WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/SG/Q2/TUR/3 
5 October 2011 
 (11-4835) 
Committee on Safeguards Original:   English 
  
 
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(A) OF THE AGREEMENT 
ON SAFEGUARDS ON INITIATION OF AN INVESTIGATION 
AND THE REASONS FOR IT 
 
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(B) OF THE AGREEMENT ON 
SAFEGUARDS ON FINDING A SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT 
THEREOF CAUSED BY INCREASED IMPORTS  
 
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(C) OF 
THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
 
Questions Posed by INDIA  
Regarding Notifications of TURKEY1 
 
(Certain types of cotton yarn) 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 3 October 2011, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of India. 
_______________ 
  
1. What was the date on which the original measures were put in place?   
 
(a) WTO Documents bearing Nos. G/SG/N/11/TUR 7, 10 and 14/Suppl.1 stated the date as 
14 July 2008 (paragraph 5(i)). 
(b) In the Explanation of the Turkish delegation on the Safeguard Measure received from the 
Under Secretariat of the Prime Ministry of Turkey, the date was stated as 15 July 2008. 
(c) The Application filed by the Turkish industry stated the date of imposition as 
15 July 2008 in Paragraph 1.4 and as 14 July 2008 in paragraph 4.   
2. On what date did the original measures lapse?  
 
3. Does Turkey agree that extension of the period of application of existing measures is covered 
under Article 7.2 of AoS?  
(a) If yes; can it be extended before making a relevant determination as required under 
Article 7.2? 
(b) If no, under what provision the period is sought to be extended?   
                                                      
1 G/SG/N/6/TUR/14/Suppl.1-G/SG /N/7/TUR/10-G/SG/N/11/TUR/17. G/SG/Q2/TUR/3 
Page 2  
 
  4. Does Article 7 authorize levy of provisional m easures in a review intended to 'extend the 
period of application of existing measures'?  
(a) Does the sequence mentioned in Article 7.3 as also in Article 6 that "….the duration of 
any such provisional  measure shall be counted as a part of the initial period and any 
extension referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Article 7"  indicate that levy of 
provisional measure is contemplated only on ce during the lifetime of a measure and not 
on multiple occasions?   
5. Whether the provisional safeguard measure pr oposed in the above WTO documents have 
been put in place?  If so, what is the date on which the provisional measure came into force? 
 
(a) When did Turkey notify WTO about the levy of provisional measures? 
(b) If there is no gap between expiry of the or iginal measure and imposition of provisional 
measure, under which provision of AoS did Turkey apply the provisional measures on a 
retroactive or retrospective basis? 
(c) If there is a gap between expiry of the or iginal measure and imposition of provisional 
measure, the following questions  follow: 
(i) Under which provision of AoS, did Turkey revive the lapsed measures?  
(ii) Applying a safeguard measure when no measure is in force would amount to 
'applying the measure again' on the same product as contemplated under Article 7.5.  Did Turkey comply with the requirements of Article 7.5? 
6. Turkey's notification to WTO states the reasons  for levy of provisional measures as follows:  
 
…… provisional safeguard measure is proposed to  eliminate uncertainty that could come out 
with the ongoing investigation on the necessity of the extension of the current measures'.  
[Conclusion (ii) under Section B.5.] 
 
7. Does Article 6 permit levy of provisional measures for such a reason?  
 8. Did Turkey make a preliminary determinati on as required under Article 6 of AoS before 
notifying their proposal to levy 'provisional measures' ?  If yes, can they make available a copy of the 
said preliminary determination? 
 
9. Did Turkey make a preliminary determination of 'increased imports'?  Can Turkey make 
available a country wise summary of the import statistics considered by Turkey while making the preliminary determination?  
10. Did Turkey establish that increased imports aro se as an effect of obligations undertaken by 
Turkey, including tariff concessions, as required under Article XIX of GATT 1994?  If yes, can they provide a copy of their findings in this regard? 
 
11. Did Turkey determine which domestic producers constitute the domestic industry within the 
meaning of Article 4.1(c) of AOS?  If yes, can they give us a list containing the names and addresses 
of the domestic producers who have participated in th e investigation by providing injury information? 
 12. Did Turkey evaluate all the mandatory injury pa rameters referred to in Article 4.2 of AoS in 
making the preliminary determination in question?  G/SG/Q2/TUR/3 
 Page 3 
 
 
  13. In particular, did Turkey examine 'profits a nd losses' of the Turkish industry while making the 
preliminary determination?  14. Did Turkey establish a causal link between increased imports and the serious injury? 
 
15. Imports of which period were considered by Tu rkey while selecting the countries eligible for 
exemption under Article 9.1 of AoS?  16. Did Turkey examine the evidence, if any presen ted by the domestic industry that they are 
adjusting as required under Article 7.2?     
 
17. What was the rationale behind reducing the rate of  duty at the rate of 1% per annum?  Does 
Turkey consider it progressive enough to meet the requirements of Article 7.4?  Can the pace of 
liberalization be kept at the uniform rate of 1% even during the 'extended' period of application of 
measures?  
 
18. What are the 'substantially equivalent level of concessions and other obligations' extended by 
Turkey pursuant to Article 8.1 upon the imposition of the original measures?  19. What are Turkey's views on offering adequate trade compensation as per Article 8.1 due to 
the adverse effects the safeguard measures have cau sed to India since the imposition of measures in 
July 2008?  
  
__________