RESTRICTED
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7
6 January 2017
(17-0103)
Page: 1/5
Committee on Trade and Development
Seventh Dedicated Session on Regional Trade
Agreements
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 15 NOVEMBER 2016
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Christopher Onyanga Aparr (Uganda)
A.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA .................................................................................... 1
B.
CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS ............................................. 1
(i)
Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by the Chairman .......................... 1
(ii)
Preferential Trade Agreement between Mauritius and Pakistan (Goods)
(WT/COMTD/N/47, WT/COMTD/RTA/7/1) ............................................................................... 3
C.
OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................... 5
A.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.
The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/RTA/2 of 4 November 2016
was adopted.
B.
CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS
(i)
Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by the Chairman
2.
The Chairman said that he wished to provide Members with a brief update on the regional
trade agreements (RTAs) notified under the Enabling Clause that were to be considered in the
Dedicated Sessions on RTAs of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) on the basis of
factual presentations. With regard firstly to the Agreement between the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN) and India, he informed the Committee that the Secretariat had received
comments from both parties on the draft factual presentation, and that the factual presentation
would be circulated shortly. He also noted that there had been one new notification under the
Enabling Clause since the last update he provided to the CTD in July 2016. In particular,
Afghanistan's accession to the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) was notified on
29 July 2016 in document WT/COMTD/N/50. The parties had been requested to provide the data
to the Secretariat by 22 December 2016 for the preparation of the factual presentation. Turning to
the Agreement between the Dominican Republic and Panama, he recalled that the parties had
been requested to provide the data for the preparation of the factual presentation by
9 August 2016. Data had been received from Panama, and some data had also been provided by
the Dominican Republic. With regard to the Agadir Agreement between Egypt, Jordan, Morocco
and Tunisia, data had been received from Egypt and Jordan. The Secretariat was still waiting to
receive data from the other parties, which had been requested by 15 July 2016.
3.
In the case of the Agreement between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and Singapore,
data had been received from Singapore, and the Secretariat was still waiting to receive data from
the GCC parties, which had been requested by 23 November 2015. The Secretariat was also still
waiting to receive comments on the draft factual presentation relating to the accession of Rwanda
and Burundi to the East African Community, which was sent to the parties in 2014. For a number
of other RTAs - namely, RTAs between India and Nepal, India and Afghanistan, India and Bhutan,
and Cuba and El Salvador - the full set of data needed to complete the factual presentations had
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7
-2not been submitted by the parties. He urged the parties to these agreements to provide the data
as soon as possible. He went on to say that there remained one RTA notified under the Enabling
Clause that had not been ratified by all the parties. This was the Pacific Island Countries Trade
Agreement (PICTA). Following the procedures of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements
(CRTA), a factual presentation of an RTA falling in this category would only be drafted after the
Agreement had been ratified by all the parties. The parties to PICTA were urged to inform the
Secretariat as soon as all ratifications were complete.
4.
He added that he wished to take the opportunity to remind Members of the
implementation reports which were due under paragraph 15 of the Transparency Mechanism for
RTAs. According to this paragraph, at the end of the implementation period of an RTA, the parties
were to submit to the WTO a short written report on the realization of the liberalization
commitments in the RTA as originally notified. He recalled that, in 2014, this matter had been
brought to the Committee's attention by his predecessor in the Chair, and the Secretariat had
been requested to prepare a list of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause that were subject to
implementation reports. This list was circulated in document WT/COMTD/RTA/W/1. It appeared
that there had been no implementation reports submitted in the CTD to date, and he believed that
it was useful for the Committee to keep track of this matter. Since there had been a number of
new notifications of RTAs under the Enabling Clause since 2014, he suggested that the Secretariat
could update its list of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause that were subject to
implementation reports.
5.
The representative of Brazil sought clarification on the background to the list of RTAs
notified under the Enabling Clause subject to implementation reports that the Chairman had
referred to. He also asked how work on this matter was coordinated, and what was the status of
work on the list of RTAs subject to implementation reports that was circulated in the CRTA.
6.
A representative of the Development Division said that, in 2014, the CTD Chairman had
brought to the CTD's attention a list of RTAs notified under GATT Article XXIV and GATS Article V
subject to implementation reports that had been circulated in the CRTA. In light of the CTD's
responsibilities for RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause, the CTD Chairman had requested the
Secretariat to prepare a list of RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause that were subject to
implementation reports. He indicated that he was not aware of the status of work in the CRTA on
the issue of implementation reports, but noted that there was some complementarity between the
CRTA and CTD lists, to the extent that they together provided Members with information on the
RTAs notified under the various provisions that were subject to implementation reports.
7.
The representative of India said that he wished to also provide information in response to
the questions from Brazil. He noted in particular that RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause were
dealt with in the CTD, while RTAs notified under GATT Article XXIV and GATS Article V were dealt
with in the CRTA. Implementation reports for RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause were
accordingly to be discussed in the CTD, while implementation reports for RTAs notified under other
provisions were to be discussed in the CRTA. The two Committees carried out their work
independently.
8.
The representative of Brazil indicated that his delegation would need to consider the
matter and was not in a position at the present time to agree to an update to the list of RTAs
notified under the Enabling Clause subject to implementation reports.
9.
The representative of the United States said that it was important for Members to be
aware of the growing number of non-notified RTAs. He believed that the CTD should pay attention
to this matter, as many of the non-notified RTAs with a coverage limited to goods were between
developing countries, and it could therefore be assumed that these might eventually be notified
under the Enabling Clause. With regard to the Chairman's report on the status of preparation of
factual presentations, he noted that a number of Members had still not provided the Secretariat
with the required data for the preparation of the factual presentations. He called on Members to
fulfil their transparency requirements in a timely manner, and indicated his delegation's particular
interest to receive an update from the GCC with respect to the data required in the context of the
GCC-Singapore Agreement.
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7
-310.
The representative of Morocco referred to the Chairman's report on the status of data
provision with respect to the Agadir Agreement. She informed the Committee that Morocco had
very recently submitted the required data to the Secretariat.
11.
The representative of Nigeria asked if the Chairman could summarize the discussion that
had taken place under the present sub-item.
12.
The Chairman said that he had provided a report on the status of the work of the
Dedicated Session, and some comments had been made. He also indicated that there had not
been consensus on his proposal for the Secretariat to update its list of RTAs notified under the
Enabling Clause subject to implementation reports under paragraph 15 of the Transparency
Mechanism for RTAs, and the list could therefore not be updated at the present time. He explained
that he had suggested an update to this list because he felt it was important for the CTD to keep
track of the issue of implementation reports. Members were invited to consider the matter further.
13.
The Committee took note of all interventions.
(ii)
Preferential Trade Agreement between Mauritius and Pakistan (Goods) (WT/COMTD/N/47,
WT/COMTD/RTA/7/1)
14.
The Chairman said that the Preferential Trade Agreement between Mauritius and Pakistan
entered into force on 30 November 2007 and was notified on 30 September 2015 under paragraph
4(a) of the Enabling Clause. The notification was contained in document WT/COMTD/N/47. The
text of the Agreement, together with its annexes, could be found on the parties' official websites.
The factual presentation on the Agreement – circulated as document WT/COMTD/RTA/7/1 on
17 August 2016 – had been prepared by the Secretariat on its own responsibility in full
consultation with the parties, in accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Transparency Mechanism
for RTAs. A fax had been sent to Members on 17 August 2016 inviting the submission of written
questions on the Agreement, for onward transmission to the parties. In this regard, he informed
the Committee that no written questions had been received by the Secretariat. He proposed to
organize the consideration of the Agreement by giving the parties, and then Members, the
opportunity to provide general comments. Members could then turn to the specifics of the
Agreement.
15.
The representative of Pakistan said that the Agreement was Pakistan's ninth RTA and the
first signed with an African country. He highlighted the close relationship between Mauritius and
Pakistan and indicated that the Agreement would provide an impetus for the mutually beneficial
growth of relations between the parties. With regard to the content of the Agreement, he said that
it contained 25 chapters and three annexes, covering several topics including tariff liberalization,
rules of origin, dispute settlement, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, standards and
technical regulations. Noting that all items were WTO-consistent, he indicated that he wished to
particularly highlight a chapter on transparency, which provided the parties with an important
enabling environment to trade. Turning to the bilateral trade pattern between the parties, he said
that a notable decrease in Pakistan's trade surplus had been witnessed over the 2010-2014 period.
In particular, imports from Mauritius rose from less than US$1 million in 2010 to US$22.5 million
in 2014, while Pakistan's exports to Mauritius over the same period declined from US$34 million to
US$28 million. The parties were aware that there was potential to further increase their trade by
broadening the scope of the Agreement, and bilateral talks had recently been held to consider the
matter.
16.
The representative of Mauritius summarized the concessions offered by the parties under
the Agreement and in this context noted, inter alia, that the offer from Mauritius included
concessions on fresh flowers, vegetables, fruits, cereals, biscuits, tobacco, wood articles, textiles,
paint and varnishes. Pakistan's offer to Mauritius comprised fresh flowers, pineapples, cane sugar,
fish products, pharmaceuticals, soaps, detergents, textiles and garments. He also noted that, since
2007, Mauritius and Pakistan had signed memorandums of understanding to enhance cooperation
in a number of areas, including with respect to standards, SPS measures, state trading
enterprises, trade promotion agencies, customs matters and small enterprises. He believed that
one of the reasons for the relatively low level of exports from Mauritius to Pakistan was a lack of
awareness among the business operators in Mauritius. In this regard, he indicated that awareness
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7
-4campaigns would be undertaken in order to encourage the Mauritian business community to export
to Pakistan, and strong marketing drives would also be undertaken in Pakistan.
17.
The representative of Japan observed that RTAs had greatly risen in number and had
become an indispensable part of the global trading system. All WTO Members had at least one RTA
in force. Against this background, there was an increasing need to enhance transparency in, and
promote understanding of, RTAs – including those notified under the Enabling Clause. The WTO
played an important role for that purpose, in accordance with the Transparency Mechanism for
RTAs. While taking note with concern of the interval between the entry into force of the
Mauritius-Pakistan Agreement and its notification, as well as of the imbalance in the liberalization
rates between the parties, his delegation nevertheless commended the parties for the
transparency demonstrated by notifying their Agreement and providing the necessary information
for the preparation of the factual presentation. He also encouraged other Members to notify their
RTAs as soon as possible.
18.
The representative of the United States appreciated that the parties had notified their
Agreement and had undertaken the required transparency review process. He noted that table 4.1
of the factual presentation listed other RTAs that Mauritius and Pakistan were parties to which had
yet to be notified. He called on the parties to notify these RTAs, and more generally called on all
Members to notify their agreements. He next referred to paragraphs 3.6 and 3.7 of the factual
presentation, and sought confirmation from the parties that Mauritius had liberalized only 49 tariff
lines that were not already duty-free on an MFN basis, while Pakistan had liberalized only 75 lines.
Turning to table 3.1, he observed that just over 20% of Mauritius' lines remained dutiable under
the Agreement, while according to table 3.2, over 93% of Pakistan’s tariff lines remained dutiable.
Furthermore, he noted from paragraph 3.7 that exports from Mauritius to Pakistan in lines covered
by the Agreement were negligible during the period 2004 to 2006. His delegation was not sure
that a lack of awareness was the primary cause of the low trade volumes under the Agreement, as
had been suggested by Mauritius. In this regard, he asked the parties why so many tariff lines had
been left uncovered. He also asked the parties to explain how such large carve-outs were
consistent with the Enabling Clause, which stated that agreements needed to be designed to
facilitate and promote the trade of developing countries. The parties were additionally asked how
they were benefitting from the Agreement on the tariff side, given the large tariff exclusions, as
well as the low bilateral trade flows shown in chart 1.1. Finally, while noting that no negotiations
on product-specific rules of origin had taken place, he inquired whether the parties had considered
that changes to the rules of origin under the Agreement could stimulate trade between them.
19.
The representative of the European Union expressed appreciation to the parties for the
transparency they had demonstrated. While her delegation had not raised any written questions on
the Agreement, she indicated that she wished to take the opportunity to address the low coverage
of the Agreement, particularly in the case of Pakistan. She invited the parties to review their
concessions with the goal of broadening the coverage in the future and, in particular, to address
the present asymmetric situation. She noted that, according to the factual presentation, at the end
of the implementation period for Pakistan, 93.1% tariff lines would remain dutiable, representing
51.2% of imports from Mauritius. For Mauritius, 20.2% of the tariffs would remain dutiable,
corresponding to 2.2% of its imports from Pakistan. Taking into account the limited coverage of
the Agreement, she wondered how the parties had assessed the impact it would have on bilateral
trade.
20.
The representative of Pakistan said that during the recent visit of the President of Mauritius
to Pakistan, it had been agreed that discussions would begin shortly on ways to widen the scope of
the Agreement. He also indicated that the parties would provide responses to the specific
questions raised on the Agreement.
21.
The representative of Mauritius said that the parties had taken note of the issues raised by
delegations, and would provide responses to the specific questions posed.
22.
The Chairman said that oral discussion of the Preferential Trade Agreement between
Mauritius and Pakistan could be concluded in accordance with paragraph 11 of the Transparency
Mechanism for RTAs. Further questions by Members would need to be submitted in writing to the
Secretariat within one week, by 22 November 2016. The parties would then be given two weeks to
submit written replies, by no later than 6 December 2016. In accordance with paragraph 13 of the
Transparency Mechanism, all written submissions as well as the minutes of the meeting would be
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/7
-5circulated promptly in all WTO official languages, and would be made available on the WTO
website.
23.
C.
The Committee took note of all interventions.
OTHER BUSINESS
24.
No matter was raised under "Other Business".
25.
The meeting was adjourned.
__________