. /.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/REG82/4/Add.1
11 May 2001
(01-2422)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:  English
FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN AZERBAIJAN, ARMENIA, BELARUS,
GEORGIA, MOLDOVA, KAZAKSTAN, THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, UKRAINE,
UZBEKISTAN, TAJIKISTAN AND THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC
Questions and Replies
Addendum
This document reproduces additional questions addressed to the Kyrgyz Republic and the
responses submitted.
_______________
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT
3. Scope
With regard to the list of exceptions, the Parties explain that such a list will not be
developed at all since the decision of not developing such a list is stipulated in the Protocol on
Amendments and Supplements to the Agreement on Creation of Free Trade Area of2 April 1999.  Could the Parties clarify whether the above mentioned Protocol of 2 April 1999 is
the same as the Protocol of 15 April 1994 done  on 2 April 1999 as described in WT/REG82/1
(pages 1 and 26)?  If this is the Protocol the Parties are referring to, could the Parties indicate
the actual provision which eliminates the list of exceptions?
There is no Protocol of 15 April 1994.  There is the Protocol of 2 April 1999, On
Amendments and Supplements to the  Agreement on the Creation of a Free Trade Area, of
15 April 1994 .  The actual provision, which eliminates the list of exceptions, is contained in
paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Protocol provided in document WT/REG82/1 page 19.
4. Trade Data
Could the Kyrgyz Republic please provide a basic table setting out the percentage of
trade covered by the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) Agreement, for each party to
the Agreement?
Information on percentage of trade covered by the CIS Agreement, for each Party to the
Agreement is provided in document WT/REG82/3.WT/REG82/4/Add.1
Page 2
III. GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT
4. Relations with other Trade Agreements
With regard to the relation of CIS Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the other five
trade Agreements of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Parties' reply was that "existence of theplurilateral and bilateral agreements with the sa me countries does not contradict the provisions
of GATT 1994."  We consider that such parallel  existence of agreements means that there are
several rules, which regulate one single trad e, and that it would not contribute to the
transparency of such trade rule.  We thus would like to know whether the Parties have any
intention to integrate and streamline the existing Agreements.
Currently there are no intentions to integrate the Agreements.
In light of the overlapping membership between several of the agreements concluded by
the Kyrgyz Republic, what is the nature of the relationship between the Customs Union
Agreement, the Bilateral Agreements and the CIS Agreement (agenda items DI.-VII.)?  Does
the Kyrgyz Republic intend to coordinate the various Agreements?  If so, could the KyrgyzRepublic please provide details?
The CIS FTA and bilateral FTAs of the Kyrgyz Republic with Kazakstan, Moldova, the
Russian Federation, Ukraine and Uzbekistan are separate legal documents and each Agreement shall
be judged on its own merit.  The free trade provisions of the Customs Union Agreements are based onbilateral and multilateral free trade area agreements between the Parties.  Free trade regime with no
exceptions and restrictions is applied in trade between the Parties to the Customs Union under the
bilateral and multilateral agreements on free trade.  Currently there are no intentions to coordinate the
Agreements.  Developments in the creation of the EuroAsian Economic Community may affect some
of the free trade agreements.
__________