. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/WGTI/W/129
1 July 2002
(02-3649)
Working Group on the Relationship
between Trade and InvestmentOriginal:  English
COMMUNICATION FROM THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF
TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU
The following communication, dated 28 June 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.
_______________
ENSURING TRANSPARENCY
1. Following up the discussions in the Working Group meeting on April 18 and 19, 2002, the
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu considers that some additional
inputs on the issues raised in the Secretariat’s note on transparency might be of help for participants to
further consider this issue.
I. PUBLICATION OF RULES
2. There has been a general consensus among delegations regarding the importance of
transparency.  We concur with such view.  We consider, however, that mere publication of rules
might not be adequate at times for Members and their industry to acquire a sufficient degree of
knowledge on the domestic investment environment,  regulatory or otherwise, of other Members.
Increased transparency is not only for the purpose of allowing foreign investors to understand more
about the business environment in host countries so  as to evaluate their opportunities and future
operations there, but also for the host countries to create a more attractive environment for foreigninvestors.  It is therefore preferable that in the future rules on investment, Members be required to
ensure that other Members and their firms will be given the opportunity to further information as
regards investment in respective jurisdictions.  From this perspective, establishing an enquiry point
and unifying various offices to answer enquiries may be a workable way to meet this particular need.
The relevant provisions of the GATS, for instance, may be used as a reference in this regard.
II. NOTIFICATION
3. Under the existing WTO framework, notification in addition to publication is required under,
for example, Article III of the GATS.  Notification in advance of adopting a regulation is called for
under Articles 2:9 and 7 of the TBT Agreement.  However, such advance notification, which only
applies to specific matters, is unique in itself in those circumstances and perhaps should not be used asa future reference in the rules on investment.  While we appreciate the importance of transparency by
way of notification, the administrative burden posed on developing Members by such obligation
should be taken into special account while considering the question of notification.WT/WGTI/W/129
Page 2
III. TRANSPARENCY IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
4. The existing WTO framework requires not only transparency on the regulations themselves, it
also requires transparency on the implementation of such regulations including the right to due
process and administrative/judicial review in order to ensure consistency, fairness and reasonableness.
It seems that it is difficult to find reasons for a deviation from such general requirements with respectto investment matters.  We consider that the future  rules on investment perhaps should not make any
exception on this issue.
IV. DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
5. We note that under the existing WTO framework, a relatively longer period of time is usually
given to developing Members in setting up their respective enquiry points.  Apart from such
concessionary measures given to developing Members, we consider that developed Members should
also make definite commitments on rendering technical assistance meeting the specific needs ofdeveloping country Members in this particular aspect.
V. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
6. Protection of confidential information is vital in ensuring that public and legitimate
commercial interest will not be affected by such notification obligation.  As the existing WTO
framework already provides for protection of confidential information, there is no reason why futurerules on investment should make an exception.
VI. NON-BINDING COMMITMENT
7. Since there is little experience or practice of having non-binding rules under the existing
WTO framework, such kind of arrangement should probably be avoided so as to ensure consistency.
In addition, non-binding rules on transparency would impair the positive aspects of havingtransparency with regard to ensuring an attrac tive investment environment.  Assuming that the
specific concerns of developing Members, such as the capacity of establishing an enquiry point, are
well taken care of and confidential information is excluded from transparency obligation, we are of
the view that there is no need to have non-binding rules as regards transparency.
__________