. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/SPS/W/263 
10 October 2011  
 
(11-4913) 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original:   Spanish 
  
 
AD HOC CONSULTATIONS OR NEGOTIATIONS AMONG MEMBERS UNDER 
ARTICLE 12.2 OF THE AGREEMENT ON THE APPLICATION OF 
SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES 
 
Communication from Chile 
   The following communication, received on 7 Octobe r 2011, is being circulated at the request 
of the delegation of Chile. 
 
_______________ 
 
 1. The original idea was to establish rules or gui delines for a procedure that encouraged and 
structured conflict resolution and dispute clar ification among Members on an informal basis. 
2. At first this issue did not seem to pose any prob lems, but delays have led to complications in 
the Committee's discussions and confusion w ith the discussions of the Negotiating Group on 
Market Access. 
3. Chile is in favour of a very simple document that encourages and facilitates consultations or 
negotiations among Members on specific sanitary or phyt osanitary issues, as set out in Article 12.2 of 
the Agreement on the Application of Sa nitary and Phytosanitary Measures. 
4. To this end, the procedure must be voluntar y and flexible with regard to deadlines and 
procedures. 
5. It has to be flexible because any country may have recourse to it at any moment it sees fit, 
irrespective of whether or not it has alre ady raised the issue with the Committee. 
6. It must also be flexible so that the docu ment can be adapted or amended whenever the 
Committee deems this necessary. 
7. We are in favour of transparency and it is our understanding that it will be the countries 
themselves that decide whether or not to notify th e Committee, in the same way that at present each 
country is free to determine whether or not to subm it communications on the outcome of clarifications 
received or concerns addressed. 
8. In short, transparency matters to us, but we r espect the fact that certain Members may prefer 
to have recourse to the procedure without bei ng under an obligation to inform the Committee. 
9. If the Committee is kept informed, follow-up can be conducted by the Secretariat.  It is, 
however, a fact that at present a great many issues are resolved in informal bilateral meetings, in 
parallel to the work of the Committee, wit hout the Members being obliged to notify it. G/SPS/W/263 
Page 2  
 
  10. With regard to the Facilitator, it is preferable that he or she does not opine on the 
interpretation of the Agreement.  Furthermore, th e tasks required of the position should not be overly 
burdensome. 
11. We should like to make some observa tions concerning document G/SPS/W/259: 
(a) Preamble:  we endorse the text, including the additions proposed by India, Norway, 
the Philippines and Switzerland (the four countries); 
(b) Paragraph 4:  we would rather  this were not compulsory; 
(c) "General Considerations", paragraph 5:  we would keep the sentence up to the word 
'voluntary' and delete the rest; 
(d) All deadlines, notably those specified in paragraphs 11, 12, 13 and 18, should be 
deleted as these should be established bilaterally between the parties; 
(e) Paragraph 15:  the Facilitator should not opine on interpreta tions of the Agreement or 
on technical issues, nor be respons ible for organizing meetings; 
(f) Step C, "Consultation Procedure", paragr aph 19:  we prefer Alternative A; 
(g) Section V, "Review and Duration", paragr aph 22:  we prefer Alternative B. 
12. Finally, we wish to state that, although we should like there to be rules or guidelines, given 
how involved the procedure has become and the fact that it is taking precedence over the key objective, in this instance we  prefer to maintain the status  quo, whereby a procedure can be 
conducted even in the absence of agreed guidelines. 
__________