RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/NOP/W/1
30June1995
ORGANIZATION(95-1793)
Working Group onNotification
Obligations andProcedures
BACKGROUND NOTE BYTHE SECRETARIAT ON
NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES INTHE GATT SINCE 1979
1. Introduction
TheMinisterial Decision onNotification Procedures1contains threesections: thefirstaffirms
Members'commitmentstotheirobligationsregardingpublicationandnotification;thesecondestablishes
acentral registry ofnotifications within theWTO Secretariat; andthethirddirects that"theCouncil
forTrade inGoods willundertake areview ofnotification obligations andprocedures under the
Agreements inAnnex 1AoftheWTO Agreement." Thereview willbecarried outbyaworking group
opentoallMembers2,whose terms ofreference aresetoutinSection 4below.
TheSecretariathasassembledthefollowingnotetoprovideMembersparticipatingintheworking
group withabackground totheprevious discussions intheGATT onthistopic. Itisnotintended
tobeanexhaustive review ofearlier discussions buttoillustrate thedirection andcontent ofprevious
work inthisarea.
2. Reviews byGATT Council 1980-85
Among theresults oftheTokyo Round wasthe"Understanding Regarding Notification,
Consultation, Dispute Settlement andSurveillance" adopted bytheCONTRACTING PARTIES on
28November 1979.3Thenotification portion ofthisDecision (paragraphs 2and3)contains a
reaffirmation oftheexisting notification commitments andanundertaking byallparticipants tonotify
totheCONTRACTING PARTIES anytrade measures adopted which would affect theoperation of
theGeneral Agreement. Itwasanticipated thatthese notifications would bereviewed inthecontext
ofthesurveillance process setoutinparagraph 24oftheUnderstanding, i.e.theCONTRACTING
PARTIES would "conduct aregular andsystematic review ofdevelopments inthetrading system".
Inthisreview, particular attention would bepaid, interalia,totrade measures notified inaccordance
withtheUnderstanding.
InadoptingthisUnderstanding,theCONTRACTINGPARTIESdecidedthattheGATTCouncil
would conduct thereviews ofdevelopments inthetrading system. Inanticipation ofthis,theGATT
Secretariat updated existing listsofnotification requirements andtheDirector-General proposed to
theCouncil thatparticipants should bereminded oftheserequirements andthatnotifications submitted
1Results oftheUruguay Round ofMTNs, Legal Texts, page444.
2TheWorking Group wasformally established bytheCouncil forTrade inGoods on20February
1995 (G/C/M/1 section 6).
3BISD 26S,page210.G/NOP/W/1
Page2
should bereviewed bytheCouncil atspecial biannual sessions heldspecifically forthatpurpose,
beginning in1980.4
Thisbiannual review process waslaunched bytheCouncil inNovember 1980withthesupport
ofafactual noteprepared bytheSecretariat listing allnotifications received inresponse toeachreporting
requirement intheGATT.5Thisprocess evolved andexpanded thereafter withtheSecretariat preparing
morecomprehensivebackgroundnotes,andaddingexplanatoryinformationinrespectofeachnotification
requirement forthesecond review6andlaterincluding information ondevelopments inthetrading
system obtained from sources other thannotifications. IntheCouncil 'spreparation forthe1982
Ministerial meeting, some participants commented thattheUnderstanding could beimproved and,in
thisregard, concern wasexpressed thatitwasnotalways being applied "intherightspirit". Itwas
alsoemphasized that"theessential element wasthecontracting parties 'political willtomake thesystem
work".7
Withthebenefit ofthesereviews, adelegation submitted apaper containing a"listofillustrative
questions" relating toapossible review ofnotification procedures.8Thislistofquestions included,
interalia:
- What hasbeentherecord ofcontracting parties asregards reporting requirements?
- Aretheconsiderations which prompted establishment ofthereporting requirement still
valid? Should therequirements bereconsidered?
- Arequestionnaires oncertain notifications unduly complex, detailed orrepetitive?
- Aretheoriginal objectives ofthenotification requirement being met?
- Arenotifications being provided inatimely anduseful fashion?
- Arenotifications comprehensive enough? Isthere duplication oroverlap?
Further evolution inthereview process tookplace in1983 when itwasdecided toinclude in
thedocumentation prepared fortheCouncil reviews notonlyactions notified byparticipants butalso
trademeasures oragreements which hadnotbeennotified.9Further expanding thescope oftheactivity,
in1984 an"overview" section wasadded totheSecretariat reports, toassist participants intheir
examination.
In1984,withthebenefitoffouryearsofreviewexperience,attentionagainturnedtothepossible
needtostreamline orrationalize theexisting notification procedures toimprove thequantity andquality
ofthenotified information andtoimprove transparency. Itwasstressed that,while theinformation
4Document C/111, 14March 1980.
5Document C/W/349, 31October 1980.
6Document C/W/361, 15April 1981.
7Document C/W/395, 22October 1982.
8Document C/W/385/Add.1, 28May1982.
9Document C/M/169, 10August 1983G/NOP/W/1
Page3
drawn fromnotifications andreverse notifications, plusinformation fromotherofficial andnon-official
sources provided agood picture fortheCouncil 'sreviews, onlynotified information carried full
"authority" forthistask. Therefore, possibilities forexpanding thequality andquantity ofnotified
information should beexamined.10
Accordingly,theSecretariatdrewupalistofpossibleareasforimprovingthenotificationprocess
which included:
(a) avoidance ofduplication inrequests orcollation ofnotifications;
(b) more uniform periodicity ofdatacollection (e.g. asingle reporting datesuchas
1January forseveral notifications orasingle annual airgram fortheyear'snotifications
supplemented byseparate airgrams covering eachrequirement through theyear);
(c) greater uniformity inquestionnaires which would simplify responses andassist
computerization; and
(d) development ofacoding system forprocessing theinformation received andofa
common gridfordatapresentation (e.g.theHSsystem).
Early in1985 theSecretariat prepared afurther noteonthesubject ofimprovements inthe
notification procedures. Thispaper11identified thethree basic purposes ofnotifications as:
(i) toassist theCONTRACTING PARTIES intheirsurveillance ofdevelopments inthe
trading system;
(ii) tomeetobligations under theMTN codes ortoprovide documentation needed under
theGATT work programme; and
(iii) toshow whether individual contracting parties arefulfilling theirobligations under
theGeneral Agreement.
Itwasobserved intheSecretariat notethatcountry-specific notifications such aswaiver
requirements orterms ofaccession toGATT were generally fully complied withwhile general
notifications required ofallparticipants fellfarshort. Thiswasattributable inparttothelackof
multilateral review ofthese notifications andtheabsence ofanyclear authority totheSecretariat to
seekfurther information orclarification.
Afurther observation was:
"Ifsome countries arepermitted toignore notification requirements without comment
being made ontheiromissions, others willbelikely tofollow theirexample. Theconclusion
seems inescapable thatlackofafollow-up procedure isakeyreason whycertain periodic and
adhocnotification requirements arenotsatisfactorily fulfilled."
ConclusionsfromthesubsequentCouncilreviewwerethatsomerationalizationmightbepossible
throughavoidanceofduplication,adoptionofuniformformatsandincreasedcomputerization.However,
anyproposals forchange would havetotakeaccount oflegalandother requirements oftheGATT.
10Document C/W/446, 28September 1984
11Document C/W/471, 22May1985G/NOP/W/1
Page4
3. Work inthePreparatory Committee 1986
In1986, while thework intheSpecial Council (i.e.theCouncil reviewing developments in
thetrading system) continued, thequestion ofpossible improvements orstreamlining ofnotification
procedures wasraised inthePreparatory Committee. Forthis,theSecretariat prepared anexpanded
listing ofnotification requirements toinclude areas notpreviously covered bytheCouncil 'sreviews
(MTN Codes, MFA, 1979 Understanding and1982 Work Programme).12
From theoutset adistinction wasmade inthediscussions between notifications which would
bemade forpurposes ofsurveillance oftheimplementation oftheUruguay Round results andthose
madeforsurveillanceoftradepoliciesascarriedoutbytheGATTCouncil.Followinginitialdiscussions
inthePreparatory Committee, theSecretariat assembled aNotesetting outthemain points raised.13
These included:
(a) Awidely heldview thatthere wasscope forimprovement andstreamlining ofthe
notification requirements andprocedures;
(b) Thesuggestion thatefforts should bemade toreduce andsimplify thelarge number
ofexisting notifications soastoavoid unnecessary duplication andmake iteasier for
participants tocomply;
(c) Theproposal thatapermanent bodyshould beestablished tocarry outregular reviews
oftrade andtrade-related policies ofindividual participants, possibly tobecalled the
Trade Policy Committee; and
(d) Theneedforfurther discussion onthequestion ofimprovement oftheGATT machinery
fornotifications which would needtobecontinued onalong-term basis.
Inthediscussions laterin1986, itbecame clear thatadistinction should bemade between
surveillance ofcommitments made onstandstill androll-back intheUruguay Round negotiations and
onothernotification procedures. Forthelatter, aprocess todealwithnotification requirements resulting
fromtheUruguay Round wasneeded. Itwasproposed that"suitable language should beincorporated
intheMinisterial Declaration instructing negotiators todevise amoreefficient andoperative notification
andsurveillance mechanism".14
4. Work intheUruguay Round 1986-94
The1986 Ministerial Declaration launching theUruguay Round decided, under theheading
of"Functioning oftheGATT System" that"Negotiations shallaimtodevelop understandings and
arrangements ...toenhance thesurveillance intheGATT toenable regular monitoring oftradepolicies
andpractices ofcontracting parties andtheirimpact onthemultilateral trading system; ...".15In
reviewing theexisting surveillance arrangements, theSecretariat noted that: theUruguay Round
SurveillanceBodymonitoredstandstillandroll-backcommitments;thebiannualspecialCouncilmeetings
oversaw developments inthetrading system; theCommittee onTrade andDevelopment reviewed
12Document PREP.COM(86)/W/31/Add.1.
13Document PREP.COM(86)W/31.
14Document PREP.COM(86)SR/7, paragraph 9.
15MIN.DEC, 20September 1986.G/NOP/W/1
Page5
theimplementation ofPartIV;andvarious othercommittees surveyed developments intheirrespective
agreements (BOPs, MTN Codes, Textiles, etc.).16
While much oftheearlydiscussion centred ontradepolicy surveillance, anumber ofdelegations
expressed support forinstitutionalizing thedisparate notification procedures inacentral repository
ofallnotifications relevant toGATT surveillance, asproposed bytheUnited States.17NewZealand
proposed toseparate thenotifications made tosome GATT committees (which itconsidered should
besimplified andstandardized) from thetrade policy notifications made toother committees. The
latter (e.g.QRs, NTMs andPartIVnotifications) could bereported inasingle, annual notification
withtheexamination ofthese being carried outthrough yearly trade policy reviews foreachparty.18
TheEuropean Community expanded upontheemerging concepts fornotification byproposing
ageneral obligation tonotify newmeasures; thatacommon format bedeveloped forthistopic; that
acentral repository beestablished tomaintain acomplete listing; andthatasystem becreated for
themonitoring ofcompliance.19
Insubsequent months discussions firmed uparound theproposal foracentral repository for
notifications andtheSecretariat prepared anextensive background noteonthis.20Atthemid-term
review theTPRM wascreated which functionally removed thenotifications oftradepolicy development
from thecurrent discussion.
Thework onnotifications intheFOGS Group wassummarized inthereport onmeetings held
inJune1988, asfollows:
"The Group alsodiscussed thequestion ofnotifications, inthelightofthepresent
commitments intheUnderstanding onNotification, Consultation, Dispute Settlement and
Surveillance, andproposals made byparticipants forabroad, general obligation tonotify all
newtrade measures, acommon format fornotification under eachArticle orprovision ofthe
General Agreement, simplification orstandardization ofnotifications andacentral repository
forallnotifications. Theviewwasexpressed thatnotification obligations hadnotbeengiven
thefullrespect necessary toensure transparency. Some delegations feltthatageneral obligation
tonotify wasnecessary. Common formats should beintroduced andallnotifications should
passthrough acentral point. Others stressed theneedtosimplify therange ofnotification
procedures. Theneed toensure compatibility with theIntegrated Data Base wasalso
emphasized."21
InthedraftFinal Actof20December 1991, acomprehensive provision wasmade inrespect
ofthetopic "Functioning oftheGATT System". Itproposed confirmation oftheTPRM forcountry
reviews, continuation oftheCouncil reviews ofdevelopments inthe"international trading environment"
16MTN.GNG/NG14/W/3, 9June1987.
17MTN.GNG/NG14/W/9, 23June1987.
18MTN.GNG/NG14/W/13, 25September 1987.
19MTN.GNG/NG14/W/20, 27March 1988
20MTN.GNG/NG14/W/39, 31January 1990.
21MTN.GNG/NG14/8G/NOP/W/1
Page6
onanannual basis, expanded domestic transparency ingovernment policy-making and"improvement
andfurther review oftheGATT notification procedures".22
The1991draftFinalActsetoutprovisions which, withonlylegaldrafting changes, werecarried
overintotheMarrakeshAgreementof15April1994intheformofaMinisterialDecisiononNotification
Procedures. ThefulltextofPartIIIofthatDecision issetoutbelow.
III.Review ofnotification obligations andprocedures
TheCouncil forTrade inGoods willundertake areview ofnotification obligations
andprocedures under theAgreements inAnnex 1AoftheWTO Agreement. Thereview will
becarried outbyaworking group, membership inwhich willbeopentoallMembers. The
group willbeestablished immediately afterthedateofentry intoforceoftheWTO Agreement.
Theterms ofreference oftheworking group willbe:
- toundertake athorough review ofallexisting notification obligations of
Members established under theAgreements inAnnex 1Aofthe
WTO Agreement, withaviewtosimplifying, standardizing andconsolidating
these obligations tothegreatest extent practicable, aswellastoimproving
compliance withthese obligations, bearing inmind theoverall objective of
improving thetransparency ofthetrade policies ofMembers andthe
effectiveness ofsurveillance arrangements established tothisend,andalso
bearing inmind thepossible needofsome developing country Members for
assistance inmeeting theirnotification obligations;
- tomake recommendations totheCouncil forTrade inGoods notlaterthan
twoyears aftertheentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement.
Atitsmeeting on20February 1995, theCTG established "aWorking Group onNotification
Obligations andProcedures tocarry outthetaskssetoutinthePartIIIoftheDecision onNotification
Procedures".23
22MTN.TNC/W/FA, 20December 1991.
23G/C/M/1, 27March 1995.