WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/W/321 
22 July 2009 
 (09-3611) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original:   English 
  
 
FIFTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW OF THE AGREEMENT  
ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE 
 
Revised Proposal by India
1 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 17 July 2009, is being circulated at the request of the delegation of India
. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
I. PRIVATE STANDARDS 
1. WTO Members have in previous meetings of the Committee, expressed concern about the 
proliferation of private standards, such as volunt ary eco-labelling schemes and pointed out that such 
standards could result in the creation of unnecessary barri ers to trade. The issue was also discussed in 
the Workshop on the Role of International Sta ndards in Economic Development organized by the 
WTO Secretariat in March 2009 where it was pointed out  that the issue of private standards was being 
addressed by the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committee.  
2. India is of the view that Article 4.1 of the TBT Agreement requires that WTO Members take 
reasonable measures to ensure compliance of non- governmental standardising bodies with the TBT 
Code of Good Practice. The TBT Code of Good Prac tice is applicable to all standardizing bodies 
located within the territories of  WTO Members, unlike the ISO/IEC Guide 59 "Code of Good Practice 
for Standardization" which is limited only to co nsensus-making standardizing bodies. Further, the 
definition of the term "Non Governmental Body" contained in paragraph 8 of Annex 1 of the TBT 
Agreement is an inclusive definition which incl udes standards formulated by private sector/ non-
governmental standardizing bodies. 
3. India suggests that the TBT Committee discuss  the issues surrounding the adverse trade 
implications of private standards, such as volunt ary eco-labelling schemes and clarify the scope and 
applicability of provisions of the TBT Agreement,  especially the TBT Code of Good Practice, vis-à-
vis such private standards. India also notes the ongoing work of the SPS Committee and other 
international organizations to address the issue of private standards and suggests that the Secretariat 
organize a workshop or a special session for Member s to discuss specifically  how private standards 
such as private eco-labelling schemes can be regulated by the TBT Agreement. 
4. Further, in order to assess the impact of private standards, the TBT Committee may seek 
inputs, from interested Members, based on a model questionnaire, as to how such private standards 
impact some key products of export interest to WTO Members. 
                                                      
1 Replacing earlier Indian proposals G/TBT/W/314 dated 10 June 2009 and G/TBT/W/318 dated  
23 June 2009 G/TBT/W/321 
Page 2  
 
  II. USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
5. The multiplicity of international standards/  guides/ recommendations and conformity 
assessment procedures could constitute a serious barri er to international trade, particularly for 
developing countries. India suggests that the WTO Secretariat consider developing a mechanism to 
track the development of international standards and conformity assessment procedures across various 
international standardizing bodies and to monitor th eir use. More specifically, India suggests that: 
(a) The WTO Secretariat work along with Inte rnational Standardizing Bodies such as 
ISO and IEC to create and maintain an online database of existing and proposed 
International Standards, along with a descripti on and  HS Code of the product that is 
affected by such a standard;  
(b) Although Members may not be required to no tify technical regulations where such 
Regulations are in accordance with relevant  international standards (Article 2.9), 
Members may discuss the possibility of providing additional information to the WTO Secretariat identifying the relevant Intern ational Standard on which their technical 
regulations are based, if any;  
(c) Members who choose not to use internationa l standards may give an explanation for 
deviation (a revised column for the purpose may be added in the TBT notification format).  Members would be required to gi ve an explanation only when they choose 
to base their regulation on a risk level that requires compliance with more onerous 
requirements than the one on which the international standard is based; 
(d) India concurs with the proposal made by Singapore.
2  Members may consider using 
the existing TBT notification mechanism to tr ack the use of international standards in 
the formulation of new Technical Regulations;  
(e) The TBT Committee may utilize the existi ng information exchange mechanism3 to 
seek information from international standa rdizing bodies on International Standards 
that they are formulating, that may have a significant implication on global trade flows and to communicate the views of WTO Members on the content of such International Standards; and 
(f) The WTO TBT Secretariat should assess reasons why the Members deviate from 
International Standards and conduct a Works hop with participants from international 
standard-setting organizations such as  ISO and the IEC and representative from 
national standard-setting organizations, to discuss ways in which national deviations 
from international standards may be minimized.  
III. USE OF MRAS AND EQUIVALENCE AGREEMENTS 
6. India concurs with Singapore’s proposal
4 that Members should work towards developing a 
template for Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRA s) and voluntary guidelines on their use. This 
model MRA could be developed after reviewing th e information exchanged between Members on this 
issue and Members may be invited to share their experiences, including examples of successful MRAs 
in order to frame a model MRA.  
                                                      
2 G/TBT/W/312, paras. 5(a) and (b), 14(a). 
3 G/TBT/5, 19 November 1997. 
4 G/TBT/W/312, para. 14.  G/TBT/W/321 
Page 3 
 
 
  IV. TRANSPARENCY 
7. India is of the view that the transparency provisions in the TBT Agreement, including the 
notification requirements are of immense importance, particularly for developing countries, many of 
whom have no other means of tracking changes in key export markets. India suggests that the Committee consider a few modifications to its notification system: 
(a) India concurs with Jordan’s proposal
5 that the Secretariat provide a platform to enable 
national notifying authorities to post comments received from other Members and responses to them. India supports Mexico’s proposal
6 that all comments on 
notifications as well as responses to such comments be hosted on a website; 
(b) The non-availability of the full text of the TB T Notifications and the laws referred to 
in such notifications in English and other WTO languages is a major hindrance in the 
examination of TBT notifications, particular ly for developing countries who lack the 
resources to translate the notifications and furnish effective comments within the 
prescribed time period. While India notes the existence of the unofficial translations 
(Notification Format)7 informing Members of the availability of unofficial 
translations of TBT notifications, it sugg ests that the Committee establish a formal 
mechanism to make translations of the text of the laws available in English and other 
WTO languages to Members. The Committee ma y also discuss the extension of the 
comment period to 90 days in tho se instances where Members do not make 
translations of the full text available in English; 
(c) India concurs with the proposal made by the European Communities8 that where 
translations are not made available, the Committee consider requiring Members to 
provide a comprehensive description of th e law being notified, which describes the 
technical regulation or conformity assessment procedure comprehensively. 
V. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  
8. We agree with Canada (JOB(09)/50) that speci fic trade concerns have to be expeditiously 
addressed for the WTO to be meaningful.  Howeve r, since developing countries face a resource and 
capacity constraint, India would like to clarify that  meeting the time-lines suggested by Canada may 
not work out in practice.  
9. Regarding the resolution of Specific Trade Concerns , India also calls attention to the fact that 
the TBT related NTBs have been notified by several members in the NAMA negotiations. Members are, in the NAMA negotiations, considering proce dures that will transparently discuss and possibly 
resolve the specific trade concerns, including tho se relating to TBT.  The TBT Committee should 
keep itself updated on these negotiations.  
10. India also proposes that the Committee consider circulating a bi-annual, consolidated 
summary of all specific trade concerns raised at  meetings, including responses by Members to the 
specific trade concerns raised against them and the re solution of issues, if any. This will form a useful 
database for Members to track concerns of importance to them.  
__________  
                                                     
 
5 G/TBT/W/311, para.2. 
6 G/TBT/W313, para.11(f). 
7 G/TBT/1/Rev.9, page 45 
8 G/TBT/W/309, paras. 14-17.