RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/C/M/19
12May1997
ORGANIZATION(97-1984)
Council forTrade inGoods
14April 1997
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING
Held intheCentre William Rappard
on14April 1997
Chairman: Mr.T.Johannessen (Norway)
Theproposed agenda contained indocument G/C/W/78 wasadopted withtheinclusion ofitems
4,5and6under "Other Business" asfollows:
Page
1. Market Access Matters 2
(a) Committee onMarket Access
-Periodic Report oftheCommittee (G/MA/57) 2
(b) Harmonized System -Requests forextensions ofwaivers 2
(i) Bangladesh (G/L/163, G/C/W/74) 2
(ii) Bolivia (G/L/161, G/C/W/72) 3
(iii) Nicaragua (G/L/166, G/C/W/77) 3
(iv) SriLanka (G/L/164, G/C/W/73/Rev.1) 3
(c) Senegal -Renegotiation Schedule XLIX
- Request foranextension ofthewaiver (G/L/165, G/C/W/76) 4
(d) Zambia -Renegotiation ofSchedule LXXVIII
- Request foranextension ofthewaiver (G/L/162, G/C/W/75) 4
(e) Decision ontheintroduction ofharmonized system changes intoWTO
schedules oftariff concessions on1January 1996
- Extension ofthetime-limit (G/MA/W/12 andCorr.1) 4
2. Implementation oftheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation Technology
Products (G/L/159, G/L/160) 8
3. Approval oftherules ofprocedure oftheCommittee onSanitary andPhytosanitary
Measures (G/SPS/W/48 andCorr.1) 9
4. Notification ofFreeTrade Agreements between theCzech Republic andtheSlovak
Republic ontheonesideandBulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania andtheState of
Israel ontheother. 10G/C/M/19
Page2
5. Chairperson oftheWorking Party onState Trading Enterprises 11
6. Dateofthenextmeeting 11
________________
TheChairman welcomed delegations tothismeeting convened byWTO/AIR/564.
1. Market Access Matters
(a) Committee onMarket Access
- Periodic Report oftheCommittee (G/MA/57)
1.1 Mr.Tagma, Chairman oftheMarket Access Committee stated thatinaccordance withthe
procedures adopted bytheMarket Access Committee regarding thesubmission offactual information
onrequests forwaiver extensions, aperiodic report tothisCouncil hadbeencirculated asadraftin
document G/MA/SPEC/4 dated 4April 1997 andwasexamined bytheMarket Access Committee
atitsmeeting of8April 1997. Following thismeeting, thereport wasrevised taking intoaccount,
interalia,thediscussions thathadtaken place atthatmeeting. Thisrevised report wascirculated in
document G/MA/57, dated 9April 1997, forconsideration bytheCouncil.
1.2 ThereportsummarizedtheactivitiesoftheCommitteesincethebeginningof1997,andindicated
inAnnexes IandIIthereasons whycertain Members whose waiver expired on30April 1997 had
torequest anextension foranewperiod ofsixmonths, i.e.until31October 1997. Inthisconnection,
heinformed theCouncil thatatthemeeting oftheMarket Access Committee, anumber ofdelegations
hadexpressed concern atthealmost automatic renewal ofthese waivers because ofreservations, of
ageneral orspecific nature, lodged withrespect tothedocumentation submitted bythese delegations.
Heencouraged thedelegations concerned tomake thenecessary efforts inorder toconclude assoon
aspossible anypending negotiations andtolimitasmuch aspossible anywaiver requests inthefuture.
1.3 TheCouncil tooknoteofthereport.
(b) Harmonized System -requests forextensions ofwaivers
1.4 TheChairman drewattention tothecommunications fromBangladesh, Bolivia, Nicaragua and
SriLanka,containingrequestsforextensionsofwaiverswhichexpiredon30April1997.Theserequests
hadbeenmade inthecontext ofthetransposition oftheSchedules intotheHarmonized System, and
inaccordance withparagraph 1oftheUnderstanding inrespect ofWaivers ofObligations under the
General Agreement onTariffs andTrade 1994. Pursuant toArticle IXoftheWTO Agreement, these
requests were before theCouncil foritsconsideration; draftdecisions hadbeencirculated toassist
theCouncil initsconsideration ofthese requests.
(i) Bangladesh (G/L/163, G/C/W/74)
1.5 TheChairman stated thattherequest fromBangladesh hadbeencirculated indocument G/L/163
andadraftdecision indocument G/C/W/74.
1.6 Therepresentative ofBangladesh stated thathisdelegation shared theconcern expressed at
thealmost automatic extension ofwaivers. InthecaseofBangladesh, negotiations hadbeeninitiated
withfourMembersandconcludedwiththree,includingrecentlyCanada.NegotiationsremainedpendingG/C/M/19
Page3
withAustralia, butfromtheassurances given bythatdelegation, itwashisexpectation thatnegotiations
would becompleted within afewdays, andthatBangladesh would notneedtorequest afurther extension
ofthewaiver after31October 1997.
1.7 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatement, approved theextension ofthewaiver granted to
Bangladesh until31October 1997, andrecommended thatthedraftdecision contained indocument
G/C/W/74 beforwarded totheGeneral Council foradoption.
(ii) Bolivia (G/L/161, G/C/W/72)
1.8 TheChairman stated thattherequest fromBolivia hadbeencirculated indocument G/L/161
andadraftdecision indocument G/C/W/72.
1.9 TheCouncil approved theextension ofthewaiver granted toBolivia until31October 1997,
andrecommended thatthedraftdecision contained indocument G/C/W/72 beforwarded totheGeneral
Council foradoption.
(iii) Nicaragua (G/L/166, G/C/W/77)
1.10 TheChairman stated thattherequest fromNicaragua hadbeencirculated indocument G/L/166
andadraftdecision indocument G/C/W/77.
1.11 TheCouncil approved theextension ofthewaiver granted toNicaragua until31October 1997,
andrecommended thatthedraftdecision contained indocument G/C/W/77 beforwarded totheGeneral
Council foradoption.
(iv) SriLanka (G/L/164, G/C/W/73/Rev.1)
1.12 TheChairman stated thattherequest fromSriLanka hadbeencirculated indocument G/L/164
andadraftdecision indocument G/C/W/73/Rev.1.
1.13 Therepresentative ofNewZealand stated thathisdelegation recognized thefundamental role
andimportance ofwaivers which allowed WTO Members toimplement newtariffsystems andtoconsult
andrenegotiate items adversely affected. However, asconcerned thewaiver referred toindocument
G/C/W/73/Rev.1, andashisdelegation hadindicated attheMarket Access Committee meeting of
8April 1997, itwould bedifficult tosupport therequest forawaiver extension. Thegreat patience
demonstrated byhisdelegation inpursuing newbindings onkeyNewZealand products intheSriLankan
market, along withitspreparedness toobserve theconsensus principle, hadgradually narrowed the
options available toit.Hisdelegation hadreached thepoint where itfeltthattosupport another waiver
extension would undermine firstly NewZealand 'sowncredibility asaMember committed tothedefence
ofWTO rulesandcommitments, andsecondly thatoftheWTO waiver procedures which hisdelegation
didnotbelieve were intended tosupport extended waivers inthese circumstances. However, his
delegation didwishtoachieve aresolution oftheissues between NewZealand andSriLanka, and
hoped thatthere would beconstructive discussions withSriLanka inthisregard inthenearfuture.
1.14 Therepresentative ofSriLanka referred tothedetailed statement made byhisdelegation at
theMarket Access Committee meeting of8April 1997 explaining therationale forSriLanka 'slatest
request foranextension ofthetime-limit ofthewaiver. Hehadcommunicated theoutcome ofthat
meeting tohisauthorities. However, there hadbeennoresponse fromhisauthorities duetoafestive
period inSriLanka which hadbegan lastweek andwould onlyconclude attheendofthecurrent week.G/C/M/19
Page4
1.15 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatements andagreed torevert tothismatter atitsnextmeeting
bywhich timethetwodelegations concerned should haveconsulted andreported onthestatus ofthese
consultations totheChairman.
(c) Senegal -Renegotiation Schedule XLIX
- Request foranextension ofthewaiver (G/L/165, G/C/W/76)
1.16 TheChairman drew attention totherequest bySenegal, circulated indocument G/L/165, for
anextension ofawaiver granted toitinconnection withtherenegotiation ofitsSchedule, andtoa
draftdecision, circulated indocument G/C/W/76.
1.17 Therepresentative ofSenegal informed theCouncil thatveryrecently substantial progress had
beenmade withatrading partner withwhom negotiations remained pending. Ifagreement wasreached
withthistrading partner before theGeneral Council meeting of24April 1997, thenhisdelegation
would notneedtopursue itsrequest forawaiver extension.
1.18 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatement, approved theextension ofthewaiver granted toSenegal
until31October 1997, andrecommended thatthedraftdecision contained indocument G/C/W/76
beforwarded totheGeneral Council foradoption.
(d) Zambia -Renegotiation ofSchedule LXXVIII
- Request foranextension ofthewaiver (G/L/162, G/C/W/75)
1.19 TheChairman drew attention totherequest byZambia, circulated indocument G/L/162, for
anextension ofawaiver granted toitinconnection withtherenegotiation ofitsSchedule, andtoa
draftdecision, circulated indocument G/C/W/75.
1.20 Therepresentative ofZambia stated thathisdelegation hadinitiated negotiations withthree
trading partners, andhoped toreport positively ontheprogress achieved inthisregard bytheendof
October 1997.
1.21 TheCouncil forTrade inGoods, tooknoteofthestatement, approved theextension ofthe
waiver granted toZambia until31October 1997, andrecommended thatthedraftdecision contained
indocument G/C/W/75 beforwarded totheGeneral Council foradoption.
(e) Decision ontheIntroduction ofHarmonized System Changes intoWTO Schedules ofTariff
Concessions on1January 1996
- Extension ofthetime-limit (G/MA/W/12 andCorr.1)
1.22 TheChairman stated thatthedraftdecision before theCouncil concerning theextension of
thetime-limit forawaiver andcirculated indocument G/MA/W/12 andCorr.1, related tothe
Harmonized System 1996 (HS96) changes which were tobeintroduced on1January 1996. Ithad
appeared thatawaiver would beneeded forMembers finding itnecessary toconsult ornegotiate under
Article XXVIII ofGATT 1994 asaresult oftheHS96 changes introduced intheirschedules. The
General Council Decision togrant awaiver until30June1996 toMembers which hadrequested to
becovered bysuchawaiver wascirculated indocument WT/L/124 andCorr.1. Thiswaiver was
extended until30April 1997 byDecision oftheGeneral Council of18July1996 (WT/L/173). The
various time-limits setoutintheDecision werealsoextended accordingly. Itwasnowbeing proposed
toextend thetime-limit ofthewaiver until31October 1997.
1.23 Therepresentative ofSwitzerland stated thatsomeMembers haddeveloped apractice ofmaking
reservationswithintheestablished90-dayslimit,however,withoutspecifyingthesereservations.SeveralG/C/M/19
Page5
Members hadreceived suchgeneral reservations more thanayearago,butnofollow-up interms of
specification ofthereservation hadbeenmade since then. Consequently, ithadnotbeenpossible to
enter intoconsultations ornegotiations inorder toaddress theproblem. Bymaking suchgeneral
reservations without further specifying theproblem, aMember extended defacto the90-day period
fortheverification oftheproposed transposition ofschedules oftariff concessions intotheHS96
nomenclature foranindefinite period oftime. Thispractice wasextremely worrying andcreated legal
uncertainties. Itseriously putintoquestion thepredictability ofrights andobligations ofWTO Members
andtherefore thecredibility oftheWTO itself. Infact,asof14April 1997, onlytwoMembers had
certified schedules asfarasHS96 changes were concerned.
1.24 Hestated thatthisdelegation hadasked theSecretariat tocirculate acommunication (G/C/W/79,
WT/GC/W/56) tothisCouncil which outlined Switzerland 'sconcerns andsuggested asolution tothis
problem aswellastoanother issue, namely thedelays inthetransposition ofalarge number of
schedules. Thetimewastooshort toreach adecision atthismeeting onhisdelegation 'sproposal.
Therefore, Switzerland would notoppose transmission ofthedraft decision contained indocument
G/MA/W/12andCorr.1totheGeneralCouncil.Howeverhisdelegationproposedthatthetwoproblems
specified inhiscountry 'scommunication betaken upfordiscussion anddecision attheGeneral Council
meeting scheduled for24April 1997. Forthispurpose, hisdelegation requested theChair toforward
thismatter totheChairman oftheGeneral Council andtoholdconsultations before thenextmeeting
oftheGeneral Council.
1.25 Therepresentative ofNorway stated thathisdelegation could approve thedecision onthesecond
extension ofwaivers pertaining totheintroduction oftheHS96 nomenclature inthenational schedules.
However,hisdelegationhadconcernsregardingthequasi-automaticprocedurefollowedfortheextension
ofthewaivers, particularly inlightofthefactthatmany ofthose Members requesting theextension
ofwaivers inrespect oftheirschedules didsobecause other Members maintained reservations ofa
general nature. Inmostcases, these reservations hadbeeninplace formore thanayear. Inthecase
ofNorway 'sschedule, theUSstill,andinspiteofrepeated requests tosubstantiate theirconcerns,
maintained ageneral reservation. Thissituation blocked thepossibility ofproceeding withpossible
Article XXVIII negotiations andthecompletion oftheverification process. Itwasnotsomuch Norway
thatwasaffected bythissituation asNorway hadalready implemented theHS96 changes initsnational
tariff. Itwastransparency andtheWTO system atlarge thatstood tolosefrom thisuseofgeneral
reservations. Heurged theUStoproceed expeditiously withthelifting ofthegeneral reservations
withregard totheNorwegian list,andforthatmatter withregard toalllistsonwhich itmaintained
general reservations. Inthisrespect, hewelcomed theSwiss initiative onhowtodealwiththisproblem.
Theproposal wasrecent sohehadonlypreliminary remarks. Withregard toparagraph 7oftheSwiss
proposal, Norway could support suchadecision ifsub-paragraph (b)wasdeleted. Allowing general
reservations,evenwithinalimitedtime-frame,constitutedanimplicitrecognitionofgeneralreservations
asatool,andentailed adefactoprolongation ofthetime-frame of90daysestablished fortheverification
andcertification ofschedules. Given thenature ofthisdecision, however, hebelieved some further
consultations were needed. Paragraph 8oftheSwiss proposal addressed thedirect concerns his
delegation hadwithregard tothecurrent HS96 exercise andhisdelegation fullysupported itsinclusion
inthedraftdecision. Members should atthisstage beabletoagree thatthefinalaimoftheHS96
exercise must betoconclude itby31October 1997, assetoutinthedraftdecision.
1.26 Therepresentative ofIndia stated thathisdelegation could approve thedraftdecision onan
extension ofthetime-limit ofthewaiver ascontained indocument G/MA/W/12 andCorr.1. Healso
wished toexpress hisdelegation 'ssupport forthepoints made intheSwiss paper andbytheSwiss
representative regarding theproblems created bygeneral reservations. Members hadtofindaway
ofdealing withsuchreservations inorder toavoid them becoming permanent.G/C/M/19
Page6
1.27 Therepresentative ofSingapore, speaking onbehalf ofASEAN Members, stated thatthis
delegation could support thedraftdecision ontheextension ofatime-limit ofthewaiver. Onthe
practice ofgeneral reservations, ASEAN countries wereconcerned withtheunrestrained useofsuch
reservations inthecontext oftheHS96 exercise, which hadcreated anunacceptable situation where
theverification process wasimpeded andHSdocumentation remained unverified foraseemingly
indefinite period oftime. There hadtobeajudicious anddisciplined useofsuchreservations and
within areasonable time, theMember making thegeneral reservation should communicate thespecific
problems totheother party. Against thisbackground ASEAN welcomed theSwiss paper andagreed
withitsgeneral thrust. Certain details could befurther refined anddiscussed andASEAN would
participate insuchconsultations.
1.28 Therepresentative ofJapan stated thathisdelegation could support thewaiver extension as
setoutinthedraft decision indocument G/MA/W/12 andCorr.1. However, hisdelegation was
concerned withtherepeated extensions ofthetime-limit ofthewaiver andshared theconcerns expressed
byprevious speakers. Thisconcern alsoexplained hisdelegation 'sinterest intheSwiss proposal.
Hisauthorities werestudying thisproposal veryclosely, andlooked forward toconsulting withothers
onthismatter.
1.29 Therepresentative ofHungary shared theconcerns expressed bySwitzerland inconnection
withthecurrent practice ofgeneral reservations andtherefore welcomed theSwiss proposal.
1.30 TherepresentativeoftheCzechRepublicstatedthathisdelegationwelcomedtheSwissproposal.
1.31 Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thathisdelegation regretted thetimeithadtaken
tocomplete thedetailed review oftheHSsubmissions. Hisauthorities tookthisexercise veryseriously
andwere trying todoathorough review oftherelevant documents. Unfortunately, thereview had
taken much longer thananticipated, fortworeasons: (i)theHS96 involved somany changes andthe
procedures adopted in1992 didnotforesee theneedforthesubmission ofconcordance tables from
allMembers; and(ii)anelectronic verification process hadnotyetbeenestablished. Thismeant that
officials hadtoreview thousands ofpages manually. Hisauthorities wereworking hardtoprovide
detailed comments tobothNorway andSwitzerland, andwould actively participate indiscussions
concerning theprocess tobeusedintheWTO forfuture HSrecommendations fromtheWorld Customs
Organization (WCO), withthehopethatdifficulties encountered withHS96 conversion would notbe
repeated inthefuture.
1.32 Therepresentative ofAustralia stated thatherdelegation wished toassociate itself withthe
concerns expressed about theuseofgeneral reservations andlooked forward toparticipating infurther
consultations ontheSwiss proposal.
1.33 Therepresentative ofCanada stated thatthepaper putforward bytheSwiss delegation raised
anumber ofverycrucial issues regarding theconduct ofArticle XXVIII negotiations andmodification
ofschedules. These issues hadbeendiscussed intheMarket Access Committee lastyear, buthad
notledtoanyconclusion because attention hadshifted towork related totheSingapore Ministerial
Conference. Heproposed thattheChairman holdinformal consultations onthismatter.
1.34 Therepresentative ofArgentina stated thathisdelegation shared theconcern expressed by
Switzerland, Norway andothercountries withrespect togeneral reservations. However, atthisjuncture
itwasalittletooearly totakeadecision onthisquestion. Informal consultations were necessary,
particularly because theSwiss proposal hadtwosections. Thefirstsection wasveryclear, however
thesecond section on"Delayed Transposition", called formore precision. Inthissection, Switzerland
suggested thatanadditional condition beadded forcountries wishing toobtain awaiver. However,
thetextonwaivers wasclear. Paragraph (a)ofthedraftdecision contained indocument G/MA/W/12G/C/M/19
Page7
required thesubmission ofcertain documentation byMembers. TheSwiss proposal prejudged thefact
thatMembers would notcomply withthiscondition when itstated insub-paragraph (a)ofSection II
on"Delayed Transposition" thefollowing: "Members failing tosubmit detailed explanations ofthe
reasons preventing themfromsubmitting therequired information orHSdocumentation....". Inclusion
ofthissentence leftanopen door toMembers toprovide explanations instead oftherequired
documentation. Forthisreason, theSwiss proposal on"Delayed Transposition" required more
discussion, because atfirstsightitwould seemtocounter whatwasbeing sought inrespect ofcompliance
oftheconditions necessary forgranting awaiver.
1.35 Therepresentative ofHong Kong stated thathisdelegation didnotappear tohavethesame
concernsasSwitzerlandtotheextentthatHongKongdidnotexpecttohaveanysubstantivemodifications
introduced toitstariff schedule asaresult oftheHS96 changes. However, hisdelegation supported
theSwiss proposal inprinciple andwould beready totakepartinanyopen-ended consultations on
thematter.
1.36 Therepresentative ofZimbabwe stated thathisdelegation shared theconcerns raised bythe
Swiss delegation andmostother Members. However, hisdelegation hadquestions about thesubstance
oftheSwiss proposal, namely making amendments totheexisting procedures, which inZimbabwe 's
viewwerenottherealsource oftheproblem. Ithadalsobeenpointed outthatthegeneral reservations
affected approximately twenty-seven Members. There were anumber ofother Members whowere
notasyetaffected. Inlightofthissituation, itwould havebeenpreferable tohavethisproposal first
discussed intheMarket Access Committee, oratleasttohavehadsome informal consultations atthat
level. There wasalsosome prejudicial presumption thatMembers notyetaffected bythese general
reservations because theyhadforexample notyetsubmitted therelevant documentation, would be
subject tosuchreservations atafuture date. Itwould, therefore, beadvisable tolookfurther intothis
matter before transmitting ittotheGeneral Council.
1.37 Therepresentative ofColombia stated thathisdelegation shared theconcerns expressed with
respect totheuseofgeneral reservations. Hisdelegation feltthatfurther discussions hadtobeheld
before agreement could bereached onthedraftsuggested bythedelegation ofSwitzerland.
1.38 Therepresentative ofTunisia stated thatTunisia hadfound itnecessary tobecovered bya
waiver, because adelegation which hadraised ageneral reservation against Tunisia 'sschedule had
notfollowed itupwithanyspecific problems. Asaresult, hisdelegation hadnothadtheopportunity
torespond ortakeaction. Inlightofthissituation, hisdelegation welcomed theSwiss proposal.
1.39 Therepresentative ofCuba stated thatherdelegation could approve thedraftdecision contained
indocument G/MA/W/12 andCorr. 1.Herdelegation alsowelcomed theSwiss proposal butwould
needmoretimetoexamine itindetail. Itwasnecessary fordelegations having made general reservations
tosubsequently identify thespecific problems sothataprompt solution might bereached.
1.40 Therepresentative ofPakistan stated thatPakistan hadnotbeenabletoincorporate theHS96
changes intoitsschedule because Article XXVIII negotiations hadnotyetbeenconcluded withthe
US. Hisdelegation hadrequested theUSforameeting which wasexpected totakeplace inearly
May1997. Itwashishopethatitwould bethelastmeeting inthisconnection.
1.41 Therepresentative ofSwitzerland thanked delegations forthesupport theyhadexpressed at
hisdelegation 'sproposal. Oneaspect tobeconsidered wasthatthedocument submitted contained
specific points relating totherelevant decision thathadtobetaken bytheGeneral Council contained
indocument G/MA/W/12 andCorr.1. So,hisdelegation intended toraisethispoint attheGeneral
Council meeting of24April 1997. However, hisdelegation hadnoobjections toconsultations being
heldunder theframework ofthisCouncil.G/C/M/19
Page8
1.42 TheChairman proposed thattheCouncil takenoteofthestatements, approve theextension
ofthewaiver until31October 1997, andthatthedraftdecision granting thisextension andcontained
indocument G/MA/W/12 anditscorrigendum betransmitted totheGeneral Council foradoption.
Healsoproposed thatheholdconsultations ontheSwiss proposal, leaving itopentoSwitzerland to
bring thematter upbefore theGeneral Council.
1.43 TheCouncil soagreed.
1.44 TheChairman added thatMembers should keepinmind tworuleswhich would facilitate the
functioning ofthesystem. First, thescrupulous observance ofnotification obligations which wasa
sinequanonforthisOrganization andsecond, theinvocation ofwaivers should bemade sparingly,
bothintimeandinnumbers.
1.45 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatement.
2. Implementation oftheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation Technology Products
(G/L/159, G/L/160)
2.1 TheChairman recalled thattheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation Technology
Products (the"ITA") dated 13December 1996andcirculated indocument WT/MIN(96)/16 envisaged
theelimination ofduties andotherduties andcharges oninformation technology products through equal
ratereductions ofcustoms duties beginning in1997 andconcluding intheyear2000. Although only
certain Members andacceding states orseparate customs territories chose toparticipate, thebenefits
oftheITAwould accrue toallWTO Members astheywould begranted onanmfnbasis. Itwasworth
noting thattheseparticipants represented morethan92percentofworld tradeininformation technology
products valued atover500billion USdollars. Thisinitiative could beconsidered amajor success
forthefurther liberalization ofinternational trade.
2.2 Pursuant totheDeclaration andthemodalities setouttherein, theparticipants totheDeclaration
hadtaken decisions concerning theimplementation oftheITAandhadforwarded thecommunications
contained indocuments G/L/159 andG/L/160 tothisCouncil.
2.3 Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thattheITAwasasignificant achievement for
allMembers. Eachparticipant haddemonstrated toitsdomestic sector aswellastotheworld trading
system thatliberalization ofthissector wasofkeyimportance topreparing theinfrastructure forthe
twenty-first century. Thesuccess oftheITAandthenegotiations onBasic Telecommunications showed
howtheWTO could bethevehicle forongoing tradeliberalization, anditsetaverypositive precedent
forfuture negotiations. Theparticular point, hewished tomake wasthefactthathisdelegation
welcomed several participants 'decisions toderestrict theirITAschedules andauthorize theposting
oftheirschedules ontheWTO 'sInternet Website. Hisdelegation encouraged allparticipants totake
similar action thereby ensuring thatthisimportant information would bereadily accessible.
2.4 Therepresentative ofIndia stated thathewasnotinaposition toagree tothederestriction
ofIndia'sschedule inasmuch asnecessary domestic approval procedures hadyettobegonethrough.
Onanother point, hestated thatitdidnotseem appropriate tousetheDecision of26March 1980 on
"Procedures forModification andRectification ofSchedules ofTariff Concessions" (BISD 27S/25)
toincorporate whatwasagreed intheITAnegotiations intariff schedules ofvarious Members. To
describe thetypeofcommitments undertaken andthetypeofconcessions given intheITAas
modifications andrectifications ofschedules wasanunderstatement. Herealized thatintheexisting
context thiswastheonlylegalroute available tomodify Members 'schedules, buthewasmentioning
thisasapoint forconsideration inthefuture.G/C/M/19
Page9
2.5 TherepresentativeofNorwaystatedthathisdelegationsupportedthesubstanceoftheintervention
bytheUS.However, ontheissue ofderestriction oftheschedules, while Norway wasgenerally in
favour oftransparency ofthistype, itwould bedifficult torelease Norway 'sschedule ontheinternet
before theNorwegian Parliament hadbeenproperly informed ofthecontents ofthisschedule.
2.6 InresponsetoaquestionfromtherepresentativeofPeru,amemberoftheSecretariat(Mr.Hoda)
referred toparagraph 4ofdocument G/L/160 which stated that"theCommittee maydecide toinvite,
asappropriate, representatives ofWTO Members andofobservers totheCouncil forTrade inGoods
thatarenotparticipants asof26March 1997 toattend meetings oftheCommittee asobservers".
Therefore, therequest forobservership totheCommittee ofParticipants hadtobeaddressed tothe
Committee. Practically, thiswould mean theMember concerned should sendarequest totheSecretariat
withtheinstruction thatitbeplaced before theCommittee foritsconsideration.
2.7 Therepresentative ofSwitzerland stated that,while hisdelegation wassatisfied withtheoutcome
ofthenegotiations, unfortunately participants hadnotbeenabletoagree tothecompletion oftheinitially
tabled product coverage asproposed byvarious delegations intheprocess upto31January 1997.
Therefore, theSwiss delegation attached considerable importance totheprocedures forconsultations
onandreview ofproduct coverage asagreed on26March 1997. Thisprocess would begin on
1October 1997. Switzerland alsoattached considerable importance tothese procedures toensure all
participants theirrights tobeconsulted incaseofArticle XXVIII actions. Development ofadditional
procedures toaddress theconcerns ofsmall- andmedium-sized exporting participants regarding their
rights under Article XXVIII were alsoveryimportant. Inthiscontext, Switzerland reaffirmed the
request toseenegotiating rights granted toallITAparticipants, particularly tosmall- andmedium-sized
exporting participants, incaseaparticipant invoked theprovisions ofArticle XXVIII inorder tomodify
orwithdraw anITAconcession included initsWTO schedule oftariff concessions.
2.8 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatements.
3. Approval oftherulesofprocedure oftheCommittee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures
(G/SPS/W/48 andCorr.1)
3.1 TheChairman stated thattheCouncil hadbefore it,foritsapproval pursuant toparagraph
6ofArticle IVoftheWTO Agreement, therules ofprocedure oftheCommittee onSanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures.
3.2 Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities stated thathisdelegation wished tofurther
reflect ontheserules, inparticular rule33.Hisdelegation hadnoted thatthepractice differed between
theCommittee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures andothers ontheissue oftaking decisions.
Anumber ofCommittees provided specifically thatadecision should bereferred toasuperior body
when itwasfound thatthedecision could notbearrived atthrough consensus, while thisCommittee
providedfordecision-makingonlythroughconsensus.Hisdelegationwishedtoconsidertheimplications
ofthissituation bearing inmind theneedtoensure themaximum possible consistency between the
Committees.
3.3 Therepresentative from Perupointed outthatsome textinrules 12,13and14were within
square brackets.
3.4 Therepresentative ofIndia pointed outthatthematerial circulated contained onedocument
indicating thedepartures intheproposed rulesofprocedures fromtherulesofprocedures oftheGeneral
Council andanother document containing theconsolidated presentation oftheproposed rules of
procedures. Hepointed outthattheconsolidated presentation oftheproposed rulesfound intheannexG/C/M/19
Page10
todocument G/SPS/W/48 didnothaveanysquare brackets andwasthedocument inrespect ofwhich
approval wasbeing sought.
3.5 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatements andagreed torevert tothismatter atitsnextmeeting.
4. Notification ofFreeTrade Agreements between theCzech Republic andtheSlovak Republic
ontheonesideandBulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania andtheState ofIsrael ontheother
4.1 Therepresentative oftheCzech Republic, speaking alsoonbehalf ofBulgaria, Estonia, Israel,
Latvia, Lithuania andSlovakia, provided under "Other Business" thefollowing information concerning
freetradeagreementsbetweentheCzechRepublicandSlovakiaononesideandthepreviouslymentioned
countries ontheother:
(a) TheAgreement between theCzech Republic andtheRepublic ofBulgaria signed on
15December 1995 wasapplied provisionally since 1January 1996 andentered intoforce on
7June1996.
(b) TheAgreement between Slovakia andtheRepublic ofBulgaria signed on8December 1995
wasapplied provisionally since 1January 1996 andentered intoforce on11March 1997.
(c) TheAgreement between theCzech Republic andtheState ofIsrael signed on20May1996
wasapplied provisionally since 1January 1997.
(d) TheAgreement between Slovakia andtheStateofIsrael signed on22May1996 entered into
force on1January 1997.
(e) TheAgreement between theCzech Republic andEstonia signed on19April 1996wasapplied
provisionally since 1July1996.
(f) TheAgreement between Slovakia andEstonia signed on29May1996wasapplied provisionally
since 1July1996.
(g) TheAgreement between theCzech Republic andLatvia signed on15April 1996wasapplied
provisionally since 1July1996.
(h) TheAgreement between Slovakia andLatvia signed on19April 1996wasapplied provisionally
since 1July1996.
(i) TheAgreement between theCzech Republic andLithuania signed on14October 1996 was
expected toenter intoforce inthenearfuture.
(j) TheAgreement between Slovakia andLithuania signed on27November 1996 wasexpected
toenter intoforce inthenearfuture.
4.2 AlltheseAgreements aimed atthegradual establishment offreetradeareasbetween theparties
inthesense ofArticle XXIV GATT 1994. These Agreements contained alsoprovisions dealing with,
interalia,rulesoforigin, stateaid,competition, public procurement, intellectual property rights and
other areas. Therespective notifications, pursuant toArticle XXIV:7(a), would beprovided tothe
Committee onRegional Trade Agreements inthenearfuture.
4.3 TheCouncil tooknoteofthisinformation.G/C/M/19
Page11
5. Chairperson oftheWorking Party onState Trading Enterprises
5.1 TheChairman recalled thatMs.Vibeke Roosen (Denmark) wasappointed Chairperson ofthe
Working Party onState Trading Enterprises bytheCouncil atitsmeeting of12February 1997. In
aletter dated 19March 1997, MsRoosen hadindicated thatshewould beunable tocontinue as
Chairperson ofthisWorking Party duetoanimpending departure fromGeneva forprofessional reasons.
TheWorking Party onState-Trading Enterprises hadnorulesofprocedure which inthecaseofother
subsidiary bodies foresaw insuchasituation either theVice-Chairperson taking overortheelection
ofaninterim Chairperson bytheCommittee. InthecaseofthisWorking Party, theCouncil would
needtoappoint anewChairperson. Under the"Guidelines theAppointment ofOfficers toWTO Bodies"
approved bytheGeneral Council on31January 1995 (WT/L/31), itwasfortheChairperson ofthe
Goods Council toconduct consultations ontheappointment oftheChairperson tothisWorking Party.
Such consultations hadbeeninitiated buthadnotyetfinished. Hewould continue theconsultations
andreport backtotheCouncil atitsnextmeeting.
5.2 Atthesame timeitwashisunderstanding thatsome important work inthisareaneeded to
becontinued inthecontext ofinformal meetings. Thenextinformal meeting ofthisWorking Party
wasscheduled fortheendofApril 1997, i.e.before thenewChairperson oftheWorking Party would
beknown. Inorder toallow continuation ofthiswork, hesuggested thatMembers agree that
Mr.P.May, theoutgoing Chairman oftheWorking Party, continue tochairthisinformal work until
anewChairperson oftheWorking Party waselected.
5.3 Therepresentative ofMexico stated thathisdelegation could agree totheChairman 'ssuggestion
aslongasMrMaywould onlychair theinformal meeting scheduled fortheendofApril 1997. A
situation should notarisewhere theCouncil would beextending theChairmanship ofMr.Mayfor
more thantwoyears, because thiswould becontrary tothe"Guidelines forAppointment ofOfficers
toWTO Bodies".
5.4 TheChairman stated thatheanticipated concluding these consultations before theendof
April 1997.
5.5 TheCouncil tooknoteofthestatements, andagreed totheChairman 'sproposal.
6. Dateofthenextmeeting
6.1 TheCouncil tooknotethatitsnextmeeting wasscheduled for2June1997.