RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/M/23 
22 February 2005 
 (05-0723) 
Negotiating Group on Rules  
  
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE MEETING 
HELD ON 24 JANUARY 2005 
 
Note by the Secretariat
 
 
 
1. The Negotiating Group on Rules ("the Group") held a formal meeting on 24 January 2005. 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
2. The Group adopted the following agenda: 
A. Adoption of the Agenda 
B. Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs) 
C.  Other Business 
 
B. REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS  
3. The Chairman recalled that at the last mee ting Participants had been able to express 
preliminary views on a submission by Turkey, fo und in document TN/RL/W/167 dated 8 December 
2004, which had been formally incorporated in the airgram of that day meeting, and which 
contributed to the transparency debate.  In th at context, he observed that the report entitled The Future 
of the WTO , drafted by the Director-General's Cons ultative Board, gave great importance to 
improving transparency of RTAs and an understand ing of their effects.  The "Group of Eminent 
Persons" had confirmed the systemic significance give n by the Negotiating Group to this part of the 
negotiating mandate, and that was an incentive to pursue the Group's excellent work in this area.  
4. Participants thanked the propone nt for having made the proposal, which encouraged the use 
of the factual presentation format.  Referring to the introductory section of the proposal, in particular 
when it stated that one parameter agreed for the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA) 
trial exercise was the "limitation of factual presen tations to RTAs coveri ng trade in goods", one 
Participant reiterated his delegation's position that  ultimately factual presentations would also be 
extended to cover RTAs on trade in services. 
5. Referring to item 2 of the proposal ("Giving the Volunteering countries the right for a faster 
examination"), one Participant noted that while th e idea of providing an in centive for countries to 
volunteer appeared positive, his delegation had a number of questions on how it could be 
implemented.  He noted that the CRTA had a limite d number of meetings per year and that any such 
faster examination would also requi re delegations to work faster.  In concrete terms, that would 
require an efficient review, through the submission of precise and timely data, thus avoiding questions 
due to insufficient data, and restraint regarding repetition of questions.  Th ose elements should be 
considered when discussing what incentives c ould be given to volunteering Members.  TN/RL/M/23 
Page 2  
 
 6. Referring to item 3 of the proposal ("A complementary initiative for overcoming the possible 
difficulties facing the developing Members"), one Participant asked the proponent to clarify the meaning of "should be subject to faster examina tion without having bound with the requirement of 
submitting additional data";  in particular, whethe r it meant that in order to ensure a faster 
examination for developing countries, Members would compromise on some information or give a 
carte blanche to the RTA's parties.  Such clarification was needed in advance of any discussion on the 
appropriateness of applying such pr ocedure to developing countries.  
7. In response, the proponent reiterated that the submission aimed at contributing to 
transparency and improving the functioning of the CR TA, and that the proposal could be fine-tuned in 
the future.  He agreed that the data provided shou ld be comprehensive so as to move the process 
quickly.  His delegation had not yet defined wh ich incentives could be provided to volunteering 
countries, but one option could be the right to finish the examination of their RTAs within, for example, one year, while the completion of the ex amination for other RTAs would be open-ended.  
As for RTAs concluded by developing countries or under the Enabling Clause, it was proposed that they be given the right to have a faster exam ination, without having to choose for the factual 
presentation.   He also noted that for the time being that proposal only applied for RTAs on trade in 
goods, and not for RTAs on trade in services. 
8. A number of Participants reacted against the f act that the proposal referred to "examination" 
of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause, no ting that WTO rules did not provide for the 
examination of such agreements.  The point was made that the factual presentation was aimed at transparency purposes, and it was re quested that any proposal made it clear that factual presentations 
did not entail the examination of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause.    
9. Another Participant noted that it appeared to be some confusion about the meaning of the 
word "examination".  It was her understanding that wh ile the proposal dealt with the interim period, it 
had been made in the context of the transparency process being negotiated for the future, in which the 
examination of an RTA would not provide for a cons istency exercise, in line with what was formally 
proposed by her delegation.  Agreeing that currently  different procedures applied to RTAs under the 
Enabling Clause and those under Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 and GATS Article V, some 
Participants noted however that it should not be  prejudged that the transparency process resulting 
from the negotiations would apply to all RTAs alik e, as ways and means could be established for 
differentiating RTAs notified under the Enabling Clau se.  They noted however that it was important 
to improve the transparency of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause and to take the trial exercise 
a step forward; they encouraged the su bmission of proposals along those lines.  
10. Reacting to the comments made, the proponent noted that transparency would increase if 
RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause made use of  the factual presentation; it would not if they 
were not subject to examination in the CRTA.  The faster examination proposal was aimed at 
providing an incentive to developing countries to noti fy their agreements so as to reduce the number 
of non-notified RTAs and thus improve transparency .  He noted that in light of all the comments 
made, it was his initial perception that many Part icipants did not favour subjecting RTAs notified 
under the Enabling Clause to the factual presentation. 
11. The Chairman thanked the proponent for havi ng made a formal submission and those 
Participants that had commented on it.  He then  recalled that at the last meeting the Group had 
discussed on how to advance the work on systemic issu es, and once more invited Participants to come 
forward with specific proposals as soon as possible,  as no new proposal had been received in the 
recent past.  He also announced that within the ne xt weeks he would organize bilateral consultations 
with interested delegations to define, if possible, so me parameters for the Gro up's future work in this 
area.  He hoped to be able to inform the Group on these bilateral consultations at the next meeting.  TN/RL/M/23 
 Page 3 
 
 
 12. The Group held an informal debate on the basis of an informal note by the Chairman entitled 
Elements for an RTAs' Transparency Process , dated 13 January 2005 (Job(05)/1).  At the end of the 
informal discussions, the Group reverted back to formal mode. 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
13. The Chairman informed that the next mee ting of the Group would take place on 7 March 
2005.  He also said that at that meeting the Group would be able to discuss, in informal mode, the 
services "mock" presentation of the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement.  The Secretariat would 
coordinate internally regarding its own services experts,  and he invited Participan ts to make sure that 
these discussions could also benefit from input from their services experts. 
 
__________