ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (84) 4 05 
 
 
 
Vol. 1984/0 175 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Communit y and the European Atom ic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), t his file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februa r 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 v om 27.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
CO M(84) 405 f in a l
B ru sse ls, 24th J u ly  1984
COMMUNICATION F R O M  THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
concerning the p a r tip a tio n  of the Community in the in te rn a -  
tio n a l in s t it u t io n a l m achinery e s ta b lis h e d  by the UNCTAD 
R e s tric tiv e  Business P ra c tic e s  Code
COM(84) 405 f in a l

The p a r tic ip a tio n  o f the Community in  the in te r n a tio n a l in s t it u t io n a l 
m achinery e s ta b lis h e d  by the UNCTAD R e s tric tiv e  Business P ra c tic e s  Code
I .  Background
The "Set o f M u lti la t e r a l l y  Agreed E q u ita b le  P rin c ip le s  and Rules fo r  the 
C o n tro l o f R e s tric tiv e  Business P ra c tic e s " (the "Code") adopted by the 
G eneral Assembly o f the U nited N ations on 5 December 1980 p ro v id e s :
1. in  s e c tio n  B ( i i )  "Scope o f a p p lic a tio n "  th a t
"8 . Any referen ce  to 'S ta te s ' o r 'G overnem ents' s h a ll be construed as 
in c lu d in g  any re g io n a l groupings o f S ta te s , to the e x te n t th a t they 
have competence in  the area o f r e s t r ic t iv e  business p r a c tic e s ;"
2. in  s e c tio n  G  " In te r n a tio n a l i n s t it u t io n a l m a ch in e ry," s u b -s e c tio n  ( i ) ,  
th a t
"1 . An In te rg o ve rn m e n ta l Group o f E xperts on R e s tr ic tiv e  Business 
P ra c tic e s  o p e ra tin g  w ith in  the framework o f a Committee o f UNCTAD 
w i l l  p ro vid e  the in s t it u t io n a l m a ch in e ry."
Thus, although the Community is  recognized as e q u iv a le n t to a S tate o r 
Government as fa r  as the scope o f a p p lic a tio n  o f th e  RBP Code is 
concerned, i t  is  denied th is  s ta tu s  in  the in s t it u t io n a l m achinery, 
the In te rg o ve rn m e n ta l Group o f Expoerts ("IG E "), by the reference to  the 
IG E's o p e ra tin g  " w ith in  the framework o f a Committee o f UNCTAD".
This paper suggests how th is  anomaly can be r e c t if ie d .
I I .  R e p rese n tatio n  o f the Community a t the 1st and 2nd sessions o f the IGE
1. B efore the IG E's 1st session in  November 1981 the m a tter was discussed 
in  the RELEX Group (C ouncil Doc. 8243/81 and Cor. 1  and 2) and at 
an UNCTAD c o o rd in a tio n  m eeting in  Geneva. At the beginning o f the 
1st session th e  re p re s e n ta tiv e  o f the co u n try then h o ld in g  th e  p r e s i­
dency o f the C ouncil (U n ite d  Kingdom ), speaking on b e h a lf o f the

-  2 -
Community and it s  Member S ta te s , made a statem ent saying th a t the 
Community could not accept ru le s o f procedure fo r  the IGE th a t were 
in co m pa tib le  w ith  it s  le g a l competence and it s  o b lig a tio n s  in  the 
f i e l d  o f c o m p e titio n  p o lic y . The statem ent was confirm ed by le t t e r  
dated 2 November 1981 and signed by the P residency o f the C ouncil and 
the Commission (TD/B/RBP/L1) .
S upporting the Community's p o s itio n , the spokesman fo r  Group B (Canada) 
r e ite ra te d  the G roup's understanding th a t the Community, as a re g io ­
nal grouping o f S tates having competence in  th e  area o f r e s t r ic t iv e  
business p ra c tic e s , should be e n t it le d  to  p a r tic ip a te  f u l l y  in  the 
work o f the IGE, sin ce  s e c tio n  B ( ii) ( 8 )  o f th e  Code recognized i t  
as e q u iv a le n t to a Member S ta te .
F ollo w in g  c o o rd in a tio n  meetings between the Chairman and o th e r o ffic e r s  
o f the Group, the Chairman (A rg e n tin a ) announced a t th e  p le n a ry meeting 
th a t the basis on which the Group would operate a t it s  1st session 
would be the ru le s o f procedure o f the main committees o f the Trade 
and Development Board.
2. At the beginning o f the 2nd session o f the IGE in  Geneva in  November 1983, 
fo llo w in g  a fu r th e r  UNCTAD c o o rd in a tio n  m eeting, the re p re s e n ta tiv e  o f 
the co un try then h o ld in g  the C ouncil p residency (Greece) confirm ed the 
statem ent made by the Community spokesman on b e h a lf o f th e  Community and 
i t s  Member S tates at the 1st s e ssio n . The Group B spokesman (Canada) also 
re ite ra te d  it s  support f o r  the Community's p o s itio n .
3. At the 1st session the spokesman fo r  the Group o f 77 (Sudan) hoped th a t 
the problem re fe rre d  to by Group B and the Community "w ould not impede 
t h e ir  f u l l  and s u b s ta n tiv e  p a r tic ip a t io n  in  th e  work o f the G roup."
At the 2nd session the Group o f 77 spokesman (E gypt) advocated using 
the ru le s a p p lie d  a t the 1st s e ssio n .
The spokesman fo r  Group D  (GDR) sa id  a t the 1st session th a t the 
p a r tic ip a tio n  o f re g io n a l groupings o f S tates should be s t r i c t l y  
s u b je c t to the ru le s  o f procedure o f the main com m ittees o f UNCTAD.
.  At the 2nd session the Group B  spokesman (Hungary) re ite ra te d  th is  
p o s itio n , saying th a t sin ce  the IGE was to  be regarded as a sub-com m ittee 
o f a main committee o f the Trade and Development Board th e  p a r tic ip a tio n  
o f the Community os an in te rg o v e rn m e n ta l body should be s u b je c t to  the 
procedures la id  down in  A r t ic le  74 o f the Rules o f Procedure o f th e  Main 
Co^mi t t e e s .

-  3 -
I I I .  The Community's ro le  in  the Code and in  the work o f the I6E
1. The Code p rovides th a t "re g io n a l groupings o f S ta te s , to  the e xte n t 
th a t the y have competence in  the area o f r e s t r ic t iv e  business p ra c tic e s " 
are to be tre a te d  as e q u iv a le n t to  "S ta te s " o r "G overnm ents".
The Community's competence in  th is  area is  uncontested.
I f  the Community is  th e re fo re  to be tre a te d  as e q u iv a le n t to an 
in d iv id u a l S tate o r Government, i t  is  on the same fo o tin g  as i n d i v i ­
dual Member S tates when i t  comes to o bse rvin g  th e  p ro v is io n s  o f the 
Code r e la tin g  to the p r in c ip le s  to  be fo llo w e d  in  the a d o p tio n , 
amendment and enforcem ent o f n a tio n a l o r re g io n a l le g is la tio n  (se ctio n s 
C  and E) o r to  in te r n a tio n a l co o p e ra tio n  (s e c tio n  F ). However, the 
Community's p o s itio n  in  th is  regard is  p u re ly  academic as long as i t  is 
denied th e  same s ta tu s  in  the in s it u t io n a l m achinery fo r  im plem enting 
the Code.
2. The fu n c tio n s  assigned to  the IGE under the Code can be d iv id e d  
b ro a d ly in to  the fo llo w in g :
(a) m a in ly te c h n ic a l fu n c tio n s  in  the realm o f s tu d ie s , e t c . ,  and
(b) fu n c tio n s  r e la tin g  to  the im plem entation and development o f the Code, 
(a) S tudies
The IGE is  re q u ire d  to  undertake s tu d ie s  and research and to  work 
f o r  w ider exchanges o f experience on r e s t r ic t iv e  business p ra c tic e s  
in  o rd e r to g ive  g re a te r e ffe c t to  the Rules and P rin c ip le s  
(s e c tio n  G ( i i i ) ( b ) ,  ( c ) , (d) and ( e ) ) .  I t  re p o rts  on i t s  work 
once a y e a r.
The Community's le g is la tio n  and experience p la y  a m ajor ro le  in  
th e  research work and s tu d ie s  undertaken by the IGE.
-  The papers produced by th e  S e cre ta ry-G e n e ra l draw h e a v ily  on 
them. The Community in flu e n c e  is  seen, f o r  exam ple, in  the 
model laws d ra fte d  by the  S e c re ta ria t which use wordings and

-  4 -
- procedures very s im ila r  to those found in  Community compe­
t i t i o n  law and re fe r to Community experience in  t h e ir  arguments 
in  support o f such wordings o r procedures.
-  The S e c re ta ria t re g u la rly  asks the Commission fo r  c o n trib u tio n s  
to ongoing w ork.
-  For the 2nd s e ssio n , f o r  example, the Commission pre sen ted , on 
b e h a lf o f the European Community, a re p o rt on e x c lu s iv e  d e a lin g  
arrangements which concluded th a t th e re  was a b ro a d ly  fa vo u ra b le  
economic case fo r  e x c lu s iv e  d is t r ib u t io n  arrangements in  
in te r n a tio n a l tra d e .
-  This in te r e s t in  the Community's experience is  h a rd ly  s u rp ris in g  
sin ce  both the Code and Community law, u n lik e  n a tio n a l law,
are m a in ly concerned w ith  r e s t r ic t iv e  business p ra c tic e s  th a t have 
damaging e ffe c ts  on tra d e , whether a t in te r n a tio n a l le v e l o r 
between the Member S tates o f the Community.
The Community should th e re fo re  be able to in te rv e n e  o r respond 
in  the d is u s s io n  o f s u b s ta n tiv e  issues concerning Community 
law in  the IGE, w ith o u t having any c o n d itio n s  placed on it s  
rig h ts  in  th is  re g ard.
(b) Im plem entation and development o f th e  Code
The IG E's ro le  in  e nsuring the e ffe c tiv e  im plem entation o f the 
Code in v o lv e s  p ro v id in g  f a c i l i t i e s  fo r  c o n s u lta tio n s  between S ta te s , 
making a p p ro p ria te  recommendations to  S tates and p re p a rin g  proposals 
on ways o f im proving and d eveloping the Code fo r  the review  conference 
scheduled f o r  1985 (s e c tio n  G ( ii) ( a )  and ( f )  and ( i i i ) ( 6 ) ) .
The Community is  as d ir e c t ly  concerned by the a c t i v i t i e s  o f the 
IGE as are the in d iv id u a l Member S tates o f UNCTAD. For example, 
i t  may be the s u b je c t o f recommendations and i t  is  a ls o  d ir e c t ly  
concerned by the proposals f o r  amending th e  p ro v is io n s  o f the 
Code. I t  must th e re fo re  be able  to take a f u l l  p a rt in  th e  IGE's 
w ork.

-  5 -
IV . How to  secure the Community's r ig h t to  p la y a f u l l  p a rt in  the work 
o f the IGE
The u ltim a te  s o lu tio n  is  to  amend the s e c tio n  o f the Code d e a lin g  w ith  
the in s t it u t io n a l m achinery (s e c tio n  G ( i) ( 1 ) )  to  make p ro v is io n  fo r  
re g io n a l groupings o f S tates to  be tre a te d  as e q u iv a le n t to  S tates or 
Governments in  the same way as the s e c tio n  on th e  scope o f a p p lic a tio n . 
T his could be done d u rin g  the re v is io n  o f the Code which is  scheduled 
fo r  1985.
Irre s p e c tiv e  o f t h is  u ltim a te  s o lu tio n , i t  would be a p p ro p ria te  to  subm it 
to  the Trade and Development Board fo r  the 3rd session o f the IGE 
(scheduled fo r  7-16  November 1984) a proposal designed to secure the 
Community's r ig h t to  f u l l  p a r tic ip a t io n  in  the s h o rte r term .
The p roposal would read as fo llo w s :
"N o tw ith s ta n d in g  A r t ic le  78 o f th e  Rules o f Procedure o f the Trade and 
Development Board, re g io n a l groupings o f S ta te s , to  the e x te n t th a t they 
have competence in  th e  area o f r e s t r ic t iv e  business p ra c tic e s , s h a ll 
p a r tic ip a te  in  th e  work o f the In te rg o ve rn m e n ta l Group o f E xperts on 
the same fo o tin g  as Member S tates o f UNCTAD."
The Community should make i t  c le a r to  the Trade and Development Board 
th a t i f  re g io n a l groupings o f S tates which have competence in  the area 
o f r e s t r ic t iv e  business p ra c tic e s  are not given the same rig h ts  as in d i­
v id u a l Member S tates o f UNCTAD on the In te rg o ve rn m e n ta l Group o f E xpe rts, 
the Community's s ta tu s  under the Code can o n ly  be th a t accorded to  i t  
w ith in  the in s t it u t io n s  o f UNCTAD. This s ta tu s  does not a llo w  the 
Community to  be tre a te d  as e q u iv a le n t to  an in d iv id u a l Government o r 
S tate  in  the in s t it u t io n a l m achinery and renders the equivalence clause 
in  s e c tio n  B ( i i ) ( 8 )  o f th e  Code in o p e ra tiv e . In these circum stances the 
Community should not co nside r assuming it s  r e s p o n s ib ilitie s  under the 
Code as long as i t  was not accorded e q u iv a le n t s ta tu s  in  the IGE.