./.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SG/Q1/EST/1
3 May 2001
(01-2267)
Committee on Safeguards Original:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLE 12.6 OF THE AGREEMENT
Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES
Concerning the Notification of ESTONIA1
The following communication, dated 30 April 2001, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
1. Increased imports requirement.   Section 120.1 of the Rural Development and Agricultural
Market Regulation Act (hereinafter Act), which sets out the basis for applying a safeguard measure to
imports of an agricultural product, generally tracks the language of Article 2.1 of the WTOSafeguards Agreement (hereinafter SA), but does not include the requirement that imports be in “such
increased quantities”.  Why has this requirem ent been omitted?  [Note: the increased imports
requirement is included in section 123, which is entitled “Obligation to conduct investigation”.]
2. Transparency, and adequacy of time to conduct investigation.
(a)  Section 126.1 gives the competent authorities up to 15 working days (roughly 3 weeks) from
the time of the petition is filed to decide whether to commence an investigation.  The
authorities would thereafter publish a notice of investigation in the official journal ( “metlikud
Teadaanded) .
(b)  Section 126.2 states that the commencement of the investigation occurs on the date on which
the notice is published in the official journal.
(c)  Section 127 of the Act requires the competent authorities to complete their investigation in 2
months of receipt of the petition, and allows them an additional month in “exceptional cases”.
(d)  Section 128 requires that the administer ing authorities hold public hearings in all
investigations, at which importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence
and their views.
This means that upwards of 4 weeks of an 8 week investigation period may have elapsed
before notice of the investigation is published, and that the competent authorities will have at most 4
or so weeks to gather evidence, hold hearings, and make their decision.  It also means that importers
and other interested parties would likely be given virtually no time to retain counsel and prepare for a
hearing and submit written evidence and views.  Please explain how such a short schedule would:
                                                     
1 G/SG/N/1/EST/2G/SG/Q1/EST/1
Page 2
(a) provide the “reasonable public notice to all interested parties” of public hearings and other
appropriate opportunities at which to present evidence and their views, including opportunity
to respond to the presentations of other parties, as required by SA Article 3.1; and
(b)  provide the competent authorities with sufficie nt time to compile a record that would provide
a basis for making findings and reasoned conclusions on all pertinent issues of fact and law,
and to publish a report to such effect, as required by SA Article 3.1?
3. Provisional relief .  Section 132.1 appears to allow Estonia to apply a safeguard measure on a
provisional basis pending completion of an investigation if either of two conditions exist: (a) there is
clear evidence that increased imports have caused or  threatening to cause serious injury, “or” (b) if
critical circumstances arise in the agricultural market whereby any delay in the application ofsafeguard measures would cause injury to a domestic industry which would be difficult to repair.  SA
Article 6 requires that both conditions must be present to find that critical circumstances exist.
(a)  Please explain how section 132.1 is consistent with SA Article 6.
(b)  Please explain the circumstances in which a provisional measure might be extended up to two
times within the context of the overall limit of 200 days (in section 133 and SA Article 6), as
suggested by section 132.3.
__________