SEE ALSO:
press releases
WTO news
Mike Moore's speeches
Renato Ruggiero's speeches,
1995-99
|
However, in
reviewing the statements made at the meeting last night, and after consulting with a
number of Members, I believe that we must find a solution to the problem we now face. In
that spirit and keeping in mind the proposals on the table, including those of Japan, a
number of developing countries, the European Communities and the Director-General, I would
suggest the following:1. A number of delegations have
highlighted the lack of clarity in how Articles 21.5 and 22 should be interpreted and
the sequence in which they should be applied. I believe that many of these concerns are
legitimate, but we face the problem of how to solve our problem in this dispute today,
without undermining the spirit and letter of the DSU and, in particular, its
provisions on consensus, automaticity and time-limits. I think that the best approach is
to proceed by separating the Bananas case from the more general systemic issues. The
solution to the Bananas matter would be totally without prejudice to future cases
and to the question of how to resolve the systemic issue of the relationship
between Articles 21.5 and 22 of the DSU.
2.
The two parties will agree to proceed immediately to consultations under Article 4
of the DSU in an effort to find a mutually-agreed solution to their problems. That result
is always the aim of the DSU and I am convinced that negotiations in good faith could
resolve all problems.
3.
As to Bananas, the original panel is now engaged in two Article 21.5 proceedings. In light
of the request by the United States under Article 22.2, and assuming the EC make a request
for arbitration under Article 22.6, the same individuals could be given the task of
arbitrating the level of suspension. Let me be absolutely clear - a request for
arbitration under Articles 22.6 will mean that the DSB will not authorize suspension of
concessions at today's meeting. After the arbitrator's award is circulated, a new request
for suspension of concessions could be made to the DSB at that time, and the DSB would be
required to grant authorization, consistent with the decision of the arbitrator, unless
there is a consensus against it. There remains the problem of how the panel and the arbitrators
would coordinate their work, but as they will be the same individuals, the reality is that
they will find a logical way forward, in consultation with the parties. In this way, the
dispute settlement mechanisms of the DSU can be employed to resolve all of the remaining
issues in this dispute, while recognizing the rights of both parties and respecting the
integrity of the DSU. To assist the arbitrators, I will make sure that the minutes
of this meeting are made available to them to take into account, as they deem appropriate.
4.
As to the systemic issues concerning the relationship of Articles 21.5 and 22, they must
be resolved expeditiously. A number of Members have proposed that the issue of this
relationship should be referred to the General Council. I will propose to the Chairman of
the General Council that this matter be taken up by that body and that it inform the DSB
of the results of its discussions as soon as possible. Secondly, I will make this a
priority issue for discussion in the DSU review, and I am prepared to conduct informal
consultations on this matter at an early date. |
|
