TURKEY – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF COTTON YARN (OTHER THAN SEWING THREAD)
Document: Request for Consultations by India
Date: 15 February 2012
Document codes: WT/DS428/1; G/L/979; G/SG/D41/1
Complainant: India
Respondent: Turkey
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. XIX:1  GATT 1994Art. 2.1, 2.20(e), 4.2(b), 4.2(c), 4.1(c), 2, 3, 4, 5.1, 5, 6, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5, 12.1(c)  Safeguards

TURKEY – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF COTTON YARN
(OTHER THAN SEWING THREAD)

Request for Consultations by India

 The following communication, dated 13 February 2012, from the delegation of India to the
delegation of Turkey and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

 My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Republic of Turkey
("Turkey") pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes (the "DSU"), Article XXII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
1994 (the "GATT 1994") and Article 14 of the Agreement on Safeguards [hereinafter "AoS"] with
respect to, but not limited to, the following measures of Turkey:

(a) Definitive Safeguard Measures on imports of cott on yarn (other than sewing thread) from all
origins classified under heading 52.05 of the Harmonised System (HS) Codes imposed by
Turkey with effect from 15 July 2008 for a peri od of three years in pursuance to investigation
report published in the Turkish Official Gaze tte on 11 August 2008 and the related Decree of
the Council of Ministers;
1

(b) Provisional Safeguard Measures imposed by Turkey as per Decree /notification No.
2011/2041 dated 4 August 2011 retroactively with effect from 15 July 2011; 2

(c) Extension of the period of application of de finitive Safeguard Measures referred at (a) above
on 28 January 2102 retroactively with effect fro m 15 July 2011 vide Council of Ministers'
Decree No.2012/2721 dated 28 Janua ry 2012 pursuant to the definitive findings in a review
vide Communique No.2012/2 published in Official Gazette No.28184 dated
25 January 2012;3

(d) As well as the underlying investigation, any amendments, replacements, related or
implementing acts or measures to the above.

1 WTO Document No. G/SG/N/8/TUR/11, G/SG/N/9/TUR/5, G/SG/N/10/TUR/11,
G/SG/N/11/TUR/12 dated 22 August 2008.
2 WTO Document G/SG/N/6/TUR/14/Suppl.1, G/ SG/N/7/TUR/10 and G/SG/N/11/TUR/17 dated
24 June, 2011.
3 WTO Document No. G/SG/N/11/TUR/17/Suppl.1 and G/SG/N/14/TUR/7 dated 31 January 2012.

2. Turkey imposed definitive safeguard measures on imports of cotton yarn with effect from
15 July 2008 for a period of 3 years. The said measures were to expire on 14 July 2011. Turkey
initiated a review on 11 June, 2011 to consider extension of the period of application of the said
measure. Turkey imposed provisional safeguard measures on 4 August 2011 with retroactive effect
from 15 July, 2011 without making the required determ ination in the said review. Upon conclusion of
the review, Turkey issued the definitive finding s on 25 January 2012 recomme nding continuation of
the measures. The safeguard measu res as recommended in the defin itive findings were imposed on
28 January 2012 retroactively with effect from 14 July 2011.
3. India considers that as Turkey initiated a review to extend the safeguard measures, it is under
an obligation as per the provision of Article 7.2 of the AoS to make a determination before the
extension of measures, in conformity with the pro cedures set out in Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the AoS
that the safeguard measures continue to be necess ary to prevent or remedy serious injury to its
domestic industry, that there is evidence that the in dustry is adjusting and the pertinent provisions of
Articles 8 and 12 have been observed. Without ma king a determination as required under Article 7.2,
Turkey imposed provisional safeguard measures on 4 August 2011 with retroactive effect from
15 July, 2011 as per Decree /notification No.2011/2041 dated 4 August 2011. India considers that the
extension of safeguard measures by imposing provisi onal measures is inconsistent with the AoS as
Turkey cannot take recourse to provisional meas ures under Article 6 of the AoS while undertaking a
review of existing measures. At the time of appl ying initial safeguard measures in 2008, Turkey had
also applied safeguard measures on provisional basis for 200 days which were followed by definitive
safeguard measures. India considers that impos ition of provisional safeguard measures is permitted
under Article 6 of the AoS for a maximum period of 200 days only in an original investigation and not
in a review for extension of existing measures.
4. India considers that the measures in question ar e inconsistent with Turkey's obligations under
the following provisions of the GATT 1994 and the AoS in, at least, the following aspects:
(a) With regard to the definitive Safeguard M easures imposed with effect from 15 July 2008,
Turkey acted inconsistently with the provisions of -

(i) Article XIX:(1(a) of GATT 1994 and Articles 3.1 and 4.2(c) of the AoS as
Turkey did not establish that increased imports causing serious injury to the
domestic industry were as a result of unforeseen developments and of the
effect of GATT obligations;
(ii) Articles 2.1, 3.1, 4.1(c), 4.2(c) of the AoS as Turkey did not consider data
relating to domestic producers whose collective output constituted a 'major
proportion' of total domestic producti on of like or directly competitive
articles;
(iii) Articles 2.1, 3.1, 4.2(b) and 4.2(c) of the AoS as Turkey failed to
demonstrate, on the basis of objective evidence, the existence of causal link
between increased imports and serious injury;
(iv) Article XIX:1(a) of the GATT 1994 and Articles 3.1, 4.2 (c), 5.1 and 7.1 of
the AoS as Turkey failed to establish th at the measure was necessary for a
period of three years to 'facilitate adjustment' as the investigation report did
not consider this aspect at all;

(b) With regard to the provisional safeguard m easures imposed on 4 August 2011 retroactively
with effect from 15 July 2011, Turkey acted inconsistently with the provisions of-

(i) Articles 7.1 and 7.2 of the AoS by extending the period of initial application
of measures after their expiry and by retroactively applying the provisional
measures;
(ii) Articles 3.1, 4.2(c), and 7.2 of the AoS as Turkey extended the measures on
4 August 2011 with retroactive effect from 15 July 2011 without making any
determination that the safeguard me asure continues to be necessary to
prevent or remedy serious injury and that the domestic industry is adjusting;
(iii) Article 7.2 of the AoS, read with Artic les 3.1, 4.2(a), (b) and (c), as Turkey
did not make the required determination based on an evaluation of all
relevant factors and Turkey did not demonstrate on the basis of objective
evidence, the existence of causal link;
(iv) Articles 3.1, 4.2(c) and 6 of the AoS as Turkey did not make a preliminary
determination establishing the critical circumstances and that there was clear
evidence of increased imports causing or threatening to cause serious injury,
whereas Turkey imposed provisional safeguard measures by stating " ……
provisional safeguard measure is proposed to eliminate uncertainty that
could come out with the ongoing investigation on the necessity of the
extension of the current measures"
4 ;
(v) Article 6 of the AoS as Turkey impo sed provisional measures in excess of
200 days by imposing these measure s on two occasions in 2008 and on
4 August, 2011 for 200 days on each occasion;
(vi) Article 6 of the AoS, read with Article 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3, as imposition of
provisional measures is permitted only at the time of original investigation
before initial application of definitive measures but not permitted in a review
meant for extending the period of initial application of measures;
(vii) Article 6 of the AoS, read with Ar ticle 7.2, as Turkey imposed the
provisional measures retroactively and not prospectively;
(viii) Article 7.5 of the AoS as the initial app lication period of safeguard measures
expired on 14 July 2011 and Turkey made the fresh application of measures
on the same product without waiting fo r the mandatory period as required
under Article 7.5 of the AoS;
(ix) Articles 3.1 and 4.2(c) of the AoS as Turkey neither made a determination
nor published any report of its findings as required under Article 6 or 7, as
the case may be;

4 WTO Document G/SG/N/6/TUR/14/Suppl.1, G/ SG/N/7/TUR/10 and G/SG/N/11/TUR/17 dated
24 June, 2011.

(x) Article 5.1 of the AoS, read with Artic le 6 and 7.1, which provides for the
application of a safeguard measure only for remedying serious injury and to
facilitate adjustment and not with a view to eliminate uncertainty;
(xi) Article 12.1 (c) of the AoS, which provides for notifying the Committee on
Safeguards upon taking a decision to apply or extend a safeguard measure.
(c) With regard to the definitive measures applied on 28 January 2012 retroactively with effect
from 15 July 2011, Turkey acted inconsistently with the provisions of-

(i) Article XIX:1(a) of the GATT 1994 and Articles 3.1 and 4.2(c) of the AoS as
Turkey did not establish that increased imports causing serious injury to the
domestic industry were as a result of unforeseen developments and of the
effect of GATT obligations;
(ii) Article 7.2 of the AoS as Turkey extended the period of application of
measures on 28 January 2012 after the expiry of the measures on
14 July 2011, and without making a prior determination in conformity with
the procedures set out in Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the AoS that the safeguard
measures continue to be necessary to prev ent or remedy serious injury to its
domestic industry, that there is evidence that the industry is adjusting, and
provided that the pertinent provisions of Articles 8 and 12 having been
observed.
(iii) Article 7.5 of the AoS as the initial app lication period of safeguard measures
expired on 14 July 2011 and Turkey made the fresh application of measures
on the same product on 28 January 20 12 without waiting for the mandatory
period as required under Article 7.5 of the AoS;
(iv) Article 7.2 of AoS as the determinatio n made by Turkey did not meet the
requirements of Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of AoS regarding determinations with
respect to domestic industry, like or directly competitive articles, serious
injury or threat thereof, causal link and that the safeguard measures continued
to be necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury and that there was
evidence that the industry was adjusting.
5. India considers further that the measures at issu e have a serious adverse impact on the export
of cotton yarn from India to Turkey. India also rese rves its right to raise additional claims and legal
matters that may arise during the consultations in relation to the measures at issue and their
application under the Agreement on Safeguards and the GATT 1994.
6. In view of the above, India looks forward to receiving Turkey's reply to this request within the
prescribed time limit. India proposes that the date and venue of these consultations may be mutually
agreed.