intermediate processes , such as speed  of cross -border delivery , could be shortened, the logistics 
costs could be reduced, and the consumer experience enhanced, thus improving the efficiency of 
the transaction for both online sellers and buyers. Regarding the regulatory aspects of  
E-Commerce, China believed that a uniform regulation of goods by competent government 
authorities could also be more convenient, such as  the imported goods that could b e stored in 
bonded warehouses in advance and then delivered directly from the bonded warehouse upon 
confirmation of an order. This would enable customs authorities effectively to monitor the 
authenticity and validity o f all the requirements by cross -checki ng the transaction, payment, and 
logistics data that had been submitted electronically. Since many Members may have similar 
practices for such transaction modalities, China invited them to share the state-of-play and any 
other relevant policy information. China remained ready to discuss with Members further 
facilitation measures in the area of E -Commerce.  
20.8.   In addition to the above -mentioned issues, transparency and e -signatures were two  aspects 
that China considered important in the E -Commerce environment fo r cross -border trade in 
internet -enabled goods. Regarding the former, China commented that the emergence of 
cross-border E -Commerce had driven and stimulated innovation in manufacturing and related 
services and industries, had provided opportunities for ec onomic development by leaps and 
bounds and, therefore, had imposed new challenges. Under such circumstances, improving 
transparency on Members' regulatory framework s and policies was of great importance in order to 
create a sound and predictable business e nvironment and to promote the development of 
E-Commerce itself. In this regard, China was ready to further explore possible positive collective 
actions on transparency. Regarding e -signatures, e -certification, electronic contracts , and 
electronic invoices,  China indicated that E -Commerce, as a new economic model, should have, as 
embedded characteristics, security and agility in all stages of transactions, including the objective 
requirements of stakeholders. Therefore, it was necessary to discuss a series o f issues with regard 
to digitalization of transaction documents, elimination of obstacles to E -Commerce development, 
safeguard ing the legitimate rights and interests of participants, and ensuring the security of 
electronic transactions.  
20.9.   China also referred  to the cross -cutting aspects of E -Comme rce, each of which merited  
in-depth discussion. China was ready to continue communicating with Members in the General 
Council and its subsidiary bodies to encourage a further exchange of information, and to explore 
together what positive progress might be achieved within the WTO  framework  with a view to 
delivering  pragmatic results  at MC11 that were  of interest to all Members.  
20.10.   The delegate of Pakistan  said that E -Commerce was a very powerful vehicle for inclusive 
trade and the achievement of Members' development goals. Digital trade was an effective tool for 
the economic empowerment of women, youth, and marginalized communities. Cross -border 
movement of goods, servic es, and intangibles through ICT  had created enormous opportunities for 
the promotion of inclusive growth in developing countries. However, there was a huge gap and 
digital divide among developed and developing countries. Thus , the development dimension of 
E-Commerce was crucial. Like other Members, Pakistan was interested in future outcome s on 
E-Commerce at the WTO that gave adequate consideration to the development needs of 
developing countries and LDCs. Pakistan had also co -sponsored two  papers on E -Commerce, 
JOB/CTG/2/Rev.1 , and JOB/CTG/5, and urged Member s to engage constructively in discussions on 
E-Commerce.  
20.11.   The delegate of the European Union  thanked again China for its submission and, as 
indicated at the CTG  meeting in November  2016, recalled that China's communication contained a 
number of elements and  issues on which the EU was ready to work with China and other Members. 
In that regard, t he EU had  already  shared some preliminary comments in other bodies. Like China, G/C/M/128  
 
- 39 - 
 
  the EU believed in the importance of the development component and enhancing the partic ipation 
of SMEs in Members' work on E -Commerce. A number of issues outlined in China's paper could 
well form a part of efforts at the WTO in the area of E -Commerce, such as rules on recognition of 
electronic contracts, e -signature , and e -authentication. Th ese provisions could be expanded to the 
global level. The EU also agreed with China with regard to the importance of address ing consumer 
protection issues and saw value in a general commitment from Members to having such rules in 
place, but without develop ing protection ist standards. The provision of greater clarity and certainty 
for the trading community regarding the moratorium on customs duties was also very important. 
There was a strong case for making the moratorium permanent. The EU also supported the  
transparency -related objectives set out in China's paper.  
20.12.   There were a number of ideas on the paper with regard to customs procedures that the EU 
wished also to discuss further at the CTG. However, the EU also noted that a number of measures 
had already b een incorporated into its customs procedures  as laid dow n in the EU  Union Customs 
Code.  
20.13.   The EU also acknowledged the exponential increase in goods traded electronically. This 
raised a number of policy concerns with regard to security, safety, and revenue c ollection. 
Therefore, when discussing the various elements in the communication, Members would need to 
work closely with and take into account developments in the context of the World Customs 
Organization (WCO), so as to strike the right balance between fa cilitation and control. However, 
the EU believed that taxation issues were outsi de the scope of the discussion.  
20.14.   He seized the opportunity to introduce a communication co -sponsored by the EU and other 
Members , contained in document  JOB/CTG/4, and circulated  some  months ago. According to that 
communication , E-Commerce was one o f the key topics for future WTO  work and an area where 
achieving progress could benefit the membership at large and, at the same time, provide tangible 
results for economies and citizen s. Although the digital economy had developed remarkably in the 
past decades there had been only limited progress  on E-Commerce issues  at the WTO.  
20.15.   There were major gaps in the multilateral rulebook; this ha d been acknowledged in 
post-Nairobi discussions, w ith many Members indicating their interest and readiness to look into 
this issue in the WTO  context more thoroughly than in the past. This interest had been 
demonstrated by numerous submissions in the context of the E -Commerce Work Programme , in 
2016. To f acilitate discussions on potenti al WTO  work in this  area, the EU and many other 
co-sponsors of the communication  JOB/DEV/42  had attempted to map trade poli cy related issues 
that impact  upon E-Commerce. This joint communication had originally been submitted  in the 
context of the E -Commerce Work Programme in July  2016. However, since a number of Members 
had considered it useful also to have technical discussions on this issue in the regular bodies, the 
communication had been resubmitted to the GC, the CTG, TR IPs, and Services Councils. 
Proponents considered it of crucial importance to have it on the agenda of this Council given that 
there was a strong dev elopment angle to the debate.  
20.16.   Document  JOB/CTG/4 – JOB/DEV/42 listed substantive trade policy -related eleme nts that 
were relevant for E-Commerce, including rule -making, liberalization commitments, facilitation 
measures , and the development dimension present across the entire list of issues. But this did not 
constitute an exhaustive list of issues, was not a neg otiating proposal , and was without prejudice 
to the elemen ts the co -sponsors might seek to pursue. The submission was an invitation for a 
discussion; therefore, its various elements had been tentatively grouped in to four clusters: 
(1) regulatory frameworks , which related to rules to enhance  transparency, measures to promote 
consumer' s confidence, such as consumer protection, privacy, and anti-spam, or to facilitate trade 
by ensuring that regulatory barriers would be addressed, like electronic payments , or access to the 
internet ; (2) open markets , which related to liberalization measures, both in the form of bindings 
for both goods and services, and of measures addressing trade barriers , such as data flow, 
localization requirements , or source code ; (3) initiatives facilitating the development of 
E-Commerce which went beyond rules and liberalization measures, and initiatives to enhance 
E-Commerce , such as regulatory cooperation, custom s facilitation m easures , or technical 
assistance;  and (4) enhanced transparen cy at the WTO , which encompassed  ideas as to how the 
WTO could continue to play an important role in contributing to an enhanced transparency in all 
Members ' policies that relate to E -Commerce.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 40 - 
 
  20.17.   Against this backdrop, the co -sponsors encouraged WTO  Members to consider a series of 
questions, notably with respect to this mapping exercise , and to come forward with ideas , 
comments , and questions , in order to encourage more focused technical work. The EU also invited 
Members to ref lect on whether or not there wer e additional E -Commerce -related elements of trade 
policy, particularly those that fell with in the remit of the CTG, which should be included in the 
mapping , and on what elements Members would wish to see more focused technical discussions at 
the CTG. In th at broader context , and in order to facilitate discussion with regard to potential 
WTO work, the EU and other co -sponsors had made an attempt to map trade policy -related issues 
that had an  impact upon E-Commerce.  
20.18.   The delegate of Canada  thanked the EU for h aving introduced the joint communication on 
trade policy, the WTO , and the Digital Economy. As outlined in that joint paper, Canada considered 
that E -Commerce presented new opportunities for inclusive economic growth, including increased 
trade in goods, wh ile recognizing that there were challenges to fully grasp ing its benefits. In 
response to request s from many Members, the paper had been re -circulated to encourage a 
bottom -up discussion of tho se elements, and the CTG was certainly an important forum for such a 
discussion. Indeed, a thorough examination at the CTG of the various elements contained in the 
different submissions would be of great v alue. 
20.19.   Even though E -Commerce was often referred to as a new issue, there were a number of 
decidedly old issues, am ong them the extension of the customs duty moratorium, the robust 
implementation of the TFA, and expanding participation in the ITA that would help Members to 
leverage E -Commerce for inclusive growth.  
20.20.   Indeed, full implementation of the TFA would reduce tra de costs and enable small traders, 
particularly MSMEs , to participate in international trade and take advantage of the global consumer 
base provided by internet -based sales platforms. The relevant provisions provided for the 
electronic processing of docume ntation prior to importation, the electronic collection of payments 
by customs a uthorities , the acceptance of e -copies of border document s, and the establishment of 
a single window for traders to submit documentation and data through a single entry point. The 
TFA had built in flexibility to accommodate different circumstances across Members' regimes, and 
provided mechanisms to address concerns about the burden of implementation. These were 
uncontroversial steps that Members could take to advance their parti cipation in E -Commerce. In 
this vein, Canada encouraged developing and least -developing Members to submit their 
Category  A, B, and C  notifications , and to take advantage of the technical assistance and capacity 
building offered by several international org anizations  so as to fully implement th ose provisions.  
20.21.   The 20th anniversary of the entry into force of the ITA would take place in 2017, and 
studies had shown that the use of information and communication technology (ICT) improved 
productivity and promoted innovation in industries that adopted it. This had been demonstrated 
across the development spectrum. For example, a 2007 W orld Bank survey of over 
20,000  businesses in low and middle income countries had found that firms that used more ICT 
had faster sale s, higher employment growth, and higher productivity. By eliminating tariffs on ICT, 
ITA participants had provided their businesses and consumers with access to the best technology 
at lower prices. This was particularly important for SMEs . Indeed, a study of 4,800  SMEs in 
twelve  developing countries had found that SMEs using web technologies grew twice as fast as 
those with a minimal internet presence. Canada encouraged Members to join the ITA and the 
expanded ITA as  ready -made tools for promoting inclusive  economic growth.  
20.22.   With regard to the moratorium on the imposition of customs duties on electronic 
transmissions , Canada considered this to be a valuable contribution towards inclusive trade. 
Members were increasingly including a customs duty moratorium in their RTAs. Indeed, 56  notified 
RTAs included such a provision. This trend indicated that many Members saw benefit in ensuring 
open, duty -free electronic transmissions , and at the same time that these Members were not 
waiting for the WTO but rather were ad dressing their commercial in terests elsewhere. Thus, a 
long-term multilateral solution would ensure a stable environment for electronic commerce and a 
level playing field for all Members, particularly for smaller Members who did not benefit from 
exten sive RTA networks.  
20.23.   The dele gate of Norway  welcomed Members' various submissions on E -Commerce , as well 
as the useful discussions that were being held across the various Counci ls and Committees of the 
WTO. E -Commerce was important for WTO -Members and governments  as well as for businesses G/C/M/128  
 
- 41 - 
 
  and consumers. Norway hoped that the discussions at the CTG would help Members to develop a 
better common understanding of the role E -Commerce could play in facilitating trade in goods. 
Norway considered that the mapping out of E -Commerce issues a t the WTO, included in 
document  JOB/CTG/4 , gave an extensive overview of a long list of issues pertinent to 
E-Commerce. The document provided a structured approach to the topics and gave a good picture 
of a number of non -exhaustive aspect s that needed to be address ed. Like China, Norway agreed 
that it was important to consider whether  or not  there were specific aspects pertinent for 
developing Members, LDCs in particular , that should be reflected in the  discussions.  
20.24.   In assessing the variou s submissions and together finding a path forward, Members should 
look for elements of commonality in the submissions. A n especially  useful approach was to identify 
elements that were important in establishing E -Commerce disciplines that would work to the 
benefit of all Members , and  not least, the developing Members. However, there were other areas 
in which WTO  rules and guidelines could push Members to put in place the necessary domestic 
rules that would help enhance each Member's capacity for internationa l trade through electronic 
means. A prerequisite for E -Commerce to flourish was a high degree of trust in the digital 
environment, and consumers' trust enabled the development of digital trade. It was crucial to 
continue to support a good consumer environm ent online. Online consumer protection, as well as 
protection of personal information , and other security issues , needed  to be addressed 
appropriately.  
20.25.   Norway supported the implementation of measures regarding unsolicited commercial 
messages. Technological ly neutral measures were required to prevent spam, in order to maintain 
consumer trust. Another central aspect relating to both goods and services was t ransparency in 
regulations.  
20.26.   Like China and Pakistan, Norway believed that Members n eeded to address the issue of 
E-Commerce and digital trade step by step. Tackling tariffs was one step, and Norway supported 
the extension of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, and looked 
forward to discussing this further with other Members in the l ead up to MC11.  
20.27.   In the area of non -tariff measures, Members should look at improvements and  technical 
conditions for cross -border E -Commerce, such as electronic signatures, authentication , and 
certificates that  pertained to E -Commerce both for goods and se rvices. Norway was also interested 
in looking more closely at other ways to facilitate cooperation on E -Commerce among Member s 
with a view to facilitating electronic  trade in goods.  
20.28.   The delegate of Switzerland  welcomed the various initiatives taken by Memb ers with 
respect to the WPEC and appreciated the positive acceptance and comments that these had 
received in the different WTO  bodies where electronic commerc e was being discussed. All 
four papers on the agenda of today's meeting addressed topics in which Switzerland had a clear 
interest and that it wished to explore further, such as electro nic signatures and contracts, 
e-payment, facilitation of logistics services, transparency and cooperation disciplines, and the 
customs moratorium. Furthermore, electroni c commerce was an important dimension of the 
environment in which MSMEs operate. As underlined in the submission circulated by Singapore,  
and other Members, digital means enabled such enterprises more easily to reach foreign markets. 
Switzerland welcomed a ny contribution or initiative that would further explore this dimension.  
20.29.   However, the variety of subjects encompassed by electronic commerce required a 
balanced approach. Not all Members had the same focus and the same questions and obstacles to 
clarify an d resolve. In this vein, sharing experiences and practices through submissio ns was one 
way to enhance Members'  common knowledge. Thus, in line with the various seminars and 
workshops held on different issues, Switzerland wished to continue a technical dial ogue in the 
most efficient way with a view to producing a preliminary result for MC11.  
20.30.   With regard to the structure of the discussions, Switzerland supported the suggestion 
made by some Members to explore way s forward in informal joi nt session s of the diff erent 
WTO bodies that currently had received a mandate to discuss E-Comm erce. This would enable the 
WTO memb ership to continue looking at E -Commerce in a coherent and meaningful way.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 42 - 
 
  20.31.   The delegate of Singapore , when introducing the paper it had submitted to gether with 
12 other Members, indicated that the paper had  first been circulated at t he Dedicated Discussion in 
July 2016, and then re -circulated  at the CTG, the CTS, the TRIPS  Council , and the CTD. The aim 
was to encourage further  discussion and reflectio n on E -Commerce, especially on the nexus 
between development and E -Commerce. Thus, the submission identified some potential areas of 
interest relevant to developing countries in the E -Commerce environment.  The proponents 
believed that E -Commerce opened  up opportunities for businesses, especially for MSMEs, and 
allowed them to reduce their costs of doing business and to reach customers beyond their local 
markets. This had happened not just in developed but also in developing countries.  
20.32.   The conduct of E -Comme rce in developing countries certainly had unique characteristics; 
for instance, cash and delivery was still a problem when doing business via  E-Commerce in many 
developing countries; connectivity and access to reliable communication networks also posed 
particular challenges while at the same time providing  innovative oppor tunities for businesses. The 
co-sponsors of the submission encouraged Memb ers to take advantage of the paper's 
re-circulation and to engage substantively, at the technical level, in identi fying areas and elements 
of interest as well as challenges Members faced in leveraging with regard to E-Commerce. 
Enhanced information and experience sharing would only help Members better to understand and 
identify where the WTO could help them to achieve  their trade policy objectives in E -Commerce. 
All the co -sponsors of this paper looked forward to work ing with other interested delegations to 
advance work in this area.  
20.33.   Consumers were increasingly buying goods online and having them delivered to their 
doorsteps; thus, the relationship between E -Commerce and trade in goods was actually evident. 
Singapore believed that the existing WTO  rules pertaining to trade in goods would still apply. 
However, given the increased participation of businesses, especially M SMEs, in cross -border trade 
in goods through E -Commerce, it would be important to see which measures could be adopted to 
facilitate their participation in E -Commerce and what role could  be played by  trade policy. In this 
regard , and drawing from the propos als already tabled, Singapore considered that there were 
some areas where it would be useful to advance , in the goods context , to further discussions at 
the CTG. One such area was paperless trading , which would further help trade facilitation and 
maximize accessibility for businesses, especially MSMEs, by cutting the cost and time required to 
trade. There were already several provisions in the TFA  of relevance in this regard , such as the 
acceptance of electronic copies of supporting documents , and also the Single Window. Electronic 
Authentication and E -Signatures were other areas where the mutual recognition of electronic 
signatures and interoperable electronic authentication methods had facilitated  the development of  
smaller E -Commerce businesses in their cross-border E -Commerce. It would also enable paperless 
trading because accepting electronic copies of documentation would necessarily require that 
documents be authenticated electronically. Finally, improved transparency and information -sharing 
on E-Commer ce-related regulations would enable businesses, especially smaller businesses , to 
navigate individual Member's E -Commerce landscape s with more confidence. Additionally, and in 
light of the tran sparency obligations under GATT  Article  X, and in the TFA, Memb ers would benefit 
from a useful discussion on enhancing transparency and sharing information on measures affecting 
E-Commerce.  
20.34.   Singapore looked forward to further substantive exchanges and information sharing on all 
these issues. The discussions that had t aken place at the CTD, the CTS, and the TRIPS  Council, 
had been fruitful and instructive in highlighting some of the areas and issues that Members 
considered important to explore  further . A continued discussion of these issues would provide 
opportunities f or Members to learn from each other on how best to leverage E -Commerce for 
inclusive growth, opportunities, and development. Singapore also hoped that these discussions 
would provide a sound basis for an outcome at MC11.  
20.35.   The representative of Montenegro  welcomed Members' submissions and recalled that her 
delegation was a co -sponsor of the document "Trade policy, the WTO and digital economy ", 
introduced by the EU. The CTG was the pertinent body for these discussions and, as pointed out by 
Canada, many elemen ts related to trade in goods were highlighted in document  JOB/CTG/4  and 
critically positioned in E -Commerce. Montenegro strongly believed that the expansion of the digital 
economy fostered new opportunities to promote inclusive economic growth. Among other  things, it 
helped to connect rural and urban economies, to open new channels for trade for landlocked 
countries, and to facilitate the p articipation of women and micro -enterprises in the formal 
economy.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 43 - 
 
  20.36.   Montenegro and other co -sponsoring Members of JOB/CT G/4 took very seriously the 
concerns raised by some countries with regard to the digital divide and the lack of appropriate 
infrastructure for enabling  an adequate E -Commerce  environment, as well as the calls from other 
Members for a more focused and concr ete discussion in the future. Indeed, the elements in 
document  JOB/CTG/4 had indicated the interest of its co -sponsors in further discussions in the 
WTO on a limited set of concrete rules that facilitated electronic transactions, such as with regard 
to e-contracts, e -signatures, and also regulatory frameworks pertaining to consumer protection 
and unsolicited messages, as China had also proposed. Montenegro remained engaged towards 
facilitating discussions that could lead to the further constructive engageme nt of all Members in 
this discussion, and to pragmatic progress towards tangible results at MC11.  
20.37.   The delegate of Australia  welcomed the discussion on E -Commerce and each of the 
communications on this topic, and reiterated that electronic commerce was a po werful driver of 
international trade, inclusive economic growth, and development. Australia shared the aim set out 
in China and Pakistan's paper of realizing pragmatic progress on E -Commerce at MC11. This would 
not only help to ensure that all Members woul d better capture the opportunities offered by 
electronic commerce, but would also signal the WTO's continuing relevance in today's rapidly 
evolving global trade environment. When commenting on China and Pakistan's paper she referred 
also to Australia's com ments on other papers in recent discussions on E -Commerce that had taken 
place at the TRIPS  Council, the CTD, and the CTS. Indeed, there were several common issues that 
had been highlighted in the papers circulated for discussion and also raised by a numbe r of 
Members during recent E -Commerce discussions, including discussions at this meeting. Australia 
considered that Members could further explore some of these issues, including the customs duties 
moratorium, the promotion of paperless trade, electronic au thentication and e -signatures, and 
cooperation and increased transparency with respect to laws, regulations, and administrative 
measures relating to E -Commerce.  
20.38.   With regard to the issue of e -signature and authentication in document  JOB/CTG/2 from 
China and  Pakistan, she indicated that , in the CTS, Australia had provided detailed information 
about its domestic approach to electronic authentication which had provided certainty for 
electronic transactions and had allowed electronic commerce to operate on the s ame basis as 
paper -based commerce by providing a 'technologically neutral' approach. Australia considered that 
broader acceptance of electronic authentication methods would help to facilitate trade both in 
goods and in services and would also help to increase access to global trade for businesses, 
including MSMEs.  
20.39.   Australia also agreed that transparency was important in the facilitation of  E-Commerce 
and noted the suggestion in paragraph  2.1 of the paper that Members should publish laws, 
regulations, and ad ministrative measures relating to E -Commerce and provide information on 
those measures to the WTO. Australia also welcomed any discussion of the possibility of making  
the services that support E -Commerce transactions , such as electronic payment, logistics,  and 
courier services , more accommodating, and supported the full implementation of the TFA in order 
to support electronic commerce  and, in particular, the provisions on electronic payments, single 
window, publication of documents, and paperless trade.  
20.40.   To provide greater certainty to consumers and businesses, including MSMEs, Australia 
encouraged Members to agree to extend the period of the customs duties mo ratorium beyond the 
current two -year cycle or  else to make the moratorium permanent. Australia also a greed that the 
development dimension of E -Commerce should be taken into account and looked forward to 
hearing from the proponents and other Members on how the WTO could best contribute with 
respect to the developm ent dimension of facilitating E -Commerce , and also what specific steps 
could be taken by Members in the lead up to MC11. In this regard, Australia was open to 
discussions on E -Commerce in any format.  
20.41.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  welcomed the discussion on E -Commerce and recalled that 
Ministers in  Nairobi had indicated that the next steps on the WPEC should be based on concrete 
proposals by Members. However, a great deal of work still needed to be done in order to define 
what areas should be the subject of future discussion on E -Commerce. At presen t, the commonly 
shared view seemed to be that the most essential elements for trade in E -Commerce were open 
network interconnectivity, privacy protection, and therefore the flow of data, among others. Some 
elements were already contained in the proposal be fore the Council but further ideas and a further 
mapping exercise was still required. If the WTO was to remain relevant to world trade in the G/C/M/128  
 
- 44 - 
 
  future, E -Commerce had to be one of the cornerstones of any future WTO structure. Any proposal 
had to take free ac cess to the internet into account in order to create a fair and competitive 
environment , and inclusive trade , before touching upon elements especially relevant from an Asian 
perspective.  
20.42.   The delegate of Chile found it encouraging that the different proposa ls distributed since 
2016 by different Members contained common elements. Chile co -sponsor ed the proposal 
contained in document  JOB/CTG/4 , introduced by the EU. This document facilitated discussions on 
possible areas in which Members could focus their work  in the WTO and provided a starting point 
for these with a tentative but broad list of elements of trade policy that were relevant to electronic 
commerce. Thus, the questions raised at the end of the document were relevant, in particular as 
concerned  the e lements that Members considered should be subject to specific and technical 
discussions in the CTG, particularly considering the close relationship that existed between the  
Council and  the issue of  Electronic Commerce. Chile hoped that this document, initi ally submitted 
to the CTD, would encourage substantive discussions on this issue, so crucial for Members of the 
WTO, regardless of their level of development.  
20.43.   The delegate of Hong Kong, China , thanked the proponents for their submissions , which 
stimulated and focused discussion of this issue. Hong Kong, China supported the development 
dimension of E -Commerce  as set out  in document  JOB/CTG/2, and looked forward to exploring 
ways to facilitate integration of Developing and Least Developed Members into the glo bal trading 
system. With regard to document  JOB/CTG/3, e -signatures were an important element to develop 
in the context of E-Commerce as they helped to ensure the authenticity, integrity, and 
confidentiality of online transactions , and foster ed business an d consumer confidence in 
E-Commerce. Document  JOB/CTG/4 was a comprehensive paper for stimulating thoughts on 
elements that E -Commerce might cover; and document  JOB/CTG/5, of which her delegation was a 
co-sponsor, recognized the difficulties faced by SMEs with regard to E-Commerce , due to their lack 
of resources, infrastructure, and technology. Hong Kong, China,  supported all initiatives aimed at 
facilitating SMEs' participation in this global business and to create a reliable business 
environment, includin g consumer protection, secure online payment, privacy protection, access to 
services, and online security.  
20.44.   The delegate of New Zealand  found  it positive that the papers tabled were co -sponsored by 
a large number of developed and developing Members. Previou s discussions in the CTD, the CTS, 
and the TRIPs  Council, had reinforced the diversity of interest in E -Commerce and its broad 
relevance across the WTO  membership. This diversity not only demonstrated the broad relevance 
of E-Commerce across the membership  but also underscored the wider transformative effect 
digital technologies and services were having on Members' economies, including in the area of 
international trade. In this regard , the mapping exercise featured in several papers was useful to 
the consideration of  those disciplines and frameworks that already existed on E -Commerce at the 
WTO, and helped Members to direct their efforts to areas where there were tangible prospects for 
progress. Examination of concrete examples of E -Commerce regulatory disc iplines, such as those 
relating to e -signatures, would help Members to identify potential commonality in the domestic 
and regional approaches and  in this way  to find also the easiest way forward to achieving progress 
on a multilateral basis.  
20.45.   Additionally, the growth of E -Commerce had the potential to lift the engagement of MSMEs 
in international trade, and Members might also recall the need for the WTO to make progress in its 
core work of improving trade access and trade facilitation. The WTO must stay rele vant in a rapidly 
changing global trading environment. Members should look at what they could achieve on 
E-Commerce this year at MC11, and how  to lay do wn a path for the Organization's work beyond 
that. 
20.46.   The delegate of Mexico , as a co -sponsor of document  JOB/CTG/4, echoed the statement 
made by the EU, Canada,  and other co -sponsors. Mexico believed  that the CTG played a 
constructive role in E -Commerce discussions within the WPEC. The paper included a list of topics 
that were highly relevant for Members' disc ussions, even though some areas  were more applicable 
to trade in services and others to trade facilitation in the goods area.  
20.47.   Mexico, as co -sponsor of the proposal contained in document  JOB/CTG/5, entitled 
"Electronic Commerce and Development" , supported S ingapore's statement , which emphasized the 
importance that electronic commerce might play in the economic development of countries, and G/C/M/128  
 
- 45 - 
 
  particularly in improving the export capacity of SMEs, and the costs reduction it thereby implied. 
Indeed, SMEs played a n important role in their economies and generated 35% of their GDP and 
80% of total jobs. Some reports indicated that platforms for internet sales represented 
approximately 80% of SMEs in Mexico that exported to ten or more countries.  
20.48.   She encouraged Member s to exchange information on their experience in this area as this 
might help to strengthen the link between electronic trade and economic development. China's 
proposal contained interesting aspects that were also relevant for Members' discussions, in 
particular with regard to the trade in goods using electronic means. Mexico would participate in 
any discussion on this issue aimed at clarifying any outcome that could be achieved at MC11.  
20.49.   The delegate of the Republic of Korea  thanked the proponents for their  submissions. As a 
supporter of the WPEC, Korea had been actively engaged in this discussion since the beginning, 
and hoped that a meaningful outcome could be achieved at MC11. To this end, a pragmatic 
approach was needed based on common interests among Me mbers and focused on areas that 
were less controversial and more feasible. E -Commerce and trade facilitation, consumer 
protection, and transparency might be discussed as feasible areas, and the development 
dimension should be fully incorporated into that discussion. Certainly, digital trade was 
transforming the global trade landscape and there was no reason to spare Members' efforts on 
E-Commerce discussions in the WTO. Korea hoped that substantive progress could be attained on 
E-Commerce in the CTG and oth er WTO  bodies. Korea would continue  to engage in this discussion 
in a productive manner.  
20.50.   The delegate of Costa Rica  said that all the contributions before the CTG were very useful 
for understand ing the different areas  of interest  and the overall complexity  of this topic. 
Document  JOB/CTG/5, co -sponsored by Costa Rica,  and introduced by Singapore, included 
relevant information important to be discussed so as to bridge the various gaps, in particular the 
relationship between trade facilitation and electronic commerce, between infrastructure and acce ss 
to payment solutions, and IT  security. E -Commerce was the most efficient way to distribute 
resources, both for producers and consumers, and represented a useful tool for overcoming 
geographical, political, econom ic, and technological barriers. Furthermore, there was much 
complementarity and synchronicity between the various topics covered in the proposal and in the 
other submissions indicated in the agenda of this meeting. This was a call to Members to reflect on 
how to build a  clear and  proper road map enabling progress to be made at the WTO on the issue of  
electronic commerce.  
20.51.   The delegate of Colombia , when commenting on the different submissions, stated that , for 
Colombia,  electronic commerce was an essential co rnerstone in promoting  countries' development , 
as it clearly allowed all producers to offer their products in global markets. Because of this, 
Colombia supported any initiative and effort to facilitate commerce by electronic means.  
20.52.   China and Pakistan's sub mission , contained in document  JOB/CTG/2 , continued to be 
assessed in Capital ; however, given the important elements contained therein, Colombia had a 
number of preliminary comments, particularly as concerned paperless trade, the use of a single 
window, ex pedited and simplified customs procedures, and inspections and quarantine. There were 
two aspects of concern : first, Colombia would appreciate further clarification with regard to the 
so-called "list of products" that would benefit from these procedures , as this could easily become a 
limit to innovation, in particular for MSMEs ; second , the establishment of customs warehouses 
could imply commitment s under the Services Agreement.  
20.53.   With regard to document  JOB/CTG/4, Colombia,  as a co -sponsor of this text, foun d the 
approach contained therein appropriate as it established a list of specific matters with regard to 
electronic commerce that already existed or could exist in the multilateral context. This allowed 
Members to enjoy a broad perspective on the basis of which to begin  discussions within the work 
plan. Many topics in the document had a direct relationship to the activity of this Council but , at 
this juncture , Colombia would focus on the paperless aspects of E -Commerce , which formed part 
of the facilitating  initiatives for the development of electronic commerce. The use of electronic 
tools for the administration of import and export procedures would have a positive impact on  
companies and thus contribute to national development. Since 2005, Colombia had impl emented 
the single window called "Ventanilla Única de Comercio Exterior (VUCE) "; this portal encompassed 
the procedures of 21  governmental institutions and currently had approximately 62,000  users. The 
VUCE had contributed to improving information exchange  between companies and governmental G/C/M/128  
 
- 46 - 
 
  authorities, to eliminating redundant procedures, to implement ing efficient controls , and to 
promoting transparent administrative procedures. During the twelve  years of the 
VUCE's  existence , 4.5  million foreign trade ope rations had taken place, which represented an 
average of 13,000  operations per month. The Colombian single window had been very successful 
and was directly linked to other single windows in the region. Since 2009 , an electronic exchange 
of certificates of origin had taken place with Mexico and Chile and , since 2014 , with Ecuador. 
Currently a link with all the single windows and automated procedures with all members of the 
Pacific Alliance was taking place.  
20.54.   Colombia was also a co -sponsor of document  JOB/CTG/ 5, and echoed the statement made 
by Singapore. A key issue for developing countries and least developed Members was the 
reduction of the infrastructural gap with a view to develop ing a robust environment that promoted 
electronic commerce. This was crucial in the E -Commerce discussions . Thus , Colombia encouraged 
Members to exchange their experiences as concerned  infrastructure, and in particular with regard 
to public -private initiatives  developed to promote access to the internet.  
20.55.   In this vein, Colombia shar ed its own experience in the area of infrastructure and 
connectivity as an element that drove growth. Indeed , in 2010, the Government designed the plan 
"Vive Digital ", aimed at providing connectivity and internet access to the whole Colombian territory 
by installing and spreading the necessary infrastructure to provide internet access throughout the 
Colombian territory. After four  years, internet connections in the country had been multiplied by 
four and passed from 2.2  million internet connections to 8.8  million connections, and 96% of the 
municipalities of the country were now connected using fibre -optic channels . This was only 
possible thanks to public -private partnerships that maximized the resources of the State in the 
area of infrastructure through pub lic bids, open and transparent , and with high quality 
requirements as regarded coverage. The digital plan was designed together with the private sector 
and the needs and requirements of the private sector were incorporated into the "Vive Digital 
Plan". Colombia was interested in an integral discussion of all the topics related to electronic 
commerce.  
20.56.   The delegate of Japan  welcomed the various proposals aimed at facilitating E -Commerce 
discussions , as well as the constructive discussions that had already taken place in other 
WTO bodies. Japan was convinced that ICT had a significant potential to enable various actors to 
enjoy improved  access to the global market; thus, Japan attached great importance to 
E-Commerce and digital trade as these could contribute t o "facilitating trade" and were enabler s of 
"inclusive trade". Looking ahead to MC11 , and beyond, Japan believed that a concrete and focused 
approach was needed, and that Members should consider what they could do in E -Commerce at 
the WTO from a pragmatic point of view.  
20.57.   The delegate of South Africa, on behalf of the African Group , thanked the proponents for 
their submissions and welcomed the fact that they had been  tabled at the CTG, in accordance with 
paragraph  1.1 of the WPEC, and as also reaffirmed in pa ragraph  1 of the Nairobi Ministerial 
Decision, which provided that work under the Work Programme should continue "based on the 
existing mandate and guidelines and on the basis of proposals submitted  by Members in the 
relevant WTO  bodies as set out in parag raphs  2 to 5 of the Work Programme ". 
20.58.   The African Group reminded Members that, over the last five  years, there had been a 
greater sense of purpose in Africa and  that, for sustainable growth and development, Africa 
needed to move away from a growth path base d on consumption and commodity exports. The 
African Ministers of Trade had pronounced themselves clearly when they had declared that 
continental integration, structural transformation , and industrialization , remained the overriding 
priorities for Africa, f ollowing the establishment of the Continental Free Trade Agreement in line 
with "Agenda  2063: The Africa We Want". Therefore, it was critical that the work undertaken in the 
area of multilateral trade supported Africa's continental integration agenda.  
20.59.   The African Group approached the exploratory discussions under the WPEC from a 
perspective that gave paramount importance to "the development implications of E -Commerce, 
taking into account the economic, financial, and development needs of developing countries  … ". 
After having listened carefully to the introduction of the submissions in the CTG, there were a 
number of issues that would  have been better suited to a discussion in other relevant WTO bodies, 
such as the CTD, the CTS , and the TRIPs Council. Some of  the issues raised in some of the 
submissions fell outside the scope of the Work Programme or were being taken up extensively in G/C/M/128  
 
- 47 - 
 
  other multilateral organizations. The African Group therefore strongly urge d the proponents to 
refine their proposals so as to make them specific to the body where they wished the discussion to 
take place, as per the Work Programme.  
20.60.   The African Group would also like to see the CTG take up issues that placed the needs of 
developing and least developed countries at the centre of any  discussion on E -Commerce, 
especially the "challenges to and ways of enhancing the participation of developing countries in 
electronic commerce, in particular as exporters of electronically delivered products: role of 
improved access to infrastructure and transfer of technology, and of movement of natural 
persons". This included but was not limited to scoping the range of issues relating to the digital, 
technological, infrastructure, industrialization, workforce skills , and income divides. In this context, 
the potential benefits of E -Commerce could not be assumed or simply asserted. For example, 
Sub-Saharan Africa was home to nearly half of the global population of people living without 
access to electricity. It was also the only region in the world where th e number of people living 
without electricity was increasing. According to the ITU, 53% of the world 's population were not 
using the Internet. Fixed broadband penetration remained at 0.7% in Africa and in LDCs , and 
Africa was the only region in the world w here mobile broadband penetration remained below 20%.  
20.61.   The technologies and advances of the Fourth Industrial Revolution could not bring socially 
equalizing effects, including for developing countries' MSMEs , if the above realities remained, and 
where some countries had access to the digital technologies and, in fact, owned th ose new 
technologies, whilst others had only partial or no access to them, and did not have any rights over 
those technologies. Part and parcel of this discussion was the need to addres s the asymmetrical 
nature of the existing global E -Commerce space so as to enable Africa to become 'E -Commerce 
ready'. According to UNCTAD, four  countries accounted for 80% of business -to-business (B2B) 
E-Commerce, which was by far the largest form of e -trade. While business -to-consumer (B2C) 
E-Commerce was much smaller, it appeared to be growing faster ; but again, the regional shares 
varied considerably , with the Middle East and Africa together accounting for only 2.5%. If these 
figures did indeed approxim ate reality, they underscored the scope and depth of the digital divide.  
20.62.   Therefore, the African Group wished to see the CTG take up this issue in a meaningful 
way. One of the overriding questions the African Group had in the  context of the  E-Commerce 
discussion was how to build an inclusive growth and equitable development trajectory for all 
developing and least developed countries. The African Group encouraged Members to share their 
experiences with regard to  the measures they had employed to develop their  capabilities in the 
digital economy and trade. Africa would greatly benefit from a discussion of these issues, as it 
explored its own policy options in response to the profound changes brought about  by the 'Fourth 
Industrial Revolution' vis -à-vis Africa's  core development objectives. The African Group was 
committed to engaging in a comprehensive discussion in the CTG of all issues relating to the 
development implications of E -Commerce and looked forward to having a substantive discussion at 
the next meetin g. 
20.63.   The delegate of South Africa , on behalf of her country, associated her delegation with the 
statement delivered by the African Group. South Africa had taken note of the submissions that 
were in accordance with paragraph  1.1 of the WPEC and paragraph  1 of the Nairobi Ministerial 
Decision. Th e comprehensive WP EC stated that " the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) shall 
examine and report on aspects of electronic commerce rel evant to the provisions of GATT  1994, 
the multilateral trade  agreements covered under Annex  1 of the WTO  Agreement, and the 
approved work programme ". The issues to be examined under the auspices of the CTG were  
further elaborated in document  WT/L/274. From the introduction of the proposals today, it was 
clear that many Members were only jus t beginning to come to grips with what appeared would be 
the very profound changes brought on by the digital transformation , of which E -Commerce was 
integral. What was even clearer was that E -Commerce was developing rapidly but unevenly across 
the globe . The African Group had provided the data , which described a stark picture of the scope 
and depth of the digital divide , and  that was fully reflected in the highly concentrated nature of 
B2B and B2C  E-Commerce. As indicated previously, South Africa was ready to continue examining 
E-Commerce issues in a comprehensive manner in the WTO , within the existing non -negotiating 
mandate. However, South Africa was of the view that the current proposals needed to be further 
refined and appropriately focused to ensure a m eaningful discussion that was relevant to the CTG , 
as required in the Work Programme.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 48 - 
 
  20.64.   When referring to the developmental aspects of the discussion in the CTG, South Africa 
wished to propose that the following issues be taken up for further examination: (i) properly and 
fully to scope the range of challenges developing countries needed to overcome to approach a 
level where they might be considered as being 'E -Commerce ready'; (ii) to address the 
measurement challenges of E -Commerce that were essential for b uilding  up a body of accurate 
data that wa s the prerequisite for evidence -based policy making; (iii) carefully to consider what 
was required to build the capabilities of developing and least developed countries so that they 
would then be able effectively to participate in cross -border E -Commerce; (iv) to consider the 
impact of E -Commerce on Africa's long -standing developmental objectives , including industrial 
development, structural transformation , and employment. All this needed to be done with a view 
to promoting inclusive and equitable growth, trade , and development in the digital economy.  
20.65.   In this context, and aimed at stimulating a fruitful engagement at the next CTG  meeting, 
South Africa sought indication s from Members as to what specific government mea sures had been 
employed to support the development of E -Commerce. South Africa would like to better 
understand the measures and policies others had employed to develop their capabilities in the 
so-called 'digital economy' and trade. There was considerable potential in establishing strong links  
between industrial policy, ICT -related infrastructure , and skills development that supported the 
digital economy. At the same time, there were questions about measures that might be taken to 
address tax avoidance, on market concentration, on anti-competitive practices, and what needed 
to be done to avoid the possible negative impacts on such long-standing objectives as improving 
labour conditions, increasing employment , and advancing industrial development.  
20.66.   In addition , more clarity was needed with regard to the references in various non -papers 
by Members t o terms such as "digital trade ", "digital economy " and "digital product ". These terms 
were used int erchangeably within the term "E -Commerce" by some Members. What did  they 
mean , and how were they related to E -Commerce? What were the "digital /digitized/digitizable 
products"? Were " digital products " more akin to goods or services? What was an "electronic 
transmission "? Would goods ordered online but delivered offline fall under the Work Progra mme 
definition of "E-Commerce "? 
20.67.   With respect to China and Pakistan's proposal , she asked the following: (i)  to what extent 
were the proposed measures already covered by the TFA? (ii)  what measures were in place in 
China and Pakistan that supported the import ation of goods ordered via the Internet? (iii)  did the 
customs authorities in China and Pakistan make a distinction between goods ordered online and 
those ordered by other means such as through mail order or telephone? and (iv)  were goods that 
were delivered online c lassified as goods or services?  
20.68.   Given the number of proposals tabled , and their relevance to the GATT  legal framework as 
per the WPEC, all these initial questions deserved further examination by Members. South Africa 
was of the view that there was certainly room for Members to share their experiences of what they 
had done to build their capabilities , and of their views of the definitions and classification issues 
that had been raised.  
20.69.   The delegate o f Uganda , on behalf of the LDCs  Group, thanked the proponents for their 
submissions and recalled that, with regard to the process, the Group had indicated that the 
submissions should be taken to the relevant bodies as set out in pa ragraphs  2–5 of the WPEC; 
only once the discussi ons in the relevant bodies had matured should they be reported to the 
General Council. In the same vein, paragraphs  1.1 and 1.2 of the 1998 WPEC also instructed 
Members to continue the work under the Work Programme based on the existing mandate and 
guideli nes and on the basis of proposals submitted by Members in the relevant WTO  bodies, as set 
out in paragraphs  2-5 of the Work Programme. In addition, the General Council should take up 
consideration of any trade -related issue of a cross -cutting nature. Addit ionally, the non -negotiating 
mandate established in the Work Programme was exploratory in nature.  
20.70.   Two decades after the adoption of the WPEC in the WTO, the digital divide for LDCs had 
widened. In theory, E -Commerce provided a critical gateway for consumer s and businesses in 
weaker countries that would allow them to surmount the obstacles they faced when competing 
domestically and with enterprises from stronger players in the trading system. However, in reality, 
most LDCs faced a number of constraints , such as insufficient basic infrastructure and access to 
electricity and the internet, the high cost of broadband connectivity, and various other bottlenecks G/C/M/128  
 
- 49 - 
 
  that hindered LDCs from taking advantage of the opportunities theoretically available to them 
through t he E-Commerce platforms.  
20.71.   The LDCs  Group considered that three  things were critical to a country's capacity  to benefit 
from E -Commerce: access, affordability, and availability. In addressing these questions, it was 
important to contextualize the LDCs' situa tion. According to the ITU  facts and figures for 2016, 
75% of the entire population in Africa was offline. Only 20  million households in LDCs had internet 
access out of 1  billion households in the world, while more than 50% of the LDC  population was 
covere d by a mobile broadband signal, only 15% use d the internet. Fixed broadband penetration 
remained at below 1% in Africa and among the LDCs; and only five  LDCs had achieved the 
Broadband Commission target on affordabil ity. The rest could not afford  it. 
20.72.   Infrastructure and connectivity were another major issue. By early  2016, the total 
international interne t bandwidth had reached 185,000  gigabytes, up from 30,000 in 2008. Africa, 
which was home to two -thirds of LDCs, had the lowest international connectivity of  all regions. 
There was twice as much bandwidth per inhabitant available in Asia and the Pacific, four  times as 
much in the CIS region, eight  times as much in the Americas, and more than 20  times as much in 
Europe. The lack of international connectivity wa s therefore a major bottleneck in the i nternet 
infrastructure of LDCs.  
20.73.   With this low penetration rate in internet use, LDCs would not be in a position adequately 
to take advantage of the benefits of E -Commerce. Indeed, without meeting the basic 
requirement s, many LDC  entrepreneurs and consumers would not be able effectively to participate 
in E-Commerce and take advantage of the benefits it promised . Therefore, the discussions under 
the Work Programme should focus on overcoming the challenges that were imped ing LDCs from 
being E -Commerce ready, such as access to electricity, access to digital infrastructure, inadequate 
IT-skills, access to cheap and fast broa dband, and technology transfer.  
20.74.   As a way forward, the LDCs  Group agreed with the African Group that almost all of the 
submissions already tabled fell outside of the scope and mandate of the Work Programme. 
Members should narrow their submissions to issues specific to each particular body and, in the 
event that this was not possible, the focus should be on the development -related aspects of the 
WPEC with a view to considering the examination of improved access to infrastructure, technology  
transfer , movement of natural persons, and the use of information technology in the integration of 
developing countries.  These were issues at the heart of the digital divide that had to be resolved 
with a view to bui lding LDC E-Commerce readiness.  
20.75.   The African Ministers of Trade , in their declaration issued in November  2016, directed that 
any work undertaken in the WTO shoul d be consistent with Agenda  2063 with a view to structural 
transformation and industrialization in building the Africa that Africans wanted. Therefore, the 
work at the WTO should complement  but not undermine that agenda.  
20.76.   Consequently, it was important to e xamine the implications of E -Commerce on the 
structural transformation and industrialization of Africa, and the transformations to traditional 
production and supply chains most developing countries were involved in, and what the impact 
would be on domestic  markets, domestic manufac turers, and services suppliers.  
20.77.   On the technical assistance and Aid -for-Trade aspects, it was important that Members, 
especially the proponents, adopted an approach of consistency in message and practice. T he 
LDCs Group saw no rec onciliation at all in this endeavour. To the contrary, all indications were that 
Aid-for-Trade was in a downward trajectory, and most of it went to non -LDCs. In a workshop 
organized by the Friends of E -Commerce in December  2016 the Secretary -General of the  
ITU indicated that his organization had a plan to connect 1.5  billion people to the internet by 2020; 
and that this strategy required 450  billion US  dollars to operationalize; however, he reported that 
he had been told that there was no money for this. Li ke him, the LDCs were of the view that , 
unless people were connected, E -Commerce w ould not be of benefit to them.  
20.78.   The delegate of Zimbabwe  echoed the statements by the African Group and the 
LDC Group , and thanked the proponents for ensuring that their subm issions at the CTG were 
aligned  with the mandate. As it was , these submissions went beyond the Work Programme 
mandate and so me were even outside the scope of WTO  work. Zimbabwe requested the G/C/M/128  
 
- 50 - 
 
  proponents to realign the various elements of their proposals so as to bring them in to line with the 
mandate and also to refer some of the elements of their proposals to the relevant bodies. 
Additionally, the proposals did not address the key challenges in relation to the digital d ivide, as 
indicated in paragraph  1.3 of  the Work Programme , which stated that the WP EC should also 
include issues pertinent to the deve lopment of infrastructure for E -Commerce. Some of the 
proposals emphasized transparency issues; however, Zimbabwe considered that this could result 
in burdensom e and onerous procedures for some Members due to their level of development and 
limited capacity. A technical discussion on E -Commerce was needed that centred on the potential 
impact on the economies of developing countries, and on the relationship between  E-Commerce 
and digital trade. Finally, exploratory work was required as well as a discussion about the 
challenges that were being faced by developing countries, aimed at developing concrete strategies 
on how to improve access to infrastructure, transfer o f technology, and to reduce the knowledge 
gap in developing countries so as to bridge the digital divide and level the playing field. Zimbabwe 
acknowledged that SME s benefited from E -Commerce; however, SMEs in developing countries, 
including Africa, could only participate and realize benefits when the challenges regarding the 
digital divide had first been addressed.  
20.79.   The delegate of Brazil  introduced document  JOB/CTG/3 , containing a joint proposal by 
Brazil, Paraguay,  and Argentina . This document had been ci rculated to the four  subsidiary bodies 
and the General Council Dedicated Discussion as the proponents did not want to determine in 
advance whether Members might consider this  a cross -cutting issue or whether it fell under one 
specific agenda; it was not ea sy to determine whether the different proposals referred to a specific 
or to a cross -cutting issue. 
20.80.   The proposal identified electronic signatures as one of the relevant issues for E -Commerce 
in general because , in its digital version, an electronic signatu re enjoyed  the same legal standing 
as a handwritten signature. Thanks to digital certificates, it was possible to ascertain with 
correctness , and lawfully , the owner of a signature, and thus it enabled people to identify who was 
on the other side of a comp uter or a mobile. All these  developments  enhanced the legal security 
and transparency of electronic transactions in general and in deed of  all kinds of electronic 
transactions. An example was the work that was taking place in Services on domestic regulation , 
where the single window was  currently  being discussed. Single windows offered  a solution that 
enable d users to submit  documents , through one digital entry, and also to accept electronic copies  
of documents, as well as  digital certificates.  
20.81.   The proposal h ad been negotiated among developing countries and had been adopted by 
MERCOSUR, whose members were developing their national legislation on this issue. With regard 
to document  JOB/CTG/5 , he indicated that development was at the heart of any discussion on 
E-Commerce, and that without considering the digital divide and the developmental dimension of 
E-Commerce it would be very difficult to move this agenda item forward. China and Pakistan's 
proposal was one of the most comprehensive proposals tabled in the co ntext of the E -Commerce 
discussion. Nevertheless, t he discussion should not be reduced only to the trade of goods through 
digital means, even as Brazil acknowledged that this was not China's intention. There were also 
concerns about taxation that Brazil co nsidered did not fall under the mandate of the WTO. 
Regarding the proposal contained in document  JOB/116, Brazil had already recognized the 
importance of the list of topics concerning  E-Commerce submitted by the co -sponsors of that 
proposal because they  considered it useful for the discussion under the non -negotiating  mandate 
of the Work Programme.  
20.82.   The delegate of India thanked the proponents for having provided an overview of their 
papers. With regard to China and Pakistan's submission , he recalled the pre liminary feedback 
indicated at the last CTG  meeting, and also highlighted that China had made a point of respecting 
the existing mandate, namely, to focus on the development dimension, and a note involving 
market access. India agreed with China that the de velopment dimension had not been emphasized 
enough in previous discussions, and that the existing mandate was the very basis for future 
discussions. China had also referred to sharing development experiences and comparing best 
practices. India had pointed out that the Work Programme should involve a sharing of experiences 
in order to understand national perspectives and developmental priorities. China had also 
expressed some views on the moratorium; there were different approaches to this issue but many 
Members were not ready to make the moratorium permanent. India would continue to give 
thought to  China's ideas and would express those thoughts in future discussio ns. G/C/M/128  
 
- 51 - 
 
  20.83.   With respect to the proposal contained in document  JOB/CTG/4, the EU and the 
co-sponsors had  identified 27  elements that had been grouped in different clusters. The EU and 
Canada's  statements had explained their positions , and India appreciated the step s undertaken by 
the proponents to discuss these positions in the relevant bodies; this was an e xtremely important 
step. The elements themselves appeared to be quite expansive, touching trade in goods, services, 
and TRIPs. A number of very important concepts had been highlighted, the scope and ramifications 
of which still needed to be discussed and u nderstood. India looked forward to discuss ing the 
elements that were relevant to the CTG in the context of the Work Pr ogramme in the coming 
sessions.  
20.84.   E-Commerce was indeed becoming a major driving force of international economic activity. 
Even in India, E -Commerce was transforming the way business was done and was one of the 
fastest growing segments , witness ing exponential growth over the past few years. However, as 
with any new emerging area of technology, the regulatory frameworks and institutions to supp ort 
E-Commerce were still at an evolutionary stage. India agreed with the EU and the co -proponents 
when they stated that, even after 18  years, the original Work Programme remained relevant , and 
that Ministers in Nairobi were committed to continue the work based on the existing mandates and 
guidelines. It was also a well-known  fact, as reiterated by various Members at this meeting, that 
many developing Members were grappling with basic access and connectivity issues , such as 
providing uninterrupted power sup ply, improving patchy internet connectivity, and enhancing 
bandwidth. In India itself, around 70% of the population did not have access to the internet, 
especially in rural area s. Indeed, there was a huge digital divide within and amongst Members that 
needed to be bridged. Moreover, the growth of E -Commerce activities had given birth to new 
challenges, both for domestic as well as for cross -border trade, including issues with regard to 
consumer protection, sale of pirated/counterfeit ed goods and services, s afety of online payments, 
a need to  find a  balance between free cross -border data flows and privacy concerns, a common 
framework for interoperable and mutually recognized e -authentication procedures, taxation of the 
digital economy, issues regarding  shorta ge of skilled manpower, and human resource 
development, among others. In India, as in most developing countries, these regulatory 
frameworks were still evolving. Discussion on how Members had addressed these issues 
domestically within their developmental c ontexts was required. Considering that the growth of 
E-Commerce activities and digital trade had given birth to new challenges, cooperation among 
WTO Members through the sharing of best practices was of particular importance. China's 
indication with regard  to experience -sharing would also be useful.  
20.85.   Document  JOB/CTG/4, introduced by the EU, indicated that the mapping list was not a 
proposal for negotiations. India believed that it was premature to discuss multilateral rule -making 
in the area of E -Commerce a nd that it would be more appropriate to limit E -Commerce discussions 
within the non -negotiating mandate and focus instead on bridging the digital divide.  
20.86.   With regard to document  JOB/CTG/3, on e -signatures, submitted by Argentina, Brazil,  and 
Paraguay, whic h highlighted a regional initiative in the context of e -signatures , and the experience 
of MERCOSUR in this regard, India was still consulting with domestic stakeholders on its 
significance and understanding in the context of th ose discussions. Members woul d need in 
particular to understand the national frameworks and what experience they had  had in this regard. 
Many countries, including India, had already implemented the Electronic Signatur e Act, modelled 
on the UNCITRAL  model law, and had provided legal va lidity to digitally signed documents equal to  
manually signed documents. However, it had been noted that certifying authorities recognized in 
one country might not necessarily be recognized in other countries, and hence the Digital 
Signature and Certificat es issued by that Certifying Authority might be invalid in other countries. 
Therefore, mutual recognition of certifying authorities might pave the way for recognition of Digital 
Signature s issued by one country in another. Furthermore, interoperable , mutua lly recognized 
E-Authentication frameworks for seamless cross -border paperless trading might also be useful and 
require additional discussion. India would continue to remain engaged on this aspect and would 
evolve its own understanding of these issues. Mem bers' experiences and challenges and their 
relevance in the discussion under the E -Commerce Work Programme in the CTG would also need 
to be analysed.  
20.87.   India agreed that E -Commerce could become a driver of inclusive growth and sustainable 
development. Howeve r, in order to realize its potential, significantly larger efforts were required by 
national governments and the international community to enhance the readiness of countries to 
engage in and benefit from E -Commerce. In this vein, pertinent questions and c larifications on the G/C/M/128  
 
- 52 - 
 
  various proposals had been made by some Members at today's meeting. India considered it 
valuable to continue engaging with these Members  and on the proposals in the CTG so as to move 
forward the agenda item under the Work Programme.  
20.88.   The delegate of  the Republic of  Moldova  expressed her delegation 's wish to  join the 
proposal contained in document  JOB/CTG/4 , introduced by the EU and Canada, and co -sponsored 
by other members. Moldova wished  to see all WTO  Members engaged in a substantive d ialogue 
and negotiation process in order to achieve concrete results at MC11. Electronic commerce was 
essential in this digital era of human development. E -Commerce and investment were main 
priorities for the Moldovan Government , which believed that the WT O had a role to play to help 
leverage the digital economy for inclusive economic growth , to encourage closer economic 
integration among participating Members , and to narrow  the gap between developed, developin g, 
and least developed Members.  
20.89.   The Moldovan Na tional Agenda focused on ensuring digitalization of all public services until 
2020. The Moldovan authorities would continue to capitalize on all opportunities to create a 
multi-stakeholder platform approach to Internet Governance processes by ensuring the meaningful 
and accountable participation of all stakeholders, including local governments, the private sector, 
SMEs, civil society, technical and academic communities, and users, and which would include other 
areas in addition to the TFA  provisions, such a s protection of private data, prevention and 
prosecution of cybercrimes,  and online abuse of children.  
20.90.   Moldova was convinced that all efforts in the WTO  negotiations towards opening  markets, 
regulatory framework s, enhanced transparency, and particularly in  identifying measures and 
initiatives that would facilitate the development of E -Commerce , would lead to concrete results in 
the area of trade in goods, E -Commerce, trade competition policy , and the digital economy. 
E-commerce would become a fundamental pi llar of trade in goods and services policies , as should 
be stipulated at MC11.  
20.91.   Moldova had the sixth  fastest internet speed in the world, and would like to see this 
experience repeated in other countries. Moldova was ready to engage in an interactive debat e and 
to move forward on this important topic. In conclusion, she requested  the Secretariat to register 
Moldova as a co -sponsor of the proposal set out in document  JOB/CTG/4.  
20.92.   The delegate of Cuba thanked the proponents for their submissions and indicated that 
there were certain topics in those proposals that went beyond the WTO  mandate on E -Comme rce, 
such as the issue of cyber security, which was being dealt with in the context of the United Nations, 
as well as other issues related to market access liberaliz ation and facilitating market access. 
Furthermore, there was a limited list of what the true challenge s that E -Commerce faced in the 
international context  actually were . Indeed, the digital gap was separating more and more 
Members every day and, in the con text of the so -called "digital economy" , and the Fourth 
Industrial Revolution, this gap was widening in an immeasurable way. Thus, a question to be 
addressed , and on which the discussion should focus, was how to fill this gap , taking into account 
the devel opment dimension at its centre, and ensuring that those Members that had structural and 
financial disadvantages would see their participation in E -Commerce at a global level improved.  
20.93.   The proposals did not mention how to address S&D  treatment. Cuba believe d that the 
development dimension should be preserved in any discussion , as indicated in the Ministerial 
Decision, and was of the view that , before agreeing on an ambitious agenda, it was necessary first 
to identify and clarify what the issues were and which difficulties required a solution. All examples 
of countries that had succeeded in developing their digital economy , and closing the existing digital 
gap in many developing countries , would be welcomed. Another area that required clarification 
was the ter minology used in the E -Commerce environment.  
20.94.   In light of the above , it was premature to talk about disciplines . The work at  the WTO 
should concentrate instead on an  exchange of experience, good practices, and the elements that 
were already in the WPEC. Lik e the African Group, Cuba expected from the proponents the 
pertinent amendments to their proposals so as to cover the above -mentioned issues , and in order 
to generate a fair, balanced, and realistic discussion with a view to achieving progress on this issu e 
at MC11.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 53 - 
 
  20.95.   The delegate of Plurinational State of Bolivia  noted that similar debates had a lready taken 
place in other WTO  bodies. E -Commerce was important for all because each Member, in one way 
or another, performed various activities digitally, and the w hole membership was interested in 
benefiting from t echnological breakthroughs in E -Commerce. However, its proper use depended 
very much on Members' level s of development , with Members facing  different situations and 
realities depending on their needs, infr astructure, and other elements. Thus, the demands were 
different. The 1998  mandate required Members to look at all issues relating to international trade 
that affected E -Commerce, but  while also  considering the economic, financial, and development 
needs of  developing countries. Bolivia observed that many of the proposals did not fulfil the 
development aspect of the mandate. For instance, the proposal in document  JOB/CTG/4 identified 
areas like transparency, exchange of information, market liberalization, an d access to markets 
worldwide , but several difficulties , such as connectivity, infrastructure, and lack of access to 
technology, prevented countries like Bolivia from taking full advantage of the digital economy  in 
the first place . The problem was not stan dards and regulations but a lack of infrastructure per se , 
including a lack of access to broadband internet. Given the digital gap, the needs of many 
developing countries differed from what one found in the proposals. Such issues should be 
included in the list in document  JOB/CTG/4, as well as the  definitions mentioned by Cuba.  
20.96.   Another issue was the need to have data and statistics on internet diffusion in developing 
countries, on legislation on E -Commerce, on connectivity, on access to broadband, on market ing 
E-Commerce, and so on . These elements would be very helpful and would also contribute to 
fulfilling the 1998  mandate on E -commerce.  
20.97.   Bolivia recognized the development aspect in document  JOB/CTG/5. However, it fell short , 
in Bolivia's view,  as Bolivia c onsidered that development should be at the heart of these 
discussions at the WTO. The proposal was geared to wards  development issues and basically 
targeted MSMEs, which existed in all developed and developing countries and played an important 
role in Memb ers' economies . However, Bolivia considered that the proposal assumed that all SMEs 
were alike in all countries and did not recognize that there were differences between SMEs in 
developed and developing countries. Additionally there was no specific proposa l on S&D  treatment 
for th e SMEs in developing countries.  
20.98.   In conclusion, he  encouraged the proponents to make proposals not only within the 
context of the 1998  Ministerial Declaration but also tailored to each WTO  body, particularly as 
there were various el ements outsi de the scope of the WTO  itself.  
20.99.   The delegate of Ecuador , when thanking the proponents for their submissions , shared 
China's comment  that the discussions should take place within the existing mandate and not go 
beyond the WPEC, given the broad d igital divide among Members. However, the proposal did not 
contain any aspect that related to S&D  treatment . Without bridging the digital divide, not all 
Members would be able to benefit fully in the area of E -Commerce.  
20.100.   With regard to document  JOB/CTG/4 , she indicated that it went beyond the Work 
Programme as it included aspects that related to the opening of markets, although there were still 
certain topics that could be discussed. Ecuador said that the proposal had to be amended to align 
it with the Work Programme. With regard to document  JOB/CTG/5 on Electronic Commerce and 
Development, Ecuador believed that some of the issues appeared to go some way towards 
resolving some of the problems encountered by developing countries; it might make an interesting 
starting point for the discussion on the digital divide. Ecuador supported any initiative that was 
properly aligned to  the WPEC.  
20.101.   The delegate of Egypt  associated his delegation with the statement delivered by South 
Africa on behalf of the African Group. Man y Members had increasing interests in enhancing 
E-Commerce, and different opinions confirmed that E -Commerce could play a promising role in 
increasing the levels of growth rate and development in developing and least developed countries. 
Indeed, Egypt coul d also understand the interest in developing E -Commerce to enhance and 
increase world trade growth; nevertheless , it was premature to judge its implications on the 
Egyptian economy , or to say whether or not it would really help both developing and least 
developed countries in their endeavours  to be release d from  poverty in their territories and to 
increase their overall share of World Trade.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 54 - 
 
  20.102.   The submissions and discussions as well as the different workshops and seminars 
organized by the WTO and UNCTAD had d emonstrated that there were four  main challenges facing 
the majority of developing and least developed countries with regard to E-Commerce , namely:  
insufficient infrastructure; lack of technology  transfer ; lack of a suitable regulatory framework; and 
absen ce of multilateral understanding s on E-Commerce. Egypt believed that priority in the 
discussions should be given to how to overcome the problems of both lack of infrastructure and 
lack of technology transfer, but that these discussions should take place in  the CTD.  
20.103.   With regard to the CTG, and considering that , according to paragraph  3.1 of the Work 
Programme , its main role was to examine and report on specific aspects of electronic commerce 
relevant to the provisions of GATT  1994, Egypt believed that this C ouncil should enhance the 
discussion of issues such as standards in relation to electronic commerce, rules of origin , and 
classification issues, and especially those issues affecting exports by electronic means in 
developing and least developed countries. Like others, he thanked the proponents for their 
submission and invited them to revise the submissions so as to make  them compatible with the 
Work Programme.  
20.104.   The delegate of Argentina , like others, noted that E -commerce had been discussed in 
various bodies , and from various points of view, but added that one thing that had kept coming 
up, and to which Members had referred  again today,  was the development dimension. The 
WTO membership knew that everything had to be linked to development, an area of interest that 
went beyond the fact of being a developing or a developed country , as could be observed in the 
various proposals that had been tabled. It had also been said that , for MSMEs , E-Commerce could 
help to improve their competitive capacity. However, this  did not mean that there were not 
different types of problems based on different levels in a Members' development.  
20.105.   Argentina believed that E -Commerce was a useful tool, and that all the issues and 
aspects relating to this tool should be fully explored; i.e.  if there were a proposal containing a 
specific issue of importance, even if it did not deal sufficiently with the development dimension, 
because the latter could be indicated and includ ed in the discussion.  
20.106.   The issue of infrastructure had also been mentione d repeatedly given that all developing 
countries were confronted with the issue to  varying degrees; however, it was also a cross -cutting 
issue present not only in E -Commerce but also in other areas. For instance, the lack of electricity 
affected not only E -Commerce but also agriculture, services, and industry. Therefore, 
infrastructure was a cross -cutting issue , across the board , for various sectors.  
20.107.   With regard to China and Pakistan's proposal, he recalled that , in the CTD , Members had 
already indicated it s value and that it fell within the general context of trade in goods as part of 
electronic commerce. With regard to the submission on electronic signature s co-sponsored by 
Argentina, he commented that all the proponents were developing countries, and that  Argentina 
had worked on it together with the World Customs Organization (WCO), and particularly with the 
Working Group on E -Commerce. The proposal introduced by the EU and Canada seemed to be the 
most detailed of the proposal s tabled , and contained elemen ts that Members would wish to 
discuss. The proposal from Singapore and other Members focused on issues of primary interest to 
Argentina.  
20.108.   Argentina considered that the discussion should take place within the framework of the 
Work Programme, and that Members  should also bear in mind the systemic aspects , as highlighted 
by other delegations . However, the development of E -Commerce was not going to wait for the 
WTO, so the multilateral trading system needed to be involved and engaged in this issue, and  to 
that e nd E-Commerce should be dealt with within the Organization.  
20.109.   The delegate of China  thanked delegations for their comments; this had been an 
interesting interaction , which demonstrated that there was an improved awareness of the 
important role that E -Commerc e could play in the current era. It had also been an opportunity to 
listen to the priorities and concerns identified by the delegations that had intervened in the current 
discussion. The number of speakers, almost 30, demonstrated by itself that all Member s had a 
keen interest in the various issues of E -Commerce, and that E -Commerce was hi ghly relevant in 
today's world.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 55 - 
 
  20.110.   China also welcomed the wide support expressed during the interventions for the 
Development Dimension of E -Commerce. Statements made by som e developing and LDC  Members 
served to pave the way for future work in the WTO on E -Commerce, and revealed that 
development was a specific topic that needed to be considered before moving  ahead towards any 
possible pragmatic progress at MC11.  
20.111.   South Africa and Uganda's statements on behalf of  the African Group and the 
LDCs Group, respectively, had highlighted the strong eagerness to listen to more experiences or 
policies and practices currently avail able among  other Members. In China' s view, that exchange of  
ideas and best practices , as well as any possible information with regard to the development of 
E-Commerce , was crucial as it would help Members to identify a possible landing zone of common 
interests and, consequently, find a possible way ahead  in the le ad up to MC1 1. 
20.112.   In this vein, China would propose that, if possible, the incoming CTG  Chair task the 
Secretariat to conduct some technical assignments, namely to sort out and consolidate the points 
made by today's speakers and, in particular, the specific r equests and points made by the 
developing countries and the LDCs. China also proposed that the CTG  Chair organize informal 
discussions and information -sharing exercises to enable all Members to have a better 
understanding of the state of play of E -Commerce  in different countries and to further enrich the 
ongoing discussions.  
20.113.   She thanked delegations for their comments and questions on China and Pakistan's 
proposal , whose purpose was to reignite discussions on E -Commerce. China was ready to explore 
the detail s of that proposal further with any interest ed Member. With regard to China's experience, 
she recalled that China had established 13  pilot zones to develop E -Commerce but that there were 
also big companies, as well as SMEs enterprises , which were  dealing a nd operating in an 
E-Commerce  environment . These had been very innovative in their practices and business 
operations. China's experience demonstrated that the active and enthusiastic participation of all 
stakeholders was valuable and effective for the E -Commerce environment. China remained 
engaged in communicating and interacting with all Members in the WTO, at the General Council , at 
the CTG, or in any subsidiary body.  
20.114.   The Chairperson  indicated that the discussion had demonstrated a substantive interest in  
E-Commerce, that several ideas had been mentioned to continue discussions, including experience 
sharing, and the scope of the issue, and particularly that Members should keep in mind the 
development dimension in any discussion. He had taken note of China' s ideas and would conv ey 
these to the incoming CTG Chair.  
20.115.   He also encouraged the proponents to take note of the ideas that had been mentioned 
during the meeting and to engage with other interested Members. He proposed that the Council 
take note of the stat ements made and revert to th is subject at the next meeting.  
20.116.   The Council so agreed . 
21  OTHER BUSINESS  
21.1.   The Chairperson  recalled that, at the start of the meeting, two  delegations had requested 
the inclusion of certain issues under the agenda item "Other Busines s". 
21.1  Pakistan – Closure of Corridors and Transit – Request from Afghanistan  
21.2.   The Chairperson  invited Afghanistan to report on Pakistan's closure of corridors and transit.  
21.3.   The delegate of Afghanistan  stated that , on 17  February  2017, Pakistan had unilaterally  
closed the entry points to Afghanistan at the Durand Line for all trade and transit. The closu re had 
been maintained until 21  March  2017. As a result, Afghan exporters had been prevented from 
shipping any goods destined to be released for consumption in P akistan. Similarly, they could not 
export any goods to other countries that had to transit through the territory of Pakistan. By the 
same token, imports from Pakistan to Afghanistan had not reached Afghanistan. The same was 
true for goods from other countr ies that had to transit through Pakistan in order to reach 
Afghanistan.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 56 - 
 
  21.4.   The measures taken by Pakistan at the entry points to Afghanistan at the Durand Line 
border were tantamount to a total ban on trade between the two  countries. Afghanistan 
considered th at these measures nullified the benefits accruing to Afghanistan under the provisions 
of Article  I:1, Article  V:2, and Article  XI:1 of GATT  1994. The total import value from Paki stan to 
Afghanistan during 2015 -2016 was $876  million. The total export value from Afghanistan to 
Pakistan during 2015 -2016 was $235  million. Regarding international transit, on average , during 
2015-2016, a total of 3,400  trucks had transited goods from Afghanistan through Pakistan. 
Accordingly, the consequences of closing the entry  points at the Durand Line were huge. After 
almost one  week, some 2,434  trucks had been blocked on both the Afghanistan and Pakistan sides 
of those entry points. Around 308  trucks, which had to tran sit through Pakistan to a third  country, 
had also been blo cked. When the entry points at the Durand Line border had been  opened, it had 
taken around 11  days for a return to a normal clearance of goods, although there still existed 
many unjustifiable measures imposed on  Afghanistan's trucks wishing to transit thro ugh Pakistan. 
As a result, Afghan exporters and carriers had suffered enormous economic losses due to 
demurrage costs for stocking perishable goods, as well as a loss of those products. The total value 
of exports from Afghanistan that had been banned due t o the blockage of entry points at the 
Durand Line had been estimated at $6  million. Based on the reports from the Afghanistan 
Chamber of Commerce and Industries (ACCI), Afghan traders had suffered a total loss of 
$80-90 million as a result of paying demurr age fees and damage caused to perishable goods.  
21.5.   Moreover, closing the entry points at the Durand Line had had adverse effects on the entire 
economy and population of Afghanistan. Within a few days, there had been shortages of basic 
goods, pushing their pri ces to levels where many Afghans could no longer afford them. 
Afghanistan was a least developed country, and its development depended, to a large extent, on 
its participation in international trade. Enhancing that participation was one of the main goals of  
the Afghanistan government. Access to the markets of other countries was a prerequisite for 
achieving that goal. Afghanistan was also a landlocked country, and freedom of transit through the 
territory of neighbouring  countries, in particular those having access to the sea, was a crucial 
condition for Afghanistan to be able to participate in international trade. Afghanistan was in a 
particularly vulnerable state as a least developed and a landlocked country. Therefore, denial of 
access to the markets of oth er countries and of the freedom of transit through neighbouring  
countries was prone to put the country's development into jeopardy. In short, the measure was 
contrary to the principles of international trade and was unfair. Securing the respect of such rig hts 
had been one of the main concerns that motivated Afghanistan's decision to join the WTO. The 
Government of Afghanistan hoped that Pakistan would accept to honour  its corresponding 
obligations as a Member state of the WTO.  
21.6.   The delegate of Pakistan  stated that his delegation had taken note of the matter raised by 
Afghanistan, and that Pakistan's valued neighbour was its third -largest trading partner. Their latest 
information, which had been verified by the Honourable Excellency, was that the trade between  
Pakistan and Afghanistan was again open. However, his delegation would check with Capital and 
revert back to Afghanistan on a bilateral basis  to address these concerns.  
21.7.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Coun cil 
take note of the statements made.  
21.8.   The Council so agreed . 
21.2  United States – Certain Trade Restrictive and Distorting Practices – Request from 
China  
21.9.   The Chairperson  recalled that China had requested to include under "Other Business" , 
"Certain T rade-Restric tive and Distorting Practices" adopted by the US.  
21.10.   The delegate of China  wished to raise three  specific trade -restrictive and distorting 
practices by the US which were v ery, very important for China. Before that, his delegat ion would 
like to note the USTR  2017 President Trade Policy Agenda , which had recently been submitted to 
the US  Congress. It had sent troubling signals on the issue of US commitments to its international 
obligations, and to sa feguarding the authority of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanis m, as well 
as its adherence to the cause of multilateralism. China was conce rned about the trajectory of 
US trade policies and its potential impact on the global economy and international trade.  G/C/M/128  
 
- 57 - 
 
  21.11.   The three  specific issues he wished to raise were : the US  Seafood Import Monitoring 
Program; the abuse of trade remedy measures; and the failure to implement the obligation under 
Article  15 of China's Accession Protocol to stop using "surrogate country" methodology in 
anti-dumping investigation s. China had already raised these concerns in many other fora. 
However, the issues had not yet been addressed by the US  delegation.  
21.12.   Regarding the US  Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP), published by the 
US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in February  2016, C hina believed that it was 
problematic because the measure had not ever been notified to any of the WTO  Committees. The 
measure's requirements related to traceability and catch certification and were being applied only 
to imported fish and fish products , which was inconsistent with the WTO  principle of 
non-discrimination. It was also applicable to all imported aquatic products regardless of their risk 
levels and, therefore, it lacked scientific justification. The excessive and burdensome information 
and data  requirements also constituted an unnecessary burden to international trade.  
21.13.   Regarding trade remedy measures, China was very concerned about the US  abuse of trade 
remedy measures, including in respect of subsidy investigations, the designation of public bo dies, 
the selection of outside benchmark s, the identification of specificity of a subsidy and, in respect of 
anti-dumping investigations, the issue of a separate rate, the abuse of adverse available facts, and 
the addition of the VAT  export rebate differen tial rates to the dumping margin in anti -dumping 
investigations. China urged the US to fulfil its WTO  obligations in trade remedy investigations, to 
increase transparency , and to end the above -mentioned practices.  
21.14.   Article  15 of China's Accession Protocol w as a sunset clause for the "surrogate country" 
methodologies in anti -dumping investigations against Chinese imports, i.e.  after 
11 December  2016, Members could not use "surrogate country" methodologies in anti -dumping 
investigation s against Chinese compani es. It had been an agreement between China and the US 
16 years ago. It had also been a promise made by the US to China. The deadline had been clearly 
set. The words had been written in black and white. Sixteen  years ago, the US  negotiators had 
also deliver ed a clear statement in Congress.  
21.15.   Chinese companies had waited 15  years for the "sunset". All they were asking for was for 
the US to honour its promise. China emphasized that it was a legal issue, and therefore, it should 
not be politicized. It was an inte rnational obligation, so it should not be circumvented by referring 
to domestic laws. It had nothing to do with the so -called "market economy status" (MES), so the 
US should not use the "MES" requirement in its domestic laws as an excuse to stop honouring its 
international obligation s. China urged the US to respect its obligations under Article  15 of China's 
Accession Protocol and to stop using "surrogate country" methodologies in anti -dumping 
investigations against Chinese companies , and to do so  in a time ly manner.  
21.16.   The delegate of the United States  considered it important to respect the rules of procedure 
by addressing substantive issues as regular agenda items, in part to allow all Members of the 
Council advance notice of the issues being raised. However,  as was now appearing to be a trend, 
China had skirted the established rules of procedure to place substantive matters under "Other 
Business", a trend that the US found unacceptable. China had had ample time to request a regular 
agenda item to raise its co ncerns, none of which were new or late breaking. It was inappropriate 
that China chose to outline its concerns with the US  Seafood Import Monitoring Program under 
"Other Business". Those concerns should have been raised when the issue had been up for 
discussion under the regular agenda.  
21.17.   Yet even when a Member requested for an item to be included on the agenda under "Other 
Business", the rules of procedure dictated that the requesting Member should provide the other 
Members directly concerned, whenever possi ble, with advance notice of the items intended to be 
raised under "Other Business". Her delegation had been given no such advance notice. She trusted 
that China would be more respectful of the Council's rules in the future.  
21.18.   With respect to the issue on Art icle XV of China's Protocol of Accession, the US did not 
consider the Council to be the appropriate forum to discuss a matter currently before the DSB. The 
US had, however, covered the issue in great detail in the DSB. In that forum, her delegation had 
explained to Members that the expiration of a single provision of China's Protocol of Accession to 
the WTO did not require Members to grant China market economy status, or to discontinue a G/C/M/128  
 
- 58 - 
 
  non-market economy methodology. Rather, the WTO  Agreements permitted M embers to treat 
China as a non -market economy for as long as the facts on the ground showed that this was the 
case. She would refer all Members of the Council to the full statement made by the US in the DSB, 
which she would be happy to provide, in hard cop y, to interested Members.  
21.19.   The delegate of Japan  stated that , as his delegation had explained at the last 
DSB meeting, regarding anti -dumping methodology taken by China, Japan was of the view that 
the WTO  Agreement, including China's Accession Protocol, con tinued to allow WTO  Members to use 
a methodology not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or cost in China.  
21.20.   The Chairperson  thanked delegations for their interventions and proposed that the Council 
take note of the statements made.  
21.21.   The Council  so agreed . 
21.3  Date of the next meeting  
21.22.   The Chairperson  informed the Council that the next meeting of the Council had b een 
scheduled to take place on 4 and 5  July. Confirmation of the date would depend on the incoming 
Chair. Delegations would be informed at t he appropriate time of the exact date of the meeting and 
of the corresponding deadline for submitting items. He concluded by expressing his gratitude for 
the honour of having again been invited to Chair the Council.  
21.23.   With regard to the closure of the CTG  Agenda, he reminded delegations that, according to 
the Rules of Procedure, meetings of WTO  bodies were convened by a meeting notice (Airgram) 
issued not less than ten  calendar days prior to the date set for the meeting. The agenda itself 
therefore closed one  WTO working day prior to circulation of the mee ting notice; in other words, 
11 calendar days before the date set for the meeting (or, if the date fell on a weekend, the 
previous Friday).  
21.24.   The meeting was closed . 
__________