WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SG/Q1/NOR/3 
4 November 2009 
 (09-5495) 
Committee on Safeguards Original:   English 
  
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER 
ARTICLE 12.6 OF THE AGREEMENT 
 
Replies to Questions from the UNITED STATES
1 Regarding  
the Notification of NORWAY2 
 
  The following communication, dated 3 November 2009, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Norway.    
_______________ 
 
  It is referred to questions posed by United  States to Norway in G/SG/Q1/NOR/2, as regards 
the notification in G/SG/N/1/NOR/4 of the Norwegian Customs Act.    
A. G
ENERAL STATEMENT  
  The questions raised concern the implementa tion of the WTO Agreement into the Norwegian 
domestic customs legislation.  This gives us th e opportunity to outline some general aspects of the 
legal status of the WTO Agreements in the No rwegian legal system, a nd the legal techniques 
employed to ensure full conformity with our WTO obligations.   
  It is necessary to describe the relationship between Norwegian law and public international 
law.  Generally, it is usual to di stinguish between monistic and dualis tic states.  In monistic states, 
treaties that bind the state are deemed to take i mmediate effect and as such be applied by national 
courts and authorities.   
 
 In dualistic states, such as Norway, a special act of implementation is, in principle, required in 
order for the treaty to apply as part of domestic law.  Such special acts of implementation are not necessary if domestic legislation is in harmony with the obligations of the treaty.  Thus, where legislation already conforms to the WTO obligations there will be no need to promulgate a special law 
to implement the particular WTO obligation.   
  However, domestic legislation must clearly state, and circumscribe, the level of competence and the relevant body authorised to handle cases and take decisions in question – if decisions are 
required.  It is for this reason that both the new and the former Customs legislation included general 
references to safeguards, anti-dumping measures and countervailing measures, authorizing the 
relevant Ministry to promulgate implementing regulations and take decisions.  As  here, often the Act 
itself will only contain general principles coupled with  an authorization to the relevant Ministry to 
develop the provisions further in implementing regu lations.  This can be seen in the new Customs 
Act, where the Act itself contains only a condensed version of the main principles of the relevant 
                                                     
 
1 G/SG/Q1/NOR/2.   
2 G/SG/N/1/NOR/4.   G/SG/Q1/NOR/3 
Page 2  
 
  WTO obligations regarding trade remedies.  Neither  the former Act nor the present Act contained a 
full implementation of all the aspects of the relevant WTO Agreements.     Actual investigations in trade remedy situ ations, however, would not, and could not, be 
undertaken before implementing regulations are in place.  Norway has in general followed a cautious 
line with respect to the use of all trade remedy measures.  No measure has been imposed by Norway 
under the Agreement on Safeguards in recent years, i.e. since the establishment of the WTO.  The present government has not signalled any change of this policy.     Implementing regulations relating to the Agreem ent on Safeguards were not in place under the 
previous Customs Act.  The government does not in tend to promulgate any implementing regulations 
under the new Act.     For this reason, Norway can generally confirm and assure that, if – hypothetically – Norway 
were to introduce implementing regulations  in the future;  and, furthermore, if Norway – 
hypothetically – were to introduce an actual me asure against any imported product, then such 
measures would certainly conform to all Norway's WTO obligations.    B. Q
UESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES  
 
Question 1 
 
 With regard to Chapter 10, Trade Measures, Section10-5 Safeguard Measures and 
Countermeasures (3)  of the Customs Act , please confirm that any safeguard measure applied 
under this article would be progressively liberalized  over the period of imposition.  In addition, 
please confirm, in accordance with Article 7.4 of  the WTO Agreement on Safeguards, that if the 
duration of the safeguard measure exceeds three years, that Norway will review the situation 
not later than mid-term of the measure and, if appropriate, withdraw it or increase the pace of liberalization.   
 
Reply
 
 
 The Norwegian customs act of 2007 contains – as the previous one – some provisions on 
trade measures, as has been the tradition over a centu ry.  As said, the revision of the customs domestic 
legislation has been solely of a technical nature, and Norway has for the time being no intention of 
bringing these legal provisions into action.  Norway  keeps strictly to the obligations resulting from 
the WTO – Agreement, and all domestic legislati on must be interpreted in this context.   
 
 With this in mind, we can therefore confir m that any safeguard measure applied under the 
Customs Act, Section 10-5, titled "Safeguard M easures and Countermeasures", Para. 3 should be 
progressively liberalized over the period of imposition, as stated in the WTO Agreement on Safeguards.  We can also confirm that, if such a measure would be applied, and its duration exceeds 
three years, Norway will review the situation no t later than mid-term of the measure and, if 
appropriate, withdraw the measure or increase th e pace of liberalization, in accordance with 
Article 7.4 of the Safeguard Agreement.    
Question 2  
 
 Chapter 12, Special administrative rules, Sec tion 12-8 Investigation, etc. in cases relating 
to safeguard measures (2)  of the Customs Act  states "The Ministry may, as a step in preparing a 
case, obtain advice from a specially appointed committee, and entrust to other supervisory or 
control authorities to carry out an investigation".     G/SG/Q1/NOR/3 
 Page 3 
 
 
  a) Please describe the likely composition and expected duties and responsibilities of any 
such "specially appointed advisory commi ttee" and any such "other supervisory or 
control authorities".   
 
b) Would either a "specially appointed commi ttee" or "other supervisory or control 
authority" have the ability to adjust or remand Ministry of Finance determinations?  
Please clarify which authority of the Government would make the final decision to impose a safeguard measure.   
 
Reply
 
 
 There is de facto no "specially appointed comm ittee" established for the time being, due to the 
fact that the responsible Ministry (i. e. of Mini stry of Finance) does not consider such a committee 
needed.  If in the future a need will be identified, the committee's composition should be broad, with 
representatives from all sectors and consumers.  However, the Ministry's responsibility and 
competence will not be influenced by the establis hing of a committee, due to the fact that the 
committee should only have advisory functions, and its conclusions shall not bind the Ministry.   
 
The "specially appointed committee" or "other s upervisory or control authority" will not have 
the ability to adjust or remand Ministry of Finan ce determinations.  The Customs Act states clearly 
that imposing a safeguard measure should be dete rmined only by the King in council, i.e. the 
government.   
 
Question 3  
  Please identify the provisions of, and any co rresponding revisions or amendments to, the 
Public Administration Act of 1967 or other similar legislation that specifies procedures that 
govern the conduct of investigations in safeguard proceedings.   
 
Reply
 
  General provisions in the Public Administra tive Act should be appli cable, setting conditions 
for i.a. preparations, consultations and administra tive appeal.  As there is no implementation 
regulation, any need for further supplementing regulati ons has not been looked into.  It should also be 
noted that any administrative decision, those done by the Government in Council inclusively, may be 
subject to appeal in national courts.    
 
 
__________