WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/SG/W/219 
10 November 2011 
 (11-5789) 
Committee on Safeguards Original:   Spanish 
  
 
STATEMENT BY THE DELEGATION OF COLOMBIA 
 
(Regarding the Request under Article 13.1(b) of the 
Agreement on Safeguards) 
 
 
 The following statement was made by the dele gation of Colombia at the meeting held on 
27 October 2011 under agenda item D - Request under Article 13.1(b) of the Agreement on 
Safeguards.  
_______________ 
 
 
I. REQUEST AND INTEREST 
 Colombia once again requests that the Comm ittee, pursuant to Article 13.1(b) of the 
Agreement on Safeguards, find whether or not th e procedural requirements set forth in the 
Agreement, in particular that under Article 12 con cerning the need to hold prior consultations, were 
complied with in connection with the proce dure undertaken by Ecuador pertaining to the 
establishment of a definitive safeguard measure on goods classified under tariff subheading 7007.21.00.00 (glass windshields).  The measure was imposed on 11 October 2010 and 
notified on 15 October 2010, as set out in doc ument G/SG/N/8/ECU/3 - G/SG/N/10/ECU/4 of 
21 October 2010.  Colombia also reiterates its request that the Co mmittee report its findings to the 
Council for Trade in Goods.   Colombia recognizes and takes into considerati on Members' right to use the instruments and 
procedures expressly established under the Agreemen ts, but wishes to take this opportunity to 
reaffirm its systemic interest in protecting the ins titutional framework and rules of this Organization. 
 
 Colombia notes with concern the increased number of trade defence measures taken by 
Ecuador and wonders whether this is not an expression of the protectionist tendencies that have 
emerged recently.  We hereby call for any measur es adopted to be truly in consonance with the 
reasons for which they were established and to meet  the procedural requirements regarding which all 
Members of this Organization have undertaken commitments.  The measure to which our request 
refers failed to comply with the procedural requi rements and moreover is not in full compliance with 
the substantive requirements governing its imposition.  However, given that Article 13.1(b) refers 
only to procedural aspects, we will focus on this point.  II. RELEVANT FACTS 
(a) With a view to establishing the legal basi s for the imposition of a safeguard measure, on 
8 March 2010 Ecuador initiated an investigation concerning im ports of goods classified under 
NANDINA subheading 7007.21.00 ("Of size and shap e suitable for incorporation in vehicles, 
aircraft, spacecraft or vessels") to determine wh ether such imports had caused or threatened to 
cause serious injury to the domestic industry prod ucing like or directly competitive products. G/SG/W/219 
Page 2  
 
  (b) On 11 October 2010, Ecuador ordered the applica tion for a period of three calendar years of a 
definitive safeguard measure consisting of "an additional specific duty of US$12.72 on 
imports of windshields classified under NANDINA national import tariff 
subheading 7007.21.00.00". 
 
(c) On 15 October 2010, following the imposition of  this safeguard, Ecuador notified the WTO 
of its finding of serious injury or threat ther eof caused by increased impor ts.  This notification 
is set forth in document G/SG/N/8/ECU/3 - G/SG/N/10/ECU/4. 
 (d) On 25 October 2010, after the imposition of the definitive measure, Ecuador held 
consultations with Colombia to discuss the safeguard.  A further meeting was held on 
23 November 2010.  At neither of these meeti ngs, which we reiterate were held after the 
imposition of the measure, did Ecuador seek to re view the information on the application of 
the safeguard or to exchange views on an agreement on any adequate means of 
trade compensation for the measure, with a view  to reaching an understanding on ways to 
achieve the objective set out in Article 8.1 of the Agreement on Safeguards. 
 (e) At neither of the two meetings, which were  held after the imposition of the measure, was 
there an exchange of views on this measure or a review of the pertinent information, such as, 
inter alia , evidence of serious injury or threat ther eof caused by increased imports, the precise 
description of the product involved and the pr oposed measure, the proposed date of 
introduction of the measure, its expected duration and the timetable for progressive 
liberalization, in accordance with Article  12.3 of the Agreement on Safeguards. 
 
III. SHORTCOMINGS IN THE PROCEDURE 
 Ecuador's failure to hold consultations prior to  imposing the safeguard is a flagrant violation 
of the procedure established in Article 12 of the Agreement on Safeguards. 
  As noted by the Panel in Korea – Dairy , consultations must take place before a safeguard 
measure is applied, i.e. when it is still simply a proposal.
1  This did not happen in this case since the 
consultations with Colombia were held af ter the imposition of the definitive safeguard. 
 
 Ecuador also failed to provide "adequate opportunity" for prior c onsultations in so far as the 
information on the finding of the existence of seri ous injury or threat thereof caused by increased 
imports was not notified prior to the imposition of th e definitive safeguard, whic h is inconsistent with 
Article 12.2 of the Agreement on Safeguards.  
 In fact, as noted in the Report of the Appellate Body in US – Wheat Gluten
2, the information 
referred to in Article 12.2 of the Agreement on Safe guards, i.e. the evidence of serious injury, should 
have been provided prior to hol ding consultations and, in any case, before the imposition of the 
definitive safeguard, which did not happen, t hus further affecting Colombia's rights. 
  Ecuador's actions in this process, as detaile d above, violate the international commitments 
undertaken by this country under the GATT 1994 a nd its covered agreements , in particular the 
Agreement on Safeguards.   In view of the foregoing, we categorically insi st on our request, so that the Committee carries 
out the mandate assigned to it by Members in Artic le 13.1(b) of the Agreement on Safeguards and 
reports without delay on this situa tion to the Council for Trade in Goods. 
                                                      
1 Report of the Panel in Korea – Dairy  (DS98), paragraph 7.147. 
2 Report of the Appellate Body in US – Wheat Gluten  (DS166), paragraph 133.  G/SG/W/219 
 Page 3 
 
 
   We will continue to make every effort, at both bilateral and multilateral levels, to ensure that 
Ecuador terminates this measure, which is seriously affecting our domestic industry and which, as has 
been illustrated, was imposed in disregard of the procedure and the requirements laid down in the 
Agreement.  
 Colombia and Ecuador are friendly, neighbouring countries, bound by strong ties that they 
constantly strive to deepen.  We therefore seek today both to  maintain our good relations with 
Ecuador and to protect our industry - two objectives which are not necessarily incompatible.   We hereby request that this statement be inco rporated in full in the minutes of this meeting. 
 
__________