WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/GEN/49/Add.1 
14 October 2005 
 (05-4722) 
Negotiating Group on Rules Original:   English 
   
PROPOSAL ON ISSUES RELATING TO EVIDENCE, PUBLIC NOTICE  
AND EXPLANATION OF THE DETERMINATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLES 6 AND 12 OF THE ADA
 
 
Communication from Norway  
 
Addendum  
 
 The following communication, dated 13 October 2005, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Norway. 
 
 The submitting delegation has requested that th is paper, which was submitted to the Rules 
Negotiating Group as an informal document (JOB(05)/1 32/Add.1), also be circulated as a formal 
document. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
FURTHER PROPOSAL ON ISSUES RELATING TO 
ARTICLE 6 OF THE ADA  
 
 1. Introduction  
 Members have had a preliminary discussion on the major aspects of the due process and 
transparency paper submitted by Norway in TN/RL/GEN/49 during the Rules-session of September 2005.  The discussion  revealed a  broad interest amongst Members on this key issue and 
valuable input was given on how to carry the discussion forward.   
 At this juncture Norway would like to provide  an update on some of the elements discussed 
and on the background of proposals for changes reflected in Annex of TN/RL/GEN/49.  For the sake of expediency we have concentrated on the elemen ts of the proposals relating to Article 6 of the 
ADA.  We have considered various input from Memb ers and thus amended the legal text relating to 
certain, but not all parts of Article 6.  We expect  that the various inputs from Members reflected in 
this revised text will facilitate an agreement on i ssues related to the due process and transparency.  
Norway welcomes additional comments on these and other transparency and due process-related 
issues in the course of the negotiations.   
 This document presents a number of specific  proposals for clarification and improvement. It 
does not represent final positions.  TN/RL/GEN/49/Add.1 
Page 2  
 
 ANNEX 
Summary of proposed
 changes to current text of ADA 
(For ease of reference we reproduce below the current text of the relevant Articles of 
the  AD Agreement, with the proposed ch anges included.  Additions are underlined , 
while deletions are presented with strikethroughs.)  
Article 6 - Evidence 
 
6.1 Authorities shall actively and in an obj ective and unbiased manner seek the evidence 
necessary for the investigation .  All interested parties in an anti- dumping investigation shall be given 
notice1 of the information which the authorities require  and ample opportunity to present in writing all 
evidence which they  the interested parties  consider relevant in respect of the investigation in 
question.2 
6.1.1 Exporters or foreign producers receiving questionnaires used in an anti-dumping 
investigation shall be given at least 30  45 days for reply.3  Due consideration should be given 
to any request for an extension of the 30  45-day period and, upon cause shown, such an 
extension should be granted whenever practicable.4  
 6.1.4 Where information submitted must be translated, authorities shall accept unofficial 
translations, and shall not require certification by official translators.5  
 
..... 
 
6.4 The authorities shall whenever practicable  provide timely  prompt  opportunities for all 
interested parties to see all information that is re levant to the presentations of their cases, that is not 
confidential as defined in paragr aph 5, and that is used by  before  the authorities in an anti-dumping 
investigation, regardless of whether the author ities use or intend to use a particular piece of 
information,  and to prepare presentations on the basis of  this information.  Authorities shall make 
available to all interested parties on request an update d list of all  documents contained in the file of  
an anti-dumping investigation, including a list of al l documents withheld because of confidentiality.  
The list shall be updated throughout the investigation.  Authorities shall  maintain a location where 
                                                      
 1 New footnote to be inserted:  Authorities shall make best efforts  to identify the exporters and/or 
producers concerned, including through, inter alia,  checking customs declarations, through requests to industry 
associations in the exporting Member, through industry publications in the exporting Member and any other 
means reasonably available to them.  
2 Editorial note: Any possible conflict of the new footnote above with Article 5.5 will be solved 
through the proposals in FANs paper.....related to the initiation of investigations.  
 3 Existing footnote no. 15:   As a general rule, the time-limit for exporters shall be counted from the date 
of receipt of the questionnaire, which for this purpose shall be deemed to have been received one week from the 
date on which it was sent to the respondent or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic representative of the exporting Member or, in the case of a separate customs te rritory Member of the WTO, an official representative 
of the exporting territory.  
4 Editorial note: Instead of extending the time limit, we are willing to discuss possibilities to enhance 
the extension clause. Special treatment of SMEs and langu age problems in responding to questionnaires  are of 
particular importance. In this respect , reference is also made to G/ADP/7.  
5 Editorial note: We raise the question whether the is sues of language and the review of documents are 
more appropriately dealt with in ANNEX II, which  then would be, and probably already is procedures relating 
to the whole of Article 6 and not solely paragraph 8 of Article 6.   TN/RL/GEN/49/Add.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
information will be placed  promptly after its receipt or creation, and where free access shall be given 
to all interested parties to review or copy the information.6 
 6.5.1. The authorities shall require interested pa rties providing confidential information to furnish 
non
-confidential summaries thereof.  a public version of the document containing the confidential 
information.  The public version of the document shall be identical to the version containing the 
confidential information except that the confidential information shall be redacted and replaced by a 
non-confidential summary.  Upon cause shown, where that is not possible, a  non-confidential 
summary may replace the confidential document.   These summaries shall be in  sufficiently  detailed  to 
permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information submitted in confidence.  In 
exceptional circumstances, such  parties may indicate that such information is not susceptible to 
summary.  In such exceptional circumstances, a st atement of the reasons why summarization is not 
possible must be provided to all interested parties.  
 
..... 
 
6.6 [Except in circumstances provided for in paragraph  8, t , ]  7  The authorities shall during the 
course of an investigation satisfy themselves as to  the accuracy of  the information supplied by 
interested parties  upon which their findings are based.  Within a reasonable period   after receipt of 
responses to the questionnaires, the authorities shall se t out in writing any requests for clarifications or 
additional requirements for information from the interested party concerned .  If evidence or 
information is not accepted, the suppl ying party shall be informed promptly of the reasons therefore, 
and shall have the opportunity to provide further ev idence or information or explanations within a 
reasonable period.  
 
..... 
 
6.13 The authorities shall take due account of any di fficulties experienced by interested parties, in 
particular [small companies] [SMEs]8, in supplying information requested, and shall provide any 
assistance practicable.  In particular the authoriti es shall respond in a timely manner to requests for 
clarifications of the questionnaire, including on the information needed.  
 
__________ 
 
 
                                                      
6 Editorial note: We raise the question whether the is sues of language and the review of documents are 
more appropriately dealt with in ANNEX II, which  then would be, and probably already is procedures relating 
to the whole of Article 6 and not solely paragraph 8 of Article 6.  
7 Editorial note: In FANs proposal TN/RL/GEN/64 on Facts Available, Article 6.8 is changed. Thus the 
first sentence in Article 6.6 may be deleted.  
8 Editorial note: SMEs appears to be a term commonly used by Members, and may be a better 
alternative to the term “small companies”. See also footnote 4.