RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/MA/M/52 
4 November 2010 
 (10-5884) 
Committee on Market Access  
  
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 11 OCTOBER 2010 
 
Chairman: Mr. Daniel Owoko (Kenya)
 
 
Subjects discussed  Page  
 
1. Periodic report of the Committee to the Council for Trade in  Goods 
(G/MA/SPEC/45) ................................................................................................................. .....1 
2. Extension of the HS2002 waiver (G/C/W/637) .......................................................................2  
3. Extension of the HS2007 waiver (G/C/W/638) .......................................................................2  
4. Introduction of HS96 changes to schedules of concessions ...................................................2  
(i) Submission of HS96 documentation............................................................................................2  
(ii) Decision on Procedures leading to the ver ification and certification of HS96 changes 
relating to the schedules of 64 Members (WT/L/756) – report by the Chairman .......................2  
5. Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 changes to schedules of concessions 
using the CTS Database (WT/L/605) ......................................................................................3  
6. Modalities and operation of th e Integrated Data Base..........................................................5  
7. Consolidated Tariff Sche dules (CTS) Database.....................................................................5  
8. Dissemination of the IDB and the CTS Database ..................................................................6  
9. Timeliness and completeness of notifications – Decision on notification 
procedures for quantitativ e restrictions (G/L/59)..................................................................6  
10. Proposed derestriction of certain bilatera l negotiating documentation relating to 
earlier GATT Rounds of negotiations.....................................................................................7  
11. Draft Report (2010) of the Committee to  the Council for Trade in Goods..........................8  
12. Election of the Vi ce-Chairperson ............................................................................................8  
13. Other Bu siness................................................................................................................. ..........9  
 
 The Committee adopted  the agenda as reproduced in WTO/AIR/3621.  An annotated agenda 
was circulated in document JOB/MA/52.  
1. Periodic report of the Committee to the Council for Trade in  Goods (G/MA/SPEC/45) 
1.1 The Chairman
 drew attention to document G/MA/SPEC /45 which contained the draft periodic 
report of the Committee.  He noted that this repor t, which would be finalized in the light of the 
discussion that would take place at this meeting,  would be submitted to the Council for Trade in 
Goods (CTG) for examination.  He noted that there were no requests for extensions of HS96 waivers so no factual information on this issue had been provided in the Annex.  G/MA/M/52 
Page 2  
 
  1.2 The Committee took note
 of the periodic report1 and agreed  to forward it to the CTG for 
appropriate action.  
2. Extension of the HS2002 waiver (G/C/W/637) 
2.1 The Chairman
 recalled that a number of Members were  given an extension or granted a new 
waiver, through the form of a "collective deci sion", in order to introduce HS2002 changes 
domestically and to subsequently introduce these ch anges to their respective schedule of concessions 
and to undertake negotiations if required. This wa iver decision was contained in document WT/L/786 
and would expire on 31 December 2010.   He proposed  to extend the waiver for another year as the 
Members seeking the extension had yet to complete  the HS02 procedures.  If the Committee was in 
agreement, he proposed that the Committee forw ard the draft waiver decision to the CTG for 
approval.    2.2 The Committee agreed
 to forward the draft decision contained in G/C/W/637 to the CTG for 
approval. 
 
3. Extension of the HS2007 waiver (G/C/W/638) 
3.1 The Chairman  recalled that a number of Members had been granted a waiver through the 
form of a "collective decision" in order to introduce HS2007 changes domestically and to 
subsequently introduce these changes to their r espective schedule of concessions and to undertake 
negotiations if required. This decision was contai ned in document WT/L/787 and would expire on 
31 December 2010. Given that the HS2007 exercise ha d not as yet started,  he proposed that the 
waiver be extended for a year.  If the Committee w as in agreement, then he proposed that the 
Committee forward the draft waiver d ecision to the CTG for approval.  
 3.2 The Committee agreed
 to forward the draft decision contained in G/C/W/638 to the CTG for 
approval. 
 
4. Introduction of HS96 changes to schedules of concessions 
(i) Submission of HS96 documentation 
4.1 The Chairman  drew attention to document G/MA/TAR/2/Rev.45. He noted that this 
document differed from the previous version insofar as there was the inclusion of the document 
symbol containing the waiver decision (WT/L/801 ) which granted Argentina an extension until 
30 April 2011.   He further noted that the Spanish version of the document was missing the end notes, and a corrigendum would have to be issued.   4.2 The Committee took note
 of the document and the statement. 
 
(ii) Decision on Procedures leading to the verification and certification of HS96 changes relating 
to the schedules of 64 Members (WT/L/756) – report by the Chairman 
4.3 The Chairman  reported that the files of sixty Members were in the process of being certified 
under these procedures.  However, he recalled that the files of four Members, namely Barbados, 
Dominican Republic, Ecuador and South Africa had some information relating to tariff rate quotas 
and/or part IV of the schedules which was missi ng.  So, while their tariff-related information was 
approved at the multilateral review held on 5 Ma rch, the missing information remained to be 
reviewed.    
                                                      
1 Issued as G/MA/243.  G/MA/M/52 
 Page 3 
 
 
  4.4 Members were informed of the posting of th e information for Barbados, Dominican Republic 
and South Africa on the Members' website through document G/SECRET/HS96/CTS/2 of 
26 May 2010.  Ecuador's information still needed to be prepared.  The multilateral review session held 
on 26 July to review the information resulted in th e approval of the information pertaining to the files 
of Barbados and Dominican Republic, but comments re mained in respect of South Africa's file.  The 
Committee would need to revert to South Africa's fi le at the next multilateral review.  The files of 
Barbados and Dominican Republic were already in th e process of certification.  Finally he mentioned 
that the status of work on the HS1996 exer cise was reflected in document JOB/MA/41. 
  The Committee took note
 of the report.   
 
5. Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 chan ges to schedules of concessions using the 
CTS Database (WT/L/605) 
 - Report by the Secretariat on the status of work  
 
5.1 A member of the Secretariat  (Mr. Jurgen Richtering) noted th at a full report of the status of 
work on the HS02 files was contained in JOB/MA/42.  The current  situation was that two draft HS02 files remained to be prepared; four draft HS02 files had been recently completed and sent to Members for their first review; five HS02 files had been released for examination at the next  multilateral 
review;  sixty-nine HS02 files had been released  for multilateral review most of which had been 
approved by all Members; thirty-eight  HS02 files had been certified or were in the process of being 
certified. 
 5.2 The Committee took note
 of the statement made.  
 
 - Proposed amendments to a procedure fo r the introduction of Harmonized System 
  2002 changes to schedules of concessions using the CTS Database  
 
5.3 The Chairman  reported that at the 26 July informal meeting of the Committee, he had raised a 
problem which had been ongoing for some time now in respect of the HS02 procedures.  Although, 
there was progress made with the HS2002 transpositi on, and most of the technical work was near 
completion,  there were an increasing number of f iles that were approved by  the Committee in these 
multilateral reviews, but which were not appr oved by the Member concerned which was a 
pre-condition for certification. His predecessors had tried a number of approaches to redress this 
situation, including sending formal letters to th e delegations concerned and meeting with them 
individually. In spite of these efforts there were appr oximately 62 files in the situation just described.   
 
5.4 The Committee was fully aware of this problem when it had discussed the new HS96 
procedures.  As a result, the HS96 procedures pr ovided that if there was an approval by the 
Committee and the Member concerned did not object or provide comments, certification would take 
place.  In other words, silence was understood as con sent to proceed with the certification procedures.  
Bearing this in mind, as well as the fact that some of the HS02 files had been in this situation since 
2006, he had asked Members at the 26 July informal  meeting whether they were open to the idea of 
amending the HS02 procedures in order to fo llow the same approach as under the new HS96 
procedures.   Members supported the idea and the Secretariat had prepared a draft decision which was discussed at an informal consultation held on 5 Octobe r.  At the consultation, India had proposed an 
amendment which in essence gave more time to th ose concerned Members to lodge a reservation on 
their own file which in effect would halt the cer tification process.  This proposed amendment gave 
rise to a discussion, and while there were no objections to it, questions were raised as to its necessity 
and usefulness.  At the end of the consultation, he  had requested the Secretariat to prepare a revised 
draft incorporating the views expressed. The revi sed draft was circulated as JOB/MA/51 which was 
now before the Committee.  G/MA/M/52 
Page 4  
 
  5.5 The representative of India
 stated that his delegation was appreciative of the amendments 
introduced by the Secretariat in document JO B/MA/51 which proposed a new paragraph 12 bis based 
on the comments that India had given in the last informal meeting. India's concern stemmed from the fact that many capital-based colleagues who were ac tually looking at the HS02 files needed to be 
given some sort of a push to review their own HS02 f ile and to take it to its logical fruition. That was 
the reason why India had proposed a timeline for sp ecific comments to be submitted.  India did not 
have any problems with the Secretariat language in terms of having a mandatory requirement for a 
Member to submit details of the specific reasons for such a reservation.  In short, India was fairly 
comfortable with the new paragraph 12 bis. 
 
5.6 The representative of the United States
 stated that his delegation could also support the draft 
as it currently stood in principle.  He had not obtained formal approval from his authorities on the specific language and requested that th e Committee approve the document on an ad referendum  basis 
and an additional week be given for his authoriti es to complete their review of the language.   
 
5.7 The representative of Turkey
 also supported the idea of speed ing up the certification process.  
Paragraph 12 bis contained good language but he wished to draw the Committee's attention to one 
aspect in the second paragraph of 12 bis where there was reference to the Secretariat requiring "details 
of the specific reasons for such a reservation".  The problem was that once a Member provided the 
details of the specific reasons for such a reserva tion, it was no longer subject to any deadline unless 
the specific reasons led to an amendment of its HS02  file.  This "black hole" could perhaps be filled 
with some additional language along the lines of  the Secretariat requiring a proposal for an 
amendment of the HS02 file from the Member in a ddition to the details of the specific reasons for 
such a reservation.    5.8 The representative of Hong Kong, China
 stated that his delegation could support the language 
proposed in JOB/MA/51.  
 5.9 The representative of Zambia
 stated that her delegation could support the proposed 
amendments as reflected under para graph 12. Regarding paragraph 12 bis, she wished to seek her 
authorities' views.   
5.10 The representative of Barbados
 stated that her delegation was still in the process of looking at 
the language.  Barbados had been plagued by proble ms of certification for some time and in that 
regard, her delegation wished to  thank India for paragraph 12 bis because it provided Members, who 
faced technical or administrative challenges in going through the certification process, with additional 
time to review and reflect.  
 
5.11 The Chairman  proposed that a revised document be prepared taking on board the comments 
made.  Following its circulation, one week would be  given to Members to review the document. If no 
comments were submitted the revised document2 would be forwarded to the General Council for 
adoption.   
5.12 The Committee so agreed
. 
                                                      
2 In light of comments made on the revised document, the Chairman proposed that JOB/MA/51 be once 
again considered by Members and a time-period was gi ven for comments.  As no comments were received, 
document JOB/MA/51 was considered approved by the Committee and was re-issued as G/MA/W/104.  This 
document was forwarded to the General Council for adoption.  G/MA/M/52 
 Page 5 
 
 
  6. Modalities and operation of the Integrated Data Base 
 - Status of submission of the required documentation (G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.32)  
 
6.1 A member of the Secretariat  (Mr. Jurgen Richtering) noted that the document on Status of 
Submissions (G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.32) was in a new fo rmat.  The new format included two tables: the 
first table showed new submissions received since th e circulation of the last Status of Submissions 
and the second table showed in a tabular form a comprehensive across-years overview of all MFN 
applied tariffs and import statistics available in the IDB. This kind of presentation would make it 
easier to identify data gaps and would thus increase transparency.  
6.2 Since the circulation of the Status of Subm issions document the Secretariat had received the 
following submissions:  The Philippines 2009 imports;  Mexico 2009 imports;  the West African 
Economic and Monetary Union (Benin, Burkina Faso , Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Niger, 
Senegal and Togo) 2009 and 2010 tariffs.   
  6.3 Currently, 1060 country-periods, coveri ng 124 out of 125 Members and seven acceding 
countries, were available on the IDB website.
3 
 6.4 On software developments, the WTO Secretariat was migrating its PCs from the 
Windows 2000/Office XP environment to the ne w Windows 7/Office 2010 environment.  The 
migration was expected to be finished in the firs t quarter of 2011.  At present, the IDB and CTS MS 
Access files distributed to Members via the IDB/CT S File Transfer Facility were in MS Access 2000 
format.  Once the migration was completed, the Secretariat would switch to Access 2002 format to 
ensure backward compatibility for users still using th e Office XP environment.  He also requested any 
delegation encountering problems with the new form at to contact the Secretariat via email at 
idb@wto.org.  
6.5 On technical assistance, sin ce the last meeting of the Committee in April 2010, IDB and CTS 
were presented at the following national workshops  in: Fiji; Zambia; Zimbabwe; and at the following 
regional NAMA workshops in: Fiji for the Pacific re gion; Trinidad for the Caribbean; China for the 
Asian economies; Jordan for Arab countries; Panama  for Latin American countries. The IDB and CTS 
were also presented in the regional Trade Policy Course in Singapo re and Swaziland.  
 
6.6 The Committee took note
 of the report.  
 
7. Consolidated Tariff Schedules (CTS) Database 
 -  Consolidated Tariff schedules Database form ats for tariff commitments as well as 
specific commitments in agriculture in  HS2002 nomenclature (JOB/MA/13/Rev.1)  
 
7.1 The Chairman  recalled that the initial document JOB/ MA/13 was before the Committee at its 
April meeting.  In light of some comments, it was ag reed to come back to it at this meeting.  The 
Secretariat had revised the document and he invite d the Secretariat to elaborate the changes it had 
introduced to this document in relation to the previous version.  
 
7.2 A member of the Secretariat  (Mr. Jurgen Richtering) stated that a further revision of the new 
CTS formats in HS2002 nomenclature was issued as JOB/MA/13/Rev.1 dated 27 September 2010.  
This revised version excluded the ITA_Attachment B table in its standardized form as well as the 
correlation between the export subsidies and the Concession table. 
                                                      
3 The information provided by the European Communities covered its 27 member states as of 
1 January 2007;  the information provided by  Switzerland covered also Liechtenstein. G/MA/M/52 
Page 6  
 
  7.3 The Chairman
 proposed that the Committee approve the document4. 
 7.4 The Committee so agreed
. 
 
8. Dissemination of the IDB and the CTS Database 
 - Communication from the European Bank  for Reconstruction and Development
 (G/MA/W/103)   
 
8.1 The Chairman  recalled that on 13 July 2009 the Co mmittee had adopted document G/MA/238 
containing the dissemination policy of the IDB and CTS database.   Certain organizations (UNCTAD, 
IMF, World Bank, ITC) had been given automa tic access to these two databases.  However, the 
Committee had agreed that other intergovernmental organizations wishing to have access would need 
to obtain approval from the Committee on a case-by- case basis.  This policy was contained in 
paragraph 5 of document G/MA/238.  Since the adopt ion of the dissemination policy,  the Committee 
had granted access to several bodies which had b een listed in an addendum to G/MA/238.  
 8.2 The Committee had before it a request for access to these two databases from the European 
Bank for Reconstruction and Development.  The Se cretariat of the Bank had undertaken to use and 
publish the information contained in these databases in accordance with the terms and conditions laid 
out in document G/MA/238.  If th e Committee agreed to grant this institution access, he  would also 
propose writing to them and requesting them to sh are whatever data the might have pursuant to 
footnote 3 of the document G/MA/238.   8.3 The Committee approved
 the request.  
 
9. Timeliness and completeness of notifications – Decision on notification procedures for 
quantitative restrictions (G/L/59) 
 - Report by the Chairman 
9.1 The Chairman  reported that the Committee had been discussing for some time how to proceed 
with the Decision on Notification Procedures for Qu antitative Restrictions ("QR Decision") as part of 
the work on improving the timeliness and completeness of  notifications.  He had held consultations on 
2 July and more recently on 5 October.    
 9.2 Following the 2 July consultation, he had left Members with a question to ponder over the summer break and to respond to at the next consulta tion. What was it that they wanted to achieve 
from the QR Decision?  He believed that having  a clear objective was crucial, because without it 
Members  ran the risk of getting lost in the details.   
 
9.3 At the 5 October consultation, he had circulated a room document
5.  The idea was to give 
some direction to the discussion, and the room document put forward certain options on how to 
proceed.   Regarding the consultation, he noted that Members present were of the view that the 
Decision should be improved and clarif ied and that option C was the best path to pursue.    Issues 1 
and 2 under option C also seemed to be acceptable to  Members as well as the text highlighted in the 
box at the bottom of the page which noted that the database needed to be updated to take account of 
technological developments and to increase its user-friendliness.  Issue 3 on circulating the 
notifications and reviewing them in the Committee ha d not appeared to be controversial either.  The 
points under 4 were the ones that generated most of the discussion.  Clearly the key issue was that of 
                                                      
4 The approved document was re-issued as G/MA/244.  
 5 Subsequently circulated as JOB/MA/53.  G/MA/M/52 
 Page 7 
 
 
  scope which was mentioned under 4(a).  Some Member s were of the view  that notifications under 
this decision should be comprehensive while others took the view that only those notifications spelt 
out in paragraph 11 of document JOB/MA/6 sh ould be notified under this decision to avoid 
duplication.  There was also mention of the Secr etariat compiling this information and sending it to 
the Member concerned as a potential notification, much like what was being done on the IDB data.   
The discussion was inconclusive on this subject.  On  4(b) concerning cross referencing, he observed 
that  it was linked to the discussion on scope.  As  one delegation had mentioned, perhaps all the 
elements are linked in some way and to some exte nt.  On 4(c) concerning confidentiality there was no 
discussion.    
9.4 At the end of the consultation, he requested the Secretariat to prepare a revised draft decision 
which captured some of the views expressed. The Secretariat would circulate the revised draft to Members well in advance of future consultations that woul d be held on the subject so that there would 
be sufficient time to consult with capitals.   
9.5 The representative of Zambia
 recognized difficulties encountered in fulfilling notification 
obligation in general and in particular the difficulti es experienced in relation to the procedure. There 
was indeed a case for improving the timeliness and completeness of notification under the decision 
but it would be useful to know what steps had b een undertaken by the Secretariat including outreach 
programmes to establish where the challenges lay.  In  the absence of an identification of what these 
challenges were, changes to the decision might fail to yield the intended results. 
 
9.6 The representative of India  stated that his delegation wished to make clear that it would prefer 
a single-point notification of all the NTMs under the QR decision because that would facilitate the creation of a comprehensive database of such measur es.  There could be a possibility of duplication of 
notifications but the larger picture was to have all qua ntitative restrictions in a specific place.  If  this 
was done, then it would create a great service for this  institution. It could also be a platform for 
linking the QRs to the IDB and CTS database in or der to create an entire structure which would be 
accessible to all WTO Members through the WTO website.   9.7 The Committee took note
 of the report and the statements.   
 
10. Proposed derestriction of certain bilateral ne gotiating documentation relating to earlier 
GATT Rounds of negotiations  
- Report by the Chairman 
10.1 The Chairman  reported on the efforts being undertaken to eventually de-restrict 
documentation relating to bilateral request and offer negotiations from the 1940s and the 1950s under 
the GATT.   He had made a report on this subject at the 26  July informal meeting of the Committee.   
 
10.2 The earlier negotiations under the GATT were  carried out using the product-by-product 
modality, which was also known as the "request/offer"  approach.  The Secretariat had a good record 
of the bilateral requests, offers and agreements that  were negotiated at the time, and had taken steps in 
a joint project with Stanford Univer sity to scan much of this documenta tion to ensure its preservation.  
In line with the general trend of this organizati on towards more transparency, the Secretariat was 
looking to see whether such documents could be de restricted.  This would enable Members and the 
public to have access to this information, which was of  high historical and research value.  With this 
in mind, the idea was to consult with the Members engaged in these  earlier negotiations and whose 
material has been scanned, in order to seek authori zation from them to de-restrict this material.  It 
went without saying that de-restriction  would not take place if the author of the communication or if all the parties to a bilateral did not authorize its derestriction.  
 G/MA/M/52 
Page 8  
 
  10.3 He had met with the six delegations prior to the 26 July meeting to apprize them of this idea. 
These were the Members with the highest number of bilaterals.  However, in order to be more expeditious, and mindful of the fact that most gove rnments would first like to see the documents that 
were being proposed for de-restriction, he had requ ested the Secretariat to prepare CDs containing the 
individual information for each of the Members concer ned.  The Secretariat had since that time been 
approaching delegations individually to furnish th em with the CD containing the material which was 
being proposed for derestriction as well as with a dr aft letter which listed in detail the contents of the 
CDs.  The idea being that if a Member signed the letter, such a signature would  authorize the derestriction of the listed material.  The Secretar iat had approached some twenty-eight delegations. 
  
10.4 He was pleased to announce that authoriza tion letters had been received from Norway and 
South Africa. Chile had also indicated that they  were ready to authorize such a derestriction
6.   
 10.5 Finally, he wished to clarify that what was being referred to were bilaterals that took place up 
until 1956, so this meant that there was a large number of Members who were not involved in the 
negotiations and would, as a conseque nce, not have been approached by the Secretariat.   At the end 
of this process,  the Secretariat would issue a document listing the Members concerned as well as the 
derestricted material.   10.6 The representative of Brazil
 stated that Brazil was one of the Members that the Chairman had  
consulted. Brazil supported the proposed de-restri ction and encouraged other Members to do the 
same.  He further announced that his delegation inte nded to  submit the letter of authorization very 
soon.  10.7 The representative of Chile
 stated that, as mentioned by the Chairman, his delegation had 
consulted with capital and receive d approval to de-restrict this information provided by the 
Secretariat. His delegation was currently working on the official letter.  
  10.8 The Committee took note
 of the report and the statements..  
 
11. Draft Report (2010) of the Committee to the Council for Trade in Goods 
11.1 The Chairman  noted that the Committ ee was required to submit annually a report on its 
activities to the CTG.  A draft report, covering th e activities of the Committee in 2007, was circulated 
in document G/MA/SPEC/46.  The report w ould be updated in light of the meeting7.  
 11.2 Further, he proposed that following the prev ious year's procedure, the updated draft report 
would be sent to Members by fax, and if no commen ts were forthcoming within a certain time period 
then it would be considered adopted.  If there were minor changes, a revised report would be 
circulated with the changes mark ed clearly and if no comments were  submitted within a certain time 
frame, the revised report would be considered adopted.    11.3 The Committee so agreed
.     
 12. Election of the Vice-Chairperson 
12.1 The Chairman
 noted that he had completed his informal consultations on a Vice-Chair, and on 
that basis, he proposed that the Committee el ect Ms Sabrina Musumeci (Switzerland) as 
Vice-Chairperson of this Committee by acclamation.  
                                                      
 6 Since then, Nicaragua,  Turkey, the United States and Uruguay have authorized the de-restriction of 
their material.  
 7 Final report was circulated as G/L/938.  G/MA/M/52 
 Page 9 
 
 
  12.2 The Committee elected  Ms. Sabrina Musumeci as Vice-Chairperson.  
 
13. Other Business 
 - Website addresses of national tariffs  
  
13.1 The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to a document prepared by the Secretariat 
entitled website addresses of national tariffs  (G/MA/TA R/3/Rev.14).   This was information that he 
believed might be of use to Members and to the public. 
 
- Date of the next meeting  
 13.2 The Committee took note
 that its next meeting would take place in the spring of 2011. 
 
__________