|
I. Paragraph A back to top
A. Text of Paragraph A
Members hereby agree as follows:
A. Objectives
(i) The purpose of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (“TPRM”) is
to contribute to improved adherence by all Members to rules, disciplines
and commitments made under the Multilateral Trade Agreements and, where
applicable, the Plurilateral Trade Agreements, and hence to the smoother
functioning of the multilateral trading system, by achieving greater
transparency in, and understanding of, the trade policies and practices
of Members. Accordingly, the review mechanism enables the regular
collective appreciation and evaluation of the full range of individual
Members’ trade policies and practices and their impact on the
functioning of the multilateral trading system. It is not, however,
intended to serve as a basis for the enforcement of specific obligations
under the Agreements or for dispute settlement procedures, or to impose
new policy commitments on Members.
(ii) The assessment carried out under the review mechanism takes
place, to the extent relevant, against the background of the wider
economic and developmental needs, policies and objectives of the Member
concerned, as well as of its external environment. However, the function
of the review mechanism is to examine the impact of a Member’s trade
policies and practices on the multilateral trading system.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph A
1. Mission of TPRM
1. The TPRB’s report on its third appraisal of the operation of the
TPRM remarked as follows:
“The TPRM is linked to WTO disciplines, transparency, understanding
and a collective appreciation by the WTO Membership as a whole of
individual Members’ trade policies and their impact on the trading
system. The TPRB reaffirmed the relevance of TPRM’s mission as defined
in Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement.”(1)
2. Reference to GATT Practice
2. The WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) continues and expands
the GATT 1947’s TPRM, which was established on 12 April 1989 on a
provisional basis by a GATT Council Decision adopted as one of the “early
harvest” decisions of the Uruguay Round.(2) The 1989 Decision
established the TPRM “to contribute to improved adherence by all
contracting parties to GATT rules, disciplines and commitments … by
achieving greater transparency in, and understanding of, the trade
policies and practices of contracting parties”.
3. The WTO TPRM, like the GATT 1947 TPRM, “enables the regular
periodic appreciation and evaluation of individual Members’ trade
policies and their impact on the functioning of the multilateral trading
system”, but “is not, however, intended to serve as a basis for the
enforcement of specific obligations under the Agreements or for dispute
settlement procedures, or to impose new policy commitments on Members.”(3)
4. The WTO Agreement incorporated the April 1989 Decision and
expanded trade policy reviews to cover services trade and intellectual
property rights. On 10 May 1994, just after the conclusion of the
Uruguay Round, the GATT 1947 Council agreed to continue the TPRM until
the WTO’s TPRM entered into force.
3. “not … intended to serve as a basis …
for dispute
settlement procedures”
5. In Canada —
Aircraft, Brazil referred to material from a
Trade Policy Review, and Canada argued against reliance on this
material. Brazil argued that assistance to the regional aircraft
industry conferred a “benefit”, relying on a statement in the
Secretariat report in the 1998 Trade Policy Review of Canada that the
programme in question “provides export guarantees for projects
considered too risky by private financial institutions”. The Panel
noted that according to TPRM section A(i), the TPRM “is not, however,
intended to serve as a basis for the enforcement of specific obligations
under the Agreements or for dispute settlement procedures ….” The
Panel then stated that it would “attach no importance” to this Trade
Policy Review in relation to this issue, and it then found that Brazil
had “failed to adduce any evidence” of assistance to the Canadian
regional aircraft sector by the programme in question, and therefore
that there was “no basis for a prima facie case” that such
assistance had been provided as export subsidies prohibited by the SCM
Agreement.(4) The Panel noted separately that none of its findings were
based on the Trade Policy Review material.(5)
6. In Chile —
Price Band System, Argentina argued that a
Secretariat Report in a Trade Policy Review of Chile had stated that
Chile’s price band mechanism “works as a variable levy”, arguing
that the document “represents a respectable technical opinion”.(6) The
Panel found that a Secretariat TPRM Report “should not be taken into
account in the context of dispute settlement proceedings”, and decided
to disregard the information contained in the TPRM report referred to by
Argentina.(7)
II. Paragraph B back to top
A. Text of Paragraph B
B. Domestic transparency
Members recognize the inherent value of domestic transparency of
government decision-making on trade policy matters for both Members’
economies and the multilateral trading system, and agree to encourage
and promote greater transparency within their own systems, acknowledging
that the implementation of domestic transparency must be on a voluntary
basis and take account of each Member’s legal and political systems.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph B
7. The TPRB Report on its 1999 appraisal of the TPRM concluded that
“[g]reater attention should be given to transparency in government
decision-making on trade policy matters, in line with Paragraph B of
Annex 3.”(8)
III. Paragraph C back to top
A. Text of Paragraph C
C. Procedures for review
(i) The Trade Policy Review Body (referred to herein as the “TPRB”)
is hereby established to carry out trade policy reviews.
(ii) The trade policies and practices of all Members shall be subject
to periodic review. The impact of individual Members on the functioning
of the multilateral trading system, defined in terms of their share of
world trade in a recent representative period, will be the determining
factor in deciding on the frequency of reviews. The first four trading
entities so identified (counting the European Communities as one) shall
be subject to review every two years. The next 16 shall be reviewed
every four years. Other Members shall be reviewed every six years,
except that a longer period may be fixed for least-developed country
Members. It is understood that the review of entities having a common
external policy covering more than one Member shall cover all components
of policy affecting trade including relevant policies and practices of
the individual Members. Exceptionally, in the event of changes in a
Member’s trade policies or practices that may have a significant
impact on its trading partners, the Member concerned may be requested by
the TPRB, after consultation, to bring forward its next review.
(iii) Discussions in the meetings of the TPRB shall be governed by
the objectives set forth in paragraph A. The focus of these discussions
shall be on the Member’s trade policies and practices, which are the
subject of the assessment under the review mechanism.
(iv) The TPRB shall establish a basic plan for the conduct of the
reviews. It may also discuss and take note of update reports from
Members. The TPRB shall establish a programme of reviews for each year
in consultation with the Members directly concerned. In consultation
with the Member or Members under review, the Chairman may choose
discussants who, acting in their personal capacity, shall introduce the
discussions in the TPRB.
(v) The TPRB shall base its work on the following documentation:
(a) a full report, referred to in
paragraph D, supplied by the Member
or Members under review;
(b) a report, to be drawn up by the Secretariat on its own
responsibility, based on the information available to it and that
provided by the Member or Members concerned. The Secretariat should seek
clarification from the Member or Members concerned of their trade
policies and practices.
(vi) The reports by the Member under review and by the Secretariat,
together with the minutes of the respective meeting of the TPRB, shall
be published promptly after the review.
(vii) These documents will be forwarded to the Ministerial
Conference, which shall take note of them.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph C
1. Subparagraph (i)
(a) Establishment of Trade Policy Review Body
8. The TPRB is formally established by
paragraph C(i) of the TPRM,
but its composition and rules of procedure are based on Article IV:4 of
the WTO Agreement, which provides that “[t]he General Council shall
convene as appropriate to discharge the responsibilities of the Trade
Policy Review Body provided for in the TPRM. The Trade Policy Review
Body may have its own chairman and shall establish such rules of
procedure as it deems necessary for the fulfilment of those
responsibilities.”
(b) Rules of procedure
9. At its meeting of 6 June 1995, the TPRB adopted rules of procedure
for its meetings(9), which provide that the TPRB follows, mutatis
mutandis, the General Council’s rules of procedure,(10) with
adaptations regarding the timing of meetings, advance notice for
agendas, and conduct of reviews. The rules provide that there is no
requirement for a quorum to conduct reviews. TPRB rules provide that TPR
reports by governments and the Secretariat are immediately derestricted
after the relevant press embargo, and the Member under review may
request derestriction at an earlier date; the minutes of TPRB meetings
are issued as unrestricted documents.
10. The TPRB revised its rules of procedure in 2005 and 2008 as a
result of its second and third appraisals of the TPRM, to adjust the
procedures for conducting reviews.(11)
(c) Overview of activities
(i) Reviews
11. As of 30 September 2011, the TPRB have conducted 334 reviews
since its formation in 1989, at 250 review meetings. The reviews have
covered 140 of 153 Members, representing some 89% of world trade and 97%
of the trade of Members.(12) Of the 32 least developed Members of the WTO,
28 have been reviewed by the end of 2010.(13)
(ii) Reporting
12. The TPRB issues annual reports assessing the TPRM and trade
policy reviews conducted during the year.(14)
2. Subparagraph (ii)
(a) Timing and frequency of review
13. Paragraph 3 of the TPRB rules of procedure, as amended, provides
as follows:
“The cycle of reviews provided for in Paragraph C (ii) of the
Agreement on the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) shall be applied
with a general flexibility of up to six months, if and as may be
necessary. Schedules of subsequent reviews shall be established counting
from the date of the previous review meeting. Members should adhere
strictly to the timetables for the preparation of reviews, once agreed.”(15)
14. In 1999, in its report on its first appraisal of the TPRM, the
TPRB observed that “the current frequency of reviews provided a
balance amongst numerous competing considerations, including TPRM
objectives, particularly the smoother functioning of the multilateral
trading system, the need to maintain a realistic workload, and the
benefits of reviewing all Members soon.”(16) In its 2005 report on its
second appraisal of the TPRM, the TPRB concluded that “[t]he WTO
Secretariat should continue to give priority to reviewing all Members at
least once as soon as possible”.(17)
(b) “the review of entities having a common external policy”
15. A Note by the Chairperson dated 13 December 1995 stated that “individual
reviews must remain the basis of the TPRM … at this stage there is
no support for reviews of regional entities other than the EU.”(18)
However, the 1999 TPRB report on the first appraisal of the TPRM
suggested that “Efforts to maximize efficiency might include: (i) a
more considered use of grouped reviews ….”(19) In addition, the 2005
report on the second appraisal of the TPRM welcomed “the use of
grouped reviews as an instrument to make a more efficient use of
resources and generate greater interest in the reviews of smaller
Members” and encouraged “the identification of further opportunities
for reviews of geographically or economically close trading partners,
while taking due account of their rights and obligations as individual
WTO Members.”(20)
16. Since 1995, the TPRB has conducted reviews of the European Union
and its members. In addition, the TPRB has conducted group reviews of
the WTO Members of (i) the South African Customs Union (“SACU”)(21),
(ii) the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (“OECS”)(22), and
(iii) the East African Community.(23) The TPRB has also conducted grouped
reviews of Switzerland and Liechtenstein(24); Cameroon and Gabon(25); Benin,
Burkina Faso and Mali(26); Niger and Senegal(27); and Guinea and
Mauritania.(28)
(c) Reviews of least-developed countries
17. The TPRB’s 2010 annual report notes:
“Trade Policy Reviews of LDCs have increasingly performed a
technical assistance function along with increasing understanding of the
trade policy structure in place and its relationship with the WTO
Agreements. The reviews have helped to enhance understanding in these
countries of the WTO Agreements, enabling better compliance and
integration in the multilateral trading system; in some cases, better
interaction between government agencies has been facilitated by the
reviews. The reports’ wide coverage of Members’ policies also
enables Members to identify any shortcomings in policy, and specific
areas where further technical assistance may be required. The
Secretariat Report includes a section on technical assistance and
aid-for-trade needs and priorities, as identified in cooperation with
the Member concerned, prepared in close collaboration with staff of the
secretariat of the Enhanced Integrated Framework as well as the WTO’s
Development Division and Institute for Training and Technical
Cooperation.
“When requested by the Member concerned, the Secretariat organizes
ex-post seminars to discuss the outcome of the trade policy review
process with domestic stakeholders.”(29)
3. Subparagraphs (iii)–(v)
(a) TPRB Rules of Procedure
18. The TPRB Rules of Procedure set out rules for conducting reviews,
including:
“8. The TPRB shall adopt a programme of reviews for each year, as
referred to in section C(iv) of the Agreement on the TPRM… by the
middle of the previous calendar year.
10. A TPRB review shall normally take place in two sessions (each
typically half a day) with a day in between.
11. Documentation relating to each review meeting shall be circulated
in all working languages not less than five weeks in advance of the
relevant meetings… .”
12. Members should submit written questions to the Member under
review at least two weeks before the review meeting, to allow time to
prepare replies.
13. The Secretariat should identify the main points contained in the
questions submitted at least two weeks before a review meeting, post
them on the Members’ Website one week before the meeting, and
distribute a revised list of main points during the first session of a
review when questions received after the two-weeks deadline give rise to
significantly new issues.
14. Initial remarks by Members under review … should provide an
overview of policies … Statements from the floor should not exceed
seven minutes.
15. Replies by the Member under review, which should be
comprehensive, should be structured according to the main themes
identified in consultation with the Chairperson, discussants and
Secretariat; the themes should be distributed to Members in advance of
the second session of a TPRB review. … Questions left unanswered at
the end of the second session should be answered in writing no later
than one month after the meeting with some latitude in the Chair’s
discretion for Members reviewing a very large number of questions.”(30)
(b) Reports by the Member or Members under review
19. See
paragraphs 27–29 below.
(c) Reports by the Secretariat
20. The TPRB’s Rules of Procedure prescribe that “Secretariat
reports should focus principally on the trade policies and practices of
the Member under review, seen, to the extent necessary, in the context
of overall macro-economic and structural policies.”(31) On this subject,
the TPRB’s 2008 report on its third appraisal of the TPRM stated:
“Secretariat reports should remain closely focused on the trade
policies and practices of the Member under review, considered against
the background of its wider economic environment. The Secretariat should
also continue to prepare comprehensive and focused reports that through
objective, analytical presentations assist the TPRB to arrive at a
collective, fully informed evaluation of a Member’s trade policies.
The TPRB saw scope for Secretariat reports to highlight more
explicitly the significant changes made by the Member under review to
the trade policies and practices discussed in its previous reviews.”(32)
(d) Derestriction of reports
21. The TPRB’s Rules of Procedure provide: “Reports by the Member
under review and by the Secretariat shall be derestricted immediately on
the expiry of the relevant press embargo; a Member under review may
request the Chair to de-restrict the two reports at an earlier date.”(33)
4. Subparagraph (vi)
22. On the dissemination of reviews, the TPRB’s report on its
second appraisal of the TPRM stated:
“The TPRB considered present dissemination practices as
satisfactory but noted the value of building greater awareness within
the wider public of TPRM work. The Secretariat was thus encouraged to
publish the respective documentation in all WTO official languages
within three months after the review meeting. Written questions and
answers should be included in the final publication provided this does
not create delays in the publication of documents. The published
documentation, including that available through the WTO website, should
reflect any revisions made after the distribution of the meeting
documents.”(34)
IV. Paragraph D back to top
A. Text of Paragraph D
D. Reporting
In order to achieve the fullest possible degree of transparency, each
Member shall report regularly to the TPRB. Full reports shall describe
the trade policies and practices pursued by the Member or Members
concerned, based on an agreed format to be decided upon by the TPRB.
This format shall initially be based on the Outline Format for Country
Reports established by the Decision of 19 July 1989 (BISD 36S/406–409),
amended as necessary to extend the coverage of reports to all aspects of
trade policies covered by the Multilateral Trade Agreements in Annex 1
and, where applicable, the Plurilateral Trade Agreements. This format
may be revised by the TPRB in the light of experience. Between reviews,
Members shall provide brief reports when there are any significant
changes in their trade policies; an annual update of statistical
information will be provided according to the agreed format. Particular
account shall be taken of difficulties presented to least-developed
country Members in compiling their reports. The Secretariat shall make
available technical assistance on request to developing country Members,
and in particular to the least-developed country Members. Information
contained in reports should to the greatest extent possible be
coordinated with notifications made under provisions of the Multilateral
Trade Agreements and, where applicable, the Plurilateral Trade
Agreements.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph D
1. Reports by the Member(s) under Review
(a) Format
23. With respect to the Decision of 19 July 1989,(35) see GATT
Analytical Index, page 307.
24. The TPRB’s Rules of Procedure as amended provide that “Reports
by Members under review shall be in the form of policy statements, whose
form and length is essentially to be determined by the Member under
review.”(36) The TPRB’s 2008 report on its third appraisal of the TPRM
stated that “The TPRB thought that Members should remain free to
define the structure and coverage of their own reports in accordance
with Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement, and Chapter VI of the Rules of
Procedure for Meetings of the TPRB.”
(b) Timing
25. See above regarding deadlines for circulation of documentation
relating to review meetings. In practice, Members are requested to
submit their government reports to the WTO at least nine weeks before
the TPRB meeting for their review.(37)
V. Paragraph E back to top
A. Text of Paragraph E
E. Relationship with the balance-of-payments provisions of GATT 1994
and GATS
Members recognize the need to minimize the burden for governments
also subject to full consultations under the balance-of-payments
provisions of GATT 1994 or GATS. To this end, the Chairman of the TPRB
shall, in consultation with the Member or Members concerned, and with
the Chairman of the Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions,
devise administrative arrangements that harmonize the normal rhythm of
the trade policy reviews with the timetable for balance-of-payments
consultations but do not postpone the trade policy review by more than
12 months.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph E
26. For Members invoking the balance-of-payments exceptions of the
GATT, trade policy reviews have been coordinated with
balance-of-payments consultations, for instance in the case of the
Slovak Republic in 1995.(38)
VI. Paragraph F back to top
A. Text of Paragraph F
F. Appraisal of the Mechanism
The TPRB shall undertake an appraisal of the operation of the TPRM
not more than five years after the entry into force of the Agreement
Establishing the WTO. The results of the appraisal will be presented to
the Ministerial Conference. It may subsequently undertake appraisals of
the TPRM at intervals to be determined by it or as requested by the
Ministerial Conference.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph F
27. The TPRB has conducted three appraisals of the operation of the
TPRM. Each appraisal has reaffirmed the relevance of the TPRM’s
mission, and concluded that the TPRM has functioned effectively and its
objectives are generally being achieved. The appraisals have provided
guidance on priorities for operation of the TPRM; the second and third
appraisals resulted in changes to the TPRB’s rules of procedure.
28. At its meeting of 27 January 1999, the TPRB agreed on a procedure
for its first appraisal of the operation of the TPRM.(39) On 5 October
1999, the TPRB adopted a report on its first appraisal to the Third
Ministerial Conference.(40) The TPRB agreed on 31 May 2005 on a procedure
to carry out its second appraisal, and on 14 September 2005, adopted a
report on its second appraisal to the Sixth Ministerial Conference.(41) On
10 November 2008, the TPRB adopted a report on its third appraisal.(42)
The 2008 report calls for the next appraisal of the operation of the
TPRM to take place within the three years following that date.(43)
VII. Paragraph G back to top
A. Text of Paragraph G
G. Overview of Developments in the International Trading Environment
An annual overview of developments in the international trading
environment which are having an impact on the multilateral trading
system shall also be undertaken by the TPRB. The overview is to be
assisted by an annual report by the Director-General setting out major
activities of the WTO and highlighting significant policy issues
affecting the trading system.
B. Interpretation and Application of Paragraph G
29. Annual reports by the Director-General are submitted to the TPRB
in accordance with Paragraph G.(44) The most recent such report explains
that:
“This is intended to be a purely factual report and is issued under
the sole responsibility of the Director-General. It has no legal effect
on the rights and obligations of Members, nor does it have any legal
implication with respect to the conformity of any measure noted in the
report with any WTO Agreement or any provision thereof. This report is
without prejudice to Members’ negotiating positions in the Doha Round.
It is a preparatory contribution to the report by the Director-General
that is called for in Paragraph G of the TPRM mandate and that aims to
assist the TPRB to undertake an annual overview of developments in the
international trading environment which are having an impact on the
multilateral trading system.”(45)
Footnotes:
1. WT/TPR/229, para. 4. back to text
2. L/6490, GATT BISD 36S/403; see the text of this decision in the
GATT Analytical Index at pp. 303–308. back to text
3. TPRM, para. A(i). back to text
4. Panel Report, Canada
— Aircraft, paras. 9.274–9.275. back to text
5. Panel Report, Canada
— Aircraft, para. 8.14. back to text
6. Panel Report, Chile
— Price Band System, paras. 4.47,
4.108. back to text
7. Panel Report, Chile
— Price Band System, footnote 664. back to text
8. MIN(99)/2, section VIII. back to text
9. WT/TPR/6; regarding rules of procedure and practices for TPR
reviews under GATT 1994, see L/7208 (1993) and L/7458 (1994). back to text
10. WT/L/28. back to text
11. WT/TPR/Rev.1 (2005), WT/TPR/6/Rev.2 (2008). back to text
12. WT/TPR/269, para. 2. back to text
13. WT/TPR/269, para. 7. back to text
14. Annual reports: WT/TPR/27 (1996),
Annual reports: WT/TPR/41 (1997),
WT/TPR/59
(1998), WT/TPR/69 (1999),
WT/TPR/86 (2000),
WT/TPR/101 (2001),
WT/TPR/122
(2002), WT/TPR/140 (2003),
WT/TPR/154 (2004),
WT/TPR/173 (2005),
WT/TPR/192
(2006), WT/TPR/213
(2007),
WT/TPR/232 (2008),
WT/TPR/249 (2009),
WT/TPR/269
(2010). back to text
15. WT/TPR/6/Rev.2. back to text
16. WT/MIN(99)/2, para. 9. On this matter, see also
WT/TPR/13, section
(i) and WT/TPR/20, para. 10. See para. 29 of this Chapter. back to text
17. WT/MIN(05)/1, section VII, second bullet point. See
para. 29 of this Chapter. back to text
18. WT/TPR/13, para.11. The Note, however, states that “[t]he
general feeling was that national trade policy reviews should not be
confused with analyses of regional agreements under Article XXIV of GATT 1994 and
Article V of
GATS.” WT/TPR/13,
para. 9. back to text
19. WT/MIN(99)/2, para. 15. See para. 29 of this Chapter. back to text
20. WT/MIN(05)/1, para. 14. See para. 29 of this Chapter. back to text
21. WT/TPR/M/34–38,
114 (Botswana, the Kingdom of Lesotho, Namibia,
South Africa and the Kingdom of Swaziland), and 222. back to text
22. WT/TPR/M/85 (Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and
Nevis, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines), and 190. back to text
23. WT/TPR/M/171 and
171/Corr.1 (Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda). back to text
24. WT/TPR/M/77 (2000),
WT/TPR/M/141 (2004),
WT/TPR/M/208 (2008). back to text
25. WT/TPR/M/187 and 188 (2007). back to text
26. WT/TPR/M/131, 132, 133 (2004);
WT/TPR/M/236 (2010). back to text
27. WT/TPR/M/118, 119 (2003,
WT/TPR/M/223 (2009). back to text
28. The meeting was held on 28 and 30 September 2011 (see
WT/TPR/279).
Minutes have not been issued as of 30 September 2011. back to text
29. WT/TPR/269, paras. 8–9. back to text
30. WT/TPR/6/Rev.2, paras. 8 and 10–15. back to text
31. WT/TPR/6/Rev.2, para. 11. back to text
32. WT/TPR/229, paras. 11–12. back to text
33. WT/TPR/6/Rev.2, para. 16. back to text
34. WT/MIN(05)/1, para. 16. See para. 24 of this Chapter. back to text
35. L/6552. back to text
36. WT/TPR/6/Rev.2, para. 11. back to text
37. See also the Decision adopted by the GATT Council at its meeting
12 April 1989 to establish the Trade Policy Review Mechanism, L/6490,
para. B(i), WT/TPR/6,
para.10 and
WT/MIN(99)/2, para. 12. See para. 25 of this Chapter. back to text
38. WT/TPR/S/7. back to text
39. WT/TPR/69, para. 7. back to text
40. WT/MIN(99)/2. back to text
41. WT/MIN(05)/1, para.3. back to text
42. WT/TPR/229. back to text
43. Id, para. 17. back to text
44. The reports are numbered WT/TPR/OV/-. back to text
45. WT/TPR/OV/W/5/Rev.1, footnote 1. back to text
|
