 
. /. RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG132/M/2 
19 November 2004 
 
 (04-5029) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Thirty-Seventh Session  
 
 
 
EXAMINATION OF THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT 
BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND CROATIA 
 
Note on the Meeting of 8 October 2004  
 
Chairman:  Mr. S. Dalela (India) 
  
1. The meeting was convened in document WTO/AIR/2393. 
2. Under Agenda Item B.VIII of its Thirty-S eventh Session, the Committee on Regional Trade 
Agreements (hereinafter CRTA or the Committee)  took up the examination of the Free Trade 
Agreement (FTA) between the EFTA States and Croatia. 
3. The Chairman
 said that this was the second round of examination of the FTA between the 
EFTA States and Croatia.  The proceedings of the first round, which took place in the Thirty-Fifth 
Session of the Committee in December 2003, could be found in document WT/REG132/M/1.  Since 
then no written questions had been submitted to the Parties. 
4. The representative of the United States  said that he had several questions concerning Section 
II:8 of the Standard Format dealing with Sector-Sp ecific Provisions.  He indicated that these would be 
submitted in writing should the Parties be unable to pr ovide replies at the meeting.  As a point of 
transparency, he pointed out that the Agreement,  Annexes and Protocols were not accessible through 
the URL address as contained in document WT/REG132/ 1;  however, they had been found on another 
URL.  Given that these Annexes were short in le ngth, he wondered whether they could have been 
provided along with the text of the Agreement.  In  that respect he asked the Parties whether it would 
be possible to provide copies of the agricultural Protocols as notified documents.  Furthermore, he 
remarked that the bilateral agricultural Protocol be tween Switzerland and Croatia was not available in 
English on the EFTA website and asked the Parties whet her they could provide a translation of this so 
that the text could be fully analysed in Capital.  He added that his delegation wished to follow-up such 
Protocol at a future meeting of the Committee and that they planned to submit written questions in 
that regard.  Turning to the specific questions, he  asked the Parties to explain why the Agreement 
contained no agricultural Protocol be tween Liechtenstein and Croatia.  With respect to the agricultural 
Protocol between Norway and Croatia, he noted that  in Annex 1, which listed the concessions granted 
by Norway to Croatia, entire chapters of the agri cultural tariff schedule were missing;  these included 
chapters one to six, nine, 13, 14, 16, 18 and 19.  He added that in other ch apters a large portion of 
tariff lines were missing;  these included chapters se ven, ten, 21 and 22.  He noted further that for 
many of the tariff lines contained in Annex 1 wher e concessions were granted, tariffs were only 
slightly reduced.  With respect to Annex 2, wh ich listed the concessions granted by Croatia to 
Norway, he remarked that it contained only 15 tari ff lines, of which three were on water and only one 
had zero tariff.  Furthermore, he noted that many ta riff lines in that Protocol were only marked as, and 
he quoted, "treatment no less favourable than that a ccorded to the European Community".  He asked 
the Parties to provide a written explanation of exactly  what that meant for each of the tariff lines so 
cited in the bilateral Protocols.  With regards to the agricultural Protocol between Iceland and Croatia, WT/REG132/M/2 
Page 2  
 
 he noted that the schedule of concessions granted by  Iceland to Croatia only contained 7 products and 
that the one granted by Croatia to Iceland contai ned roughly 30 products many of which were tropical 
products such as coffee, tea, mate and spices.  He ad ded that under the rules of origin of that Protocol, 
those concessions were coupled with a wholly obt ained requirement, which he wondered whether it 
applied to tropical products in Iceland.  Summin g up, he indicated that his delegation questioned 
whether the coverage described by the Parties in te rms of current trade gave an accurate account of 
the real coverage of the Agreement and that they  had concerns about compliance with GATT Article 
XXIV. 
5. The representative of Switzerland
, on behalf of the EFTA States, said that they would reply to 
the questions in writing.  However, with respect  to absence of an agricultural Protocol between 
Liechtenstein and Croatia, he explained that this  was due to the customs union between Switzerland 
and Liechtenstein which provided that both Part ies granted the same concessions to Croatia.  
Speaking on behalf of Switzerland, he acknowledged his surprise to the lack  on the EFTA website of 
an English version of the agricultural Protoc ol between Switzerland and Croatia since RTA 
negotiations were normally conducted in English.  He added that such translation would be provided. 
6. The Chairman  said that the second round of examination of the FTA between the EFTA 
States and Croatia had allowed to clarify a numbe r of questions, but some outstanding issues 
remained.  He invited delegations wishing to ask further questions to submit them in writing to the 
Secretariat by 29 October 2004 and for the Parties to provide written replies by not later than 3 
December 2004.  The next round of examination woul d then be scheduled for a forthcoming meeting. 
7. The Committee took note  of the comments made. 
 
__________ 
 
 