RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/NOP/3
11January 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-0067)
Working Group onNotification
Obligations andProcedures
MEETING HELD ON28NOVEMBER 1995
Chairman: Mr.A.Shoyer (United States)
Note bytheSecretariat
1. Thedraftagenda forthethirdmeeting oftheWorking Group, setoutinWTO/AIR/222, was
adopted.
Introduction
2. TheChairman noted thatthereport oftheGroup 'ssecond meeting wascontained inG/NOP/2
andrecalled thatthelistofallnotifications required under theAgreements inAnnex 1AoftheWTO
Agreement hadbeencirculated inG/NOP/W/2/Rev.1. Hesuggested thatthismeeting should conclude
thefirstphase oftheGroup 'swork, thatis;(i)theelaboration ofaninventory ofissues tobeexamined
indetail and(ii)theestablishment ofamethodology fortheGroup toapproach these issues inthe
nextstage, beginning intheNewYear.
Agenda Item2A(i) -Duplication/overlapping ofNotification Obligations
3. Inopening thediscussion ofthisitem, theChairman referred totherelevant documents which
hadrecentlybeencirculated,(i)apaperbytheUnitedStatesdelegationinG/NOP/W/4;(ii)aSecretariat
NoteinG/NOP/W/6; (iii)adocument circulated bytheCommittee onAgriculture relating tosubsidy
notifications inG/AG/W/13; and(iv)agraphical comparison ofthecoverage oftheSPSandTBT
agreements inG/SPS/W/32, circulated bytheCommittee onSPSmeasures.
4. Herecalled thatthere hadbeenfoursetsofagreements citedinprevious meetings aspossibly
having some elements ofduplication; namely Agriculture/Subsidies, TRIMs/Subsidies, Agricultural/
Import Licensing andSPS/TBT. Inaddition, reference hadbeenmade bytheUnited States tosome
other areas where duplication might exist.
5. Ingeneral comments, anumber ofdelegates referred tothedifficulty fortheGroup toconduct
acomprehensive examination ofthenotification situation withlimited experience inboththepreparation
ofnotifications byMembers andtheirexamination intherelevant committees. Insome respects,
therefore, thework oftheGroup waspremature, lacking abroad overview ofthedifficulties Members
would experience incarrying outtheirnotification obligations. Thissituation required thattheGroup
examine thenotification obligations andarrive atrecommendations forimprovements moreonthebasis
oftheory thanfrompractical experience. Itwould, therefore, bedifficult toarrive atthecompromises
needed toharmonize procedures incertain areas. While noting these circumstances, thespeakers said
thattheyweremindful oftheGroup 'smandate andwould continue towork towards achieving itsgoals.
6. Turning totheconsideration ofthepossible areas ofduplication inthenotification obligations
oftheAgreement onAgriculture andtheAgreement onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures, someG/NOP/3
Page2
delegates emphasized thatthere were differences intheobjectives ofthenotification procedures of
these agreements. IntheAgriculture Agreement, theobjective ofsubsidy notification wastoensure
compliance withthereform programme which waslargely based onquantitative measurements while
intheSubsidies Agreement, thenotifications procedures hadtheobjective ofsetting outlegal and
economic information related tothecommitments themselves. Itwasstressed thatachievement of
theobjectivesoftheseAgreementsmustnotbeimpairedbyeffortstowardsadministrativesimplification.
Nevertheless, somedelegates considered thatitmight bepossible toworktowards adegree ofunification
inthenotification formats whereby additions might bemade intheformat oftheAgriculture Agreement
toaddtheessential notification requirements oftheSubsidies Agreement. Thegoalwould betomeet
theinformational requirements ofbothAgreements while removing thereporting duplication. Itwas
stressed thatthisprocess mustnotentail changes inthenotification obligations themselves, norimpair
theachievement oftheobjectives oftheAgreements. Theviewwasalsoexpressed that,ifthedetailed
examination showed theduplication tobeminimal, changes informats might notbewarranted.
7. Asregards thepossibility ofduplication intheSPSandTBTAgreements, itwassaidthatthis
situation wasa"mechanical" problem andnotofalegalorinstitutional nature, withthedistinction
between thereporting processes ofthese twoagreements being generally understood byMembers.
Theviewwasalsoexpressed thattheoverlap between theAgriculture andImport Licensing Agreements
wasalegaldifference which could entail aninterpretation ofthenotification obligations themselves.
Itwasquestioned ifsuchmatters wereappropriate tothisGroup oriftheyshould belefttotherespective
committees. Another suggestion wastoexamine thepossibility ofcombining certain notification
requirements ofthese agreements through adjustments intheformat ofoneofthem. Concerning the
other areas ofpossible overlap citedintheUSpaper (G/NOP/W/4), some delegates commented that
further clarification would berequired before theycould beexamined. Inanycase, acertain number
oftheitems suggested inparagraph 2ofthatpaper (possible overlap between provisions inGATT 1947
andGATT 1994) would betransitory, forthisyearonly.
8. Itwasobserved thatthisGroup hadcertain limitations withrespect toexpertise when itcame
toexamining thespecific details ofeachoftheagreements inquestion. Oneapproach, therefore, might
befortheGroup tomake recommendations astotheapproach orprocesses under which specific
problems might bedealtwithandhavetherelevant committees address suchproblems.
9. Thequestion ofcompliance withthenotification obligations wasraised inrelation tothe
considerable importance placed ontheneedtomaintain transparency. Oneview wasthatafailure
ofsome Members tocomply could arisefromashortage ofhuman resources andpossibly fromalack
ofexperience leading tounclear interpretation ofsome oftheprovisions oftheagreements. Another
viewwasthatnon-compliancearosenotonlyforthesereasons,butalsofromaconcerninsomeMembers
overtheimplications forthemofnotifying certain information orofindicating thattheydidnothave
required legislation inplace. Torespond tothispossibility, itwasconsidered thatamore "pedagogic"
approach should betaken bytheSecretariat withnotonlytherequirements butalsotheimplications
ofcompliance ornon-compliance being explained.
10. Itwasalsosuggested thatcompliance might beimproved ifthenotification formats were
supported byexplanatory guidelines which could bedeveloped intherelevant committees. Itwas
suggested that,while theactual development ofguidelines neednotbeamatter forthisGroup, itcould
examine thissubject asageneric issue, andifitwasfound thatexplanatory guidelines would assist
Members, thiscould berecommended asanareafordevelopment bytheconcerned committees. Some
delegates expressed concern thatpreparation ofguidelines could leadtointerpretation oftheprovisions
oftheagreements andthattheywould require negotiations insome cases, thusraising sensitive issues
inthecommittees.G/NOP/3
Page3
Agenda Item2A(ii) -Simplification ofDataRequirements andStandardization ofFormats
11. TheChairman recalled thattheSecretariat hadprepared aNoteinSeptember (G/NOP/W/3)
which listed theagreements forwhich notification formats hadbeendeveloped andthedocuments issued
inthisregard bythevarious committees. Hefurther noted thatthediscussion ofthistopic had
highlighted twokeypoints: (i)insome instances theinformation sought incertain questionnaires
appeared togobeyond thatspecifically required bytheagreements; and(ii)formats hadbeendeveloped
onlyforcertain agreements anditmight behelpful toconsider thepossibility ofhaving formats in
additional areas.
12. Some delegates commented thatthedevelopment ofnotification formats wasauseful means
ofassisting Members and,atthesame time, forimproving compliance. Itwasalsosuggested that
theGroup should consider thescope fordeveloping formats which would becommon tomore than
onenotification obligation.
Agenda Item2A(iii) -Improvements intheTiming oftheReporting Process
13. TheChairmanreferredtodocumentG/NOP/W/5,aNotebytheSecretariatonthetimingaspects
ofthenotification requirements. Herecalled that,attheprevious meetings, some delegations had
commented thatthequestion oftiming would beasecondary consideration related totheexamination
ofthetwosubjects, duplication andsimplification. Inother words, inmaking proposals onthese two
topics, consideration oftiming aspects could bebuilt-in, rather thanhaving itasastand-alone item.
Reference hadalsobeenmade tothebenefits tobederived fromcoordinating thedates forsubmitting
notifications which hadcertain relationships.
14. Intheexamination ofthisitem, theviewwasmaintained thatthequestion oftiming would
besubsidiary totheprincipal issues ofduplication andsimplification/standardization. Ineffect, little
would beachieved inattempting torelieve thenotification burden simply byshifting theduedates.
However, insome cases harmonization ofsubmissions suchasthose foragricultural subsidies andother
subsidies, bothinthetiming oftheirsubmission andevenintheirexamination inthecommittees would
facilitate thework. Timing wasalsorelevant where cross-referencing wasused, thatis,where one
notification wasusedtorespond totheobligations under twoagreements.
AgendaItem2A(iv)-AssistancetoSomeDevelopingCountriesinMeetingTheirNotificationObligations
15. TheChairman noted thattwopoints hadbeenraised intheGroup: (i)toinvite Technical
Cooperation andTraining Division todescribe itsactivity inthisarea; and(ii)togiveconsideration
tothepossibility ofsimplifying certain obligations ofdeveloping countries andpossibly creating
explanatory commentaries toaccompany theformats orquestionnaires. TheChairman theninvited
Mr.A.Campeas, Director ofTechnical Cooperation andTraining Division, toaddress theGroup.
16. Mr.Campeas explained thehighpriority given tothesubject ofnotification obligations inthe
work oftheDivision. Hepointed outthattheDivision hadestablished afocalpoint tocoordinate their
assistance activities inthisareaintheperson ofMr.S.Marchese toprovide overall explanations on
thenotification obligations andcomplement thework intheoperational divisions responsible forthe
agreements. Astospecific programmes, hesaidthatanotification workshop, along thelinesofthe
session which hadbeenheldinGeneva inMay1995, wasplanned forFebruary 1996. Thiswould
involve presentations onthenotification obligations bythesecretaries ofthevarious WTO committees
andtheprovision oftextsandrelated papers tosupport thepresentations. They havealsoincluded
intheirregular technical cooperation seminars amodule ontheissue ofnotification requirements.
Mr.Campeas saidthattherehadbeensomemissions, particularly Africa, which hadspecifically focused
onnotification obligations, andothers would beheldinthefuture, within thebudget limitations. HeG/NOP/3
Page4
stressed thatthetechnical cooperation efforts extended totheprovision ofsystematic information on
thenotification requirements, clarification oftherelevant provisions intheagreements andresponding
toquestions; however, thedecisions astothespecific information tobesubmitted andthemethod
ofassembling itwould, outofnecessity, restwiththeindividual Members.
17. Delegates expressed appreciation forthepresentation andfortheexpanded technical cooperation
work intheareaofnotifications. Itwasconsidered thatthecommittees examining notifications could
benefit fromfeedback fromthetechnical cooperation activity inhelping toseetheproblems ofMembers
incomplying withthenotification obligations.
18. Onthesecond point raised bytheChairman, itwassuggested thatinsome areas developing
countrieswhichwereintheprocessofestablishingandnotifyinglawsorregulationsforsomeagreements
could begiven anextension ofdeadlines todoso.Prolonged timeframes might alsobeconsidered
where translation oflawswasrequired. Onthequestion ofsimplifying formats, onedelegate commented
thatthismight bepossible fortheleast-developed country Members.
Agenda Item2B-Organization ofFuture Work, Including aProgramme ofMeetings for1996
19. TheChairman noted theproposed guidelines withrespect tothescheduling ofmeetings of
WTO bodies inthecoming year(WT/GC/W/16). Heobserved that1996 would betheGroup 'slast
yearofoperation, asitsmandate required thatitmake recommendations totheCTG bytheendof
theyear, andsuggested thatMembers should aimatfinalizing theirwork, including thereport and
recommendations, bythefirstweek ofOctober.As tothemeeting dates themselves, inview ofthe
nature oftheGroup 'stask,hesuggested fairly frequent butshorter meetings onceeachmonth fora
fulldayorpossibly evenahalf-day asappropriate.
20. TheGroup authorized theChairman totentatively arrange datesinthefirstweekofeachmonth
(excluding August andinthesecond week inSeptember).
Agenda Item2C-Other Business
(i) Presentation bytheSecretariat ontheprogress intheimplementation oftheCentral Registry
ofNotifications
21. Asproposed atthelastmeeting, theChairman hadarranged forapresentation bytheSecretariat
ontheprogress intheimplementation oftheCentral Registry ofNotifications.
22. TheSecretariat recalled thattheMinisterial Decision which established theCentral Registry
ofNotifications provided fortheestablishment ofadatabase which would maintain aninventory of
allnotification requirements under theWTO andanindex ofallnotifications received bytheSecretariat
from Members, pursuant tothese requirements. TheRegistry would thuscontain arecord foreach
notification thatMembers submitted, indicating certain specific information. Thisdatabase hadbeen
inoperation since theSpring using aprototype system. SofartheCRN hadreceived information on
around 1,100 notifications andhadcreated approximately 900records. Itwasexpected thattheentry
oftheremaining datafor1995would becompleted shortly. Theprototype currently being usedwould
bereplaced withnew,more powerful software system which hadbeendeveloped overthepastmonths
andwascurrently being tested. Itwasexpected thatthisnewsystem would befullyoperational early
in1996. When online,itwould provide theSecretariat withanappropriate tooltocarry outthe
above-mentioned tasks, aswellasassisting ittofulfil theCRN'sobligations inrespect ofproviding
information oncompliance byMembers aswellasinformation regarding individual notifications upon
therequest ofanyMember entitled toreceive thenotification concerned.G/NOP/3
Page5
(ii) 1995 Report toCTG
23. TheChairman advised thathehadprovided areport (G/L/30) totheCTG ontheGroup 's
activities sofarin1995, asauthorized atthelastmeeting.
(iii) Chairman 'sSumming-up
24. TheChairman suggested thatintheNewYeartheSecretariat should assemble abroad overview
noteonthecompliance withnotification obligations in1995. Suchanexercise would provide theGroup
withauseful knowledge basewhich might point toproblem areas deserving theGroup 'sattention and,
thereby, assist theGroup initsdeliberations inthecoming year. Heproposed thattheGroup, asof
itsnextmeeting, shifttoitssecond stage, thatis,tothein-depth examination oftheissues already
identified, leading tothefinalstage offormulating recommendations andpreparing itsreport.