The United States proposed to the General Council on19 February a WTO agreement to maintain duty-free

treatment of electronic transmissions. It said this initial stepwould “place the WTO boldly in the forefront of work onglobal electronic commerce and squarely facing the demandsof the next century”.

The United States said that currently, no country consid-ers electronic transmissions as importation for customs dutypurposes. It stressed that that its proposal did not involve taxpolicies, goods ordered through Internet but deliveredthrough normal commercial channels, or defining what isan electronic transmission.

Many delegations supported exploratory discussions inthe WTO on global electronic commerce to clarify theimplications of this issue, on which there was no sufficientknowledge. A a number of them underlined the need to keepthe development perspective in this regard. Egypt said thatit had already raised the need to look at electronic commercein the Committee on Trade and Development as it saw thesubject as a complex one with potential benefits for devel-oping countries. It highlighted the need for technical coop-eration to ensure the participation of developing countriesin electronic commerce. The ASEAN countries, Nigeria andPakistan supported further examination of electronic com-merce and its implications for developing countries.

India said that it does not impose customs duty onelectronic transmission because the trade involved is small,adding that the US proposal would not allow members toreconsider this approach when trade expands in the future.It said that the level of computer access varied from countryto country, which does not indicate a “level playing field” interms of trade in this sector.

Some delegations pointed to the trade potential of elec-tronic commerce. Canada said that electronic commerce canbe the most important factor in expanding internationaltrade in the future, and supported WTO study in this area.Australia said that to promote electronic commerce, it hadrecently announced that goods ordered and delivered elec-tronically, such as books, music or software, would continueto enter the country duty-free. New Zealand said that itsfirms expect substantial revenue increases in electronic com-merce, adding that it is virtually impossible to levy duties on

February 1998 No. 27

WTO hears US proposal on globalelectronic commerce

Director-General Renato Ruggiero, left, congratulates newlyelected General Council Chairman Amb. John Weekes (Can-ada) as outgoing Chairman Amb. Celso Lafer (Brazil) looks on.(Photo by Tania Tang/WTO)

Continued on page 2

More IT products proposedfor tariff elimination

The Committeeof Participants

on the Expansion ofTrade in Informa-tion TechnologyProducts, on 12February, beganconsidering propos-als for expandingthe product cover-age of the WTO agreement on eliminating tariffs oninformation technology products (Information Tech-nology Agreement or ITA).

Fourteen participants—Australia; Canada; theEuropean Communities; Hong Kong, China; Israel;Japan; Malaysia; Norway; the Philippines; Singapore;Switzerland; Chinese Taipei; Turkey; and the United

Continued on page 7

GENERAL COUNCIL

electronic commerce.Japan confirmed that it does not impose duties on elec-

tronic transmissions, and expressed general support formembers to maintain this practice. Switzerland agreed withthe general approach suggested by the United States, addingthat electronic commerce can contribute to trade facilitationand help speed up economic development.

The European Communities said that the need for aframework on electronic commerce had been raised in vari-ous fora. It said that the WTO should play a significant rolein providing such a framework. In welcoming the US pro-posal, it noted that there were various related aspects thatneeded to be addressed in the WTO, including intellectualproperty rights, government procurement, financial services,telecoms and information technology products. The ECadded that it intended to come up with its own initiative onthe subject.

Preparations for the Geneva MinisterialThe Chairman, Ambassador Celso Lafer (Brazil), reportedthat during his recent consultations with delegations, thereappeared to be emerging consensus on a number of pointsregarding the Ministerial Conference and the commemora-tion of the 50th anniversary of the multilateral tradingsystem. These included:» The Ministerial Conference will begin on the morning of

18 May and will last through the afternoon of 19 May. Itwill be followed by the commemoration of the 50thanniversary on 20 May with the participation of Heads ofState or Governments. These will be two distinct events.

» Two broad areas for discussion—implementation of theWTO work programme and future activities of theWTO—will make up the substantive agenda of the Min-isterial Conference.

» The formal closing session of the Conference will be heldin the afternoon of 19 May where the relevant decisionswill be taken, including election of officers, venue and dateof the next Ministerial Conference.Ambassador Lafer said that consultations would continue

on the remaining issues.The General Council agreed to apply the same guidelines

followed in the Singapore Ministerial for the participationof non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the Confer-ence and in the Anniversary celebration (see page 12).

US questions Ecuador’s implementationThe United States recalled that it had raised a year ago whatit considered to be deficiencies in Ecuador’s fulfillment ofobligations undertaken when the country acceded into theWTO in January 1996. It expressed concern that thesedeficiencies remained, including the enactment of legislationto apply the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement, the elimi-nation of discriminatory taxes on certain products like auto-mobiles, the implementation of tariff rate quotas on certainagricultural products, and the elimination of the import banson used tires, clothes and automobiles. The United Statessaid that its exporters have also identified other practices,including those related to preshipment inspection, that ap-peared to be inconsistent with the WTO.

Ecuador said it was exerting all efforts to fulfill its WTOcommitments, pointing to exchange policy and export sub-sidies as among those that had been achieved ahead ofschedule. A new intellectual property law was under consid-eration by Congress, and would update the Ecuadorianlegislation to meet the country’s WTO obligations. Ecuadormaintained that its legislation on preshipment inspectioncomplied with the WTO agreement concerned.

Working Party for Laos

The General Council established a working party to examinethe accession request by Laos.

Ambassador Khamphan Simmalavong of Laos said thathis country had been implementing significant economicand trade reforms. He added that Laos had felt the repercus-sions from Asia’s financial crisis, but that measures institutedunder International Monetary Fund guidance had begun tobear fruit. The Laotian economy, which remained depend-ent on agriculture, grew by 6-7 per cent in 1996-1997. Alandlocked country of 4.8 million inhabitants, Laos becamea member of the ASEAN in July 1997.

Electronic commerce(Continued from p.age 1) WTO Chairpersons for 1998

The WTO General Council, 19 February, noted theconsensus on the following slate of names of chair-

persons for WTO bodies:» General Council: Amb. John Weekes (Canada);» Dispute Settlement Body: Amb. Kamel Morjane

(Tunisia);» Trade Policy Review Body: Amb. Ali Said Mchumo

(Tanzania)» Council for Trade in Goods: Amb. Ronald Saborio

Soto (Costa Rica)» Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual

Property Rights (TRIPS): Amb. Istvan Major(Hungary);

» Council for Trade in Services: Amb. NobutoshiAkao (Japan);

» Committee on Trade and Environment: Amb.Chak Mun See (Singapore)

» Committee on Trade and Development: Amb.Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury (Bangladesh);

» Committee on Budget, Finance and Administra-tion: Mr. Wilhelm Meier (Switzerland);

» Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions:Mr. Peter R. Jenkins (United Kingdom);

» Committee on Regional Trading Agreements:Amb. Jean-Marie Noirfalisse (Belgium);

» Working Group on the Relationship betweenTrade and Investment: Amb. Krirk-Krai Jirapaet(Thailand);

» Working Group on the Interaction between Tradeand Competition Policy: Prof. Frédéric Jenny(France);

» Working Group on Transparency in GovernmentProcurement: Amb. Werner Corrales Leal (Vene-zuela).

Page 2 - February 1998

The ASEAN countries, Japan and Australia expressedsupport for Laos’ accession.

The General Council also approved a request by CapeVerde for observer status in preparation for a possible mem-bership request in the future.

BOP reports on Pakistan, Slovak RepublicThe Chairman of the Committee on Balance-of-PaymentsRestrictions, Mr. Peter R. Jenkins (United Kingdom), re-ported on the Committee’s recent consultations:» At the resumption of consultations with Pakistan on 10

November 1997, Committee members recognized thecontinued BOP difficulties faced by the country andcommended the government for its wide array of reformefforts. The Committee agreed that the consultationswould be deemed to be concluded provided Pakistanpublicly announced, within twelve months, a schedule forthe removal of the measures within a reasonable period oftime.

» The Committee, on 17 December 1997, heard a reportfrom the Slovak Republic that its BOP restriction—animport surcharge of 7%—would be reduced to 5% at thebeginning of 1998, and would be eliminated by October1998. On this basis, it agreed that the country be deemedto be in compliance with its obligations, provided that itadhered to this time schedule.

New home: The General Council held its first meeting at thenew facility built by the Swiss authorities as an extension of theGeneva International Conference Centre.The new CouncilRoom accommodates 729 persons in plenary session, and can beconverted into two meeting rooms. (Photos by T. Tang/WTO)

Above, WTO Director-General Renato Rug-giero and GeneralCouncil ChairmanAmb. Celso Lafer withGeneva State CouncilPresident G. Ramseyerand Swiss AmbassadorJ.-M. Boulgaris duringthe inauguration cere-mony held on 17 Febru-ary. Right, Swissarchitect Ugo Brunonisubmitted the winningdesign.

Outgoing Chairman highlights WTO’s unique decision-making process

I n its three-year history, WTO members have not had to resort to a vote on issues. This is because the organizationfollows the consensus approach by its predecessor, GATT, in making decisions. The outgoing Chairman, Ambassador

Celso Lafer, provided insights on this approach in his farewell speech at the close of the General Council meeting:“The WTO consensus-based decision-making process—which finds its highest expression in the General Council—consti-

tutes another confidence-building mechanism. Consensus is justified due to the fact that WTO’s assets are not financial resources,but legal norms. In order to be effective, such norms must be accepted by all Members. They cannot be imposed by the heteronomyrepresented by the power of some. They require the autonomy of a pactum societatis, resulting from the participation of all.The role of consensus, as a confidence-building measure, is intimately linked to the question of autonomy, that is, to the ideathat to be free, to quote Rousseau, is to obey “la loi qu’on s’est prescrite”. The value of consensus, in the perspective of action,is to diminish the fear of Members to be bound by an undesired decision. Consensus thus contributes to the legal security of allWTO Members as well as to the binding force of its norms. That is why, in contrast with the Bretton Woods institutions, thereis no weighted vote in the WTO. That is the profound and substantive reason why we are a Member-driven Organization.

“Consensus building in the WTO has unique characteristics, which I will try to describe in the light of my experience. Giventhe number of Members and the disparity of their interests, the decision-making process begins with coalitions of variablegeometry, that is to say, with various associations of different sizes and shapes, which expand until they reach the universalityof Members. Such associations are neither rigid nor pre-established. They vary according to the issue being discussed. That iswhy one does not find either automatic alignments or defined polarities in the WTO diplomatic chessboard. The success of anyinitiative presupposes the existence of confidence, which in turn requires transparency and participation as indispensableingredients for the type of economic cooperation diplomacy of the kind generated by the WTO.”

GENERAL COUNCIL

Page 3 - February 1998

DISPUTE SETTLEMENT

Hormone meat reports adoptedThe Dispute Settlement

Body (DSB), on 13 Feb-ruary, adopted the AppellateBody report, and the panelreports as modified by the Ap-pellate Body, on the com-plaints by Canada and theUnited States against meas-ures by the European Com-munities concerning meatand meat products (hor-mones).

The United States andCanada supported the adoption of the reports, which theysaid affirmed key provisions of the WTO Agreement on theApplication of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS).They called on the EC to implement the recommendationswithout delay.

The EC accepted and welcomed the Appellate Bodyreport, which it said clarified the rights and obligations ofmembers regarding human health and the vital responsibil-ity in this regard of governments to their population. TheEC expressed satisfaction that the Appellate Body had modi-fied the panel reports on certain important points, and thatit had rejected the claim of trade protectionism with respectto its measure.

At the heart of this dispute are several EC Directives thatprohibited the use of six natural and synthetic hormones topromote the growth or fattening of cattle, and bannedintra-EC trade in, and importation of, meat and meatproducts from animals treated with these hormones. Canadaand the United States contended that the EC import prohi-bition contravened the SPS Agreement. This agreementrequires WTO members to base their sanitary measures oninternational standards, where they exist, but allows meas-ures that result in a level of protection higher than interna-tional standards provided these are backed by scientificjustification.

The panel, which circulated its reports on 18 August1997, concluded that the EC import prohibition was incon-sistent with the SPS Agreement.

The EC appealed the legal interpretation made by thepanel on 24 September 1997.

The Appellate Body, in its report circulated to memberson 16 January 1998, upheld the panel’s key finding that theEC import prohibition was not based on a “risk assessment”(an evaluation of the potential for adverse effects on humanhealth), and thus was inconsistent with the SPS Agreement.However, the Appellate Body reversed or modified a numberof the panel’s findings:» It took the view that the right of members to establish a

higher level of sanitary protection in matters relating tohuman health is an important and autonomous right ofgovernments, and not merely an exception to the generalSPS obligation to base measures on prevailing interna-tional standards.

» It held that the requirement that an SPS measure is “basedon” a risk assessment signifies that the results of the riskassessment must sufficiently warrant the SPS measure atstake or in other words, that there must be a rational

relationship between the SPS measure and the risk assess-ment.

» It held that it is essential to bear in mind that the risk thatis to be evaluated in a risk assessment is not only riskascertainable in a science laboratory operating understrictly controlled conditions but also risk in human so-cieties as they actually exist. It, therefore, found that in therisk assessment, risks arising from failure to comply withthe requirements of veterinary practice in the administra-tion of hormones, as well as risks arising from difficultiesof control, inspection and enforcement of the require-ments of good veterinary practice could be taken intoaccount.

» With respect to the requirement in the SPS Agreement formembers to avoid arbitrary or unjustifiable distinctions inthe levels of sanitary protection which result in discrimi-nation or disguised restriction on international trade, itreversed the panel’s conclusion that the EC had actedinconsistently with the SPS provision concerned.

(For a detailed discussion on these and other issues addressed bythe Appellate Body and the panel in this case, please consult thefull reports, which are available on the WTO Website.)

US rejects India’s implementation dateIndia said that it was disappointed with the report of theAppellate Body regarding its patent protection for pharma-ceutical and agricultural chemical products, but that it in-tended to meet its WTO obligations. It said it would needa reasonable period of time to do so—until 16 June 1999.

The United States said it could not accept India’s pro-posed time frame. It said that India, under the TRIPSAgreement, was obliged to set up the required “mailbox” forpatents on pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical prod-ucts three years ago, and saw no basis for further delay.

India invited the United States to consultations on theperiod of time for implementation.

DSB to revert to 2 panel requestsThe DSB considered the following panel requests for thefirst time and agreed to revert to them after objections fromthe subjects of the complaints:» The United States requested a panel to examine its com-

plaint against against Canada’s measures affecting theimportation of milk and the exportation of dairy products,which it said violated GATT 1994 and the WTO Agree-ments on Agriculture, on Subsidies and on Import Licens-ing. Canada maintained that the measures in questionwere in conformity with its WTO obligations.

» India requested a panel to examine were a broad range ofquantitative restrictions by Turkey on imports of textileand clothing products, which it considered to be inconsis-tent with GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Textiles andClothing. Turkey said that the measures resulted from itscustoms union with the EC. The EC said that it neededto be assured of a role in panel proceedings.The Chairman, Ambassador Wade Armstrong (New Zea-

land), said that the United States had requested the removalof its panel request on Ireland and EC copyright protectionfrom the agenda as a settlement appeared imminent.

Page 4 - February 1998

DSB, 22 January

Panel established on US complaintagainst Australia’s leather subsidies

The United States, at the DSB meeting on 22 January,requested the immediate establishment a panel to exam-

ine its complaint against what it termed subsidies granted byAustralia to producers and exporters of automotive leather.It said that subsidies provided to Howe Leather companyincluded a loan of A$25 million on preferential and non-commercial terms and grants amounting potentially to an-other A$30 million. The United States considered thesemeasures to be subsidies conditioned on export performancein violation of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervail-ing Measures.

Australia said it was disappointed with the US request, asit had believed that this matter had been settled previously.It accepted the US request on the understanding that thepanel’s examination would be limited to measures discussedduring the consultations, which were those provided toHowe Leather.

The DSB established a panel to examine, with standardterms of reference, the US complaint in accordance with theaccelerated procedures under the Subsidies Agreement.

US requests panel on copyright complaintThe United States requested a single panel to examine itscomplaints against Ireland and the European Communitiesregarding the legal regime in Ireland for the protection ofcopyright and neighbouring rights. It recalled that as from1 January 1996, developed-country members were requiredto comply with their obligations under the TRIPS Agree-ment. The United States said that US copyright owners hadbeen suffering significant economic losses due to what itviewed as lack of adequate and effective intellectual propertyprotection in Ireland. It added that consultations with Ire-land and the EC had failed to produce a solution on thisdispute.

The EC said it needed more time to discuss the matterwith the United States and thus was not in a position toaccept the panel request at that meeting.

Japan announces implementation planJapan reported that it had reached mutually satisfactorysolutions in December 1997 with the Canada, the EC andthe United States regarding the implementation of the DSBrecommendations on its taxes on alcoholic beverages. It wassubmitting draft laws to the Diet that would accelerate thetimetable for narrowing of tax differentials between thedomestically-produced shochu and imported drinks such aswhisky, brandy, rum and vodka and at the same time reducetariffs on the imported products.

The complainants in the dispute-settlement proceed-ings—Canada, the EC and the United States—welcomedthe resolution of the dispute.

Mexico said that Japan should treat tequila in the sameway as other imported drinks.

EC and Korea set to settle dairy disputeThe EC requested the DSB to postpone consideration of itsrequest for a panel to examine Korea’s definitive safeguardmeasure on certain dairy products. It believed that its con-sultations with Korea on this dispute might lead to a mutu-ally agreeable settlement.

Korea expressed regret that the EC had chosen not towithdraw the panel request. It said that despite its belief thatthe measure in question was in conformity with the WTO,it had pursued intensive consultations with the EC. Koreasaid a solution had been worked out, and hoped that the ECwould soon withdraw its panel request.

EC’s banana trade regimeGuatemala, speaking under “Other Business,” expressedconcern over a European Commission proposal aimed atimplementing the DSB recommendations on the EC ba-nana regime. It described as discriminatory the proposedallocation of quotas, which it said would restrict marketaccess for Latin American countries.

The other complainants in the panel proceedings—Mex-ico, Honduras, the United States and Ecuador—sharedGuatemala’s concerns.

The EC underlined that the proposal was not a finaldecision but a matter that would still be discussed in theEuropean Parliament. It suggested that views regarding thisproposal should be addressed to Brussels and not to the DSB.

DISPUTE SETTLEMENT

Active Panels(As of 13 February 1998)

Complainant Subject of the complaint Dateestablished

United States Japan - Measures affecting consumerphotographic film and paper

16 Oct. 1996

EuropeanCommunities

US - The Cuban Liberty and DemocraticSolidarity Act(work suspended at EC’srequest)

20 Nov. 1996

India, Malay-sia, Pakistan,Thailand

US - Import prohibition of certain shrimp andshrimp products

25 Feb. 1997;10 April1997 for India

United States EC, UK, Ireland - Customs classification ofcertain computer equipment

25 Feb. 1997;10 March1997

Mexico Guatemala - Anti-dumping investigationregarding imports of Portland cement fromMexico

20 March1997

Canada Australia - Measures affecting theimportation of salmon

10 April 1997

Japan, EC, USIndonesia - Certain measures affecting theautomobile industry

12 June 1997(US,30.07.97)

Brazil EC- Measures affecting importation ofcertain poultry products

30 July 1997

EC, US Korea - Taxes on alcoholic beverages 16 Oct. 1997

EuropeanCommunities

India - Patent protection for pharmaceuticaland agricultural chemical products

16 Oct. 1997

EuropeanCommunities

Argentina - Measures affecting textiles andclothing

16 Oct. 1997

EC Chile - Taxes on alcoholic beverages 18 Nov. 1997

United States India - Quantitative restrictions on imports ofagricultural, textile and industrial products

18 Nov. 1997

United States Japan - Measures affecting agriculturalproducts

18 Nov. 1997

New Zealand EC - Measures affecting butter products 18 Nov. 1997

Korea US-Anti-dumping duty on DRAMs of onemegabyte or above from Korea

16 January1998

United States Australia-Subsidies provided to producersand exporters of automotive leather

22 January1998

Page 5 - February 1998

WTO telecoms accord enters into forceThe WTO agree-

ment to liberalizeinternational trade inbasic telecommunica-tions services came intoeffect on 5 February.The 72 WTO membergovernments, whichhave agreed to opentheir domestic marketsto foreign companies,account for nearly 93per cent of the total do-mestic and international revenue of US$600 billion gener-ated in this sector annually.

Examples of the services covered by this agreement in-clude voice telephony, data transmission, telex, telegraph,facsimile, private leased circuit services (i.e. the sale or leaseof transmission capacity), fixed and mobile satellite systemsand services, cellular telephony, mobile data services, pagingand personal communications systems.

Since the agreement was concluded among 69 countriesin February 1997, two of these countries—Pakistan andSwitzerland—have further improved their liberalizationcommitments, and three additional countries have agreed toopen up their domestic markets in this sector: Barbados,Cyprus and Suriname.

Overview of the commitmentsOnly the schedules themselves can provide authoritative andcomplete information on the detailed scope of the commit-ments. The following is a brief overview:

On voice telephone service, 47 of the schedules (covering61 governments) commit to competitive supply (definedhere as permitting two or more suppliers). Most of thecommitments permit the supply of public voice services,either immediate or phased-in, in at least one market seg-ment: 41 schedules (55 governments) committed on localservice, 37 schedules (51 governments) on domestic longdistance, and 42 schedules (56 governments) on interna-tional service. Resale of public voice telephone is includedin 28 schedules (42 governments) or more than 70 per centof the 59 governments permitting a degree of competitionin public voice service.

In commitments on other services: 49 schedules (63governments) include commitments on data transmissionservices; 46 schedules (60 governments) grant access forcellular/mobile telephone markets; 41 schedules (55 govern-ments) commit to competition in leased circuit services (thesupply of transmission capacity); 45 schedules (59 govern-ments) include commitments on other types of mobileservices (such as PCs, mobile data or paging). For satellite-related communications, 37 schedules (51 governments)committed on some or all types of mobile satellite servicesor transport capacity and 36 schedules (50 governments)commit on fixed satellite services or transport capacity. Inaddition, 8 governments schedules some commitments onvalue-added telecommunications services (e.g. e-mail, on-line data processing or data base retrieval).

The formal entry into force of the commitments is 5February 1998. But where a government’s commitments forparticular services are to be phased in, the actual implemen-tation would take place on the date specified in the schedule.About 40 per cent, or 25 of the 61 governments makingoffers on voice telephone services, subject these commit-ments to phase-in.

Most governments (63 of the 69), included commitmentson regulatory disciplines. Of these, 57 committed to theReference Paper in whole or with few modifications. Thesecommitments relate to such matters as competition safe-guards, interconnection guarantees, licensing and inde-pendence of regulators.

Service standards foropen global markets

I n 1998, the International Organization for Stand-ardization (ISO) is organizing, with WTO support,

four regional seminars on the harmonization of stand-ards in services; trade in services is identified as thefastest-growing sector of world trade today. The pri-mary purpose of these seminars will be to explore theinterest of major users and suppliers in broad servicesectors (tourism, banking, financial accounting, engi-neering consultancy, education, etc.) in the need forInternational Standards to support their business needsand to facilitate international trade in their sectors.Information about existing and successful standards invarious sectors will be presented, as well as a basicoutline of how things get done in the ISO system. Ifsignificant interest is identified for new areas of Inter-national Standards work, individual ISO members inthe region will be in a good position to initiate appro-priate follow-up work.

The first regional seminar will focus on hotel, hos-pitality staff training and exhibition management. Itwill be held in Singapore on 31 March - 1 April 1998,and will be hosted by the Singapore Productivity andStandards Board. (For details on registration, pleasecontact Ms. Kiat Kiat Ho, NOVO Quality Services PteLtd, No. 3 Science Park Drive, #02-13/14/15, Singa-pore 118223, Tel: +65 870 1303, Fax: +65 7774463/777 9212, e-mail: novo@pacific.net.sg. Forother information, please contact Ms. Susan Chong,Deputy Director, Centre for Standardization, PSB, 1Science Park Drive, Singapore 118221, Tel: +65 7729587,Fax:+65 7761280, e-mail: suchong@psb.gov.org.)

The other seminars are being organized by the fol-lowing ISO members: Association française de normal-isation (AFNOR), American National StandardsInstitute (ANSI) and Instituto Argention de Normali-zación (IRAM). For information on these seminars,please contact Ms. Sophie Clivio, Tel. +41 22 7497111, Fax: +49 22 733 3430, e-mail: clivio@iso.ch.

WTO FOCUS

Page 6 - February 1998

Goods Council completes major review ofTextile Agreement implementation

The Council forTrade in Goods,

on 6 February, com-pleted its major reviewof the first stage of im-plementation of theWTO Agreement onTextiles and Clothingwith the adoption ofthe report summariz-ing the discussionsand containing anumber of observa-tions and conclusionsby the Council.

The report sets outthe views expressed byboth exporting and importing countries during the review.The concerns of exporting countries included what theyviewed as lack of commercially meaningful integration oftrade in textiles and clothing during the first stage of ATCimplementation (1995-1997), in particular of products sub-ject to restraints. Other problem areas included the imposi-tion of restrictive measures related to rules of origin andanti-dumping measures. The major importing countriesunderlined that they had complied fully with the require-ments set out in the ATC.

The Chairman, Ambassador Terje Johannessen (Nor-way), said the report set out clearly the concerns and viewsof delegations. He noted that the Goods Council had had awide and detailed examination of the ATC implementationprocess in six meetings held from October to December lastyear. However, it had not been possible to reach agreementon a set of possible conclusions or recommendations. Inmid-January of this year, delegations indicated a need forextra effort to complete the review. Ambassador Johannessensaid that in intensive consultations, delegations were able toagree on a compromise text.

Colombia, speaking on behalf of WTO members com-posing the International Textiles and Clothing Bureau (in-tergovernmental group of developing country textileexporters), underlined the importance of textiles and cloth-ing for developing countries and criticized what they viewedas timid implementation of the ATC. It said that the GoodsCouncil had accomplished an important task. Colombianoted that the report contained an unequivocal commit-ment by members to implement fully and faithfully the ATCprovisions, and outlined the main conclusions of the report.

Many developing countries, including Pakistan, Egypt,Mexico, Peru, Brazil, the ASEAN members, and India wel-comed the completion of the review, and and considered itan important accomplishment.

The United States said it did not agree with everything inthe report, but expressed the hope that in the future the areasof differences between exporting and importing memberswould decrease and the areas of agreement would increase.

The European Communities hailed what it said was themain outcome of the review: the reaffirmation by all mem-bers of their commitment towards the full implementationof the ATC.

1,000 origin rules endorsed

The Committee on Rules of Origin, on 6 February,endorsed rules of origin for about 1,000 non-agricul-

tural tariff lines agreed in the Brussels-based Technical Com-mittee on Rules of Origin.

During the week, Committee members began bilateralnegotiations on outstanding issues related to agriculturalproducts.

The Chairperson of the Committee, Mrs. Lourdes Berrig(Philippines), noted emerging consensus on conferringcountry of origin to the process of bulbs becoming flowers,and not granting origin to the manufacture of wreaths andflower baskets; placing tea in individual bags; placing in bagsparts of plants and fruits; obtaining the core or peel of rattancane; coating rattan cane, core or peel with PVC; andmaking of shark fin cake.

The Committee agreed to resume discussions on agricul-tural products and start examining issues related to textilesat its next meeting scheduled for 16-27 March.

Progress in Kyrgyz’ accession

M embers of the Working Party on the Accession of theKyrgyz Republic, on 5 February, welcomed a detailed

legislative programme and calendar submitted by the coun-try in order to bring its trade regime into compliance withthe WTO Agreements by November 1998. They also notedwith appreciation the substantial progress made in the bilat-eral market-access negotiations for goods and services.

The head of the Kyrgyz delegation, Mr. E.K. Omuraliev,said his country attached great importance to the earlyconclusion of the accession negotiations. He said that hisgovernment was pursuing actively its privatization pro-gramme, which had been completed for about 80 per centof the industrial sector, 56 per cent of the construction sectorand 41 of the transport sector.

NEWS BRIEFS

Ambassador Terje Johannessen(Norway), Chairman of the GoodsCouncil. (Tania Tang/WTO)

States—have submitted “wish lists” for hundreds of ITproduct categories to be covered by ITA II. Theseinclude printed circuit board manufacturing equip-ment; flat panel display manufacturing equipment;capacitor manufacturing equipment; audio, radio, tele-vision and video apparatus; telecommunications prod-ucts; electrical/electronic machines; instruments; andparts and inputs for IT products.

Several participants, including Canada, the Euro-pean Communities, Malaysia, the Philippines and theUnited States, reported to the Committee that theywould soon start domestic consultations on the pro-posed products. The ITA Committee has until 30 June1998 to decide on what new products are to be annexedto the agreement.

At the close of the meeting, the Committee electedMr. Martin Harvey, Deputy Permanent Repre-sentative of New Zealand, as its Chairperson. Theparticipants thanked Mr. Anwarul Hoda, WTO Dep-uty Director-General, for having chaired the groupsince the Singapore Ministerial.

ITA II (Continued frompage1)

Page 7 - February 1998

The Trade Policy Review Body (TPRB) conducted its fourthreview of Japan’s trade policies on 27 and 28 January 1998.Excerpts from the Chairperson’s concluding remarks:

Participants emphasized Japan’s important role in theglobal and regional economy, in the context of the

economic crisis experienced by several countries in East Asia.Members welcomed recent measures aimed at increasingdomestic demand in Japan. However, some doubts wereexpressed whether these measures were sufficient and wouldproduce results quickly enough, to address the current eco-nomic issues facing Japan. Some members queried whetherofficial projections for growth should be adjusted down-wards in the light of current developments. Participantsemphasized the need for Japan to stimulate domestic de-mand, rather than rely on exports to revive growth. Someparticipants expressed concern on the recent widening of thecurrent account and trade surpluses.

In reply, the representative of Japan said that recent taxreductions should add some 0.2 per cent to Japan’s growth,together with a positive psychological effect on consump-tion. Structural reform should add a further 0.9 per cent perannum to growth in the period 1998-2003. Efforts tostimulate domestic demand through deregulation and re-duction in prices were bearing fruit. The Asian currencycrisis could affect Japanese exports adversely—both directly,and indirectly through changes in competitiveness—whilestimulating imports from Asian countries. A possible fall inJapanese investment in East Asian domestic consumptioncould be balanced by investment for future exports.

Concerning the current account and trade surpluses, theauthorities expected export growth to slow and imports toaccelerate in FY 1998: the surplus in goods and servicescould be some 1.2 per cent of GDP and the current accountsurplus around 2.4 per cent, comparable to previous levels.

Deregulation was having a stimulating economic effectand these efforts would be continued. Concrete examples ofstructural reform included the liberalization of gasoline im-ports, elimination of demand/supply requirements in distri-bution and transportation, and foreign exchangederegulation. Agriculture, construction and internationaltransport had not been excluded from the programme.

The work of the Administrative Reform Committee hadbeen completed. The Government had set up a body topromote new deregulation efforts. A new three-year deregu-lation programme had been established, covering all admin-istrative areas. Comments on the programme werewelcomed.

Trade policiesParticipants welcomed Japan’s emphasis on multilateralismin its trade relations and commended Japan’s contributionto the WTO process. It was stressed that Japan conducts itstrade almost entirely on an MFN basis, avoiding participa-

tion in preferential trade arrangements; assurance was soughtthat Japan’s bilateral trade agreements would consistently beapplied on an MFN basis.

Participants noted that average tariffs in agriculture werehigher than in manufacturing, and raised concerns on tariffpeaks and escalation in agriculture, food manufacturing,textiles, leather and footwear. Some participants raised con-cerns on tariff quotas, including high out-of-quota rates; thelack of a reallocation mechanism for unused tariff quotas;import quotas on certain products; length of customs clear-ance times; and Japan’s use of origin marking requirements.

Participants welcomed Japan’s efforts towards increasedinternational harmonization of standards, including em-bodying of performance based criteria, and the adoption ofnew mutual recognition arrangements, while noting thatfurther progress could be made. Participants welcomed theincrease of transparency in quarantine procedures and therevision of some Japan Agricultural Standards. However,concerns were raised on the complexity and cost of sanitaryand phytosanitary conditions; variety-specific approval pro-cedures for fruits and vegetables; and restrictive standards forfrozen foods. Participants encouraged further revision ofJapan’s Food Sanitation Law.

Participants raised concerns on the product coverage ofJapan’s GSP scheme; and on trade policy towards leastdeveloped countries, including in the follow-up to the recentHigh Level meeting.

The representative of Japan thanked Members for theirrecognition of Japan’s commitment to the MFN principlein the multilateral trading system. He saw no possibilityunder present conditions of this commitment weakening.Regional trading agreements, while they could contribute totrade liberalization, had the potential danger of undermin-ing the MFN principle. He noted that tariff rates werereviewed every year on the basis of requests from foreign anddomestic entities. Customs clearance times were difficult tocompare among countries with differing import systems butefforts were constantly being made to reduce delays; forexample, an immediate release system had been introducedfor air cargo, and cut flower imports from the EU andAustralia were cleared in an average of 1.8 hours.

TRADE POLICIES

TPRB: JAPAN

Calls for structuralreform, deregulationand market stimulation

An automobile plant near Tokyo: Members noted that theJapanese economy, in earlier days, acted as a major engine ofworld trade and investment, and expressed the hope that Japancan again effectively assume this role through its economicrecovery and the positive effects of deregulation. (ILO Photo)

Page 8 - February 1998

On TBTs, Japan had decided in 1997 on a review ofprocedures to facilitate imports. Legislation to adopt per-formance criteria had been sent to the Diet to encourage theadoption of international standards.

The representative of Japan noted that the share of manu-factured imports in GDP had risen from 3.2 to 4.5 per centbetween 1994 and 1996: therefore he was confident that theimport promotion programme was working. Its central fo-cus was not on incentives; deregulation and recognition offoreign standards were also import promotion measures.The import promotion tax concession system had beenextended until 1999: it was applied on an MFN basis to allcountries exporting duty-free items, not favouring importsfrom industrialized countries. Imports into Foreign AccessZones had grown more rapidly than the total: again, theinfrastructure of FAZs were available to imports from allsources.

Japan’s GSP system had a broad coverage and efforts hadbeen made to simplify its use. The system offered particularadvantages to least developed countries. The GSP was cur-rently under review to remove countries that had reachedhigher stages of development; LDCs had more favourabletreatment under the GSP scheme.

Sectoral issuesSome participants raised concerns about the levels of protec-tion and support for agriculture, and likely policy options inthe future, including in the next round of liberalizationnegotiations. Questions were also raised on testing andcertification requirements for agricultural products andregulatory obstacles to trade in pigmeat. Others raised con-cerns about the WTO consistency of the SBS system on rice,the continuation of import quotas on fisheries and theimport cartel of laver. A number of participants suggestedthat the results of Japan’s agricultural policies had beeninconsistent with the Government’s own food security ob-jective. Questions were raised on moves to review Japan’sBasic Agricultural Law.

Some participants raised concerns about inadequate reim-bursement prices of pharmaceuticals, also noting burden-some and costly testing procedures for medical devices,pharmaceuticals, chemicals, mechanical and electrical appli-ances. The continuation of regulatory obstacles to trade inleather and leather footwear was also noted.

Participants welcomed Japan’s contributions to the WTOfinancial services and basic telecommunications negotia-tions. However, they raised concerns about low productivityin some services sectors and openness of certain servicesareas; complex regulations in certain services sectors; and thelow level of competition in some services. Particular atten-tion was paid to construction, financial, legal, accountingand distribution services. Participants sought an assessmentof the effects of weakness in the financial sector on the tradepolicy of Japan. Questions were raised on transparency anddisclosure in the financial sector, including criteria for re-ceiving public funds. Members requested an up-to-dateassessment of the implementation of the “Big-Bang” pro-gramme, especially in the light of recent regional develop-ments.

In view of the limited time, the representative of Japan inhis reply focused on selected sectoral issues.

In respect of agriculture, he said that as regards rice, Japan

was faithfully implementing the Uruguay Round agree-ment, particularly by setting the price for minimum accessrice some 20 per cent below that for domestic rice andpromoting consumption of minimum access rice in Japan’smarket. Administration of unfilled tariff rate quotas hadbeen improved in FY 1997 by permitting applications forunused quotas at different periods. He noted that the triggerlevel for special safeguard provisions was based on importsin the previous three years, which in Japan’s view was inconformity with the Agriculture Agreement. The importquota on fisheries was intended to prevent resource exhaus-tion in surrounding waters and was, in Japan’s view, justifi-able under GATT Article XI:2(i).

Concerning footwear and leather, the representative de-scribed Japan’s tariff quota system, and noted the specificdifficulties of this sector. He also stated that prior confirma-tion system for silk aimed to ensure the faithful applicationof bilateral agreements, not to limit imports; this measurewould be phased out by 2004.

Japan had eliminated tariffs on autos in 1978, and im-ports had increased substantially in recent years. There wasno government involvement in dealership arrangements.The representative gave information on the reclassificationof vitamins, herb and mineral products and noted thatJapan’s tariff classification would not be affected.

The representative of Japan noted concerns regarding lowproductivity in services, particularly distribution, and sug-gested that differences in productivity levels between servicesand manufacturing were not significantly different fromother countries. He said that the Deregulation Action Pro-gramme sought to promote transparency in services and tosimplify administrative procedures and notification or re-porting requirements. He gave examples of increases inrecent years in foreign service providers in telecoms, con-struction, legal and all areas of financial services. He calledattention to liberalization measures in various areas of tele-communications and broadcasting, including the abolitionof the KDD Law, the forthcoming abolition of the “100destination rule”, improvements in interconnection liberali-zation on cable providers, modification of accounting rates,and the liberalization of foreign investment.

***

We have had a very constructive discussion of Japan’s econ-omy and trade policies, which has been held at a difficulttime for Japan and the world economy. Many participantshave emphasized the importance of market opening andderegulation as well as Japan’s role in assisting the resolutionof the Asian financial crisis.

Structural reform, deregulation and market stimula-tion—leading to more open markets—have been commonthemes running through this TPR discussion. The Japaneseeconomy was, in earlier days, a major engine of world tradeand investment and the TPRB has clearly expressed the hopethat Japan can again effectively assume this role through itseconomic recovery and the positive effects of deregulation.

All participants have recognized Japan’s strong and activeparticipation in the WTO system and the importance at-tached by Japan to MFN treatment has been welcomed. Wehope that Japan will respond positively, as they have under-taken, to the large number of specific or bilateral concernsraised during this meeting by various Members.

TRADE POLICIES

Page 9 - February 1998

Competition policy, economic developmentand international trade

M ore than 40 developing and transition countries in thepast two decades have adopted competition (antitrust)

laws, as an element of market-oriented development strate-gies. Typically, these laws provide remedies to deal with arange of anti-competitive practices, including price fixingand other cartel agreements, abuses of a dominant positionor monopolization, mergers that stifle competition andagreements between suppliers and distributors (“verticalagreements”) that foreclose markets to new competitors.

Many countries consider that competition laws and re-lated policies promote sound economic development bypreventing practices that artificially raise prices to consumers(and businesses purchasing input goods and services), maxi-mizing the benefits of privatization and deregulation initia-tives, and helping to ensure an efficient allocation of nationaleconomic resources generally.

The Singapore Ministerial Conference, in December1996, established a Working Group on the InteractionBetween Trade and Competition Policy (WGTCP) andcalled for cooperation between the WTO, UNCTAD andother appropriate intergovernmental fora to ensure that thedevelopment dimension is fully taken into account in thework of the Group. Guiding the work of the Group is theChairman’s Checklist of Issues (see WTO FOCUS No. 20).

SymposiumAs a contribution to the three organizations’ work in thisarea, the Secretariats of the WTO, UNCTAD and theWorld Bank organized a Symposium on Competition Pol-icy, Economic Development and International Trade on 29November 1997 at the WTO headquarters. The Sympo-sium attracted more than 200 delegates, and featured pres-entations by prominent academics and private sectorrepresentatives in addition to the heads of, or other seniorofficials from, developing and transition economies in LatinAmerica, Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe. Mr. GesnerOliveira, President of the Council for the Defense of theEconomy of Brazil, chaired the Symposium.

The Symposium focused on four main themes: TheFoundations of Competition Policy in a DevelopmentContext; Competition Policy as a Tool of MicroeconomicReform in Developing and Transition Economies; Com-petition Policy and Economic Development: The Interna-tional Dimension; and Current Issues/Other Perspectives.

HighlightsA few highlights of individual presentations at the Sympo-sium are as follows:

Professor Frédéric Jenny, Vice-Chair of the Conseil de laConcurrence in France and Chair of the WTO WorkingGroup on the Interaction Between Trade and CompetitionPolicy, noted that, in the past decade or so, a large numberof developing and other countries had moved away fromstate-led and “national champions” models of economicdevelopment. The decision to adopt or strengthen competi-tion laws was a natural outgrowth of this overall shift inthinking about models for development, and reflected arealization that companies are unlikely to succeed in world

markets if they do not also face effective competition domes-tically. Professor Jenny also referred to several examples ofactual and alleged international cartels that appeared to haveharmed development by raising the prices of industrial inputgoods in various markets, and suggested that considerationof competition rules, both at a national and internationallevel, is a natural complement to past achievements in theareas of trade liberalization and deregulation.

Mr. Philippe Brusick of UNCTAD discussed the grow-ing interest in competition legislation worldwide, and itsclose relationship to economic development, from his or-ganization’s perspective. He referred to a recent study byUNCTAD of empirical evidence on the benefits from ap-plying competition law and policy in a development contextwhich demonstrated that competition promotes efficiencyin production, allocative efficiency, dynamic efficiency, wel-fare and growth. He emphasized the importance, in design-ing and implementing national competition legislation, oftaking account of each country’s particular circumstancesand needs. This was especially important in developing andleast-developed countries where market failures were mostacute. He then stressed the need for mutually supportinginternational cooperation in this area.

Mr. Bernard Phillips of the OECD Secretariat providedan overview of the objectives, main elements and institutionsof competition policy in developed and developing coun-tries. He noted the important benefits that can be achievedthrough an effective program of advocacy activities by acompetition agency relating to other government policiesand regulations that affect competition, as a complement tothe agency’s law enforcement responsibilities, whether in adeveloped or a developing country setting. Mr. Phillips alsoreferred to several examples of industrial policy failures indeveloped countries which, in his view, highlighted theadvantages of reliance on market forces as the primary engineof economic development.

Dr. R. S. Khemani of the World Bank discussed theBank’s experience with the use of competition policy as atool for economic development. He observed that the intro-duction of competition policy complements other microe-conomic policy reforms and can be useful in reinforcing thegains from trade liberalization in addition to enhancing aneconomy’s ability to attract foreign investment. Dr. Khe-mani also suggested that a lack of strong competitive disci-plines in some markets appeared to be a factor in themacroeconomic and financial difficulties that were currentlybeing experienced in some of the Asian economies. He saidthat, in many of these countries, various private restraintsand government policies impede competition and the devel-opment of flexible and adaptable markets. As a consequence,resources do not get efficiently allocated between differentsectors, and price and profit signals become distorted—lead-ing to inappropriate business investment and output deci-sions.

Ms. Elizabeth Gachuiri (Kenya), Mr. Byong-Kyum Kim(Korea), Mr. Ferenc Vissi (Hungary), Mr. Mark Steel(New Zealand; speaking for APEC), and Mr. Jorge Bogo(Argentina) provided regional perspectives on the use of

SPECIAL REPORT

Page 10 - February 1998

competition policy as a tool of economic development intheir respective economies. These presentations highlightedthe important inter-relationships that exist between compe-tition policy and other market-oriented reforms, includingtrade liberalization. They also illustrated a range of practicalproblems facing competition authorities in developingcountries, including the challenge of creating a “competitiveculture” in the business community following a legacy ofstate intervention and protectionism in some cases, and thevigorous and encouraging efforts that are being made toaddress these challenges in various countries.

Professor Eleanor Fox (New York University School ofLaw) discussed the need for “cosmopolitan” approaches tocompetition law enforcement which would take into con-sideration the impact of anti-competitive practices on all theaffected countries. She also stressed the need for developingprotocols to settle substantive conflicts among nations. Sheproposed that an open-market concept be adopted by theworld, that would prohibit market foreclosure through anti-competitive conduct by enterprises. She said this wouldbenefit both developed and developing countries.

Mr. Rob Anderson (WTO Secretariat) provided an over-view of existing arrangements for cooperation in competi-tion policy at the multilateral, regional and bilateral levels.He referred to several examples of effective cooperationarrangements relating to competition law enforcement thatwere embodied in regional and bilateral arrangements. Atthe multilateral level, and particularly in the WTO agree-ments, the complementary relationship between trade liber-alization and competition policy is recognized in variousways, including consultation arrangements pursuant to theGATT, GATS and TRIPS Agreements as well as in thecommitments on regulatory principles adopted by manyMembers as a result of the recent negotiations on BasicTelecom Services. He noted that the existing arrangementsfor cooperation appear to be somewhat fragmented and oflimited practical significance, thus far.

Professor Ulrich Petersmann (University of Geneva) de-scribed the role of competition law and cooperative ap-proaches to its enforcement in the European Community,and commented on possible lessons for the introduction ofmeasures dealing with anti-competitive practices of enter-prises at the multilateral level. At the outset, Professor Pe-tersmann noted that there were important differencesbetween the degree of market integration in the Commu-nity and in the world economy, and that one could notexpect the same degree of cooperation in competition lawenforcement in the latter as in the former. Nonetheless, hesuggested that the Community’s experience demonstratedclearly the benefits of effective competition rules as anelement of trade liberalization, and the importance of inter-national cooperation in this area. He also suggested a needfor competition rules relating to governmental as well asprivate distortions.

Mr. Calvin S. Goldman of the firm of Davies, Ward andBeck in Toronto, who is also Chair of the InternationalChamber of Commerce (ICC) Joint Working Party onTrade and Competition Policy, discussed the role of com-petition policy in economic development from a businessperspective. He observed that vigorous competition in thedomestic economy can play a key role in strengthening theability of firms to compete in export markets, and noted the

important role that competition policy is playing in manyof the economies in transition from state control to freemarket principles. He discussed the Canadian experiencewhich illustrates the complementarity of trade liberalization,deregulation and competition policy. Mr. Goldman alsomentioned concerns held by some members of the interna-tional business community relating to the possible strength-ening of cooperative approaches to competition lawenforcement at the multilateral level, to the extent that thiscould involve the exchange of confidential information bynational authorities.

Mr. Douglas Rosenthal, of the firm of Sonneschein, Nathand Rosenthal in Washington, D.C., discussed a range ofissues relating to competition policy and international trade,focusing particularly on the treatment of vertical marketrestraints and other practices that can affect access to mar-kets, and competition policy issues regarding the exercise ofintellectual property rights. He noted the role that industrialpolicy concerns appear to play in competition law enforce-ment in some cases. Ensuring that such concerns do notunduly suppress the role of competition authorities was akey challenge for economic policy in both the developed andthe developing world.

There was extensive participation from the audience at theSymposium, with numerous questions being posed to speak-ers by delegates. The questions dealt, among other matters,with the priority that should be given to competition policyas a tool of development, and its relationship to othermarket-opening reforms; the role of exemptions from com-petition legislation as a factor limiting its effectiveness indeveloped as well as in developing countries; the matter ofwhether there is a basis for concerns about “parochial”application of national competition laws in ways that maynot adequately take into account the interests of othercountries, and how such concerns might be addressed; theindependence of competition law enforcement authoritiesand the importance of this for their overall effectiveness; andthe implications of intellectual property rights and foreigndirect investment for competition. While a range of view-points was expressed on these and other questions, a com-mon thread in the discussion was a recognition of theimportance of competition as a factor that promotes anefficient allocation of resources.

In concluding the Symposium, the Chairman, Mr.Oliveira, noted that there appeared to be wide recognitionamong a growing number of countries of the role thatcompetition policy can play in reinforcing the benefits ofother economic reforms and promoting an efficient alloca-tion of resources in developing and transition economies. Heposed the question as to whether consideration should begiven to developing an international framework that wouldset out basic standards that could be incorporated in Mem-ber countries’ competition legislation. Such a frameworkmight also ensure that basic WTO principles such as trans-parency and non-discrimination were reflected in nationallegislation. At the same time, he expressed his personal viewthat the application of competition policy must reflect thepeculiarities of national circumstances, and therefore wouldremain largely the responsibility of national authorities.The WTO Secretariat’s involvement in presenting the Symposium wasmade possible through generous support from the Netherlands Funds fortechnical cooperation. For further information, please contact Rob Ander-son (7395198) or Jorge Miranda (7395021) of the WTO Secretariat.

SPECIAL REPORT

Page 11 - February 1998

Hong Kong, China beefs up WTO trust fund for LDCs

A t a ceremony on 6 February, the Permanent Repre-sentative in Geneva of the Hong Kong Special Admin-

istrative Region of China, Mr. Stuart Harbinson, handedover to the WTO a cheque for US$1.25 million as a contri-bution to the WTO Trust Fund for technical assistance toless developed economies.

“I am delighted to present the WTO this donation onbehalf of my Government,” said Mr. Harbinson. “TheWTO does excellent work to provide technical assistance toeconomies at different stages of development. Much workcannot be funded from the main budget and we are pleasedthat Hong Kong, China, can make a contribution to thisimportant area of work by the WTO.”

WTO FOCUSNewsletter published by the Information and Media Re-lations Division of the WTO.Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, 1211Geneva 21, Switzerland. Tel. 7395111/Fax:7395458/Web: http://www.wto.org

ISSN 0256-0119

WTO FOCUS

MEETINGSAPRIL 1998

2, 16 Committee on Specific Commitments

6-7 Trade Policy Review: India

20-21 Working Party on Professional Services

20-22 Textiles Monitoring Body

21 Council for Trade in Goods

21-23 Trade Policy Review: Individual Members of theSouthern African Customs Union (SACU)

22 Dispute Settlement Body; Committee on Safeguards

23-24 Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures

24 GENERAL COUNCIL; Committee on Import Licensing

27 Working Party on GATS Rules, Cttee. on Rules of Origin

27-28 Cttee. on Anti-Dumping - Ad-hoc Group onImplementation

29 Cttee. on Anti-Dumping - Informal Group on Anti-Circumvention; Council for Trade in Services

30 Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices

Permanent Representative Stuart Harbinson (right) hands overhands over Hong Kong, China’s contribution to WTO DirectorsJacques Chabert (finance) and Jan-Eirik Sorensen (technicalcooperation) on 6 February. (Photo by Tania Tang/WTO)

Record number of WTOWebsite users

A record 37,500 computer terminals accessed theWTO Website (www.wto.org)in February, up by

25 per cent from the average monthly number of30,000. The number of individual users are higherthan these figures, which do not distinguish betweenindividual and linked groups of computers. The Feb-ruary statistics indicate the following trends:» Users downloaded a record 17.5 gigabytes (7-8 mil-

lion pages of text) of WTO information;» A growing number of developing countries, includ-

ing LDCs, are accessing the WTO Website, includ-ing Guinea Bissau, Nepal, Burkina Faso, Ghana,Zimbabwe, Maldives, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Botswanaand Zambia;

» More terminals in Latin America are accessing theWebsite, including those from Honduras, El Salva-dor, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Colombia andMexico; and

» The top user countries are the United States, UnitedKingdom, Canada and France.

NGO facilities for the Ministerial

A rrangements are being made for registration ofrepresentatives of non-governmental organiza-

tions wishing to come to Geneva to attend the secondMinisterial Conference of the WTO and the 50thAnniversary celebrations (18-20 May 1998).

Facilities will be made available, for the Conferenceand the 50th Anniversary celebrations, to the NGOsconcerned with matters related to those of the WTO,as stipulated in Article V of the WTO. These NGOsare invited to request a registration form. Only requestsaccompanied by a description of the nature of theNGO’s activities and how they relate to WTO matterswill be considered.

Requests should be addressed to: External RelationsDivision, WTO, Centre William Rappard, Rue deLausanne 154, 1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland.

The request for a registration form should be sub-mitted as soon as possible to the WTO External Rela-tions Division and not later than 31 March 1998.

Upon confirmation of registration, badges will bemade available in Geneva for entrance to the PlenarySessions, entrance to the conference rooms made avail-able for NGO meetings, and participation in socialevents.

Page 12 - February 1998