 RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/18  
 
21 July 2023 
(23-5005) Page:  1/3 
Committee on Trade and Development  
Eighteenth Dedicated Session on the Monitoring 
Mechanism on Special and Differential Treatment    
 
  
NOTE ON THE MEETING  OF 11 JULY 2023  
Chairman : H.E. Dr. José R. Sánchez -Fung (Dominican Republic)  
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  ................................ ................................ ...................  1 
B. MONITORING  OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL PROVISIONS  ................................ . 1 
- Statement by the Chairman  ................................ ................................ ......................  1 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 3 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The Chairman  said that, before turning to the draft agenda for the 18th Dedicated Session of 
the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD)  on the Monitoring Mechanism (MM) on Special and 
Differential Treatment (S&D) , he wished to request all delegations that would speak at the present 
meeting to email their statements to: ctd@wto.org . As this was the first meeting of the 
CTD's  Dedicated Session on the MM on S&D in which he was informing delegations of this method 
to submit statements, he wanted his words on thi s matter to be reflected in the minutes of the 
meeting. Submitting statements to this email address would allow a more efficient preparation of 
the minutes of the meeting by the Secretariat. He thanked all delegations for doing so in the context 
of the pre sent meeting, as well as in the context of future meetings of the CTD's Dedicated Session 
on the MM on S&D. He went on to  say that the draft agenda for the  CTD's 18th Dedicated Session of 
the on MM on S&D was  contained in Airgram WTO/AIR/COMTD/MMSDT/16 circulated on 
13 June 2023.  
2. The agenda was  adopted .1 
B. MONITORING  OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL PROVISIONS  
- Statement by the Chairman  
3. The Chairman  said that, at the Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference (MC9) held in Bali in 
December 2013, Ministers decided to establish the MM on S&D. The Decision establishing the MM 
was contained in document WT/MIN(13)/45 – WT/L/920. According to the Decision, the MM was to 
act as a f ocal point within the WTO to analyse and review the implementation of S&D provisions. 
The Mechanism was to review all aspects of implementation of S&D provisions with a view to 
facilitating the integration of developing and least developed Members into the  multilateral trading 
system. The Mechanism operated in Dedicated Sessions of the CTD. The present meeting was the 
18th Dedicated Session on the MM, and it appeared that the situation remained unchanged from the 
last meeting, which was held in November 202 2. For one thing, the monitoring of special and 
differential provisions in the Mechanism was to be undertaken on the basis of written inputs or 
submissions made by Members, as well as on the basis of reports from other WTO bodies to which 
submissions by Me mbers could also be made. However, as Members were well aware, no written 
submissions had yet been made in the MM. Furthermore, paragraph 12 of the Decision establishing 
the MM stated that "The Mechanism shall be reviewed three years after its first formal meeting, and 
 
1 The delegation  of Norway initially requested to deliver a statement on the use of the MM under  "Other 
Business" but later indicated that the statement had been  delivered under agenda item B.  WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/18  
 
- 2 - 
 
  thereafter as necessary, taking into account its functioning and evolving circumstances". This review 
had still not taken place. As had been previously highlighted, delegations  had expressed different 
perspectives on the question of the review. He recalled that he had recently held informal discussions 
on the developmental aspects of WTO reform and would be making a statement on these informal 
discussions at the meeting of the C TD's Regular Session that would be held later the same day. In 
these informal discussions, a number of Members had raised concerns that the MM had still not been 
operationalized. He urged Members to come to a common understanding on how to move forward 
with the MM.  He also indicated his readiness  to facilitate any informal discussions that could help 
Members come to this common understanding.  
4. The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
5. The MM is a Member -made dedicated forum for analysi ng S&D provisions. Its mandate , 
formulated in the Bali Ministerial Decision , explicitly provides for reviewing all aspects of 
implementation of S&D provisions with a view to facilitating integration of developing and 
least-developed Members into the multil ateral trading system. Further, as you probably all know, 
the Secretariat updates a compilation of all S&D provisions in the WTO Agreements and Decisions 
every second year . Though rarely referred to, this document can be a very useful tool and starting 
point when analysing S&D provisions. Unfortunately, the MM has not yet been used according to its 
mandate. Norway sees this as a lost opportunity for informed discussions on trade and development, 
within an agreed framework. The MM is not a competitor to any negotiations in the Special Session 
of the CTD (CTD SS). That must be clear. Quite the contrary, the MM could actually complement the 
processes in the CTD SS. The ongoing process on the two Agreement -specific proposals (ASPs) on 
sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures and technical barriers to trade (TBT) measures are 
concrete examples. Norway stated at the previous meeting of the CTD SS  that, as part of the 
process, we a re interest ed in learning whether the existing S&D provisions in the SPS and TBT 
Agreements are used, and how they work for Members. Some have said that the lack of submissions 
to the MM proves that no improvements are needed. However , perhaps Members should rather 
reflect on whether there are other reasons for this non -use. Capacity issues may be one reason. It 
can be challenging to make a first submission to an unused Mechanism without recourse to any 
previous practice. One possibility would be that inter ested Members, in cooperation with the 
Secretariat, draft an example of a template for voluntar y use, that could simplify a submission. 
Norway actually started working on such a draft some years ago  and would be  happy to share and 
further develop it. The bottom line  is that we encourage Members to start using this forum for what 
it is meant for  – starting by reflecting on whether there is  input in any format that can be useful for 
discussions in, and recommendations from , the MM . 
6. The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
7. The MM was created as per the  mandate  in the Bali Ministerial Decision  for the review of 
S&D provisions . However, as we have discussed, not much progress has been made  and it has not 
worked . The Me chanism was supposed to have been reviewed three years after its first formal 
meeting. Seventeen  formal meetings have already been held before today . We should review the 
Mechanism to figure out why it has not worked and report to  the General Council for f urther 
deliberations as to what is considered  appropriate. The Chair has suggested  informal discussions. 
We need to assess if there are concerns with the mandate, the terms of reference or the general 
design of the MM. If need be , we should report back to Ministers at the Thirteenth WTO Ministerial 
Conference ( MC13 ), given that the MM was created from a specific Ministerial mandate .  
8. The representative of  the United States  delive red the following statement:  
9. We continue to believe that we should at least give it a try and use the MM.  To work under 
the MM would lead to a more productive and specific discussion on the challenges and opportunities 
on utilizing existing S&D  provisions. With reference to the proposal brought up by Norway, 
the United  States believes that the MM does not specify a format to submit a proposal . It was  
designed  specifically  to be flexible in terms of  a written submission. Wh atever  written form  a Member  
uses, it is incumbent upon that Member to articulate fully the difficulties it is having in utilizing a 
specific S&D measure.  WT/COMTD/MMSDT/M/18  
 
- 3 - 
 
  10. The representative of  the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
11. As explained at the informal open -ended CTD meeting held on 26  June 2023, the European 
Union believes that the use of the MM would prove very helpful and would complement the 
discussions in the CTD SS  as well . 
12. The Committee took note  of all interventions . 
C. OTHER  BUSINESS  
13. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
14. The meeting was adjourned . 
__________  