Source: http://www.alca-ftaa.org/Ngroups/NGSU/publications/english/BOL2.asp
Timestamp: 2017-11-18 06:20:15
Document Index: 770746521

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 13', 'Art. 15', 'Art. 43', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 40', 'Art. 24', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 39', 'Art. 11', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 21', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 12', 'Art. 17', 'Art. 17', 'Art. 38']

ALCA - FTAA - ZLEA - AD & SCM Compendium - Bolivia
During the investigation, preferably subsequent to the preliminary determination, the complainant, the importers and exporters of the product that is the subject of the investigation and in general any persons who have shown that they have a legitimate interest in the investigation may apply for the holding of joint hearings of interested parties representing different interests. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 13.
No statutory provision.
The Technical Secretariat shall have a maximum period of seven (7) months from the date of publication of the Ministerial Decision ordering the initiation of the investigation in which to conduct and complete the investigation.
In exceptional cases, the Minister for Exports and Economic Competition shall authorize the extension of the period for the investigation. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 15.
The duration of countervailing or antidumping duties shall be two years, which may be extended if the cause which gave rise to the duty persist and provided that there is a prior request by the interested parties.
In dealing with the request for extension, the MECE shall entrust the Technical Secretariat with the following examinations.
First, after the first two years, there shall be a further examination of the margin of dumping or the amount of the subsidy.
Depending on the findings of this new investigation, the amount of the antidumping or countervailing duty may be modified according to the provisions of these regulations.
Such an evaluation shall be carried out again, upon request, after a further two years; second, after five years, there shall be a new evaluation of the injury or threat of injury and the margin of dumping or the amount of the subsidy, as well as of the causal relationship between them. If no request is made by the interested parties, the definitive duties shall lapse. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 43.
The definitive antidumping or countervailing duties established for products entered for consumption within ninety (90) days prior to the date of establishing the provisional duties, when it is proved that there is injury which is difficult to repair caused by massive dumped or subsidized imports, or when statements of intent accepted have not been respected. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 2.
Imposition of retroactive definitive duties may be ordered in the following cases:
1. Massive imports that have caused the domestic industry injury which is difficult to repair;
2. Failure to fulfill statements of intent accepted by the Minister for Exports and Economic Competition. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 40.
The investigating authority shall base its decision on the information provided, which can be verified, is appropriate and presented in timely fashion.
When the authority does not accept evidence or information, it shall so inform the party which has supplied the information or evidence and shall allow the party to provide further explanations. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 24.
In addition to the complainant, for the purposes of the investigation referred to in these regulations, the following shall be deemed to be interested parties:
(a) exporters, foreign producers or importers of a product subject to investigation;
(b) the government of the exporting country; producers of the like product who are not party to the complaint, as well as domestic producers of products for which the product under investigation is an input. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 2.
Following the opinion of the Committee on the Evaluation of Unfair Trade Practices, CONEPLAN, may determine that the antidumping or countervailing duty should be less than the margin of dumping or the amount of the subsidy if such lesser amount is adequate to remove the injury or threat of injury to national industry. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 39.
Offers to eliminate or limit the subsidy, to revise the export prices or to cease exports to Bolivia, as appropriate, in such a way as to eliminate the consequent injury shall be evaluated.
Offers shall not be considered when:
1. They are made prior to the imposition of provisional duties;
2. they do not include the supply of the information and authorization to carry out investigations which the investigating authority deems necessary;
3. they offer quantitative restrictions in cases of dumping investigations.
Parties interested in the procedure shall be given the opportunity to send their comments to the investigating authority within a specified time period, at the expiry of which it shall communicate any information to the Committee on the Evaluation of Unfair Trade Practices.
The Committee shall make a recommendation to the Minister for Exports and Economic Competition on the terms of the statement of intent (undertaking).
The Ministry of Exports and Economic Competition shall adopt and publish the decision most appropriate to the interests of the country.
In its resolution accepting the offer, the Ministry may order that antidumping or countervailing duties should not be collected, or should be collected in an amount less than the identified margin of dumping or subsidy, or be collected only as from a specified date or up to a specified date.
The application of any concessions made in the decision taken shall be conditional on fulfillment of the offers by the parties which made the statements of intent accepted by the Ministry of Exports and Economic Competition.
Where the Minister for Exports and Economic Competition, after receiving statements of intent, determined that there has been no injury, the resolution terminating the investigation shall state that the offers accepted previously have lapsed.
According to Article 44 final determinations which establish antidumping or countervailing duties may be reviewed so long as there is sufficient reason.
Such review may be self initiated by the Agency at any time, or at the request of the interested party after one year following the final determination.
Within a maximum period of five calendar days from the date of the Ministerial Decision to initiate an investigation, the Technical Secretariat shall forward basic questionnaires to the exporters or domestic producers and to diplomatic or consular representatives, requesting information on the case.
The same time-limits shall apply to the dispatch of questionnaires subsequent to the preliminary determination.
The communications accompanying the questionnaires shall indicate the time-limit within which the parties must return the questionnaires duly completed.
This shall not exceed twenty (20) working days from the date of dispatch of the communication. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 11.
The Minister for Exports and Economic Competition shall be responsible for issuing ministerial decisions on whether or not to initiate the investigation requested, evaluating the grounds for imposing provisional duties if necessary, and disclosing the statements of intent submitted by the interested party, as well as for decisions reflecting the action taken by the authorities thereon.
CONEPLAN shall be responsible for issuing decisions on the termination of investigations and any imposition of definitive duties.
All the aforementioned decisions shall be published in the Official Gazette, and a summary thereof shall be published in a newspaper with national circulation. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 2.
Interested parties may have access to and obtain the information provided to the Technical Secretariat by any of the interested parties, with the exception of the internal documents prepared by the Technical Secretariat and confidential documents.
For this purpose, they shall make an application in writing to the Technical Secretariat indicating the specific matters on which they require information and, if the request is accepted, the information shall be provided in writing. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 21.
The authorities shall require interested parties providing confidential information to furnish non-confidential summaries thereof.
These summaries shall be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information submitted in confidence.
In exceptional circumstances, such parties may indicate that such information is not susceptible of summary.
In such exceptional circumstances, a statement of the reasons why summarization is not possible must be provided. (AD Agreement, Art. 6.5.1; SCM Agreement, Art. 12.4.1).
The interested parties should therefore indicate the reasons for which they seek confidential treatment of certain evidence and documents and should annex a non-confidential summary of this information. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 17.
When initiating the investigation, the Technical Secretariat shall open a separate file, in which shall be placed the documents which the authorities, the complainant or the interested parties have determined are of a confidential nature.
Such documents shall be treated as confidential provided that the authority considers that they are grounds for so doing.
Information which has been received as confidential may only be utilized by the Technical Secretariat for the purposes for which it was requested.
Such information may not be disclosed without the specific authorization of the party providing it. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 17.
The duties shall correspond to the provisionally estimated amount of the margin of dumping or subsidy.
Provisional duties may be paid in cash or covered by a security in conformity with the legal provisions on the lodging of security for the payment of customs duties. Bi-ministerial Decision, Art. 38.