RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/RO/M/22
17 May 1999
(99-1985)
Committee on Rules of Origin
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 23 APRIL 1999
Chairman:  Mr. R. Wells (Australia)
The agenda for the meeting was adopted by the Committee on Rules of Origin (CRO) as
follows:
Page
1. Report of the Technical Committee on Rules of Origin on progress made at its
Sixteenth Session to the Committee on Rules of Orig in (G/R O/35) ................................1
2. Overall architecture of the harmon ized rules of origin (G/RO/33 & 35,
G/RO/W/41)..................................................................................................................... .....2
3. Implications of the implementation of th e harmonized rules of origin on other WTO
Agreements (G/RO/W/28/Rev.1, G/RO/W/30-34, 38 & 42) .............................................2
4. Notifications under Article 5 and paragraph 4 of Annex II of the Agreement on
Rules of Origin (G/RO/N/5) ................................................................................................3
5. Election of  officers ......................................................................................................... ......3
6. Other business............................................................................................................... .......3
1. Report of the Technical Committee on Rules of Origin on progress made at its Sixteenth
Session to the Committee on Rules of Origin (G/RO/35)
1.1 Mr. Claypole, the Chairman of the Technical Committee on Rules of Origin (TCRO) made a
progress report on the work done at the Sixteenth Se ssion of the TCRO.  The Report was circulated to
Members as document G/RO/35.
1.2 The representative of India stated that although significant progress had been made by the
TCRO at its Sixteenth Session, a number of technically complicated and difficult issues remained that
required further deliberation.  In this context, she welcomed the approach adopted by the TCRO for
its Seventeenth Session as well as for the inters essional period was a useful way of exploring
possibilities for consensus on outstanding issues.  Drawing attention to the fact that the Seventeenth
Session of the TCRO would be its final meeting for the HWP, as agreed by the CRO at its meeting on
1 and 7 July 1998, she suggested sending a letter to that effect to the Chairman of the TCRO.
1.3 The representative of Japan stated that the letter suggested by India should not be based on
any speculation on the outcome of the work of the TCRO at its Seventeenth Session.G/RO/M/22
Page 2
1.4 The representatives of Colombia, the Dominican Republic , the EC , Honduras , Korea , Mexico ,
Pakistan, the Philippines , Switzerland  and the US  supported India's proposal to send the letter to the
Chairman of the TCRO.
1.5 The CRO took note of the statements made and mandated  the Chairman to send the letter, as
agreed, to the Chairman of the TCRO1.
2. Overall architecture of the harmonized rules of origin (G/RO/33 & 35, G/RO/W/41)
2.1 The Chairman recalled that, at the meeting of the CRO on 22 and 26 February 1999, it was
considered necessary to clarify further points raised by delegations concerning certain administrative
aspects of the application of the three options in the template (G/RO/30) as well as points raisedconcerning matters of substance.  As agreed, the Secretariat, in a fax dated 3 March 1999, had sent
these questions to the proponents of Options A, B and C, as well as to the TCRO which might wish to
consider whether it would be able to contribute to clarifying the questions (G/RO/34, G/RO/W/41).
As indicated in paragraphs 4-6 of document G/RO /35, the TCRO, in this context, examined the
intentions underlying the three options and arrived at some common understandings.  The TCROagreed that a "single text" suggested by the WCO Secretariat would constitute the basis for further
discussions.  Thus Options A, B and C might no longer reflect accurately the positions of some
proponents.
2.2 The representative of the European Communitie s recalled that at the last meeting of the
TCRO there had been an attempt to explore a new approach rather than the ways which were
indicated in Options A, B and C.  On the basis of the suggestion put forward by the WCO Secretariat
and informal consultations undertaken by the EC with other delegations, it seemed possible for the
TCRO to continue to explore the WCO secretariat's suggestion at its next meeting, in order to try to
reach agreement on a different approach to the overall architecture, which would resolve the disputelaid down in Options A, B and C.
2.3 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed
 to revert to this issue at its next
meeting.
3. Implications of the implementation of th e harmonized rules of origin on other WTO
Agreements (G/RO/W/30-34, 38 & 42)
3.1 The Chairman recalled that, as concerned this agenda item, there had been five submissions
on the table:  from India (G/RO/W/28/Rev.1, G/RO /W/30);  from the United States (G/RO/W/32);
from the Dominican Republic and Honduras (G/RO/ W33);  from El Salvador (G/RO/W/34);  and
from Korea (G/RO/W/38).  The Secretariat had also circulated a new proposal from India asdocument G/RO/W/42.
3.2 The representative of India stated that in March and April 1998, India had proposed that the
WTO Secretariat prepare an analysis bringing out the implications of the major proposals for
harmonizing rules of origin for the free flow of trade as well as for the rights and obligations ofMembers under various WTO Agreements.  Several Members had supported the proposal, but there
had been no unanimity in asking the Secretariat to pr epare the neutral technical paper.  In the light of
this and since almost a year had passed in the meantime, India had undertaken extensive consultations
with various technical experts in the working of WTO Agreements, especially in the area of the
Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC), and also several other Agreements.  This analysis of theimplications of some of the major proposals for harmonizing rules of origin that were under
consideration in the Committee was summarized in a paper which was circulated by India to Members
                                                     
1 The Chairman's letter was circulated to Members as document G/RO/36.G/RO/M/22
Page 3
in document G/RO/W/42.  Some of these implicatio ns were also relevant in the context of the
Agreement on Safeguards and countervailing duty cases, origin-marking requirements and the
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994. Some of the major proposals for
harmonizing rules of origin, therefore, appeared to have serious and clear implications for Members'
rights and obligations under these Agreements, and to require broad renegotiation, which was notenvisaged by the Agreements.  The ATC had a provision for renegotiating if some rules concerning
the textiles and clothing trade were changed, but that did not appear to be a perfect solution;  in
addition, the renegotiation was purely in a bilateral context, whereas the main foundation for the ATC
was multilateralism.  The objective of India's paper was not to criticize any particular proposals, but to
promote the understanding of the outstanding issues.  Its overriding concern was to facilitate the
development of trade on the basis of neutral and predictable rules.  There should be a general
acceptance of the principle that origin rules be developed in such a way that they did not produce anadverse effect on trade.  To that end, the CRO might consider establishing a specific mechanism to
ensure that this principle was adhered to.
3.3 The representatives of Colombia, the Dominican Republic
, the European Communities , El
Salvador, Honduras , Hong Kong, China , Korea , Mexico , Pakistan , the Philippines , Switzerland  and
the United States welcomed the paper from India and stated that they needed more time to study it.
3.4 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its next
meeting.
4. Notifications under Article 5 and paragraph 4 of Annex II of the Agreement on Rules of
Origin (G/RO/N/25)
4.1 The Chairman recalled that since the last meeting, the Secretariat had circulated a document
informing delegations of the new notifications received (G/RO/N/25).  To date, 71 Members had
made notifications of non-preferential rules of origin and 74 Members had made notifications of
preferential rules of origin.  He expressed concern that a significant number of Members had not
complied with the notification requirements, and urged Members who had not yet notified to do so as
early as possible.
4.2 The Committee took note of the notifications made and the statement of the Chairman.
5. Election of officers
5.1 The CRO elected Mr. S. Moroz (Canada) as Chairman of the CRO for 1999.  The Committee
agreed to postpone the election of a Vice-Chairperson and to take up this matter at its next meeting.
6. Other business6.1 The Chairman proposed
 that the next meeting of the CRO take place on Monday,
28 June 1999.
__________