RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/RO/M/1
18May1995
ORGANIZATION(95-1304)
Committee onRules ofOrigin
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING OF4APRIL 1995
Chairman: Mr.C.Osakwe (Nigeria)
1. TheCommittee onRules ofOrigin helditsfirstmeeting on4April 1995.
2. Thefollowing agenda wasadopted:
Page
A. Election ofofficers 1
B. Rules ofprocedure 2
C. Participation inmeetings bycertain signatories ofthefinalacteligible 2
tobecome original members oftheWTO
D. Observers: governments 2
E. Observers: international organization 3
F. Useofspanish asaworking language intheTechnical Committee onRules 3
ofOrigin
G. Initiation oftheharmonization work programme under Article 9ofthe 5
Agreement onRules ofOrigin
H. Notifications under paragraph 1ofArticle 5andparagraph 4ofAnnex IIof 6
theAgreement onRules ofOrigin
I. Dates ofmeetings 7
A. Election ofOfficers
3. TheCommittee elected Mr.C.Osakwe (Nigeria) Chairman for1995.
4. TheChairman noted thattheAgreement onRules ofOrigin didnotmake specific provision
forVice-Chairpersons. Hebelieved thatitwould, from apractical point ofview, bepreferable to
haveaVice-Chairperson andsuggested thathemight undertake informal consultations withinterested
delegations onthisquestion.
5. TheCommittee soagreed.G/RO/M/1
Page2
B. Rules ofprocedure
6. TheChairman noted thattheAgreement onRules ofOrigin didnotsetoutanydetailed rules
ofprocedure fortheCommittee, beyond providing thatitshallmeetasnecessary, butnotlessthan
onceayear. Ontheother hand, theWTO Agreement, inparagraph 6ofArticle IV,allowed for
subsidiary bodies oftheCouncils toestablish theirownrulesofprocedure subject totheapproval of
theirrespective Councils. TheCouncil forTrade inGoods, atitsmeeting on3April 1995, hadagreed
thattherules ofprocedure formeetings oftheGeneral Council should apply mutatis mutandis for
meetings oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods withcertain modifications assetoutindocument G/C/W/2.
Hesuggested thattheCommittee might adopt thesame rulesofprocedure asadopted bytheCouncil
forTrade inGoods withthenecessary changes inwording, andrequest theSecretariat toprepare draft
rules ofprocedure foradoption attheCommittee 'snextmeeting; inthemeantime, theCommittee
might conduct itsbusiness onthebasis ofcommon-sense andGATT practice.
7. Therepresentatives ofAustralia, Canada, Colombia, EC,Japan, Korea, Mexico, USA and
Venezuela agreed withthecourse ofaction proposed bytheChairman. Therepresentative ofAustralia
added thattheCommittee might, depending ondevelopments, needtoelaborate anunderstanding on
cooperative working arrangements withtheTechnical Committee oftheWorld Customs Organization,
e.g.ontheissueofworking languages oftheTechnical Committee. Therepresentative ofColombia
underscored theneed totakeintoaccount, inscheduling themeetings ofthisCommittee, the
harmonization work programme setoutintheAgreement onRules ofOrigin.
8. TheCommittee agreed torequest theSecretariat toprepare draftrules ofprocedure forthe
Committee onRules ofOrigin, based ontherules ofprocedure adopted bytheGeneral Council and
theCouncil forTrade inGoods, and,inthemeantime, toconduct itsbusiness onthebasisofcommon-
sense andGATT practice.
C. Participation inmeetings bycertain signatories oftheFinal Acteligible tobecome
original Members oftheWTO
9. TheChairman noted that,withrespect totheparticipation inmeetings bycertain signatories
oftheFinal Acteligible tobecome original Members oftheWTO, thedecision oftheGeneral Council
(WT/L/27) applied alsototheCommittee onRules ofOrigin. These countries could, therefore, be
present andspeak atformal andinformal meetings oftheCommittee andhave access toallthe
documents, butdidnothavetherighttoparticipate inthedecision-making process.
10. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatement.
D. Observers: governments
11. TheChairman noted thatcertain governments which were intheprocess ofacceding tothe
WTO, orhadinitiated negotiations todoso,orhaddeclared theirintention todosointhenearfuture,
hadbeeninvited toattend meetings oftheGeneral Council asobservers. Inaccordance withthe
Guidelines forobserver status forgovernments intheWTO (Annex 2ofWT/L/28), thesegovernments
"may participate asobservers atmeetings ofworking parties andother subsidiary bodies oftheGeneral
Council asappropriate, withtheexception oftheCommittee onBudget, Finance andAdministration".
Heproposed thatsuchgovernments, allofwhich hadreceived theairgram convening thisfirstmeeting,
bewelcome toattend themeetings ofthisCommittee iftheysowished, except ifandwhen itwas
considered appropriate toholdaclosed session withtheparticipation ofMembers only.
12. TheCommittee soagreed .G/RO/M/1
Page3
E. Observers: international organizations
13. TheChairman recalled that,pending theadoption, bytheCouncil forTrade inGoods, of
guidelines onthequestion ofobserver status forinternational organizations, agreement hadbeenreached
toinvite, tothefirstmeetings ofitssubsidiary bodies, certain international organizations. Henoted
that,withrespect totheCommittee onRules ofOrigin, thedecision hadbeentoinvite asobservers,
toitsfirstmeeting, representatives oftheSecretariats ofUNCTAD andtheWorld Customs Organization
(WCO, formerly CCC). Hewelcomed them tothismeeting. TheChairman alsorecalled thatithad
beenagreed that,forthetime-being, eachsubsidiary body oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods would
decide, ateachofitsmeetings, which organizations toinvite asobservers toitsnextmeeting. The
understanding wasthattheseadhocarrangements hadbeenaccepted pending theapproval ofthecriteria
andconditions forobserver status forinternational intergovernmental organizations intheWTO, and
thattheseadhocprocedures werewithout prejudice tothepositions ofdelegations infuture discussions
onthequestion ofobserver status ofinternational intergovernmental organizations. TheChairman
informed theCommittee that,inaddition totheWCO andUNCTAD, theOECD hadrequested observer
status inthisCommittee, andthattheWorld Bank andIMFhadrequested observer status inall
subsidiary bodies oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods. Heproposed that,unless thecriteria andconditions
forobserver status wereagreed inthemeantime, these fiveorganizations beinvited toattend thenext
meeting oftheCommittee inthecapacity ofobservers.
14. TheCommittee soagreed.
F. UseofSpanish asaworking language intheTechnical Committee onRules ofOrigin
15. TheChairman recalled thattheCouncil forTrade inGoods, atitsfirstmeeting on20February
1995,hadrecommendedthattheCommitteeonRulesofOriginrequesttheWorldCustomsOrganization
toensure thatwork intheTechnical Committee onRules ofOrigin becarried outinEnglish, French
andSpanish (item 11ofCouncil Minutes, G/C/M/1). Thelanguage question hadalready beenraised
atthefirstmeeting oftheTechnical Committee onRules ofOrigin inBrussels atthebeginning of
February. Heproposed toaddress therequest totheWCO onbehalf oftheCommittee, asrequested
bytheCouncil forTrade inGoods.
16. TheCommittee soagreed.
17. TheChairman stated thattheWCO hadnot,sofar,made abudgetary provision fortheuse
ofSpanish intheTechnical Committee onRules ofOrigin. TheWCO 'sFinance Committee would
beconsidering thematter atitsnextmeeting attheendofApril 1995, anditsrecommendation would
beputtotheWCO Council forapproval atitsmeeting inJune1995. Henoted thatmany ofthe
delegations represented intheCommittee werealsomembers oftheTechnical Committee, andurged
them tobring thismatter totheattention oftheircounterparts dealing withthisquestion intherelevant
WCObodies.TheChairmaninformedtheCommitteethattherehadbeenanexchangeofcorrespondence
onthismatter between theWTO andWCO Secretariats, andthattheSecretary General oftheWCO
hadsuggested totheDirector-General oftheWTO thatthetwoorganizations share thecostofproviding
Spanish asaworking language intheTechnical Committee. Herequested theSecretariat toprovide
further information onthismatter.
18. Therepresentative oftheSecretariat stated thattheWCO hadestimated thatthecosttoitself
ofproviding translation andinterpretation inrespect ofSpanish would beintheareaofSFr.450'000.
Inarecent letter totheDirector-General oftheWTO, theSecretary General oftheWCO hadenquiredG/RO/M/1
Page4
about thepossibility oftheWTO Secretariat sharing inthework andthusintherelated costs. The
WTO Secretariat had,afterexamining thequestion, concluded thatthiswould notbepossible without
additional resources, which would needtobeapproved bytheWTO 'sCommittee onBudget, Finance
andAdministration.
19. Theobserver from theWCO stated that,astheAgreement onRules ofOrigin wassilent on
thequestion ofworking languages fortheTechnical Committee onRules ofOrigin, nospecial provision
hadbeenmade intheWCO 'sbudget forSpanish, which wasnotanofficial WCO language. The
Valuation Agreement, ontheother hand, clearly stipulated thethree WTO working languages forthe
Technical Committee onCustoms Valuation. Heconfirmed thefigure fortheestimated costs. The
WCO Secretariat hadhoped thatitmight bepossible fortheWCO andWTO toshare theburden, with
theformer providing forinterpretation andthelatter fortranslation inrespect ofSpanish. Thefact
thatthisdidnotnowappear possible would betaken intoaccount intheWCO Secretariat 'ssubmission
toitsFinance Committee. Thissubmission would putforward different possibilities, suchasanincrease
intheWCO'sbudget,voluntarycontributions,andreductionsinexpenditures.Hehopedforafavourable
outcome intheWCO Finance Committee andCouncil andnoted that,inthemeantime, theWCO
Secretariat could nottakeanydecisions relating tothismatter.
20. Therepresentative ofChile recalled hisdelegation 'sunderstanding thatitfollowed from the
provision, intheWTO Agreement, ofEnglish, French andSpanish astheworking languages ofthe
WTO, thatwork inanyCommittee established under oneoftheMultilateral Agreements should be
carried outinallthree languages. With regard tothefinancing issue, hebelieved thatitwould set
aninappropriate precedent fortheWTO tofinance thework ofanother organization. Thus, evenif
costs hadtobeshared, thiscould onlybeaveryshort-term solution, toenable work togetofftoa
prompt start.
21. Therepresentative ofColombia shared thebelief thattheprovision ofSpanish intheTechnical
Committee wasanobligation oftheWCO. Sheexpressed concern about thedelay entailed forthe
startofsubstantive work inthisarea, andwondered whether theWCO Council could holdan
extraordinary meeting earlier thanJune1995.
22. Therepresentative ofParaguay supported thestatements made byChile andColombia.
23. Therepresentative ofAustralia supported theuseofSpanish intheTechnical Committee on
anequal footing withFrench andEnglish. Further consideration ofthismatter, however, would have
toawait theoutcome intheWCO. Shebelieved thattheCommittee wasnottheappropriate forum
fordiscussion ofbudgetary matters andexpressed some reservation withrespect toanyfurther increase
inthefinancial burden ensuing from theestablishment oftheWTO.
24. Therepresentative ofVenezuela supported thestatements made bytheprevious speakers and
enquired about thefinancing oftheuseofSpanish intheTechnical Committee onCustoms Valuation.
Therepresentatives oftheSecretariat andoftheWCO confirmed thatthishadbeenentirely financed
bytheCCC (astheWCO wascalled).
25. Therepresentative ofKorea supported theSpanish-speaking members 'position andenquired
about thepossibility ofholding themeetings oftheTechnical Committee intheWTO. Theobserver
from theWCO noted thatthere wasnotradition ofholding meetings ofWCO technical committees
outside theWCO ´spremises, andfeared thatthiswould notbeapractical solution.
26. Therepresentative ofMexico recalled thattheCommittee hadagreed torequest theWCO to
provide fortheuseofSpanish asaworking language oftheTechnical Committee, andstated thatit
wasinappropriate fortheCommittee togoontodiscuss whatwere, ineffect, budgetary matters.G/RO/M/1
Page5
27. Insumming up,theChairman proposed thattheCommittee request theSecretariat totransmit
totheWCO theviews expressed.
28. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made andagreed totheChairman 'sproposal.
G. Initiation oftheharmonization work programme under Article 9oftheAgreement on
Rules ofOrigin
29. TheChairman recalled that,under theprovisions ofArticle 9.2(c) oftheAgreement onRules
ofOrigin, theCommittee mustaddress arequest totheTechnical Committee tolaunch theharmonization
work programme. Thisrequest would setthetiming ofallstages ofthework programme. He
understood thattheTechnical Committee would beabletoconclude thefirst, three-month, stage of
thework programme inSeptember 1995, and,therefore, proposed thattheCommittee senditsrequest
totheTechnical Committee inJuly1995.
30. Therepresentative ofSwitzerland expressed concern about thepossibility ofconcluding the
firstphase between JulyandSeptember, andwondered whether itmight notbewiser tosendtherequest
inSeptember.
31. Theobserver from theWCO stated that,atthisstage, itwasaWCO Secretariat proposal to
holdthenextmeeting oftheTechnical Committee from11-22September 1995. Thiswould enable
documents tobeproduced inthree languages, ontheassumption ofapositive outcome, intheJune
meeting oftheWCO Council, onfinancing theuseofSpanish asathirdworking language. Given
thehead-start made intheTechnical Committee 'sfirstmeeting inFebruary 1995andthetimeavailable
forconsultations withdelegations between thatmeeting andSeptember, hefeltthattheWCO Secretariat
would beinaposition tomake afinalproposal fortheSeptember meeting, andtotransmit theTechnical
Committee 'sreport totheCommittee within twoorthree weeks oftheconclusion ofthemeeting.
32. TheRepresentative ofBrazil proposed thattheCommittee authorize theChairman tosendthe
request onitsbehalf andtodecide ontheappropriate timing. Therepresentatives ofCanada, Chile,
Colombia, Egypt, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Peru, Philippines (onbehalf alsoofBrunei
Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore andThailand), USA andVenezuela supported theproposal made
byBrazil. Therepresentative ofMexico, supported bytherepresentatives ofChile, Colombia, Peru
andVenezuela, requested theChairman toascertain, before sending therequest, thatthetranslation
andinterpretation facilities existed forallthreeWTO working languages. Therepresentative ofJapan
emphasized thatthetiming should besuchastoenable theTechnical Committee tomake afull,not
aninterim, report totheCommittee.
33. Therepresentative ofHong Kong shared theChairman 'sunderstanding thattheinitial request
fromtheCommittee totheTechnical Committee would setthetiming forallstages oftheharmonization
work programme. Healsostated that,inthefirstmeeting oftheTechnical Committee, Hong Kong
hadhighlighted theneed, asprovided forintheAgreement onRules ofOrigin, forquarterly submission
oftheresults ofthework oftheTechnical Committee throughout thework programme, asopposed
tofactual progress reports inbetween half-yearly Technical Committee meetings. Thiswasduly
reflected inthereport ofthemeeting. Given thetighttime-frame imposed bytheAgreement, and
given theimportance oftheresults ofthework programme, which would, upon approval bythe
Ministerial Conference, beannexed totheAgreement asanintegral partofit,itwasimportant tobe
result-oriented. Hedidnotdoubt theability oftheTechnical Committee toproduce important results
inatimely manner. Hebelieved thattheCommittee would expect thatallresults submitted toitwould
carry theendorsement oftheTechnical Committee, sothattheCommittee could consider them
immediately, inaccordance withthetime-frame provided intheAgreement. Heproposed thattheseG/RO/M/1
Page6
concerns bereflected intherequest tobesenttotheTechnical Committee, withparticular emphasis
onthetighttime-frame andtheneedtosubmit quarterly totheCommittee results which could be
considered bytheCommittee without delay.
34. Therepresentatives ofChile, Colombia, Philippines (onbehalf alsoofBrunei Darussalam,
Malaysia, Singapore andThailand) andVenezuela supported theproposal made byHong Kong.
35. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee mandate himtotransmit therequest totheTechnical
Committeeattheappropriatetime.Theappropriatetimewouldnowappeartobearoundmid-July1995.
Therequest would alsostatetheCommittee 'sexpectation thatwork intheTechnical Committee would
becarried outinthethree WTO languages; anditwould emphasize theneedforthework ofthe
Technical Committee toberesult-oriented, inaccordance withtheprovisions oftheAgreement on
Rules ofOrigin. Healsoproposed thatMembers oftheCommittee beinformed ofthesending of
therequest.
36. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made andagreed totheChairman 'sproposals .
H. Notifications under paragraph 1ofArticle 5andparagraph 4ofAnnex IIof
theAgreement onRules ofOrigin
37. TheChairman recalled thattheSecretariat hadissued anairgram (WTO/AIR/18 of
13February 1995) reminding Members oftheirnotification obligations under theAgreement onRules
ofOrigin. With respect tonon-preferential rules oforigin, under theprovisions ofArticle 5ofthe
Agreement, Members weretonotify, within 90daysofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement for
themselves, notonlytheirrules oforigin, butalsotheirjudicial decisions andadministrative rulings
ofgeneral application relating torules origin ineffect onentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement.
With respect topreferential rulesoforigin, theprovisions ofAnnex IIoftheAgreement called upon
Members tomake promptly totheSecretariat similar notifications, aswellasnotifications ofany
modifications which theymight subsequently introduce. Notifications inbothcategories weretobe
keptintheSecretariat andMembers informed oftheirreceipt.
38. Therepresentative oftheSecretariat reported that11notifications hadbeenreceived todate.
Among these, fournotifications covered bothnon-preferential andpreferential rules oforigin; six
pertained tonon-preferential rulesonly, including twowhich stated thattheMembers concerned did
nothavesuchrules oforigin; onenotification concerned preferential rules only.
39. Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thathercountry hadnotyetmade anotification,
partly duetosome uncertainty regarding thescope ofthenotifications. Some guidance would be
welcome. Sheexpected thatanotification would bemade by30April, onanumber ofdiskettes.
However, itmight beuseful fortheCommittee, atitsnextmeeting, toexamine thenotifications received
andtodiscuss whatwasorwasnotappropriate tobenotified. Shewondered whether ornotsetting
anewdeadline (e.g.30April) would achieve theaimofencouraging Members tobeserious about
thenotification process. Sheasked whatinformation would becirculated bytheSecretariat withrespect
tothenotifications received.
40. Therepresentative ofAustralia stated thatAustralia hadsubmitted itsnotification ofboth
preferential andnon-preferential rules oforigin. With respect totheformer, shebelieved thatthe
obligation tonotify "promptly" meant within asimilar time-frame tothatfornon-preferential rules.
Shehoped thatotherMembers would share Australia 'sunderstanding. Shebelieved thattheAgreement
onRules ofOrigin wasclear about thescope ofnotifications. What appeared lessclear waswhat
information would becirculated toMembers regarding thenotifications received. Shesuggested thatG/RO/M/1
Page7
thismight bethesubject ofinformal consultations oncemore notifications hadbeenreceived. Such
consultations might alsoaddress thequestion ofexamination ofnotifications intheCommittee. She
alsosuggested thattheSecretariat circulate information onnotifications before thesummer break.
41. Therepresentative ofHong Kong stated thatHong Kong hadsubmitted itsnotification. He
didnotbelieve thatitwould beappropriate tosetanother deadline fornotifications.
42. Therepresentative ofJapan stated thatJapan hadsubmitted itsArticle 5notification, andwas
working onitsAnnex IInotification. Japan'ssubmission included boththeJapanese original anda
translation version intoEnglish oftherelevant partofthelegislation.
43. TherepresentativeofCanadastatedthatCanadahadnotifiedbothpreferentialandnon-preferential
rules oforigin. However, hisauthorities werestillintheprocess ofidentifying therelevant judicial
decisions andadministrative rulings tobenotified, andwould appreciate some guidance onthescope
ofthenotification requirement inthisrespect.
44. TheChairman believed that,withrespect tothescope ofnotifications, theAgreement onRules
ofOrigin required thatalljudicial decisions andadministrative rulings ofgeneral application benotified;
however, hetooknoteofthesuggestion ofinformal consultations oncemore notifications hadbeen
received. With respect todeadlines fornotifications, hedetected aconsensus neither ondeparting
fromthe90-day deadline setinArticle 5oftheAgreement bysetting anewdeadline, noroninterpreting
"promptly" inAnnex IIasmeaning "within 90days". TheChairman enquired whether, inviewof
thelikely volume andcomplexity ofnotifications, aformat might beuseful, either forthenotifications
themselves, orforasummary toaccompany thenotifications. Healsonoted thattheAgreement was
silent onthelanguage inwhich notifications weretobemade, butthatanotification made inalanguage
other thanoneoftheWTO working languages could cause difficulties toother Members. Thebest
solution would beifmembers which submitted theirnotification inalanguage other thanoneofthe
WTO languages could provide asummary ofthenotification inoneoftheWTO languages.
45. Therepresentative oftheSecretariat stated thatitwould bekeeping Members informed of
notifications received, giving alsosome indication ofthecontent ofthenotifications. Thefrequency
ofsuchinformation would bedetermined bytheflowofnotifications.
46. Therepresentative ofAustralia believed thatitwould becounterproductive todefine aformat
fornotifications atthislatestage; itwould cause further delays andmight leadtothewithdrawal of
notifications already submitted. Therepresentatives ofCanada, EC,Hong Kong andUSAagreed with
Australia.
47. TheChairman proposed, inconclusion, thattheCommittee agree thatifanotification were
tobemade inalanguage other thanoneoftheWTO languages, such anotification should be
accompanied byasummary inoneoftheWTO languages. Healsoproposed thattheCommittee
encourage allMembers tosubmit theirnotifications assoonaspossible.
48. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made andagreed totheChairman 'sproposals.
I. Dates ofmeetings
49. TheChairman stated thattheCommittee would needtomeettoconsider thefirstreport of
theTechnical Committee. Ontheassumption ofaSeptember meeting oftheTechnical Committee,
andallowing timeforMembers toconsider itsreport, heproposed thattheCommittee meetinmid-
November 1995.G/RO/M/1
Page8
50. Therepresentative ofAustralia agreed withtheChairman 'sproposal, butnoted thatitmight
benecessary toholdanearlier meeting todealwithotherbusiness, e.g.notifications. Therepresentative
ofMexico noted thatanother issue thatmight require earlier attention might betheuseofSpanish in
theTechnical Committee; thiswould depend ontheoutcome ontheWCO Council inJune. The
representatives ofJapan andVenezuela agreed thatitmight benecessary toholdameeting earlier than
November 1995.
51. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made andagreed tomeetinNovember 1995, leaving
openthepossibility ofanearlier meeting should theneedarise.