RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/COMTD/M/61 
9 February 2007 
 (07-0546) 
Committee on Trade and Development 
Sixty-First Session  
 
  
NOTE ON THE MEETIN G OF 28 NOVEMBER 2006 
 
Chairman:  Mr. Faizel Ismail (South Africa)  
  
A.
 ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ........................................................................................................2  
B. OBSERVERS ............................................................................................................................... ..2 
(i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers ...............................................................................2  
(ii) Further consideration of the requests for observer status by the League of Arab 
States, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Gulf 
Organization for Industrial Consulting, the Organisation Internationale de la 
Francophonie, the Common Fund for Commodities, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) and th e Groupe de la Banque Africaine de 
Développement.................................................................................................................. ..........3
 
C. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE .......................................................................3  
- COMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON THE AGREEMENT ON 
TRADE IN GOODS OF THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC 
COOPERATION BETWEEN THE ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH EAST ASIAN NATIONS 
(ASEAN)  AND THE PEOPLE 'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/COMTD/51/A DD.2) ..........................3  
- COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES ON THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON 
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA , THE PROTOCOL TO AMEND THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON 
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA , AND THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN GOODS OF THE 
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN 
ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/COMTD/51/A DD.3).............................3  
- COMMUNICATION FROM JAPAN ON THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON 
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN GOODS OF THE 
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN 
ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/COMTD/51/A DD.4).............................3  
- COMMUNICATION FROM BRAZIL ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT/COMTD//57/A DD.1) .............4  
- COMMUNICATION FROM CHINA ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT/COMTD/57/A DD.2) ..............4  
- COMMUNICATION FROM INDIA ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT//COMTD/57/A DD.3) .............4  WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 2  
 
  -
 COMMUNICATION FROM PAKISTAN ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT/COMTD/57/A DD.4) ..............4  
- COMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 
SUBMITTED BY BRAZIL , CHINA , INDIA AND PAKISTAN ON THE REVISED 
GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
(WT/COMTD/57/A DD.5) ...........................................................................................................4  
- PROTOCOL ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE EAST AFRICAN CUSTOMS UNION 
(WT/COMTD/N/14/A DD.1 AND WT/COMTD/25/A DD.1) ........................................................9  
D. DECLINING TERMS OF TRADE FOR PRIMARY COMMODITIES , AND ITS IMPLICATION TO 
TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT OF PRIMARY COMMODITY EXPORTING COUNTRIES ....................12  
E. PARAGRAPH 51 OF THE DOHA DECLARATION ON IDENTIFYING AND DEBATING 
DEVELOPMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE NEGOTIATIONS , IN ORDER TO HELP ACHIEVE THE 
OBJECTIVE OF HAVING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATELY REFLECTED .............14  
F. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HONG KONG DECISION ON 
DUTY-FREE AND QUOTA -FREE MARKET ACCESS FOR LEAST -DEVELOPED 
COUNTRIES ............................................................................................................................... .15 
G. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ..........................................................................................................18  
H. TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND TRAINING ..............................................................................19  
- TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING PLAN 2007  (WT/COMTD/W/151  AND 
WT/COMTD/W/151/C ORR.1)..................................................................................................19  
I. DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT (WT/COMTD/W/155) .....................................................................21  
J. OTHER BUSINESS ......................................................................................................................22  
 
 A. A
DOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The Chairman  said that the draft agenda for the 61st Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development (CTD) was contained in document WTO/AIR/2929/Rev.1 issued on 
22 November 2006.  He said that he wished to raise a matter under "Other Business" concerning a recommendation that had recently been made by  the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
(CRTA) on a common format for the notification of regional trade agreements (RTAs). 
2. The agenda was adopted
 as amended. 
B. OBSERVERS  
(i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers 
3. The Chairman  recalled that at previous sessions of the CTD, Members agreed to invite a 
number of intergovernmental organizations on an ad  hoc, meeting-by-meeting basis.  These included 
the Arab Maghreb Union (AMU), the Common Fund for Commodities (CFC), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), th e Economic Cooperation Organisation (ECO), the 
Inter-Arab Investment Guarantee Corporation, th e Islamic Development Bank (IDB), the African 
Union (AU), the Organisation of the Islamic Confer ence (OIC), the South Centre, the Pacific Islands 
Forum, the United Nations Environment Progra mme (UNEP), the West African Economic and 
Monetary Union (WAEMU) and the World Intellectua l Property Organization (WIPO).  He said that, 
following the decision taken at the previous meeti ng of the Committee, the organizations had been  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 3 
 
 
  invited to the present meeting.  He proposed that the organizations be invited to the next formal 
meeting of the CTD. 
4. It was so agreed . 
(ii) Further consideration of the requests for observer status by the League of Arab States, the 
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Gulf Organization for 
Industrial Consulting, the Organisation Int ernationale de la Francophonie, the Common 
Fund for Commodities, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) and the Groupe de la Banque Africaine de Développement 
5. The Chairman
 said that at previous meetings, the Committee had had before it a number of 
requests for observer status.  He said that if there was no change in positions to extend observer status 
to any of those applicants, then the Committee would take note and would revert to those requests at 
the next meeting.   
6. It was so agreed . 
C. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE  
- C OMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON THE AGREEMENT ON 
TRADE IN GOODS OF THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC 
COOPERATION BETWEEN THE ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH EAST ASIAN NATIONS 
(ASEAN)  AND THE PEOPLE 'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/COMTD/51/A DD.2) 
- C OMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES ON THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON 
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA , THE PROTOCOL TO AMEND THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON 
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA , AND THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN GOODS OF THE 
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN 
ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/COMTD/51/A DD.3) 
- C OMMUNICATION FROM JAPAN ON THE FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON 
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S 
REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN GOODS OF THE 
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COOPERATION BETWEEN 
ASEAN  AND THE PEOPLE 'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/COMTD/51/A DD.4) 
7. The Chairman  said that communications from the European Communities (EC), the 
United States (US) and Japan raising questions on the notifications made by ASEAN and China in 
2005 had been circulated as documents WT/COMTD/ 51/Add.2, Add.3 and Add.4 respectively.  He 
recalled that he had informed the Committee at its 58th Session on 6 July 2006 that the responses from 
ASEAN and China had been submitted bilaterally to each of the three Members that had raised 
questions.  A number of delegations had then indicated  that they wished to see all the responses, and 
were of the view that the responses should be circul ated as a CTD document.  It had been agreed that 
he would consult with the concer ned delegations, and would report back to the CTD at the present 
meeting.  He said that his consultations had not yiel ded any concrete results as yet, and suggested that 
he continue consulting with the c oncerned delegations with a view to  reporting to the CTD at its next 
meeting in early 2007.  
8. It was so agreed .  WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 4  
 
  - C
OMMUNICATION FROM BRAZIL ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT/COMTD//57/A DD.1) 
- C OMMUNICATION FROM CHINA ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT/COMTD/57/A DD.2) 
- C OMMUNICATION FROM INDIA ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT//COMTD/57/A DD.3) 
- C OMMUNICATION FROM PAKISTAN ON THE REVISED GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF 
PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (WT/COMTD/57/A DD.4) 
- C OMMUNICATION FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 
SUBMITTED BY BRAZIL , CHINA , INDIA AND PAKISTAN ON THE REVISED 
GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
(WT/COMTD/57/A DD.5) 
9. The Chairman  recalled that the EC had notified its revised Generalized System of Preferences 
(GSP) scheme at the 57th Session of the CTD on 11 May 2006.  Communications raising questions on 
the EC's revised GSP scheme had been received from Brazil, China, India and Pakistan and were 
circulated in documents WT/COMTD/57/Add.1 to Add.4 respectively.  The EC's responses to the 
questions were circulated in document WT/COMTD/57/Add.5.  He sai d that that it had been agreed at 
the last meeting of the CTD that the item would re main on the agenda for the present meeting.  He 
inquired whether any Member wished to take the floor. 
10. The representative of Brazil  said that his delegation had for some time been raising questions 
and concerns regarding transparency in the EC's  GSP scheme and on the scheme's compliance with 
the terms of the Enabling Clause.  Though his delega tion had recently met with the EC delegation, 
concerns still remained.  More than a year and a half had passed since his delegation had first asked 
the EC in writing for data on preferential imports un der its GSP scheme, but so far no data had been 
received.  He asked the representative of the EC to clarify to Members what was the correct procedure 
to obtain updated information on import data on a re gular basis, and remarked that it would be most 
useful if a simplified procedure to obtain import data under the EC's GSP scheme was put in place.  
He said that his delegation had been told that it could not be provided with  preferential import data 
concerning countries other than Brazil, and asked what  was the justification for treating such data as 
sensitive.  He added that, although GSP systems should be non-discriminatory, he was under the 
impression that the "objective criteria" of the EC's GSP scheme were in fact designed to fit a set of 
countries that had been chosen beforehand.  He requ ested that this item rema in on the agenda for the 
next meeting of the CTD. 
11. The representative of Pakistan  thanked the EC for arranging an informal meeting with its 
Brussels GSP officials regarding questions posed by Brazil, China, India and Pakistan on the 
notification of its revised GSP scheme.  She said th at the meeting had allowed a candid exchange of 
views, and that a number of points that had remain ed unclear in the written responses had been raised 
and answers had been received.  It was noted from the explanations that the EC had tailored the 
special incentive arrangement fo r sustainable development and good governance ("GSP-plus") for 
certain specific countries.  It was also acknowledged by the EC officials that while the general scheme 
that applied to all eligible countries was non-r eciprocal, the GSP-plus scheme was a special 
arrangement.  She said that EC officials had undersco red that no country was obliged to seek access to 
the GSP-plus, and that it was reciprocal to the extent  that countries wanting to use it were obligated to 
ratify and implement certain core human a nd labour UN/ILO conventions, as well as some 
environment and governance principles.  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 5 
 
 
  12. The representative of Pakistan said that her de legation wanted to follow up with additional 
questions to further clarify its understanding of the scheme:   
"Question 1 :  Could the EC explain the apparent coincidence between the large 
number of recipients under the former Dr ug Arrangement Scheme and the countries 
that also benefit from the special incentive arrangement?   
Question 2 :  Pakistan notes the assertion of the EC that its scheme is 'non-reciprocal'.  
What is the significance of Article 9.2(b) of Regulation 980/2005?  Is Pakistan correct to read this provision as requiring countries to amend their constitutions if 
these are incompatible with any 'missing conventions'? 
Question 3 :  The EC has referred to the World Bank criteria of vulnerability.  
However, the EC has also included the cr iterion of the percentage of GSP-covered 
exports.  Is the criterion based on any crite ria developed outside the EC?  Do any 
other development agencies or GSP donors u se GSP-covered exports as a measure to 
assess development, financial or trade needs? 
Question 4 :  Is Pakistan correct to read Article 10 of Regulation 980/2005 as limiting 
requests for inclusion only to those countries that have ratified the stated conventions 
by 31 October 2005?  If this is so, how does th e EC justify its statement that it did not 
adopt a 'closed list' approach?  In this re gard, Pakistan notes that the EC published the 
Regulation in June 2005, four months before the deadline of 31 October 2005. 
Question 5 :  If the EC enacted Article 9.2 to assist countries that would otherwise 
benefit but face constitutional impediments that prevent them from ratifying 'missing' 
conventions, why did the EC not consider extending the deadline to allow other 
potential beneficiaries to ratify the necessary conventions?   
Question 6 :  Would Pakistan be correct in reading Article 9.2 as a provision to 
accommodate those countries that the EC had pre-selected as beneficiaries, but that 
did not immediately qualify under Article 9.1?" 
13. The representative of the United States
 said that her delegation be lieved that the procedural 
elements of transparency in the WTO should be reco gnized by all Members.  The issues discussed in 
the CTD were issues of interest to all Members,  and responses to questions circulated in a CTD 
document should, therefore, also be circulated as a CTD document.  This was an established 
institutional principle that should not be app lied in an ad hoc or inconsistent manner. 
14. The representative of China  thanked the EC for organizing informal consultations prior to the 
present meeting, but noted that his delegation still ha d concerns relating to transparency in the EC's 
GSP scheme as well as the new special incentive arrange ment.  He said that under the previous EC's 
GSP scheme, China had applied to benefit from the special incentive arrangement for tropical 
products.  An EC expert evaluation group had visite d China three times and great efforts had been 
made by China's Ministries to comply with requ ests for information from the evaluation group.  He 
said that in 2002 the expert evaluation group is sued a report where it was found that China's 
application complied with the conditions to benefit from the special incentive arrangement for tropical 
products, and recommended that the EC offer China su ch incentives.  However, China did not receive 
any feedback or further information from the EC on this issue.  He said that his delegation had now 
received information that the previous applicati on under the former GSP scheme was no longer valid, 
and that China was not eligible to benefit from any special incentive arrangement.  He remarked that, 
although the EC scheme was non-reciprocal, in case of changes to the GSP scheme, due respect WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 6  
 
  should be paid to past applications that were found to be in conformity with special incentive 
arrangements.  He said that this item should rema in on the agenda for the next CTD meeting.   
15. The representative of India
 said that even after the meeting that was convened by the EC with 
the participation of experts from Brussels, his dele gation was still not satisfied with the responses that 
had been provided on the EC's GSP scheme and the G SP-plus.  Like Brazil, he  said that his delegation 
was increasingly convinced that the EC had selected  countries in advance of setting out the objective 
criteria for participation, and ha d developed the criteria to fit the selected countries.  In his 
understanding, this did not fit the principle containe d in various dispute settle ment panel reports that 
GSP schemes should be non-discriminatory.  He joined  the delegate of Brazil in his request for an 
explanation on the sensitivities involved in sharing data on imports benefiting from the GSP scheme.  
He also asked the US delegation whether the US p ublished, or was required to publish, data on all 
countries that were receiving preferences under the G SP scheme.  The representative of India also 
expressed concern that the position adopted by th e EC delegation regarding transparency and 
circulation of answers to questions in the CTD with  respect to the EC's GSP scheme was inconsistent 
with the position adopted in the context of the A SEAN-China notifications, which were also being 
considered by the Committee.  He said that this item should remain on the agenda for the next CTD 
meeting.   
16. The representative of the European Communities  recalled that the EC's revised GSP scheme 
had been notified in March 2006 and had been presente d to the CTD at its meeting in May 2006.  The 
EC had responded to questions posed by four delegations, and the cont ent of this exchange had been 
distributed in the documents mentioned on the agenda for the meeting.  The CTD continued 
discussions of the EC notification at the meetings of July and October 2006.  He said that, taking 
advantage of the presence of experts from Brussels, the EC delegation had also met informally with 
the four delegations concerned.  This was a useful  exercise in that it allowed discussions to go into 
more detail than was feasible in the formal se tting of the CTD.  The discussion also offered an 
opportunity for an open and frank exchange on the policy orientations that underpinned the GSP 
regime.  He noted that Pakistan  had submitted additional questions, and said that his delegation would 
need time to study them before providing responses. 
17. He said that the EC delegation had approached the notification exercise in a spirit of full 
transparency and accordingly had responded to the ques tions and issues that had been raised by other 
Members of the WTO.  He said that he was conf ident about the positive contribution that the EC's 
GSP scheme could make to the de velopment of the developing countri es and LDC partners of the EC.  
Preferences under the GSP benefited around 180 c ountries and covered some 7,200 tariff lines where 
Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) duties would otherwise a pply.  He anticipated that for 2006 – the first 
year of operation of the current scheme – the EC's GSP scheme would continue to be the most widely 
used of all developed country GSP systems.  He noted that past reviews in the WTO of the LDC-specific component of the regime – Everythi ng But Arms (EBA), whic h had been carried over 
from the previous GSP arrangement – had served to demonstrate the extent of the preferential access 
that the EC made available to all least-developed countries (LDCs).  In 2005, 99.4 per cent of EC tariff lines were covered by EBA for products from LDCs. 
18. Regarding the GSP-plus arrangement, the represen tative of the EC said the GSP-plus should 
not be allowed to obscure the subs tantial trade benefits for developi ng countries that flowed from the 
core GSP arrangement.  He said that the GSP-plus  provided some additional tariff preferences to 
vulnerable developing countries as an incentive for them to accept and implement a number of 
important international c onventions in the field of human and labour rights, the environment and good 
governance.  Taken together in an integral manne r, these instruments contributed to the goal of 
sustainable development shared by all Members.  He said that the beneficiaries of GSP-plus had all applied to be covered by this element of the regime .  They were not obliged to do so.  Their requests 
had then been reviewed against the objective and tran sparent criteria set out in the GSP Regulation.  If  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 7 
 
 
  the GSP-plus applicants proved unable to follow through on implementation, they would stand to lose 
the additional trade preferences, and would revert to the standard GSP.  
19. He said that the EC delegation was of the view that the review exercise in the CTD should not 
be prolonged indefinitely.  His de legation had worked to respond to the various requests for additional 
information and explanation that had been received from Members, and would continue to work on a 
number of factual points, including issues concerning trade data.  In this regard, his delegation had 
already informed Members of its readiness to provi de information on a bilateral basis to individual 
beneficiary countries.  He explained that the G SP Regulation would apply for three years, and was 
already well into its first year of application.  Th e law of diminishing returns would soon start to limit 
the value of the transparency pro cess in the CTD.  He said that if , at the end of this exhaustive 
questions and answers process, any individual Member  remained unhappy with particular aspects of 
the regime, this would effectively indicate underlying differences in policy appreciation.  Such differences of view would not be resolved thro ugh a transparency exercise, or through more 
questions.  
20. The representative of the EC said that in the c ontext of the informal meeting that had been 
held with certain delegations, th ese delegations had been informed about the new products of their 
interest that had been introduced in the GSP.  He noted that the EC was always open to meet with the 
GSP beneficiary countries and provide further sta tistics on their imports under the GSP scheme, but 
not on imports originating in other GSP benefi ciary countries, as certain GSP beneficiaries had 
requested the EC not to disclose data on their im ports under the GSP scheme to their competitors.  
This, he said, would respect the principle of economic  confidentiality.  He reminded Members that the 
EC's GSP scheme was completely unconditional, but in certain cases the EC had agreed to provide 
further preferences to those countries that had accepte d to pay the price for sustainable development.  
He said that sustainable development had a high cost  for the small and vulnerable countries.  Thus, the 
EC had implemented the GSP-plus arrangement for countries that could prove that they practiced 
sustainable development by adopting certain objectiv e international conventions in the area.  He 
recalled that in 2004 the EC's GSP scheme had been  found not to be in conformity with the WTO's 
rules.  However, the panel also found that the EC could establish a GSP-plus scheme, as long as the 
conditions for benefiting from the scheme were obj ective and that the schem e was accorded to all 
developing country Members in similar conditions .  In reply to the comment made by the 
representative of China, he noted that the speci al scheme for which China had applied had been 
eliminated as a result of the panel's findings.   
21. The representative of the United States
, in reply to the question from the representative of 
India, said that the US provided data on a multilatera l basis.  The data could be found, on a monthly 
basis and for all countries, on the website of the United States International Trade Commission 
(USITC).  Also, since the GSP scheme of the US w as currently under review, the Office of the United 
States Trade Representative (USTR) had prepared sev eral reports for the US Congress which were 
publicly available. 
22. The representative of Brazil  said that his delegation had regularly sent letters to officials in 
the EC's Directorate General for Trade asking for cer tain GSP data, but had never obtained a reply.  
He suggested that the EC submit a document to th e CTD detailing the procedure to obtain GSP data.  
He asked the US representative whether the United States had also received requests from GSP beneficiaries to treat their data as confidential.  He said that if GSP import data were treated 
confidentially under the principle of not revealing information to competitors, the same principle 
could be applied to MFN import data.  He noted that there was a fundamental problem of discrimination and transparency in the actions of the EC.  First, since data on the conditions and 
imports of other Members were not available, it was not possible for a Member to verify that the MFN principle was being respected.  Second, "transpare ncy" for the EC meant that some data could be 
provided from time to time on a selective basis.  He said that there were important differences of WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 8  
 
  perception with regard to the principles that must  guide a GSP scheme and which had not been taken 
into consideration in the current GSP scheme of the EC.  
23. The representative of India
 noted that since the beneficiaries of the US' and the EC's GSP 
schemes were largely the same, it seemed inconsis tent that the beneficiary countries that had 
requested confidential treatment for their GSP data to the EC did not have a problem with the US 
sharing similar data with other countries.  He said th at these inconsistencies made it clear that it was 
necessary to adopt a transparency  mechanism for preferential trad e arrangements similar to that 
agreed in the Negotiating Group on Rules concerni ng RTAs.  Regarding the GSP plus scheme, he 
asked whether there was a list of countries that had applied to benefit from this scheme available in 
the public domain and, if not, why this informa tion could not be shared with other Members.  
24. The representative of Guatemala  said that in the May 2006 meeting of the CTD where the 
EC's GSP scheme was first reviewed, her delegation had noted three elements of the scheme that she thought were important to recall.  First, the no tification by the EC on the GSP scheme, which was 
accompanied by the relevant legal instruments, cont ained sufficient and detailed information.  Second, 
as a beneficiary, Guatemala derived important econo mic and social contributions from the GSP-plus.  
Third, her delegation hoped that the preferences obt ained from the GSP-plus scheme and Guatemala's 
trade relations with the EC could be strengthened through an eventual partnership agreement.  She 
welcomed the initiative of the EC de legation to meet with the delegations that had posed questions on 
the EC's GSP scheme, and she hoped that these meeti ngs would continue so that the review of the 
EC's GSP scheme in the CTD would not be prolonged indefinitely.  
25. The representative of Malaysia
 said that data should not only be looked at from the point of 
view of concerns about competition.  Data could al so be very useful in helping developing countries 
identify ways to take full advantage of preferenc es and increase utilization rates, with the help of 
those developing countries that had benefited the most from the preferences.   Therefore, Members 
should consider the positive aspects that sharing in formation would entail from a development point 
of view. 
26. The representative of the United States , in reply to the questions from India and Brazil, 
clarified that the United States had not received requests to give confidential treatment to certain GSP data.  In any case, the US would not be in a pos ition to treat GSP data as confidential since it was 
legally bound to treat this data as public.  She su ggested that delegations which wanted to see the 
extent of the data provided by the US on its G SP scheme visit the trade database at www.usitc.gov. 
27. The representative of Sri Lanka
 said that one problem with GSP schemes was their low 
utilization rates.  His delegation ha d consulted with the EC on this i ssue and in the consultations it 
was found that large developing countries had utili zation rates of 90 to 97 per cent while a small 
vulnerable country such as Sri Lanka had a utilizatio n rate of only 40 per cent.  These contacts with 
the EC had led to the revision of the EC's GSP scheme and the creation of the GSP-plus scheme, 
where the concerns of countries like Sri Lanka had b een taken into account.  Even with the creation of 
the GSP-plus scheme, however, utilization by Sri Lanka had not expanded dr amatically, though it had 
expanded.  He said that only after the revision of the EC's GSP scheme had small developing 
countries started to really benefit from it, although there were still some problems like the issue of rules of origin. 
28. The representative of Pakistan
 said that all countries should be fully utilizing their shares 
under GSP schemes.  However, this did not mean that other countries should be excluded.  She said 
that this was the issue that had prompted the qu estions and follow-up questions from Pakistan on the 
EC's GSP scheme.  She said that the predecessor of the GSP-plus arrangeme nt had 11 beneficiaries 
while the current arrangement had 15 beneficiaries, including ten of the original beneficiaries.  She 
noted that only Pakistan had been left out due to the new vulnerability criteria that had been  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 9 
 
 
  introduced.  She said that a significant number of poor  people resided in countries like Pakistan which 
was considered to have a relatively large economy, but  was also a low-income country.  In the current 
GSP-plus, only one beneficiary was a low-income country, ten were low-middle income countries and 
three were upper-middle income countries.  She hoped that the EC would look at this aspect when 
revising its GSP scheme. 
29. The representative of th e European Communities  said that the EC had indicated in the written 
answers to Brazil's questions that it would be willing to provide further data to beneficiaries of the 
GSP scheme on a bilateral basis.  This supplemente d the data that was published by Eurostat, which 
was more general.  On the question of utilization, he said that it was surprising that this had been 
raised by Malaysia, a large developing country.  He said that usually the issue of utilization was a 
problem for LDCs and small devel oping countries, not large developi ng countries which were better 
able to integrate their economic processes.  He not ed that part of the rationale for the graduation 
mechanism in the EC's GSP scheme was that some countries had advanced sufficiently so that the 
additional advantage provided by GSP was no longer need ed.  He said that the EC was trying to focus 
its GSP scheme to fit the developmental needs of  the smaller and most vulnerable developing 
countries.  In reply to some of the comments made  by the Indian and Brazilian delegations, he said 
that he was open to a horizontal discussion on transparency and notifications of preferential trade arrangements, but that the review of the EC's notification of its revised GSP scheme was not the 
appropriate context for this discussion. 
30. The representative of Malaysia
 said that countries providing GSP should regard data 
provision as a positive tool.  Data availability w ould allow developing countries to share their 
experiences, and would also allow an improvement in  the utilization rates of those countries that had 
not been able benefit as much as others.  
31. The representative of India  said that it was not his intention to discuss the issue of 
transparency in preferential arra ngements under agenda item C.  This issue had been extensively 
discussed in other fora because of the experience of many developing countries on the lack of 
transparency exhibited in GSP schemes in the past, pa rticularly that of the EC.  He hoped that the EC 
would understand the term "transpa rency" in the same manner as the majority of Members.  He said 
that his delegation did not object to any country havi ng a unilateral preference scheme such as GSP to 
benefit developing countries, but that such schemes  had to comply with WTO rules.  He said the 
current problems with the EC's GSP scheme arose becau se of lack of transparency, either in sharing 
data or in explaining the basis for the scheme.  He  did not, however, question the right of the EC to 
establish a GSP scheme.  
32. The Chairman  proposed that the Committee take note of all interventions, and that the item 
concerning the EC's revised GSP scheme remain  on the CTD's agenda.  He also encouraged 
delegations that continued to have concerns with the EC's GSP scheme  to consult bilaterally with the 
EC delegation.  
33. It was so agreed .  
- P ROTOCOL  ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE EAST AFRICAN CUSTOMS UNION 
(WT/COMTD/N/14/A DD.1 AND WT/COMTD/25/A DD.1) 
34. The Chairman  said that the notification relating to th e Protocol on the Establishment of the 
East African Customs Union (EACU) had been made by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda.  The 
notification had been circulated in document WT/C OMTD/N/14/Add.1, while the text of the Protocol 
had been circulated in document WT/COMTD/25/ Add.1.  He said that he would first allow a 
representative of the notifying Members to make an intervention, after which the floor would be opened for questions and comments. WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 10  
 
  35. The representative of Uganda
, on behalf of the member countries of the East African 
Community (EAC), said that he was pleased to  notify WTO Members of the Protocol on the 
Establishment of the EACU.  He recalled that when  the existence of the EAC was notified in 2000, it 
had been explained that the Treaty provided fo r a progressive process towards the conclusion of a 
Protocol establishing a customs union.  This proc ess had now been successfully completed, and a 
Protocol establishing the EACU had been concluded and ratified by the Partner States of the EAC. 
36. He said that the EAC was a regional econom ic organization whose current membership 
comprised the United Republic of Tanzania, the Repub lic of Kenya and the Republic of Uganda.  The 
Community was a corporate legal entity established by  the Treaty for the Establishment of the EAC, 
which was signed on 30 November 1999 and which came in to force on 7 July 2000.  He noted that the 
Republic of Burundi and the Republic  of Rwanda had applied to join  the EAC, and consideration of 
their applications was underway.  He said that th e vision of the EAC was to have "a prosperous, 
competitive, secure, stable and politically united E ast Africa".  The Mission of the Community was  
"to widen and deepen economic, political, social a nd cultural integration in order to improve the 
quality of life of the people of East Africa through increased competitiveness, value-added 
production, trade and investments".  Therefore, th e Partner States of the EAC were determined to 
strengthen their economic, social, cultural, politi cal, technological and other ties for their rapid, 
balanced and sustainable development, by the establishment of a customs union, common market, 
later a monetary union, and ultimately a political federation.  The establishment of a customs union had been accomplished as an entry poi nt in this integration process. 
37. He said that following four years of negotiations on aspects of trade liberalization and 
development, the Protocol on the Establishmen t of the EACU was concluded and signed on 
2 March 2004.  The Protocol came into force on 1 January 2005, after ratification by the three Partner States.  The customs union was simultaneously  launched in the three Partner States on 
31 December 2004 and had been operational since 1 January 2005.  The Protocol provided, among 
other things, for the handling of the following aspect s of trade, liberalization and development in the 
EAC: 
(a) Customs administration, including harmonized commodity description and coding 
system, harmonized trade information and documentation, and trade facilitation. 
(b) Trade liberalization, including the estab lishment of a common external tariff, 
elimination of internal tariffs, and elimination of non-tariff barriers. 
(c) Trade-related issues, including rules of origin, national treatment, anti-dumping 
measures, subsidies and countervailing measures, safeguard measures, competition, 
re-exportation of goods, and restric tions and prohibitions to trade. 
(d) Export promotion schemes, including duty drawback schemes, manufacturing under 
bond schemes, duty and valu e-added tax remission schemes, and export-processing 
zones. 
(e) Issues of special economic zones such as free ports, including the promotion and 
facilitation of trade goods imported into free ports, provision of storage, warehouses 
and simplified customs procedures, and the establishment of international trade supply chain centres. 
(f) Exemption regimes, including the harmoniza tion of the partner states exemption 
regimes, and the adoption of a harm onized list of exemption regimes.  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 11 
 
 
  38. He said that the Protocol also provided for m easures to address imbalances arising out of the 
establishment of the customs union, for mechanisms for handling trad e arrangements with countries 
and organizations outside the customs union and fo r a common customs law of the Community.  He 
noted that for the complete realization of its ke y provisions, the Protocol had nine annexes which 
could be found on the EAC website.  These Anne xes included provisions for the following:  
Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, Transitional provisions on Tariff 
Reduction; Rules of Origin, Anti-Dumping Meas ures Regulations, Subsid ies and Countervailing 
Measures Regulations, Safeguard Measures Regula tions, Import Operations Regulations, Freeport 
Operations Regulations and Dispute Settlement Mech anisms Regulations.  He said that, in addition to 
the provisions of the Protocol, an EAC Customs Management Act 2004, which provided for the 
management and administration of customs and relate d matters, had been enacted by the East African 
Legislative Assembly.  The three Partner States were determined to deepen their integration to form a 
common market, a monetary union and ultimately a political federation.  The EAC Partner States 
would keep WTO Members informed of every stage of the progress made.   
39. The Chairman  said that he welcomed the notification by the EAC.  He said that he had 
recently had the pleasure of participating as a di scussant in the Trade Policy Review (TPR) of the 
EAC.  
40. The representative of the United States  said that her delegation fully supported the formation 
of the EACU.  The Protocol was ambitious in its goal of creating a customs union among the parties within five years.  She said that her delegation found  it particularly impressive that the vast majority 
of tariffs and non-tariff barriers were to be elimin ated among the parties upon the entry into force of 
the agreement. It was also notable that the parti es had agreed to certain trade facilitation measures, 
and her delegation in particular applauded the e fforts to simplify and rationalize the documentation 
and procedures covering trade among the parties.  In addition, her delega tion commended the EAC on 
its website, on which all relevant  documents could be downloaded.  She said that her delegation 
believed it would be useful if the EACU were su bjected to the Transparen cy Mechanism (TM) for 
RTAs, in particular as the Enabling Clause might not  be the appropriate provision under which to 
notify the agreement.  Her delegation believed that  the Enabling Clause was not meant to cover such 
ambitious agreements as the one under consideration, but was inst ead intended to address developing 
country preference systems which could otherwise not meet the standards of GATT Article XXIV.  
She explained that her delegation considered that  the information available on the EAC website and 
the comprehensiveness of the Protocol made it an excellent candidate for the TM for RTAs.  She 
inquired whether the parties to the EACU would cons ider submitting the Protocol to be considered 
under the Mechanism.  
41. She said that Article 12.1 of the Protocol pr ovided that the maximum tariff on goods imported 
into the EAC was 25 per cent.  However, a review  of the common external tariff revealed that a 
number of tariff lines were at 50 per cent, primarily  on textile products.  She sought clarification on 
this from the parties, and also inquired whether these  tariff rates would be reduced in the future. She 
said that her delegation also had a question relati ng to the anti-dumping a nd countervailing measures 
established in Articles 16 and 18 respectively.  In  particular, she asked whether those provisions 
applied to imports from countries party to the agreemen t, or to countries outside the EAC.  She also 
inquired whether the EAC would be treated as a single customs area for the purposes of anti-dumping 
and countervailing investigations. 
42. The representative of the European Communities
 said that his delegation had already 
expressed its support for the EAC process during the recent TPR of the EAC.  He said that his delegation had, however, not yet been able to fully consider the documentation that had been 
submitted for the present meeting.  He asked for some  clarification from the parties on the relationship 
between the EAC and other regional integration in itiatives to which the members of the EAC were 
also party.  He explained that his question was b ased on the provisions of Article 37 of the Protocol, WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 12  
 
  titled "Trade Arrangements with Countries and Or ganizations Outside the Customs Union".  He 
inquired whether the parties could provide further information on how they would ensure the greatest 
possible coherence between regional initiatives, in  particular when there was an overlapping 
membership.  He observed that it was hard to see how a customs union, implying a common trade 
policy, could co-exist with parties which were also members of other regional initiatives.  He said that 
his delegation would appreciate ha ving more time to study the EA CU notification and consider 
whether it would have more specific questions. 
43. The representative of Uganda
 requested that the questions from the US and the EC be 
submitted to the notifying Members in written form.  They would subsequently be transmitted to the 
EAC Secretariat, and responses would be provided in due course. 
44. The representative of Kenya  said that he sought clarification on the comments made by the 
US on the TM for RTAs.  In particular, he want ed to know whether Members had formally approved 
the Mechanism, and whether it was yet operational. 
45. The representative of the United States  said that the TM for RTAs was not yet operational, 
but the point that had been made in the earlier in tervention by her delegation was that the EACU was 
a good candidate to undergo the process laid out in the Mechanism because the parties had provided 
ample information on the agreement. 
46. The Chairman  proposed that the item concerning the Protocol remain on the CTD's agenda 
for the next meeting. 
47. It was so agreed . 
D. DECLINING TERMS OF TRADE FOR PRIMARY COMMODITIES , AND ITS IMPLICATION TO TRADE 
AND DEVELOPMENT OF PRIMARY COMMODITY EXPORTING COUNTRIES  
48. The Chairman  said that the Committee had heard under this agenda item a presentation from 
one Member – Malaysia – and had also heard presentations from the Common Fund for Commodities 
(CFC), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the International 
Coffee Organization (ICO), the Food and Agricultu re Organization (FAO) and the International 
Cocoa Organization (ICCO).  He recalled that at the 59th Session of the CTD on 4 October 2006, a 
preliminary discussion was held on the possibility of  holding a panel discussion on commodity issues.  
The idea was to invite to the CTD a number of international organizations working on commodity 
issues, and to allow a representative of each invited organization to make a brief presentation.  He had 
suggested that the presentations focus on policy op tions and solutions.  Such a panel discussion would 
include representatives from such organizations as the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO 
(ITC), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), UNCT AD and the World Bank.  He further suggested 
that the other organizations that had already made  presentations in the CTD – the CFC, the ICO, the 
FAO and the ICCO – could also be invited, not as part of the panel per se , but to participate in the 
discussion that followed the presentations.  He believe d that the presence of these organizations would 
contribute to enriching the discussion.  He said that if his proposal regarding the panel discussion was 
acceptable to Members, the Secretariat could work towards holding the discussion at the first meeting 
of the CTD in 2007. 
49. The representative of the United States  said that his delegation, while not opposing the 
Chairman's proposal, was concerned that a panel di scussion dealing with policy options and solutions 
to the commodities problem could take a substantia l amount of time, given the amount of work that 
had already been undertaken in this area within the WTO, as well as by several other organizations.  
His delegation believed that Members should consider  more carefully what the theme of the panel  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 13 
 
 
  discussion should be and what they  wished to accomplish through the discussion.  He also inquired 
what the proposed timeframe for the panel discussion was. 
50. The Chairman  said that he envisaged a half-day panel discussion. He inquired whether any 
other Members wished to comment on his proposal.  
51. The representative of Kenya  said that his delegation supported the Chairman's proposal.  In 
addition to the organizations suggested by the Ch airman, he proposed that one or two farmers' 
organizations from Africa could be invited to share their experiences with the Committee.  He inquired whether the WTO would be able to f und the participation of such organizations. 
52. The Chairman
 said that it would be useful if the representative of Kenya could provide the 
names of farmers' organizations that  could potentially be invited to pa rticipate in the panel discussion.  
53. The representative of Bangladesh , on behalf of the LDC Group, said that the LDCs 
appreciated the efforts of the CTD to engage a number of organizations under the present agenda 
item, and were pleased to note that the Committee had thus far heard presentations from Malaysia, the 
CFC, UNCTAD, the ICO, the FAO and the ICCO .  The presentations had enriched Members' 
knowledge and understanding of the issues involved in  the trade of primary commodities.  The LDCs 
fully endorsed the idea of holding a panel discussion in the beginning of 2007 where the ITC, the 
IMF, UNCTAD and the World Bank would take pa rt.  The LDC Group also agreed with the 
Chairman's  suggestion that the discussion would be fu rther enriched by the participation of the other 
organizations that had made presentations in the previous meetings of the CTD.  The discussion 
would lead to appropriate recommendations so that th e problem of the decline in the terms of trade of 
developing countries and LDCs was addressed. 
54. The representative of Côte d'Ivoire  said that his delegation would like the Cocoa Producers' 
Alliance (COPAL) to be one of the organizations invited to the panel discussion. 
55. The representative of Tanzania  said that his delegation suppor ted the Chairman's proposal.  
He recalled that Tanzania, along with Kenya, Uganda  and others had for some time been sharing with 
Members the problems faced by commodity-dep endent countries, not only for agricultural 
commodities, but also for commodities in other sector s, for example the mining sector.  He suggested 
that more thought could be given to the  organiza tions that would be invited to the panel discussion. 
56. The representative of Uganda  said that the Chairman's proposal was a good one.  He said that 
many commodity-dependent developing countries want ed an urgent solution to the problem of the 
declining terms of trade for primary commodities, a nd that some of these countries were dependent on 
very few commodities, in some cases only a singl e commodity.  He expressed his support for Kenya's 
proposal for one or more African farmers' organizati ons to participate in the discussion, and wanted to 
know whether the WTO could finance their participation. 
57. The representative of Nigeria  said that his delegation supported the Chairman's proposal.  He 
stressed the importance of the partic ipation of one or more African fa rmers' organizations in the panel 
discussion, but highlighted that their participation would require financial support. 
58. The representative of the United States  said that she wished to reiterate that her delegation did 
not oppose the Chairman's proposal for a panel discu ssion.  The point was to make the event useful, 
and she doubted that a half-day ev ent with several participating orga nizations would allow a clear and 
focused dialogue.  She suggested that more thought could be given to the structure of the panel discussion in order to make it more focused. WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 14  
 
  59. The Chairman
 said that his proposal for a panel discussion on commodities was an attempt to 
build on the process that had been ongoing for some time in the CTD. 
60. The representative of Benin , on behalf of the African Group, said that the Group supported 
the Chairman's proposal.  The Group also wished to  see the participation of one or more African 
farmers' organizations in the panel discussion, and asked the WTO to give its support to ensure their 
participation.  
61. The Chairman  said that he had noted a broad support from delegations for his proposal to 
hold a panel discussion on commodities, but that there had also been a call for the theme of the panel discussion to be more focused.  He remarked that  it was not necessary for all organizations to be 
invited to a single event, and that it might be po ssible to hold more than one discussion with the 
participation of different organizations.  
62. The representative of Kenya
 said that his delegation did not have any problem with the 
possibility of the CTD having more than one panel discussion with different organizations invited to 
each, but wished to see the participation of at least one African farmers' organization in the first such discussion. 
63. The representative of Djibouti
 said that the commodities problem  was a question of survival 
in several developing countries and LDCs, and that  the international community should take into 
consideration the situation of citizens in commodity-dependent countries. 
64. The representative of Côte d'Ivoire  said that the participation of a farmers' organization in the 
panel discussion should not be held up because of financial constraints.  His delegation would be 
ready to send a representative of a farmers' organization to the event. 
65. The Chairman  said he had noted that several African delegations had called for the 
participation of at least one farmers' organization from Africa.  He said that such an organization 
could possibly participate in the first panel discussion held in the CTD, and Members could 
subsequently consider holding si milar events with the participa tion of different agencies.  He 
suggested that delegations provide their views af ter the meeting on how to focus the theme of the 
panel discussion and on which specific organizations to invite. 
66. It was so agreed . 
E. PARAGRAPH 51 OF THE DOHA DECLARATION ON IDENTIFYING AND DEBATING 
DEVELOPMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE NEGOTIATIONS , IN ORDER TO HELP ACHIEVE THE 
OBJECTIVE OF HAVING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATELY REFLECTED  
67. The Chairman  said that the Committee had since its 54th Session on 5 October 2005 been 
undertaking a review of the developmental aspects of the negotiations based on a periodically updated 
background paper prepared by the Secretariat.  Members had, however, agreed at the 59th Session on 
4 October 2006 to temporarily suspend their discussion under this agenda item, in view of the fact that 
the negotiations were suspended at the time.  It w as decided that the Committee would revert back to 
this item at the present meeting to consider how to  proceed.  He said that the Director-General had 
informed the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) at its informal meeting of 16 November 2006 that 
Members were now somewhere between the quiet dipl omacy of the last months and the fully-fledged 
negotiations which would only come when they were  ready to put numbers to the flexibilities they 
had already expressed in general terms on key issues,  in particular on agricultural market access and 
domestic support.  The Director-General had suggested that Members prepare the ground for 
fully-fledged negotiations to take place when the cond itions were right.  Technical work at the level of  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 15 
 
 
  experts was, therefore, to begin, but fully-fledged negotiations – that is, negotiations at the Ministerial 
level – had not yet resumed.   
68. He said that he wanted the CTD to consider how to move forward with the present agenda 
item in light of these developments.  In particular, he wished to ask Members whether they felt that the time was right for the CTD to revert to its discussion on the developmental aspects of the 
negotiations – in which case it could be agreed at  the present meeting to resume the discussion under 
this agenda item at the next meeting of the CTD – or whether they felt that it would be premature to 
do so at this time, and that it would be better to wait to see how the process developed over the 
coming weeks and consider the matter once again at the next CTD meeting.  
69. The representative of Egypt
 said that the Director-General's remarks had been made at an 
informal meeting of the TNC, and that it might be better to wait until Members had a clearer idea on 
the status of the negotiations before the CTD formally resumed its discussion.  
70. The representative of Bangladesh , on behalf of the LDC Group, said that Ministers at Doha 
had directed the CTD to act as a forum to iden tify and debate the developmental aspects of the 
negotiations.  Based on this  mandate, the Secretariat regularly pr ovided an overview and update of the 
negotiations through its document on the devel opmental aspects of the negotiations.  Members 
discussed the contents of the document, as well as an y other issues they considered relevant.  Given 
the current status of the negotiations, the LDC Group understood that there could not be an update of 
the information contained in document WT/COMTD /W/143/Rev.2 dated 27 June  2006.  It was hoped, 
however, that by the next meeting of the CTD there would have been sufficient progress in the 
negotiations to enable the Secretariat to update its document.  The LDC Group therefore urged the 
Secretariat to make preparations for the update with  a view to providing to Members a revision to the 
document in time for the next CTD meeting. 
71. The Chairman  said that the CTD should ideally only resume its discussion under this agenda 
item when all Members felt they were in a positi on to comment on the developmental aspects of the 
negotiations.  He proposed that the CTD consider again at its next meeting when to resume the 
discussion.       
72. It was so agreed .   
F. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HONG KONG DECISION ON DUTY-FREE 
AND QUOTA -FREE MARKET ACCESS FOR LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRIES  
73. The Chairman  said that Ministers agreed in Annex F of the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Declaration that developed-country Members sh all, and developing-country Members declaring 
themselves in a position to do so should, provide duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) market access on a 
lasting basis, for all products originating from a ll LDCs by 2008 or no later than the start of the 
implementation period in a manner that ensured stability, security and predictability.  Ministers 
further agreed that Members facing difficulties at the time to provide such market access would 
provide duty-free and quota-free market access for at least 97 per cent of products originating from 
LDCs, defined at the tariff line level, by 2008 or no later than the start of the implementation period.  
In addition, these Members would take steps to progressively achieve compliance with these 
obligations, taking into account the impact on ot her developing countries at similar levels of 
development and, as appropriate, by incrementally  building on the initial list of covered products.  
Developing country Members would be permitted to  phase in their commitments and would enjoy 
appropriate flexibility in coverage.  It was also ag reed that Members would ensure that preferential 
rules of origin applicable to imports from LDCs  were transparent and simple, and contributed to 
facilitating market access.  He recalled that Me mbers were to notify the implementation of the 
schemes adopted under this Decision every year to th e CTD, which would annually review the steps WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 16  
 
  taken to provide DFQF market access to the LDCs and report to the Genera l Council for appropriate 
action.  While the CTD agreed at the beginning of 2006 to include, for all remaining meetings of the year, an agenda item relating to the Decision, it was the discussion today, under this agenda item, that 
would constitute the annual review as manda ted by the Hong Kong Declaration.   
74. He said that he wished to outline the nature of  the information that had been provided to the 
CTD over the course of the year on the steps taken to provide DFQF market access to LDCs.  He 
recalled that the Committee had received two submissions – document WT/COMTD/W/149 from the 
US and document WT/COMTD/W/150 from Japan – outlining the procedural steps that these 
countries would need to take to implement the Decision in Annex F of the Hong Kong Declaration 
and expand DFQF market access to LDCs.  He sai d that the submissions emphasized the US' and 
Japan's commitment to the Decision, a commitment that had also been confirmed in oral interventions 
by these delegations in the CTD.  The Committee ha d also received oral reports from three Members 
– Switzerland, Norway and Korea – outlining the step s they were taking, or had taken, to provide 
DFQF market access to LDCs.  He opened the fl oor to allow the CTD to conduct its first annual 
review of the implementation of the Hong Kong Decision on DFQF market access for LDCs.   
75. The representative of Bangladesh
, on behalf of the LDC Group, said that Ministers at 
Hong Kong, China had adopted a decision with rega rd to DFQF market acc ess for the LDCs, which 
was contained in Annex F, under Decision 36.  He said that this subject had come up in the CTD as a consequence of that process.  He noted that the concerned WTO Members were to notify the 
implementation of the schemes adopted under this D ecision every year to the CTD.  Thereafter, the 
Committee would annually review the steps taken to  provide DFQF market access to the LDCs, and 
report to the General Council for appropriate action.   He also recalled that the Chairman of the 
Hong Kong Ministerial Conference had read out th e Ministers' understanding on the text concerning 
the DFQF Decision.  In particular, the develope d country Members, and those developing country 
Members declaring themselves in a position to do so, we re to set out by the end of 2006 the means by 
which they would implement the Decision. 
76. He thanked those developed country Members that had already granted DFQF market access 
to LDC products.  He noted that a number of de veloping country Members had also informed the 
LDCs that they were in the advanced stages of their respective internal decision-making processes.  
The LDC Group hoped that they would complete their process at an early date to enable LDCs to 
benefit from their offer.  He also thanked the US and Japan for their submissions to the CTD, 
contained in documents WT/COMTD/W/149 and WT /COMTD/W/150 respectively.  He said that 
both these documents provided an overview of in ternal processes, but that there was also a 
fundamental difference between the two.  In document WT/COMTD/W/150, the Japanese authorities 
were not only informing Members of their internal processes, but were also setting out a timetable for 
implementation.  He recalled that when the Japanes e Minister was in Geneva, he had given the LDCs 
public assurances, which were very comforting.  The LDCs hoped that Japan would complete its 
internal processes soon.   
77. He said that upon examination of the US position, as outlined in document 
WT/COMTD/W/149, the LDCs found cause for alarm.  He said that not only had the US not followed the letter and spirit of the Chair's concluding remarks in Hong Kong, China, there also seemed to be a 
reversal from the Decision contained in Annex F.  He noted that the US had set out in its submission the various problems it faced and the processes it had to complete, and that the LDCs sympathized 
with the US.  However, there was no indication of  the manner in which the US would implement the 
Decision in Annex F, nor was there any indication of  an explicit timeframe.  He also noted that in 
paragraph 2 of its submission, the US stated that successful completion of the DDA was a prerequisite for its implementation of the DFQF initiative.  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 17 
 
 
  78. He drew Members' attention to Annex F, Decision 36 (a)(i) of the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Declaration, where it was stated:  "Provide duty-free and quota-free market access on a lasting basis, for all products originating from all LDCs by 2008 or no later than the start of the implementation 
period in a manner that ensures stability, security an d predictability".  He said that it appeared from 
the US submission that the US wanted to overl ook the Decision Members had agreed to in Hong 
Kong, China, and that this was not acceptable to the LDCs.  As Members had resumed the 
negotiations, the LDCs believed that these were i ssues that would have to be taken up in the 
respective negotiating bodies.  In the meantime, he said that the LDCs wanted Members to note that 
the requirements of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declar ation had not been met in regard to the DFQF 
Decision. 
79. The representative of Benin
, on behalf of the African Group, expressed support for the 
statement made by Bangladesh on behalf of the LDC Group.  He stressed that the question of market 
access for LDCs was extremely important, as it woul d facilitate the integration of LDCs into the 
international trading system.  It was, therefore, urgent for all developed-c ountry Members, and those 
developing country Members in a position to do so, to  adopt the necessary measures to ensure that the 
DFQF Decision was implemented rapidly.   
80. The representative of the United States  said that the DFQF Decision was an important part of 
the Doha Round.  She said that the US would implement its commitment regarding the Decision in a manner consistent with all commitments made at Hong Kong, China.  The US domestic process was 
moving forward, and an internal report by the US International Trade Commission had just been completed and was under review.  She expected that a Federal Register notice for public request for 
information would be published in late December  or early January.  She invited the LDCs to 
participate in this process.  She explained that th e implementation of the DFQF Decision was also tied 
to a Congressional process so it was difficult to provide a timetable on when the implementation process would be completed.   
81. The representative of Djibouti
 said that the situation of the LDCs was very specific and 
should be considered separately from other issues in  the negotiations, in particular as it was difficult 
to predict when there would be results in the negotia tions.  He also said that it was difficult for LDCs 
to take advantage of the market access opportunities o ffered to them and, therefore, inquired whether 
the Secretariat could prepare a summary of the proc edures for LDCs to follow in order to allow them 
to benefit from preferential market access in different countries.    
82. The representative of the European Communities  said that the EC already provided DFQF 
market access to LDCs for more than 99 per cent of tariff lines.  He said that the progressive 
implementation of market liberalization for rice, sugar and bananas from LDCs continued as foreseen in the EC's GSP Regulation.  In particular, full liberalization for bananas was completed in 2006, and 
further progressive steps had been taken to achieve the same target for rice and sugar in 2009.  He 
also informed the Committee that the EC was curr ently reviewing its preferential rules of origin 
requirements with a view to making them more simple, transparent and easy to use. 
83. The representative of Canada
 said that the his Government's Least-Developed Countries 
Tariff (LDCT) programme had been in place since 1983 and formed part of Canada's commitment to 
encourage economic growth in the developing world, and to help raise the standard of living of those 
in need.  The LDCT programme provided preferentia l market access to 49 of the world's LDCs, as 
defined by the United Nations.  He said that at the June 2002 G-8 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, 
Canada announced steps to liberalize the LDCT to help reduce poverty in the world's poorest 
countries.  Specifically, Canada committed to e liminating tariffs and quotas on LDCs' exports to 
Canada.  An important change was the inclusion of textile and appa rel products within the ambit of 
the LDCT.  These changes came in to effect on 1 January 2003, a nd products from LDCs under this WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 18  
 
  scheme could be imported into Canada duty and quot a free, provided they met the rules of origin 
criteria. 
84. He continued by saying that, in order to enc ourage growth and prosperity in LDCs, Canada 
also introduced new rules of origin at the same time the changes came in to effect, which were 
considered amongst the most liberal in the world.   For example, under Canada's LDCT Programme, 
apparel products produced in an LDC could use textile inputs from any developing country and still 
be accorded duty-free access to Canada.  He said that these rules of origin made it easier for products 
from LDCs to access the Canadian mark et.  It also encouraged trade between these countries in inputs 
used to make valued-added products.  This had the effect of not only stimulating market access in 
Canada, but also to encourage and build importa nt linkages in South-South trade for LDCs.  
85. He said that in order for LDC governments to cl aim the benefits of this programme, Canada 
had asked that they sign a Memorandum of Unders tanding (MOU) with the Government of Canada.  
So far, 21 governments had signe d MOUs under this initiative.  He believed that Canada's initiative 
was among the most far-reaching in the world in te rms of eligible countries,  product coverage, rules 
of origin and overall ease of administration.  As a result, Canada had seen tangible results in its import 
statistics.  For example, since the 2003 enlargement, merchandise imports into Canada from LDCs 
had more than tripled.  For African LDCs, Canada 's import volumes, while smaller than others, had 
also tripled since the programme had been expande d at the beginning of 2003.  In terms of product 
coverage, almost half the imports from LDCs were comprised of minera l fuels and oils, with the next 
largest category being apparel, followed by pr ecious stones and minerals.  He noted Canada's 
commitment to its LDCT scheme, as the programme had recently been renewed for a ten-year period 
(through 2014), and encouraged LDCs to take advantage of its benefits. 
86. The representative of Japan
 made reference to the communica tion that had been submitted to 
the CTD by her delegation in document WT/COMTD/W/150, and confirmed Japan's commitment to the Hong Kong Decision.  She said that internal cons ultations were ongoing in Japan with a view to 
allowing the cabinet to submit a draft proposal to amend the customs tariff law and other relevant 
regulations to implement the Decision.  Her de legation would continue to provide updates to 
Members on the process.  
87. The representative of Norway
 said that DFQF market access for all products from LDCs had 
been provided from 1 July 2002 through Norway's GSP scheme.  He said that Norway's GSP scheme 
was currently under revision with a view to simplif ying its procedures, and that his delegation would 
notify the CTD in due course wh en the process was finished. 
88. The Committee took note  of all interventions.  
89. The Chairman  proposed that the report of the CTD's fi rst annual review of the implementation 
of the Hong Kong Decision on DFQF market access fo r LDCs be transmitted to the General Council 
as part of the CTD's annual report to the General Council.   
90. It was so agreed .  
G. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE  
91. The Chairman  recalled that it had been decided at the 59th Session that the Committee would 
revert to this agenda item at the present meeting,  and that Members would consider whether to once 
again treat the issue of electronic commerce (e-comme rce) in the CTD.  He said that the CTD was one 
of four subsidiary bodies designated to carry out work on e-commerce under the WTO's Work Programme on e-commerce.  However, the CTD had agreed at its 53
rd Session in May 2005 that it 
would only revert to the agenda item concerning e-co mmerce if requested to do so by Members.  He  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 19 
 
 
  recalled that Members agreed in paragraph 46 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration to 
reinvigorate the Work Programme on e-commerce, including the development-related issues under 
the Work Programme.  In light of paragraph 46 of the Hong Kong Declaration, he asked Members 
whether they wished to treat the issue of e-commerce once again in the CTD.  
92. The representative of the United States  said that her delegation had been considering what 
would be an appropriate course of action to recomme nd for the CTD, but did not as yet have anything 
specific to propose.  Her delegation would require a little more time for internal consultation as well 
as to consult with other delegations.   
93. The Chairman  proposed that the CTD consider the matter again at its next meeting.   
94. It was so agreed .  
H. TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND TRAINING  
- T ECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING PLAN 2007  (WT/COMTD/W/151  AND 
WT/COMTD/W/151/C ORR.11) 
95. The Chairman  said that the Technical Assistance and Training Plan (TA Plan) for 2007 had 
been circulated as document WT/COMTD/W/151.  A corrigendum, in English only, had been issued 
in document WT/COMTD/W/151/Corr.1.  He recalled that the CTD at its last meeting had adopted 
the 2007 TA Plan on a provisional basis, as some delegations were still awaiting feedback from 
capitals.  It had been agreed that the item concer ning the TA Plan would be on the agenda for the 
present meeting, so as to allow the CTD to formally  adopt the Plan.  He asked Members whether the 
CTD could, therefore, formally adopt the 2007 TA Plan. 
96. The representative of Benin , on behalf of the African Group, highlighted the importance of 
the WTO's efforts concerning technical assistance and trade capacity building for the African Group 
and the LDCs.  He said that the African Group had had the time to acquaint itsel f with the contents of 
the 2007 TA Plan, and to assess the approach adopted in  its preparation.  He remarked that the Plan 
placed emphasis, inter alia , on a number of key points and criteria including the full integration of 
training and technical cooperation and the optimization of the synergies arising from these two lines 
of action.  Other points concerned needs assessment, strategic cooperation with other organizations on 
the basis of comparative advantage, the outs ourcing of some activities and the follow-up and 
evaluation of the activities carried out. 
97. He said that the African Group welcomed the fact  that the Plan reiterated the importance of 
continuing and strengthening coor dination and consultations with  partners, including training 
institutions and regional banks.  The Group shared  the view that the long-term planning of 
trade-related technical assistance activities was a u seful approach to be explored since it would 
effectively lead to sustainable and cumulative capac ity building, as emphasized in paragraph 16 of the 
Plan.  He also remarked on the usefulness of est ablishing a database of the beneficiaries by country 
and by region, with an indication of the areas of ac tivity in which such persons had participated.  The 
availability of such information, to be shared w ith the relevant national bodies, the regions and the 
Missions in Geneva, would help to advance the work of following up and planning the management 
of human resources and skills.  With regard specifi cally to the measures proposed, he said that the 
African Group welcomed their diversity and wished to emphasize the usefulness of such activities, 
which complemented each other and helped to satisfy  the existing needs in the field of trade-related 
technical assistance.  In this context, he said that the African Group wished to make a number of 
recommendations.  First, the Group requested that the East African Community be included in the 
                                                      
1 In English only. WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 20  
 
  regional programmes.  Second, in order to deal wi th the difficulty encountered by some LDCs in 
requesting and organizing national activities as noted in paragraph 80 of the Plan, the Group 
suggested that the lack of capacities to host a nationa l event should be examined more seriously with a 
view to studying the nature of the problems encountered and envisaging ways of solving them effectively (for example, problems of logistics, hum an resources and/or finance, etc.).  Finally, with 
regard to assisting beneficiaries in undertaking their own needs assessments and with a view to 
sharing information with the Permanent Missions in  Geneva and ensuring the daily follow-up which 
they were required to do, it was important that the results of the needs assessment be communicated to 
both national bodies and to the Permanent Missions in Geneva. 
98. He said that the African Group, as the princi pal beneficiary of trade-related technical 
assistance activities, endorsed the c oncerns expressed in the Plan by  the Secretariat regarding the 
difficulties that the Institute for Training and Tec hnical Cooperation (ITTC) could encounter if proper 
and timely funding was not available in time for th e implementation of the activities for 2007.  The 
African Group confirmed the support which it expressed at the 60
th Session of the CTD on 3 
November 2006 for the adoption of the 2007 TA Plan.   
99. The representative of Djibouti  expressed support for the statement made by Benin on behalf 
of the African Group.  He also thanked all donors,  in particular those developing country donors 
which had contributed according to their possib ilities to the technical assistance activities of the 
WTO.  He highlighted the usefulness of long-te rm activities such as the three-month trade policy 
courses held in Geneva and the regional trade policy courses (RTPCs), as well as the Netherlands, 
Denmark and Ireland internship programmes.  He con tinued by saying that, in order to integrate into 
the multilateral trading system, it was essen tial to know how the system worked, and 
technical-assistance activities allowed developing countries to gain this knowledge.  He urged 
developed country and developing c ountry Members to contribute more to technical assistance, as the 
need for it continued to increase.  He noted that without technical assistance it would be extremely 
difficult for African countries to implement the WTO Agreements and to follow the technical 
discussions at the WTO.   
100. The representative of Kenya  said that he wished to expand on the request that had been put 
forward by the representative of Benin concerning the East African Community.  He explained that a 
new team of East African parliamentarians had been sworn in, and it would be useful for these 
parliamentarians to follow a course on WTO issues to  help them see the implications of the WTO in 
their work of deepening the integration of East Afri ca.  He believed that this activity could fit within 
the outreach activities that were listed in the 2007 TA Plan. 
101. The representative of Mali  said that the relevant authorities in his country had put in place a 
new training plan that took into account the trai ning and institution capacity-building needs of the 
government, the private sector and civil society.  The new approach stemmed from the commitment of 
the Government of Mali to make trade a real engi ne for social and economic development.  Trade 
was, therefore, a central element of Mali's 2007 stra tegic framework for the fight against poverty.  He 
said that Mali had benefited from the technical c ooperation activities provided in 2006, and required 
continued trade-related technical assistance.  He re marked that in the 2007 TA Plan the majority of 
activities listed were in English, which was a diffi culty for the francophone African countries.  With 
respect to the last column of Annex 2 on page 48 of the Plan, he asked for some clarification on the 
formula used. 
102. The representative of Nigeria  said that, although the technical-assistance needs of developing 
countries were not homogeneous, there were, nevertheless, some similar concerns that were shared by 
most, particularly in Africa.  On a sub-regional le vel, he suggested that the needs of the various 
institutions that were located within each sub -region also be taken into account when organizing 
technical-assistance activities.  WT/COMTD/M/61 
 Page 21 
 
 
  103. The Director of the ITTC , in reply to the suggestion made to  take into account the situation at 
the sub-regional level, said that this could be done in the framework of the 2007 TA Plan.  He also 
noted that several TA activities in the past had been delivered on a sub-regional basis.  He said that he 
understood the comment made concerning the la nguage balance between French and English 
activities, but he believed that on the whole the 2007 TA Plan reflected a reasonable balance.  
Regarding the question on Annex 2 and the last colu mn, he recalled that the ITTC had come up with 
the notion of participant days to measure the volum e of activities.  This measurement was based on a 
multiplication of the number of days for an activity by the number of participants.  These numbers were then added to obtain a yearly total of planne d participant days which would later be compared 
with the number of participant days actually deliv ered.  He mentioned that for the last two years 
approximately 33,000 participant days were planne d, while 30,000 to 31,000 had been delivered.  
104. The Chairman
 asked Members whether the 2007 TA Plan could be adopted. 
105. The Committee  adopted  the 2007 TA Plan. 
106. The Director of the ITTC  said that, with the approval of the 2007 TA Plan, the Secretariat 
could now proceed with its implementation.  As ha d been done on behalf of the Director-General at 
the 22 November 2006 meeting of the Committee on Budge t, Finance and Administration, he said that 
he wished to bring to the attention of Member s the critical financial situation of the Doha 
Development Agenda Global Trust Fund (DDAGTF).  He noted that the implementation of the 2007 
TA Plan relied on the availability of funds, a nd that the Secretariat could undertake financial 
commitments only to the extent of the funds made av ailable.  At two instances in the course of 2006, 
the Secretariat had been on the verge of suspendi ng the planned activities due to the lack of funds.  
Given the tight deadlines attached to the organi zation of the technical-assistance activities, the 
implementation of several activities were thus put at  risk.  He informed Members that at the present 
time, there was less than CHF 100,000 available, as opposed to some CHF 3.3 million at the same 
time in the previous year.  In terms of up-comi ng activities for which commitments would have to be 
made in the next weeks, there was the preparat ory workshop for the Singapore RTPC scheduled for 
the end of January 2007, the RTPC in Jamaica sch eduled to commence on 9 February 2007, and the 
Singapore RTPC scheduled for March 2007.  Commitm ents for these activities, which needed to be 
made six to 12 weeks prior to their commencement, totalled some CHF 2.3 million.  He recalled that 
the WTO's financial rules and regulations required cash in-hand before entering into commitments.  
The activities mentioned would, therefore, be in ser ious jeopardy unless funds became available in the 
very near future.  He requested delegations to brin g this critical situation to the attention of their 
respective authorities and urged them to provide the necessary financing.    
I. DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT (WT/COMTD/W/155) 
107. The Chairman  said that the CTD's draft annual report for 2006 was contained in document 
WT/COMTD/W/155.  He noted that the document contained the annual reports of the CTD in 
Regular Session, the CTD in Dedicated Session and the Sub-Committee on LDCs. He also noted that 
the draft report contained a number of square br ackets relating to items under consideration at the 
present meeting.  As part of the process of adopti ng the report, the square brackets would be removed, 
and the discussion that had taken place at the presen t meeting would be appropriately reflected in the 
report.  He invited the CTD to consider the repor t with a view to adopting it, and informed the 
Committee that the report, once adopted, would be  issued as document WT/COMTD/58 and would be 
forwarded to the General Council for review at its meeting of 14 and 15 December 2006. 
108. The representative of Egypt  suggested that text be included in paragraph 13 of the draft report 
to appropriately reflect the discussion that had ta ken place at the present meeting under the agenda 
item concerning paragraph 51 of the Doha Declaration. WT/COMTD/M/61 
Page 22  
 
  109. The representative of Bangladesh
, on behalf of the LDC Group, said that he wished to draw 
attention to paragraph 14 of the draft report in  the section concerning the Hong Kong Decision on 
DFQF market access for LDCs.  He said that the LD C Group had made two subm issions in relation to 
the Decision, one concerning market access and the other on rules of origin.  The submissions had 
been made in the CTD in Special Session, th e Negotiating Group on Market Access and the 
Committee on Agriculture in Special Session.  He re quested that paragraph 14 of the draft report be 
modified to reflect the LDCs' submissions in vari ous WTO bodies.  He also requested that the LDCs' 
concerns regarding the implementation of the Deci sion be appropriately reflected in the report. 
110. The representative of the United States  said that the final report should provide a balanced 
reflection of Members' views on the implementa tion of the Hong Kong Decision on DFQF market 
access for LDCs. 
111. The Chairman  said that the points raised by Members would be incorporated by the 
Secretariat into the final report.  He proposed to  allow Members a period of seven days after the 
circulation of document WT/COMTD/58 to provide any comments, after which the report would be 
forwarded to the General Council.2       
112. The Committee adopted  its annual report for 2006.  
J. OTHER BUSINESS  
113. The Chairman  raised a matter under "Other Business" concerning a recommendation that had 
recently been made by the CRTA for a common format for the notification of RTAs.  He said that the 
CRTA agreed, on 13 October 2006, to recommend to th e Council for Trade in Goods, the Council for 
Trade in Services and the CTD the adoption of the common format, which could be found in 
document WT/REG/16 of 23 November 2006.  In the context of the CTD, the  common format would 
apply to RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause.  He proposed that the Committee consider the 
matter at its next formal meeting.  
114. It was so agreed . 
115. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________ 
 
  
 
                                                     
 
2 No comments were received from Members befo re the expiry of the seven-day deadline.