RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG/M/52 
10 March 2009 
 (09-1196) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Fifty-second Session  
 
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 4 MARCH 2009 
 
Chairman:  Mr. D. Brauns (Germany ) 
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The formal Session of the Committee on Regiona l Trade Agreements (hereinafter CRTA or 
the Committee) was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/3315, dated 11 February 2009. 
2. The following Agenda was adopted: 
A. Adoption of the Agenda 
B. Consideration of Regional Trad e Agreements involving non-Members 
 
B. CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TR ADE AGREEMENTS INVOLVING NON -MEMBERS  
3. The Chairman  recalled that at the informal meeting of the Committee he had suggested 
approaches to submitting regional trade agreements (RTAs) involving non-Members to the provisions 
of the Transparency Mechanism (TM).  Member s had notified several RTAs including non-Members 
as parties.  The consideration of such agreements had been on hold for several years given differing 
views over the WTO legal status of RTAs involving non-Members.   
4. At the same time, Members would recall that  during the negotiations leading up to the 
adoption of the TM, it had been agreed that cons ideration of RTAs in the CRTA or Committee on 
Trade and Development (CTD) under the TM would be undertaken without prejudice to Members' 
views as to the consistency of any RTA with WTO rules.  Also, Members had emphasized the importance of developing a fuller unders tanding of the operation of all RTAs.  
5. It had appeared recently that Members would fi nd it appropriate to begin considering RTAs 
involving non-Members under the TM's procedures, and to this end had requested the Secretariat, to 
the extent it had resources available, to prepar e factual presentations on such agreements to be 
distributed and considered in the relevant WTO Committee (CRTA and CTD).  Members agreed that 
those RTAs notified since 14 December 2006, incl uding future notifications, should be taken up 
before the others – taking into account practical cons iderations such as the availability of data and the 
Secretariat's established work programme.  It should  be clear that consideration of such agreements by 
the Committee did not have any implication for the vi ews or positions of any Member with respect to 
the consistency of that RTA with the WTO rules and would be without prejudice to the rights and 
obligations of Members under the WTO Agreements, as was clearly stated in paragraphs 1 and 5 of 
the TM Decision. 
 
 WT/REG/M/52 
Page 2  
 
  6. He added that this statement would be referre d to in future CRTA meetings dealing with 
RTAs involving non-Members.  The considerati on of such agreements in the CRTA would be 
organized under a separate agenda item and was his understanding that the procedures the Committee 
established, would also be adopted by the CTD for agreements notified under the Enabling Clause.   
7. The representative of Barbados
 thanked the Chairman for his statement and for his important 
consultations with interested dele gations, including his, to arrive at the well balanced, practical and 
transparent position he had just outlined for the consideration of RTAs involving non-WTO Members 
under the TM.  His delegation welcomed the fact that a systemic solution had been found to the long 
standing systemic problem of how to consider RT As with non-WTO Members and that this solution 
was identical to that already est ablished for the consideration of RTAs involving WTO Members.  
This identical treatment was important as it did not create a hierarchy of types of RTAs nor did it seek 
to focus on any one or a group of RTAs.  Instead th e consideration would be based on the procedures 
Members had agreed in the TM taking into account th e practical capacity of the WTO Secretariat.  In 
addition his delegation underscored that the tran sparency exercise would not prejudice Members' 
views as to the consistency of any RTA with WTO rules as contained in paragraph 5 of the TM and 
that the factual presentation should not be used as  a basis for dispute settlement procedures for any 
dispute proceedings as contained in paragraph 10 of the TM.  
8. Barbados was confident that this procedure enhanced transparency, and consistency and 
commended others for their willingness to work toge ther to find a constructive outcome.  He hoped 
that in other areas of the DDA Members would show  similar initiative and enthusiasm to find an 
outcome in other long standing areas where there w as no agreement.  He thanked the Secretariat for 
their supportive role during the informal discussions and looked forward to a formal adoption of these 
procedures for the consideration of RTAs involving non-WTO Members. 
9. The representative of Brazil  expressed his delegation's appr eciation for the opportunity to 
share its views on this issue following the Chairman 's consultations over the last months.  That 
process had resulted in the defi nition of procedures for the c onsideration of RTAs between 
WTO Members and non-Members in the context of the TM.  Brazil was aware that this issue touched 
upon important systemic considerations and was ple ased that one of them, related to transparency, 
appeared to have been settled.   
10. The history of the matter was long and predat ed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
1947.  In February 1946, a Resolution of the United Nations Economic and Social Council had 
established a Preparatory Committee to discuss issues related to trade and production, exchange and 
consumption of goods, with a view to the crea tion of a United Nations Conference on Trade and 
Employment.  Based on a proposal from the United Stat es for an International Trade Organization, the 
first session of the Preparatory Committee took place between October a nd November 1946 and had 
addressed, among other matters, preferential adva ntages extended to non-Members which would 
result in discrimination against the trade of any othe r Member of that future organization.  In that 
regard, the relevant parts of the report of the fi rst session of the Preparatory Committee illustrated 
what had been happening for the past 60 year s, and he quoted: “The Preparatory Committee 
considered Article 31 of the United States Draft Ch arter which is concerned with this subject but 
decided to leave the question for consideration at a later stage”1.  This might be telling of the great 
carefulness some delegations had been showing in discussing the issue of RTAs between the 
WTO Members and non-Members, but did not justify it. 
 
 
                                                      
1 Background note by the Secr etariat “PARAGRAPH 10 OF ARTICLE XXIV OF THE GATT 1994” – 
26 April 2004, paragraph 7.  WT/REG/M/52 
 Page 3 
 
 
  11. As a matter of fact, RTAs between WTO Me mbers and non-Members existed, and they 
continued to be concluded and notified to the WTO.   In the last year alone, for example, 18 such 
agreements had been notified to the WTO S ecretariat under the TM covering goods, services and 
other matters.  This should, in itself, be sufficien t to prompt Members to engage in discussions and 
debate over these RTAs but, as pointed out, this had not been the case up until now.   
12. Brazil welcomed the positive reception by Me mbers of the procedures the Chairman had 
suggested for the consideration of RTAs involvi ng non-Members under the TM.  This would enable 
Members to have a better understanding of such ag reements and to evaluate their adequateness and 
usefulness vis-à-vis the developmental and economic integration-related objectives that had oriented 
the existence of RTAs from the beginning of the multilateral trading system.  The WTO's rules on 
RTAs provided disciplines that addressed RTAs concluded between WTO Members and 
non-Members as well as those concluded exclus ively between WTO Members.  Brazil understood 
that any consideration of RTAs between WTO Members and non-Members under the TM would not 
prejudice any rights and obligations of WTO Members nor the legal status of those agreements, including their compatibility w ith the WTO's rules on RTAs. 
13. The representative of Japan
 thanked the Chairman for having led the Committee to an 
appropriate solution regarding notified RTAs involving non-Members.  Her delegation strongly 
supported the Chairman's statement on this issue.  As the Chairman had mentioned at the earlier 
informal meeting, there were differing views among the Members over the WTO legal status of RTAs 
involving non-Members.  Japan had not yet finished its review of the issue and would like to reserve 
its rights to comment on the issue later were there to be such an opportunity.  Japan understood that 
under the current rules nothing prevented the Committee from considering RTAs involving non-
Members without prejudice to the rights and obligations of the WTO Members.  Japan strongly supported improving transparency in all RTAs a nd therefore the Chairman's proposition to move 
forward with his approach regarding RTAs involving non-Members. 
14. The representative of United States
 welcomed the Chairman’s statement on the procedures 
related to RTAs with non-Members.  His dele gation had no objection, but noted that any 
consideration of agreements between Member s and non-Members of the WTO would not be 
understood as a waiver or a substitute for the pr ocedures set out in GATT Article XXIV:10.  He 
thanked the Chairman for his efforts and looked forw ard to the prospect of a greater understanding of 
all RTAs. 
15. The representative of India  welcomed the Chairman's efforts in the last few months on the 
important issue of including RTAs involving non-Members in the implementation of the TM.  India 
also appreciated the constructive engagement of Members during the Chairman's consultations.  The 
present decision would be a significant development in serving the important systemic issue of transparency. 
16. The representative of the European Communities (EC)
 thanked the Chairman for his efforts in 
having arrived at an acceptable solution.  His de legation did not share the view expressed by Brazil 
and others particularly with re ference to GATT Article XXIV:10.  This was not borne out by the 
GATT and its practice.  Differences among WTO Members and GATT Contracting Parties had 
existed in the past on this question, yet the appr oach that the Chairman had proposed was, in his 
delegation's view, meant to set aside this issue in view of the shared intention of the Committee to 
restart the consideration of RTAs involving non-Memb ers under the TM.  The EC considered that the 
approach proposed by the Chairman was useful  and pragmatic, and his delegation supported it. 
 
 WT/REG/M/52 
Page 4  
 
  17. The representative of Ukraine
 associated her delegation with the EC.  Ukraine believed that 
the TM was a good instrument for every Member to have a global picture of RTAs.  As long as the proposal did not worsen the existing system, it could be applied.  Therefore, Ukraine favoured the approach suggested. 
18. The representative of Korea
 thanked the Chairman for his e fforts to solve the difficult issue 
which had been pending for some time.  His delegation placed great importance on transparency 
which it believed was one of the most important objectives that WTO Members had been pursuing.  
In this regard, his delegation was pleased to see the Committee had reached consensus on the issue of 
RTAs involving non-Members.  Korea strongly supported enhancing transparency with respect to RTAs involving non-Members as long as it did not prejudice Members' rights and obligations and 
looked forward to the consideration of these RTAs in the future. 
19. The representative of Turkey
 welcomed the proposal of including RTAs involving non-
Members under the TM.  It was her delegation's view  that as long as those RTAs were considered 
without prejudice to WTO Members' rights and obligations, the mechanism would function as it did for RTAs consisting exclusively of Members.    
20. The representative of Norway
 thanked the Chairman for his efforts on this issue during the 
last months, and associated her delegation with the position of the EC. 
21. The representative of Chile  thanked WTO Members and the Secretariat for having reached 
this understanding on the new procedure which his delegation supported.  Ch ile believed that this 
would enable the Committee to e nhance transparency and better understand the scope of RTAs 
involving non-Members, so that everyone could make  their own assessment of the scope and degree 
of consistency or the impact of these agreements on Members.  However, as Brazil and the United 
States had stated, this did not constitute complian ce with WTO provisions, and was without prejudice 
to the rights and obligations of WTO Me mbers.  Chile supported these statements. 
22. The representative of China  thanked the Chairman for his efforts in solving the problem 
concerning non-Members.  His de legation supported the Chairman's  statement and was committed to 
actively participate in this process as the ASEAN-Ch ina services agreement was one of those to be 
considered by the Committee after the a doption of the proposed approach.    
23. The representative of Australia  thanked the Chairman for having convened the meeting.  His 
delegation agreed with the Chairman and other Memb ers that in the interest s of transparency, RTAs 
involving non-Members should be considered under the relevant WTO Committees noting that such 
consideration would not prejudice WTO Members'  rights and obligations.  Australia strongly 
supported the proposed approach for considering such agreements. 
24. The representative of Hong Kong, China  supported the proposal to consider RTAs involving 
non-Members under the TM, with the understanding th at such consideration would not prejudice 
Members' views on the WTO consistency of these RTAs as well as Members' rights and obligations under the WTO Agreements.   
25. The representative of Costa Rica
 supported the Chairman's proposal.  This was a practical 
solution and would enhance transparency for RTAs  involving non-Members, which was the main 
purpose.  Costa Rica reiterated its position that th is should be without prejudice to the rights and 
obligations of WTO Members and supported what ha d been stated by Brazil, the United States and 
Chile. 
  WT/REG/M/52 
 Page 5 
 
 
  26. The representative of Jamaica  fully supported the Chairman's statement outlining the 
proposed method for the treatment of notified RTAs involving non-Members.  This had provided the 
Committee with a systemic solution to a systemic probl em that had been before it for some time.  It 
was an objective way in which to proceed as the cons ideration of such agreements would not be based 
on criteria or procedures that were not part of the TM.  Like other WTO Members, his delegation 
appreciated the importance of transparency as one of the key principles of the WTO and also noted 
the importance that Members had attached to having a full understanding of RTAs.  In this regard, he 
assured the Committee of his delegation's continuous cooperation in its work. 
27. The representative of Colombia  said that the Chairman's proposal  appeared to fully meet the 
objective of enhancing transparency in RTAs involving non-Members.  In particular, it would also 
guarantee that this approach was without prejudice to the rights and obligations of WTO Members. 
28. The representative of Côte d'Ivoire  was open to any initiative to consider RTAs involving 
non-Members from two perspectives.  Firstly, fro m a domestic standpoint, as the Committee was 
aware, Côte d'Ivoire had already notified its Econom ic Partnership Agreement with the EC in a fully 
transparent manner.  Secondly, from a multilateral pe rspective, as his country was one of the main 
actors in the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States, like Jamaica, which had members 
who did not belong to the WTO.  In terms of requirements and the need for transparency from both standpoints, his delegation was open and committed  to any discussion on the TM for the Committee 
to better understand the impact of these RTAs invol ving non-Members.  This would be undertaken 
without prejudice to the rights and obligations of all those Members involved. 
29. The Chairman
 thanked the Members for their cooperation in reaching an agreement on the 
method and procedure regarding the considerati on of the RTAs involving non-Members.  The 
Committee and the Secretariat would start to work  according to the procedure he had outlined. 
30. The Committee took note  of the Chairman's statement and of the comments made. 
__________