WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG112/4 
7 February 2005 
 
 (05-0486) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:   English 
 
 
 
EURO-MEDITERRANEAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE  
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND MOROCCO 
 
Questions and Replies  
 
 
 The following communication, dated 1 February 20 05, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the European Communities.   This document reproduces the questions addressed  to the Parties and the responses submitted. 
The questions and replies set out below are or ganized in accordance with document WT/REG112/3 
and Corrigendum 1.  
_______________ 
 
 II. TRADE PROVISIONS 
 
1. Import Restrictions 
1. Would the parties provide the list of products in annex 1 to which an agricultural 
component applies? 
 As far as the EU is concerned, the agricultura l components relating to Annex 1 are identical to 
those included in the scheme to which the EU co mmitted itself following the Marrakesh Agreement. 
 
2. Is there any weighted average figure of th e agricultural component on imports of the 
goods originating in Morocco? 
 The calculation method is identical to the one  that was agreed following the Marrakesh 
Agreement. 
 
3. Rules of Origin 
3. Would the parties explain “the concept of bilateral cumulation, of cumulation of 
materials originating in Algeria and Tunisia and of cumulation of working or processing 
carried out in the Community, Algeri a, Morocco or Tunisia” in detail? 
4. What is the rationale for extending cumulation  of products originating from non-parties 
to this Agreement?  
- Bilateral cumulation:  
 WT/REG112/4 
Page 2  
 
  In trade between Morocco and the Community, pr oducts originating in one of the parties are 
considered as originating in the other party, pr ovided they have undergone processing or working 
going beyond the insufficient operations referred to in Article 8 of the protocol on rules of origin.   
 - Cumulation with materials originating in Algeria or Tunisia:  
 
 In trade between Morocco and the Community, pr oducts originating in Algeria or Tunisia are 
considered as originating in Morocco or the Community when they are processed there for 
exportation to the partner country, provided they  have undergone working or processing going beyond 
the insufficient operations referred to in Article 8 of the protocol on rules of origin.  This cumulation 
assumes the existence of identical rules of origin governing trade be tween Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia 
and the Community.  - Cumulation of working or processing:   
 Working or processing carried out in Morocco (or in the Community) or, when the identical 
rules of origin condition is met, in Algeria or in Tunisia, is considered as having been carried out in the Community (or in Morocco) when the pro ducts obtained undergo subsequent working or 
processing in the Community (or in Morocco) and wh en all of the working or processing carried out, 
taken together, fulfils the rules of origin.  
 The finished product will originate in the Community or in the country where the last 
processing took place, provided that processing goes beyond the insufficient working or processing referred to in Article 8 of the protocol on rules of origin.   Only materials originating in the contracting parties to the Agreement, namely Morocco and 
the Community, and those originating in Algeri a or Tunisia subject to the above-mentioned 
conditions, are eligible for cumu lation for the purposes of origin. 
  Pan-Euro-Med cumulation helps to stimulate regional integration a nd tends to encourage 
investment in the region.  Pan-Euro-Med cumulation of origin promotes the use of components originating in the partner countries forming part of the Med region, linked among themselves by free 
trade agreements with the same rules of origin. 
 
5. Safeguards 
5. Is the safeguard measure under Article 25 of the Agreement a global measure or a 
bilateral one? 
 The provisions in Article 25 define the situa tions in which the EC or Morocco may take 
safeguard action affecting imports from the other part y. A first situation is the one envisaged in the 
WTO Safeguards Agreement for the adoption of gl obal (i.e. erga omnes) measures, while a second 
situation can justify the adop tion of a bilateral measure. 
  In case of global measures (i.e. erga omnes measures), any action taken by EC or Morocco 
will have to conform to WTO safeguard rules and, in addition, as far as the EC/Morocco relationships 
are concerned, to Articles 25 (and 27) of the EC/M orocco Agreement. In case of bilateral action, 
measures may be applied, inter alia , in case the conditions of the second indent of Article 25 are met.  
 
6. If it is a global one, the second requirement under Article 25 does not exist in the WTO 
Safeguard Agreement. What is the rationale fo r introducing a new requirement for safeguard 
measures? Which factors will be taken into a ccount in order to establish this requirement 
during the investigation procedures? Do the pa rties consider that this requirement in the  WT/REG112/4 
 Page 3 
 
 
 investigation procedure is established in acco rdance with the WTO Safeguard Agreement? In 
which way? 
 This question is in part responded to above . The second requirement of Article 25 is not 
relevant in case of global measures, since, as correct ly stated by Korea, it does not exist in the WTO 
Safeguard Agreement. 
 
6. Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures 
7. Paragraph 2 of Article 27 contains the senten ce stipulating as follows: “In the selection 
of measures, priority shall be given to tho se which least disturb the functioning of the 
Agreement.” Does this sentence require the Parties to treat Parties and non-Parties separately 
with respect to the imposition of different measures or different content, or the degree to which 
measures are imposed? If the Parties and non- Parties have been reviewed together in the 
investigation procedure, what is the rationale fo r discriminating the Parties with the non-Parties 
in the selection of a measure? Is this sen tence reconciled with the WTO Anti-dumping 
Agreement? 
 As a matter of principle, the EC applies tr ade defence measures in a non-discriminatory way 
in full consistency with the WTO rules. Any measu res are imposed or reviewed on the basis of the 
pertinent dumping and injury methodologies emanating from WTO, which are applied in a non-discriminatory way. If any discussion is undertaken  vis à vis one of the Parties then the same 
procedure will be followed with other Parties.   
 Similarly, if Morocco is called upon to a pply an anti-dumping or countervailing measure, it 
will do so in conformity with the rules laid down in  the relevant WTO agreemen ts whatever the origin 
of the product subject to an anti-dumping or countervailing procedure.  
8. Sub-paragraph 3(d) of Article 27 of the Agreement establishes the precautionary 
safeguard measure in the case of anti-dumping under Article 24. However, the WTO 
Antidumping Agreement has no provision with regard to above measure. How do the parties 
reconcile the discrepancy in the investigation procedure? 
 With regard to anti-dumping measures sub-para graph 3(d) of Article 27 of the EC-Morocco 
Agreement is to be interpreted meaning that pr ior to the imposition of provisional anti-dumping 
measures the requirement containe d in sub-paragraph 2 of Article  27 (prior information of the 
Association Committee) does not apply where excep tional circumstances requiring immediate action 
make such prior information impossible. Korea is thus not concerned by this provision since sub-paragraph 3(d) of Article 27 refe rs to bilateral information pro cedures which do not impinge upon the 
non-discriminatory application of all procedural steps foreseen by WTO and EC anti-dumping legislation, and it is without prejudice to the non- discriminatory application of Article 7 of the Anti-
dumping Agreement. All requirements contained in  Article 7 of the Anti-dumping Agreement would 
have to be met also in case of a provisional measu re against imports originating in Morocco if the 
measure is applied by the EC or against imports orig inating in the EC in the case of a measure applied 
by Morocco.  
8. Sector-Specific Provisions 
9. At the meeting of the CRTA on 19 February 2002, the parties reported that the 
assessment on further agricultural liberalization had been delayed but that negotiations would 
take place shortly. We would appreciate informat ion from the parties on the state of play on 
these negotiations and we would like to express our interest in being informed of the results of 
those negotiations as soon as they are known. WT/REG112/4 
Page 4  
 
  Under Articles 16 and 18 of the EU-Morocco A ssociation Agreement in  order to implement 
"greater liberalization of their reciprocal trad e in agricultural products", negotiations on the 
agricultural protocols of the Agreement were in itiated in 2002.  These negotiations, the purpose of 
which was to open up the two markets, led in Novemb er to the amendment of protocols 1 and 3 of the 
Agreement.   
 
 Thus, thanks to these negotiations, Morocco w as able to open up more of its market for 
agricultural products, notably those belonging to tr aditional trade flows, through concessions in the 
form of duty free or reduced-duty preferential quotas.    
 As regards Europe, existing concessions were improved to help increase market access not 
only for products belonging to traditional trade flows, but also for new products, to encourage 
diversification and provide openings for Moroccan exports.     In an effort to expand liberalization and to achieve the objective of setting up a free trade area 
as provided for under the Barcelona Declaration, a pe riodic review has been scheduled for 2007 with 
a view to implementing new liberalisation measures in 2008.   
__________