RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG/M/53 
1 May 2009 
 (09-2130) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Fifty-third Session  
 
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 20 APRIL 2009 
 
Chairman:  Mr. D. Brauns (Germany ) 
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The 53rd Session of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (hereinafter CRTA or the 
Committee) was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/3332.Rev.1, dated 1 April 2009.  The Chairman  
announced the inclusion of the issue of notification of the Golf Cooperation Council (GCC) Customs 
Union Agreement in the Agenda following the request  of the United States, along with the European 
Communities (EC), Japan and Australia.  Under "O ther Business", he announced his intention to 
provide the remaining programme of meetings for th e year and to raise the issue of monitoring of 
trade developments associated with the recent global financial and economic crisis. 
2. The following Agenda was adopted: 
A. Adoption of the Agenda 
B. Election of Officers 
C. Consideration of Regiona l Trade Agreements (RTAs) 
I. Status report on the Committee's work II. Southern Africa Customs Union, goods III. Enlargement of the European Union to 25 Member States, services 
IV. Free Trade Agreement between the EF TA States and the Republic of Korea, 
goods and services 
V. Economic Partnership Agreement be tween Japan and Malaysia, goods and 
services 
VI. Free Trade Agreement between Pakistan and China, goods VII. Association Agreement betw een Turkey and Tunisia, goods. 
D. Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) notification of Customs Union. 
E.  Other Business  
3. The Chairman
 recalled that the Latin American Integration Association (LAIA) had been 
granted observer status to the CRTA on an ad hoc  basis and sought confirmation to extend an 
invitation to LAIA to attend the Committee's next meeting.  It was so agreed . 
B. ELECTION OF OFFICERS  
4. Under Item B, the Chairman recalled the c onsensus in the General Council meeting of 
3 February 2009 that he would continue to hold the position of Chairman of the Committee. He, 
therefore, proposed that the Committee confir m his re-election. The Committee so agreed . WT/REG/M/53 
Page 2  
 
  C. C
ONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS  
C.I. Status Report on the Committee's work 
 5. Under this Agenda item, the Chairman
 provided Members with an update on the 
implementation of the Transparency Mechanism (T M). First, he informed them that 30 early 
announcements had been placed on the WTO website  (not counting those RTAs which had been 
subsequently notified).  He thanked those Member s who had submitted information in line with the 
requirements of the TM and encouraged others to do so.  He also reminded Members to inform the 
Secretariat of any changes in the status of the early  announcement in order to keep them up to date.  
For instance, if an agreement moved from being under negotiation to being signed, this should be 
communicated to the Secretariat so that the information on early announcements could be kept up to 
date.  As regards the factual abstracts to be prep ared on those RTAs covering trade in goods for which 
a factual examination had already been completed,  19 had been posted on the WTO website, and 35 
had been prepared and sent to the relevant par ties for their comments. He urged those parties to 
submit their comments as soon as possible. The Secr etariat had informed him that all 20 factual 
abstracts in services had been completed and sent to the relevant parties.  Comments had already been 
received on some and should be pos ted on the WTO website shortly. 
6. As regards the preparation of the factual pr esentations under the remit of the CRTA, in the 
case of RTAs involving WTO Members only there were presently 41 RTAs for which a factual presentation had to be prepared, counting go ods and services separately.  The Chairman
 recalled that 
at the Committee's 52nd Session held on 4 March 2009, Member  had agreed to begin considering 
RTAs involving non-Members under the procedure of the TM.  Thus, factual presentations on a 
further 41 RTAs involving non-Members were to be prepared, with priority for those RTAs notified 
since the adoption of the TM on 14 December 2006.  Data requests for the 21 RTAs notified since the 
adoption of the TM had been sent to the relevant parties.  The consideration of these RTAs would 
begin in 2010.  He asked the Secretariat to provi de further details on the preparation of factual 
presentations. 
7. A representative of the Secretariat  said that ten RTAs (counting goods and services 
separately) had been scheduled for consideration in the current CRTA meeting.  Of these, all were on 
the current Session's Agenda, with the exception of  Mexico-Northern Triangle, goods and services.  
The consideration of this Agreement had been  postponed until the September meeting, as the 
Secretariat had not yet received comments from the Pa rties, despite the fact that the goods aspects had 
been sent to them on 17 November 2008 and the services aspects on 20 January 2009.  She, therefore, 
urged the Parties to this Agreement to submit thei r comments as soon as possible in order to meet the 
September deadline.  
8. Twenty-one RTAs were scheduled for the next  meeting of the CRTA in September, counting 
goods and services separately.  The situation with regard to these RTAs was as follows: for Turkey-
Albania, goods, the Factual Presentation had been circulated; for EU Enlargement (27), goods and 
services, and for Armenia-Ukraine, goods, comment s from the Parties had recently been received, 
thus the September deadline should be met; fo r Georgia-Ukraine and Ukraine Kyrgyz Republic 
goods, Pakistan-Malaysia services, and Korea-Singa pore, Japan-Indonesia and Japan-Brunei, all 
goods and services, the Factual Presentations had b een sent to the Parties and comments should be 
received shortly; for Chile-Panama, goods and servic es, the Factual Presentation had been drafted and 
would be sent to the Parties for comment soon; for US-Bahrain, goods and services, outstanding data 
had been received but not in time to send the Fact ual Presentation to the Parties for comments by the 
deadline for consideration in the September meet ing, thus this RTA would be rescheduled for 
consideration at a later date; fo r Japan-Thailand, goods and services, some outstanding data issues had 
to be resolved with Thailand, and this Agreem ent had been scheduled for consideration in the 
November meeting; for EC-South Africa, data re quested from South Africa in 2007 had not yet been  WT/REG/M/53 
 Page 3 
 
 
  received, and the Secretariat had contacted South Africa in an effort to try to resolve this matter; for 
EC-Egypt, originally scheduled for consideration in  July 2007, tariff data from Egypt had not been 
provided yet, and the Secretariat was in touch with the authorities in an effort to resolve this situation. 
9. She concluded by thanking those parties who had responded in a timely fashion to requests 
for data and comments, and urged Members to do thei r best to respect the sp ecific deadlines in order 
to make the process as efficient as possible.  She recalled the very heavy workload of the Committee 
for the year and for the foreseeable future and asked for Members’ cooperation to respect the 
timelines mandated by the TM for the preparation of  the factual presentations.  This would help the 
Secretariat in reducing the backlog of other RT As, particularly those involving non-Members. 
10. The Chairman  reminded Members that at the last CRTA Meeting they had agreed that an 
agreement should be withdraw from the Agenda if questions and answers had not been circulated 
three days in advance of the meeting.  He urged Members to do their outmost to provide information, 
in particular questions and answers, on time.  
C. II-VII. (The minutes of the consideration of th e Agreements listed under ag enda items C.II-VII are 
being distributed as separate documents). 
 
D. GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL (GCC)  NOTIFICATION OF CUSTOMS UNION  
11. Under Item D, the Chairman  informed Members of the request received from the United 
States along with the European Communities (EC), Ja pan and Australia for including in the Agenda, 
the notification of the GCC Customs Union, with pa rticular reference to paragraph 20 of the TM. In 
its request, the United States had referred to the meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development 
(CTD), held on 13 March, during which the United States, the EC, Australia , Canada and Japan had 
requested that the issue be discussed  in the CRTA. He gave the floor to the United States to elaborate 
further. 
12. The representative of the United States  recalled the statement made at the CRTA meeting in 
November 2008, where concerns with Saudi Arabia 's change in notification of the GCC Customs 
Union under the Enabling Clause had been expressed .  She clarified that there was no quarrel with 
any developing country notifying an agreement under the Enabling Clause, as there had already been 
notifications of customs unions among developing countries either under the Enabling Clause or GATT Article XXIV.  The United States had also completed a preliminary analysis of the tariff schedules of individual GCC members on a line-by-line basis, and had found that, except Kuwait, they exceeded their WTO bindings on a number of ta riff lines.  The products were: chemicals, rubber 
tubes, machines, electrical parts and scientific instruments.  Thus, GATT Article XXIV was the right 
provision under which to notify the GCC Customs Union, as it provided for a procedure to deal with the violation of binding commitments.  Moreover, she reminded the Committee that Saudi Arabia and 
Oman had made explicit commitments during their accession to the WTO to comply with GATT Article XXIV requirements for the notification of preferential agreements, including the GCC 
Customs Union.  She informed Members that her delegation had had construc tive consultations with 
Saudi Arabia and other GCC members with a view to resolving the issue soon.  
13. The representative of the European Communities (EC)
 expressed disappointment with the fact 
that the issue had not yet been resolved and called fo r a rapid satisfactory solution for all.  The EC had 
submitted written comments to the CTD in Nove mber 2008 (WT/COMTD/66/Add.2) with a detailed 
explanation of its concerns regarding the pr oposed change in the GCC notification from GATT 
Article XXIV to the Enabling Clause.  She stress ed that the GCC Customs Union did not qualify for 
notification under the Enabling Clause.  The EC be lieved that notification under this provision should 
not reflect a mere preference by Members for doing so, but it could only be done if the agreement met the appropriate requirements.  Furthermore, the EC  urged the GCC to clarify whether five out of WT/REG/M/53 
Page 4  
 
  six members of the Customs Union had exceeded their WTO binding tariffs when applying their 
common external tariffs.  If this was the case, th e EC suggested that the GCC members notify the 
Agreement under GATT Article XXIV, since in contrast  to the Enabling Clause, this provision could 
provide a legal basis even in the case of breach of WTO bindings.  Moreover, she reminded Saudi 
Arabia and Oman of the commitments made during their accession to the WTO, by which they had 
agreed to observe the provisions of GATT Article  XXIV and GATS Article V when notifying their 
trade agreements.  Thus, the EC urged them to maintain GATT Article XXIV as the legal basis for 
notification of their Customs Union.  She also not ed that consultations with the GCC members were 
ongoing with a view to clarifying the outstanding issues and to achieving a mutually satisfactory solution, and emphasized that reverting the GCC’ s notification back to GATT Article XXIV was a 
needed step.  
14. The representative of Japan
 shared the concerns of the United States and the EC.  The GCC 
Customs Union provided for common external tari ffs and for some products such common external 
tariffs were applied beyond their WTO binding duti es.  This represented a violation of GATT Article 
II and the Enabling Clause itself could not justify such a violation.  She further noted that both the 
Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV required that agreements not raise barriers towards other 
Members.  Moreover, according to paragra ph 5 of the GATT Article XXIV and the related 
Understanding, the general incide nce analysis of the duties and other regulations of commerce 
applicable before and after the formation of a customs union needed to be conducted by the 
Secretariat.  In light of all these provisions, Japan  urged the GCC to notify their Customs Union under 
GATT Article XXIV and to initiate its consid eration in the framework of the CRTA.  
15. The representative of Australia  supported the previous statements.  He considered 
GATT Article XXIV as the appropriate WTO provis ion under which to notify the GCC Customs 
Union.  Australia was ready to work with the GCC members to find a mutually agreeable solution, but 
he emphasized that in the interest of transparency this agreement should be considered in the CRTA.  
Otherwise, an unhelpful precedent would be establis hed.  Finally, noting the commitment by Saudi 
Arabia and Oman to notify the GCC Custom s Union under GATT Article XXIV during their 
accession to the WTO, Australia urged the GCC members to fulfil their accession and other WTO commitments.   
16. The representative of New Zealand
 joined other delegations in encouraging the GCC 
members to notify their Customs Union under GA TT Article XXIV.  While paragraph 1 of the 
Enabling Clause provided for an exception to the GA TT Article I, the GCC Customs Union appeared 
to go beyond the GATT Article I since the common external tariffs on certain products for some 
members were higher than bindings in their WTO ta riff schedules.  New Zealand's concern was that 
allowing the GCC Customs Union to be notified solely under the Enabling Clause would create an 
unfortunate precedent for the WTO considera tion of customs unions in the future.  
17. The representative of Canada  shared the concerns of previous  delegates on the notification of 
the GCC Customs Union under the Enabling Clause and agreed on the need fo r the Agreement to be 
notified under GATT Article XXIV.  
18. The representative of Oman , on behalf of the GCC members, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi 
Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Oman, recalled that the GCC Customs Union had been notified 
under the Enabling Clause.  The CTD should fulf il its mandate to consider the Agreement by 
preparing the factual presentation for which data would be provided by the GCC to the CTD in 
accordance with the TM.  The GCC was concerned by the current discussion because, first, the 
position adopted by some Members ran counter to both the intent and the wording of the Enabling Clause.  The Enabling Clause was the result of ex tended negotiations whose single objective was to 
grant additional flexibilities to developing countries.  In his delegation’s view, the rigid interpretation 
of such a provision by some Members would deny that flexibility.  The Enabling Clause clearly  WT/REG/M/53 
 Page 5 
 
 
  provided for WTO Members to accord "differentia l and more favourable treatment" to developing 
countries, which applied not just to treatment gran ted by developed to developing countries, but also 
to treatment that developing countries may grant to each other.  The Enabling Clause provided flexibility for regional arrangements entered into  among developing countries "for the mutual 
reduction or elimination of tariffs", and the G CC Customs Union among Arab developing countries of 
the Gulf region fitted within the meaning of the pr ovision. Second, on the de lay in the consideration 
process of the substance of the Agreement as a c onsequence of the positions adopted by some 
Members, he recalled one of the preambles of the TM, that "enhancing transparency in, and understanding of, RTAs and their effects is of sy stemic interest and will be of benefit to all 
Members". He encouraged Members to set aside the procedural debates and focus on the substance.  
The GCC members had no concerns about discu ssing substantive issues during the pending 
consideration and the GCC Customs Union was fully consistent with all the WTO obligations.  He 
informed the Committee that informal consultations  with interested Members were ongoing, but no 
agreement on how to resolve the current situation had been reached so far.  The Chairman of the CTD 
had committed to holding informal consultations to find a way forward, hence the issue should not be 
discussed any further in the CRTA until a c onclusion had been reached in the CTD. 
19. The representative of Saudi Arabia
 associated himself with Oman and encouraged the 
consideration of the GCC Customs Union in the CTD.   On the suggestion by the United States that all 
the GCC members, except Kuwait, were in breach of their WTO bound rates, he assured Members 
that Saudi Arabia was fully cons istent with its WTO bound rates commi tments.  In particular, tariffs 
on some chemical items would progressively be re duced by 2010 according to Saudi Arabia's goods 
schedule. 
20. The representative of Qatar  endorsed Oman's statement and recalled that the CTD was about 
to hold informal consultations on the matter.  He nce, he believed that this issue should not be 
discussed further in the CRTA.  His delegation w as willing to answer the United States in writing 
once his authorities clarified the accuracy of  the data provided by the United States. 
21. The representative of the United Arab Emirates  supported Oman.  He reminded Members of 
the consultations by the Chair of the CTD in  the coming days and suggested suspending the 
discussion in the CRTA until those consultations had reached an outcome. 
22. The representative of Kuwait  endorsed Oman's statement.  He  reiterated that the issue should 
not be discussed in the CRTA since the GCC Cu stoms Union had been notified under the Enabling 
Clause.  
23. The representative of Bahrain , on behalf of the Arab Group Members of the WTO, also 
supported Oman and hoped for s upport from other WTO Members on the view expressed by Oman  
24. The representative of India  recognized the prerogative of the GCC members, which were all 
developing countries, to determine whether to notify the GCC Customs Union under GATT 
Article XXIV or under the Enabling Clause.  Member s other than Parties to the Agreement could not 
advocate to themselves the right to determine th e provision under which the notification was to be 
made.  India expressed concern that developing co untry Members were being denied the right to 
notify an agreement and reminded Members that this  was not the first time that a customs union had 
been notified under the Enabling Clause.  The issue w ould be discussed with the Chair of the CTD in 
informal consultations and this was also on the agenda of the next session of the CTD in May.  
Unnecessary duplication and delay caused by the continued insistence of some Members for 
discussion of the issue in the CRTA should be avoi ded, as the CTD was the forum to which the issue 
belonged.  He also stated that consideration under the TM was not an issue over which Members 
could exercise a veto: once an RTA had been notif ied, its consideration was an autonomous process 
and it had been left to the Secretariat to schedule factual presentation based on criteria they had WT/REG/M/53 
Page 6  
 
  evolved.  If Members were to make prior judgments  on RTAs, this would undermine the rules of the 
TM and may render it redundant.  The issue of notification was a procedural one; the issue of substance could be dealt with only later during the consideration of th e arrangement based on a 
factual presentation.  For India, the key question w as whether the notification was valid or not.  If yes, 
consideration must take place in accordance with the provision under which the notification had been 
made.  Moreover, paragraphs 1 and 5 of the TM st ated that consideration of RTAs did not affect 
Members' rights and obligations under the WT O Agreements.  It was difficult to see how any 
consideration of a customs union, whether in the CRTA or the CTD, could prejudice the legal position 
of an individual WTO Member. 
25. The representative of China
 expressed a systemic concern about the GCC notification as it 
was not only about procedure but also related to th e interpretation and implementation of the Enabling 
Clause, one of the most important tools provided by  the WTO to developing countries.  In China's 
view, both technical and substantial exchanges of views should be conducted during the formal 
consideration of an agreement and a further delay would only undermine the effectiveness and 
efficiency of the TM.  He noted that Members were  not able to find a satisfactory outcome at the 
current stage and that further consultations were needed.  However, considering that the issue had 
originated in the CTD and Members had agreed on informal consulta tions in the CTD, he suggested 
avoiding duplication in the CRTA.  Otherwise, things would be even more complicated and 
inefficient as not all the delegates covered the CT D and CRTA simultaneously.  He suggested leaving 
the work to the CTD which coul d report back when necessary.  
26. The representative of Brazil  agreed that agreements i nvolving goods concluded between 
developing countries could be notif ied either under the provision of the GATT Article XXIV or under 
the Enabling Clause, and he was pl eased to see that this principl e was recognized, including by the 
United States, at this meeting. 
27. Responding to the United States’ claim that  Oman had violated its WTO accession 
commitments, the representative of Oman  noted that his authorities were verifying the accuracy of 
tariff data provided by the United States.  
28. The representative of United States  clarified that there was no quarrel with any developing 
Member notifying a qualifying agreement under the En abling Clause.  However, the Enabling Clause 
was a specific legal provision with specific proce dures and substantive requirements, and she invited 
the GCC members to respect these parameters as Members of the WTO.   
29. The representative of the European Communities  (EC) expressed full support for the United 
States comments on the rights of Members to notify an agreement.  She made it clear that an 
agreement had to be notified under one procedure or the other if it qualified under that provision 
specifically.  The interpretation of GATT Article  XXIV was very clear on which agreements fell 
under this provision.  She also reiterated that the CRTA was the right forum to discuss the issue since 
the GCC Customs Union had been originally no tified under GATT Article XXIV, and therefore the 
process had initially originated in the CRTA. 
30. The Chairman  took note of statements made, and also of  the fact that informal consultations 
were ongoing among interested Members involving the Chairman of the CTD.  He encouraged Members to find a solution as soon as possi ble in the interest of transparency. 
 
 
  WT/REG/M/53 
 Page 7 
 
 
  E. OTHER BUSINESS  
31. Under this Agenda item, the Chairman  informed Members of the dates for the last two CRTA 
meetings in 2009 scheduled for 14-15 September and 19-20 November.  He also raised the issue of 
monitoring of recent trade development. He recalled that at the informal meeting of the Trade Policy 
Review Body, held on 9 February 2009, a process of monitoring recent trade associated with the 
current global financial and economic crisis had been initiated. In order for the exercise to be carried 
out successfully and be useful to the WTO Membersh ip, he had been asked by the Chairman of the 
General Council to consult with Members on ways to improve the timeliness and completeness of 
notification and other information flows on trade me asures falling within the area of responsibility of 
the delegates in charge of the Committee.  Thus, he  invited interested Members to get in touch with 
him either following the meeting or at a later point. 
__________