RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/LIC/M/31 
12 July 2010 
 (10-3802) 
Committee on Import Licensing  
  
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 26 APRIL 2010 
 
Chairperson:  Mrs. Anna Ashikali (Cyprus)
 
 
 
 The Committee on Import Licensing held its thirty-first meeting on 26 April 2010. The agenda proposed for the meeting, containe d in WTO/AIR/3546, which was circulated on 
16 April 2010 was adopted as follows:    
Table of Contents
 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification ob ligations – Developments since the last 
meeting ........................................................................................................................ ...............1  
2. Notifications.................................................................................................................. .............7  
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) of the Agreement (publications 
and/or legislation) ............................................................................................................ ...7 
(ii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreement (new import licensing procedures, 
changes to existing licensing procedures and reverse notifications) ..................................7  
(iii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Ag reement (Replies to the Questionnaire on 
Import Licensing Procedures).............................................................................................7  
3. Other Bu siness................................................................................................................. ..........8  
(i) Information on technical assistance ac tivities related to the Agreement on Import 
Licensing Procedures ..........................................................................................................8  
4. Date of the ne xt meeting ....................................................................................................... ....8 
5. Election of Officers........................................................................................................... .........8  
 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification ob ligations – Developments since the last 
meeting 
1.1 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that sin ce the last meeting, a total of 
30 notifications had been received: three notifi cations under Articles 1. 4(a) and/or 8.2(b) on 
legislation/publications;  five under Article 5.1- 5.4 on new licensing procedures or changes to the 
procedures in force;  and twenty-two under Article 7. 3 – replies to the Questionnaire.  As of the day of 
the meeting, out of a total Membership of 153, counting the European Union (EU 27) as one, there 
remained 20 Members1 who had not submitted any no tification under any provision  of the Agreement 
                                                      
1 Angola, Belize, Botswana, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Guinea, 
Guinea Bissau, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepa l, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Sierra Leone, 
Solomon Islands, Tanzania,  Tonga and Viet Nam. G/LIC/M/31 
Page 2  
 
  since joining the WTO.  She highli ghted the fact that, at this meeting, the Committee would consider 
the first notification submitted by Cape Verde as we ll as the first replies to the Annual Questionnaire 
submitted by Nicaragua, Saint Kitts  and Nevis and Suriname.  She urged all Members who had not 
yet provided any information on their laws and regula tions relevant to import licensing to submit their 
notifications before the Committee without further delay. 
 
1.2 As to notifications concerning Members' laws  and regulations (under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 
8.2(b)), only a cumulative total of 96 Memb ers, counting the EU-27 as one, had submitted 
notifications.  Thus, 30  Members had yet to submit their notifications under this provision.  Under 
paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 5, only 32 Members, the EU-27 counted as one, had notified new 
licensing procedures or changes in the existing ones.  Of these, one Member (Papua New Guinea) had 
notified changes to import licensing procedures  without submitting the initial notification of 
legislation or its replies to the Questionnaire.  The Chairperson urged those Members who had not yet 
notified either their new licensing procedures or changes in existing procedures to do so.  She informed the Committee that, while Article 5.5 of the Agreement allowed Members to submit 
counter-notifications, up to now no su ch counter-notifications had been received.  As to the replies to 
the Annual Questionnaire under Article 7.3, she info rmed the Committee that a cumulative total of 
97 Members, counting EU-27 as one, had submitted th eir replies to the Questionnaire since the entry 
into force of the WTO Agreement;  thus, 29 Memb ers had yet to submit their responses to the 
Questionnaire.  She also recalled that the annua l deadline for the responses was 30 September, a 
deadline often not respected by many Members and urged those Members who had not yet responded 
to the Questionnaire to submit their responses without  further delay.  She highlighted that Members 
who did not apply import licensing procedures or had no laws or regulations relevant to the 
Agreement were also required to notify the Committee of this fact in order to obtain a complete 
overview of the licensing regimes of all Members.  She informed the Committee that in 2009, at the 
request of the Chairperson and in light of the suggestions and ideas proposed and discussed at the 
informal meetings, the Secretariat had prepared and sent specific letters to each one of the WTO 
Members.  This was to remind them of their transp arency obligations and highlighting the date of the 
last notification received from their authorities, especi ally under Article 7.3 of the Agreement.  These 
letters also contained an invitation to Members to re view the status of their notifications in general 
and update them whenever necessary;  they also incl uded samples of statements to be used by those 
Members which had not introduced any changes or  only minor changes to their import licensing 
regimes already notified to the Committee.  She stat ed that the latter had proved to be acceptable and 
easily applicable;  that some Members had alre ady adopted such short statements in their 
notifications
2 and, in light of this, she encouraged othe r Members to do so and to contact, if necessary, 
the Secretariat to assist them in preparing their shor t notifications under Article 7.3 of the Agreement.  
She also encouraged Members to consult the Secretariat whenever there were questions about the 
notification requirements, and;  in the case of de veloping and least developed countries, to ask for 
technical assistance to be provided in their countries with the participation of the national authorities 
who enact and administer import licensing procedures.  1.3 The Chairperson
 informed the Committee that, since the last meeting, 7 documents containing 
questions and replies concerning licensing systems ma intained by some Members had been circulated 
in the G/LIC/Q/- series.3 She also informed the Committee that after the Airgram was issued, two 
documents were submitted by Turkey and Venezuela4 and that at the start of the meeting Argentina 
                                                      
2 (See documents G/LIC/N/3COL/8 an d G/LIC/N/3/HND/4, respectively). 
3 Listed in the Airgram as follows: Questions: from (i) Peru and (ii) Canada, China, the European 
Union, Japan, Mexico, Peru and the United St ates to Argentina (G/LIC/Q/ARG/7/Add.1 and 
G/LIC/Q/ARG/10); from the United States to India (G/L IC/Q/IND/11/Add.1) and to Turkey (G/LIC/Q/TUR/5).  
Replies: from Brazil to questions from the Unite d States (G/LIC/Q/BRA/13) and from Mexico 
(G/LIC/Q/BRA/14);  and, from India to questions from Korea (G/LIC/Q/IND/15). 
4 Circulated as G/LIC/Q/TU R/6  and G/LIC/Q/VEN/6.  G/LIC/M/31 
 Page 3 
 
 
  submitted a document containing its replies to  the Questions in document G/LIC/Q/ARG/10.5  Most 
of these documents contained questions addressed to the same Member on the same subject matter;  thus, in order to facilitate the Committee's consider ation of such documents she had grouped them in 
various sets.  The first set referred to docum ents G/LIC/Q/ARG/7/Add.1 and G/LIC/Q/ARG/10 
containing, respectively, questions to Argentina addr essed by: (i) Peru;  and,  (ii) Canada, China, the 
European Union, Japan, Mexico, Peru and the Unite d States on Argentina's import licensing regime.   
 1.4 The delegate of the United States
 recalled that her delegation had expressed, at previous 
meetings, serious concern over the nature of Arge ntina's import licensing system which appeared to 
have trade restrictive effects and lacked transpar ency and predictability in a completely unacceptable 
manner.  Her authorities continued to receive num erous reports about extraordinary delays in 
approving import licences which were a de-facto  import ban on some foreign goods.  The 
discretionary approval process of licences seemed to vary based on the country of export, the 
product's use, or the company's level of exports from or investment in Argentina.  This implied that ILPs were not being administered in a fair a nd equitable manner.  Her authorities had questioned 
Argentina on the measures it had been implemen ting through its automatic and non-automatic 
licensing regime since at least 2004.  To date , Argentina had failed to provide an acceptable 
justification on the unnecessarily extensive and trade disruptive reliance on import licensing requirements;  it had only provided vague and inco mplete responses that had only created further 
confusion.  For example, Argentina still had not provided enough information to understand what a 
"pre-release verification mechanism" was or why this measure required an import licence.  It appeared 
that the only reason behind many of Argentina's ILPs  was to restrict imports, something which called 
into question Argentina's commitment to the GATT 199 4 principles.  Argentina's statements that all 
import licences were being issued in a manner cons istent with the Agreement were difficult to 
understand;  thus, her delegation, jointly with others, had submitted questions (G/LIC/Q/ARG/10) in 
order to obtain further clarification on Argentina's IL  system.  Her authorities continued an interest in 
hearing from others, especially from Argentina's MERCOSUR partners on their experiences in this 
regard.  The transparency and operation of Argentin a's IL regime, the failure to provide adequate 
explanations and the content of the reports on Arge ntina's current method of administering its regime, 
constituted a matter that her authorities were consid ering incredibly seriously.  Her authorities were 
open to
 exploring ways to jointly address the trade ba rrier created by these measures and this message 
should be conveyed to Buenos Aires.  Meanwhile  the United States urged Argentina to uphold its 
commitment to the WTO and the Agreement on ILP and to reform its import licensing regime, 
ensuring that import licences were issued without de lays and that procedures were implemented in a 
transparent and predictable manner.   Her delegation would carefully  review Argentina's latest 
responses.   
 
1.5 The delegate of the European Union  echoed the concerns raised by  the US, similar to the ones 
also raised by her delegation on several occasions  in this Committee.  Argentina's IL system, 
established at the end of 2004, not only remained va lid but also the product coverage had increased 
from 38 to nearly 400 different goods, including textiles,  toys, motor vehicles spare parts, etc.  The 
economic impact on European companies was considerable and a number of these had left the 
Argentinean market;  complaints by these compan ies namely referred to unreasonable delays in 
granting import licences, an issue mentioned in the report of the Trade Policy Review Body (TPRB) circulated in 2009.  In its replies to the first set  of questions posed by the EU and co-sponsored by 
other Members (document G/LIC/Q/ARG/10), Argentina had indicated that its IL regime was temporary, something that the EU appreciated but requested clarification by Argentina on how 
temporary it would be since this regime had l asted for a long time.  Her authorities would like 
Argentina to fully comply with its obligations under the Agreement and its WTO commitments.  The 
EU would be glad to receive responses to its qu estions before raising these points in other WTO 
                                                     
 
5 Circulated as docum ent G/LIC/Q/ARG/11. G/LIC/M/31 
Page 4  
 
  bodies;  it would carefully consider the replies Argentina had just announced at the start of the 
meeting and reserved its right to come back to the issue and ask additional questions.  
 1.6 The delegate of Peru
 stated that non-automatic import licensing regimes should not be a 
barrier to trade beyond the measure and the use they were supposed to be destined to.  Therefore, no 
difficult procedures, nor unnecessary delays should limit market access.  Given the latter, her 
delegation, as well as other delegations, had raised  their concerns at various Committee meetings 
regarding the establishment and administration of the Argentinean IL regime and its compatibility 
with the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on ILPs.  In this regard, Peru itself (documents 
G/LIC/Q/ARG 7 and Add.1) as well as jointly w ith other Members (document G/LIC/Q/ARG/10), 
had submitted questions and raised concerns on the Ar gentinean IL system.  One particular aspect of 
interest and concern for Peru was that, despite the fa ct that Argentina had indicated that its IL system 
had been set up on a temporary basis and that it had only the intention to enable Argentina to evaluate 
its imports, it had been noticed that, on various o ccasions, products covered by import certificates had 
increased.  The system covered products such as te xtiles, under the argument that this had been done 
with regard to products sensitive to the alterati ons of trade flows due to the world economic and 
financial crisis.  According to th e economic projections made by the WTO,  a recovery from the crisis 
could be appreciated for 2010;  Peru hoped that this favourable economic environment would help 
Argentina to eliminate its licensing system in th e near future given its temporary nature.  Her 
authorities had been closely monitoring Argentina's IL system and had been asking the Peruvian exporters for information and documentation which went beyond that which was strictly necessary for 
the IL regime to function correctly.  These were  excessive and onerous requirements, especially 
considering that in the decisions granting the import certificates there was no indication about how this kind of information could contribute to the objectives of monitoring and controlling what 
Argentina had argued.  Her delegation would carefully  consider the replies received from Argentina, 
but wanted to note that Argentina had informed th at there were no laws, nor regulations to support 
some of the requirements to exporters.  She also i ndicated that the Peruvian producers and exporters 
of textiles, particularly small and medium enterp rises (SMEs), had been negatively affected by the 
way in which Argentina's IL regime had been implemented and administered.  Therefore, her 
delegation supported the statements made by the delegations of the US and the EU.  
 1.7  The delegate of Japan
 echoed the concerns expressed by the US, the EU and Peru.  The 
Argentinean IL system was affecting smooth trade between Argentina and his country.  Consultations 
held between his authorities and the relevant Argen tinean authorities had led to satisfactory solutions. 
However, Japanese industries were still experien cing difficulties such as lengthy issue of import 
licences which in many cases took over 60 days;  there was also lack of transp arency in the approval 
requirements.  Additionally, the limited validity of  licences represented a serious problem for some 
Japanese companies given that cargo sh ips took no less than 50 days fr om its country to Argentina;  
this meant in practice the impossibility for them to obtain customs' approval for importation.  His 
delegation would carefully examine the responses by Ar gentina distributed at the start of the meeting 
and, if necessary, would come back with additional questions. 
 1.8 The delegate of China
 reiterated the concerns raised over the past years by his delegation on 
the increased number of products subject to non-au tomatic ILPs in Argentina and on the lack of 
transparency and predictability in such pro cedures.  Chinese producers and exporters reported 
continuous loss of revenues due to these measures.   Since the situation had not changed, nor 
improved, his delegation had submitted, jointly with  other Members,  questions to Argentina and 
would carefully considered the responses submitted by Argentina at the start of the meeting. If 
necessary China would come back to the Committee on this issue.    
  G/LIC/M/31 
 Page 5 
 
 
  1.9 The delegate of Mexico  echoed the concerns raised by previous speakers and reiterated the 
interest of her delegation in the follow-up of  this issue.  As a co-sponsor of document 
G/LIC/Q/ARG/10, she thanked Argentina for its repli es;  these would be carefully considered in the 
capital and by her delegation in Geneva.   
1.10 The delegate of Argentina
 informed the Committee that copi es of the replies to questions 
contained in document G/LIC/Q/10 had been distributed6 at the start of the meeting and asked the 
delegations that had taken the floor to provide their statements in writing so that these could be sent to 
her capital.  
 
1.11 The Chairperson  introduced document G/LIC/Q/I ND/11/Add.2 containing additional 
questions from the United States to India on its im port licensing regime applied to boric acid.   
 
1.12 The delegate of  the United States  reiterated the interest of her delegation in receiving 
responses to the questions it had posed to India.    
1.13 The Chairperson
 invited delegations to comment on document G/LIC/Q/TUR/5 containing 
questions from the United States to Turkey on the Turkish import licensing system applied to distilled 
spirits, alcohol and alcoholic beverages.  She also  informed the Committee th at after the Airgram was 
issued, a document containing Turkey's responses to the questions was received.7  
 1.14 The delegate of the United States
 thanked Turkey for its responses and informed the 
Committee that her authorities would examine th em and, if necessary, would pose follow-up 
questions at the next meeting.   1.15 The delegate of Turkey
 informed the Committee that his au thorities applied sanitary controls 
to distilled spirits during both the importation and production stages.  A "control certificate", issued 
by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affa irs (MARA), aimed at ensuring food safety and 
protection of human health and life, was required to import these products into Turkey.  Likewise, 
domestic producers of distilled spirits also had to obtain a "production permit certificate" from 
MARA to indicate compliance with the minimum tec hnical and hygienic requirements.  Therefore, 
importation as well as domestic production of di stilled spirits were subject to the same 
non-discriminatory procedures in fulfilling the sanitary requirements.  In order to avoid 
misinterpretations, he highlighted that the "contro l certificate" had been established to protect public 
health, thus this was not an import licence.  1.16 The Chairperson
 when opening the floor for co mments on document G/LIC/Q/BRA/13, 
reminded delegations that this doc ument containing Brazil's responses to the questions posed by the 
United States8 had been received after the issue of the Ai rgram convening the previous meeting; thus, 
it would be considered at this meeting.    1.17 The delegate of Brazil
 reminded the Committee that at the previous meeting he had explained 
that the written replies about the ILPs for certa in lithium compounds were what his delegation had 
already responded to the US;  and, that Brazil's inte ntion in circulating these replies was to fulfil the 
US request to receive written responses to its questions on this issue.   
                                                     
 
6 Circulated as doc ument G/LIC/ARG/11. 
7 Circulated as G/LIC/Q/TUR/6. 
8 See document G/LIC/Q/BRA/3 and addenda 1- 3  about Brazil's policy on lithium compounds. G/LIC/M/31 
Page 6  
 
  1.18 The delegate of the United States
 thanked Brazil for its responses;  at this time her delegation 
did not have any further questions on this issue.   1.19 The Chairperson
 opened the floor for comments on document G/LIC/Q/BRA/14  containing 
the responses from Brazil to questions posed by Mexico in document G/LIC/Q/BRA/10, on the import 
licensing requirements for motor vehicles. 
 1.20 The delegate of Brazil
 reminded the Committee that the written answers to Mexico9 contained 
an explanation  on the procedure followed when c onsidering applications for non-automatic IL for 
motor vehicles.  Brazil had pointed out the laws a nd regulations related to the importation of motor 
vehicles and also explained that the main reason fo r requiring non-automatic IL for this product was 
the need to ensure that imported motor vehicles co mplied with the national requirement related to air-
pollution control.  Brazil's replies also described the procedures to be  followed when there was a need 
to amend the licence as well as the cases when it w as possible to amend it.  His delegation expected 
these replies had contributed to clarify Mexico's doubt s on Brazil's IL requirement for motor vehicles;  
nevertheless his delegation was ready to provide any other clarification required. 
 1.21 The delegate of Mexico
 thanked Brazil for its clear responses that had also been circulated to 
the Mexican automobile industry;  her delegation di d not have any further questions at this time. 
 1.22 The Chairperson
 opened the floor for comments on document G/LIC/Q/IND/15 containing 
the responses from India to the questions posed by Korea in document G/LIC/Q/IND/13, on India's 
responses to the Annual Questionnaire.  1.23 The delegate of Korea
 thanked India for its written reply and informed the Committee that it 
would continue monitoring the application of I ndia's licensing regime for steel products and other 
items.  
 1.24 The Chairperson
 informed the Committee that afte r the Airgram was issued, a document 
containing Venezuela's responses to the questions posed by Mexico in document G/LIC/Q/VEN/5, on its non-automatic import licensing procedures had been received.  She invited delegations to comment 
on this document.
10  
 
1.25  The delegate of Mexico  thanked Venezuela for its replies;  these would  be carefully 
considered in her capital and would come back with follow-up questions if any.  
 1.26  The delegate of Brazil
 informed the Committee that at the start of the meeting his delegation 
had submitted its responses to the questions posed by China in document G/LIC/Q/BRA/5/Add.1 on 
the ILPs for toys;11  these explained not only the criteria used by Brazil to determine which goods 
required non automatic ILPs but also their compa tibility with the Agreement.  The replies also 
explained that the objective of the licensing regime for toys was to ensure their compliance with the 
safety requirements to protect their consumers;  the reasons why the licensing requirement was not more administratively burdensome than necessary to fulfil the objective, were also explained in the 
responses.  Indication of the Brazilian legisla tion establishing the requirement, on the specific 
requirements and a detailed description of the pro cedures followed by the Brazilian authorities when 
considering applications in the case of toys were also included in the replies.  The requirement, aimed at ensuring safety for toy users, equally applied to both, the Brazilian and the foreign toy producers 
wishing to export to Brazil;  thus, the licensing requi rement was neutral in application and consistent 
with Brazil's obligation in the WTO.  
                                                     
 
9 See document G/LIC/Q/BRA/14. 
10 See G/LIC/Q/VEN/6. 
11 Circulated as G/LIC/BRA/15.  G/LIC/M/31 
 Page 7 
 
 
  1.27 The delegate of China  thanked Brazil for its replies;  hi s delegation would come back on this 
issue if necessary.   1.28 The Committee took note
 of the statements made. 
 2. Notifications 
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2( b) of the Agreement (publications and/or 
legislation) 
2.1 The Chairperson
 recalled that Articles 1.4(a) and 8.2(b) and notification procedures, as had 
been agreed by the Committee12, required all Members to publish their laws, regulations and 
administrative procedures, and notify these to th e Committee upon becoming a Member of the WTO, 
together with copies of any relevant publications or  laws and regulations.  Any subsequent changes to 
these laws and regulations were also required to be notified.  She informed the Committee that under 
these provisions there were three notifications rece ived from Brazil, the People's Republic of China 
and Mexico, documents G/LIC/N/1/BRA/5, G/LIC/N/1/CHN/6 and G/LIC/N/1/MEX/3, respectively.  
She also recalled that at the last meeting of the Committee in October 2009, a notification received 
form India under these provisions, document G/LIC/N/ 1/IND/12, was not available in the three WTO 
official languages; consequently it woul d be considered at this meeting. 
 2.2 The Committee took note
 of the notifications.  
 (ii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreement (new import licensing procedures, changes to 
existing licensing procedures and reverse notifications)  
2.3 The Chairperson
 recalled that under paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 5, Members who instituted 
licensing procedures or changes in these procedur es, were required to notify the Committee within 
60 days of the publication of these procedures.  Para graph 2 of Article 5 listed the information that 
should be included in such notifications.  Members also had to submit copies of the publications in 
which this information was publishe d.  Furthermore, paragraph 5 of  Article 5 provided the possibility 
of making counter-notifications, where a Member co nsidered that another Member had not notified a 
licensing procedure or changes therein, in accordance with paragraphs 1-3 of Article 5.  She informed 
the Committee that there were five notifications lis ted in the Airgram submitted under this provision 
by Argentina (two notifications); Brazil; Honduras and Malaysia.13  
 2.4 The Committee took note
 of the notifications.   
 
(iii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Agreem ent (Replies to the Questionnaire on Import 
Licensing Procedures) 
2.5 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that there were twenty-two notifications from 
20 Members listed in the Airgram, received from Albania; Barbados; Brazil; Burkina Faso; Canada; 
Cape Verde; China; Colombia; Croatia; Ecua dor; Haiti; Honduras; Indonesia; Korea; Madagascar; 
Malaysia; Mexico; the Philippines; Saint Kitts and Nevis and Switzerland.14  The notification received 
                                                      
12 G/LIC/3. 
13 G/LIC/N/2/ARG/22; G/LIC/ N/2/ARG/23; G/LIC/N/2/BRA/5 ; G/LIC/N/2/HND/4; and 
G/LIC/N/2/MYS/4. 
14 G/LIC/N/3/ALB/4; G/LIC/N/3/BRB/5; G/LIC/N/3/BRA/8; G/LIC/N/3/BFA/2; 
G/LIC/N/3/CAN/8/Add.1; G/LIC/N/3/CPV/1; G/LIC/ N/3/CHN/8; G/LIC/N/3/CO L/8; G/LIC/N/3/HRV/4; 
G/LIC/N/3/ECU/3/Add.1; G/LIC/N/3/HTI/5; G/LIC/N/3/HDN/1/Add.1, 3/Add. 1 and Corr. 1 and G/LIC/M/31 
Page 8  
 
  from Switzerland was not available in the three WTO official languages and would be considered at 
the next meeting;  nevertheless, she invited delegati ons to raise questions or comments at this meeting 
to be considered by Switzerland at the next meeting.  She also recalled that, at the last meeting of the Committee it was announced that thirteen  notifications under this provision
15, received from: Canada; 
Costa Rica; Ecuador; the European Union; Grenada;  Mauritius;  Nicaragua;  Nigeria;  Suriname;  
Chinese Taipei;  Ukraine and the United States we re not available in the three WTO official 
languages;  thus, they would be considered at this meeting.   She also thanked and congratulated Cape 
Verde, Nicaragua, Saint Kitts and Nevis and Suri name for having submitted their responses to the 
annual questionnaire for the first time.   
 
2.6 The Committee took note  of the notifications.  
 
3. Other Business 
(i) Information on technical assistance activities rel ated to the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures 
3.1 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that , since the last meeting,  one technical assistance 
activity on the Agreement on Import Licensing Pro cedures had taken place in Asuncion, Paraguay.  
As in previous cases the objective of this activity was to:  (i) enha nce the administrative capability of 
the different authorities to clearly understand the aim, purposes and particularities of the Agreement;  
(ii) enable them to differentiate the two typ es of import licences and other trade barriers whose 
legitimate objectives could be better obtained thro ugh less trade-restrictive and less trade-distorting 
measures than import licences such as technical regulations, sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures; 
and, (iii) provide the necessary tools and explanatio ns to the local authorities to comply with their 
notification obligations through ex amples and practical exercises. 
 3.2 The Committee took note
 of the information. 
 
4. Date of the next meeting 
4.1 The Chairperson  informed Members that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved Monday, 
25 October 2010 for the next meeting of the Committee, on the understanding that additional 
meetings would be convened if necessary.    
4.2 The Committee took note
 of the information. 
 
5. Election of Officers 
5.1 The Committee elected by acclamation Mrs. Anna ASHIKALI (Cyprus) as Chairperson of the 
Committee, to hold office until the end of the first meeting of 2011, under Rule 12 of the Committee's 
Rules of Procedure (G/L/147).  It also elected by acclamation Mr. Homero LARREA MONARD 
(Ecuador) as Vice-Chairperson. 
__________ 
                                                                                                                                                                     
G/LIC/N/3/HND/4; G/LIC/N/3/I DN/4;  G/LIC/N/3/KOR/8 and Corr.1; G/LIC/N/3/MDG/5;  
G/LIC/N/3/MYS/5; G/LIC/ N/3/MEX/3; G/LIC/N/3/PHL/7; G/LI C/N/3/KNA/1 and G/LIC/N/3/CHE/5. 
15 G/LIC/N/3/CAN/8; G/LIC/N/ 3/CRI/6; G/LIC/N/3/ECU/3; G/LIC/N/3/EEC/12 and Add. 1; 
G/LIC/N/3/GRD/3; G/LIC/ N/3/MUS/3/Corr.1; G/LIC/N/3/NIC/1; G/LIC/N/3/NGA/5; G/LIC/N/3/SUR/1; 
G/LIC/N/3/TPKM/2/Rev.1; G/LIC/N/ 3/UKR/2; and G/LIC/N/3/USA/6.