  
  
WT/REG392/2  
 
29 October 2019 
(19-7189) Page: 1/11 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English /Spanish  
 
FREE TRADE  AGREEMENT BETWEEN TURKEY AND SINGAPORE   
(GOODS AND SERVICES)  
QUESTIONS AND REPLIE S 
 The following communication, dated 24 October  2019, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of  Turkey and Singapore . 
 
_______________  
 
 
Questions from the delegation of Canada  
 
State Trading Enterprises  
 
1.1.  Paragraph 3.36  of the factual presentation states: "The Parties affirm their existing 
rights and obligations under GATT Article XVII (State Trading Enterprises) and its 
interpretative notes that is incorporated into the Agreement mutatis mutandis 
(Article  2.13)."  
 Provi sions relating to State Trading Enterprises are covered under NTMA in the 
section on non -tariff measures. Have the Parties considered a stand -alone chapter on 
state -owned enterprises, enterprises granted special rights or privileges and designated 
monopoli es? Such a chapter could expand the coverage of the disciplines beyond trade in 
goods.  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 In the area of trade in goods, there are several well -established rules governing state owned 
enterprises under the WTO framew ork, such as the rules under the General Agreement on Tariffs 
(specifically, Article III and Article XVII), the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures 
(SCM Agreement), and the Agreement on Government Procurement. With respect to trade in 
servic es, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) (specifically, Articles VIII and XVI, the 
Annex on Telecommunications, and the Fourth Protocol on Basic Telecommunications) fulfils a similar 
role.  
 
During the negotiations, the Parties agreed on havin g a reference to the GATT Article XVII 
and neither Party has requested to have a separate Chapter on state -owned enterprises, enterprises 
granted special rights or privileges and designated monopolies. On the other hand, paragraph 2 of 
the Article 2.13 (St ate Trading Enterprises) foresees that any Party can request information from 
the other Party bilaterally as foreseen in subparagraphs 4(c) and 4(d) of GATT Article XVII if needed.  
 
 If deemed necessary, in the future, both Parties may agree to consider discussing a separate 
Chapter on state owned e nterprises under this Agreement.  
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
The formulation in the TRSFTA sufficiently serves the needs of both Singapore and Turkey.  
 
 
 WT/REG392/2  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Investment  
 
1.2.  Paragraph 4.54  of the factual presentation concerns expropriation. Article 12.11.3 : 
Expropriation  states: "Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, any measure of expropriation 
relating to land, which shall be as defined in the existing domestic legislation of the 
expropriating P arty on the date of entry into force of this Agreement, shall be for a 
purpose and upon payment of compensation in accordance with the aforesaid legislation."  
a. Would the Parties please outline how compensation is calculated in domestic 
legislation and provi de the reference to the relevant legislation?  
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Compensation is calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Expropriation Law No. 
2942 in Turkey.  According to this Law the calculation of expropriation value is determined as follows:  
 
 An Expert Commission  [establishment of which is also governed by the same Law]  shall 
determine the value of the immovable, in line with valuation standards provided by the Capital 
Markets Board of Turkey, bas ed on a report of valuation with justifications for all factors,  after 
inspecting the site of the immovable in the existence of a court delegation and hearing the persons 
concerned which are present and taking into consideration : 
 
• The type of the immovable , 
• The surface area of the immovable,  
• All qualifications and elements that can add to the value of the immovable and the value 
of each element individually , 
• Tax declaration, if any,  
• Value assessment made by public authorities on the date of expropriation,  
• For rural land, net income of the immovable property or resource according to the location 
and conditions, and in case the immovable property or resource used as it is,  
• For plots of land, sales value with respect to non-specific reference sa les made before the 
expropriation date,  
• For buildings, official unit prices and building cost calculations and the rate of wear and 
tear, 
• Other objective factors that can affect the value  provided that the effect of every factor is 
explained.  
Response from  the delegation of Singapore  
In accordance with section 33 of the Land Acquisition Act (LAA), compensation will be based 
on the market value of the expropriated land as at the date of the publication of the notification 
under section 3(1) of the LAA or the  date of the publication of the declaration made under section 5 
of the LAA.  Section 33 of the LAA also sets out the matters to be considered in determining 
compensation, and section 34 of the LAA sets out the matters to be disregarded in determining 
compe nsation.  
b. For what purpose, other than a public purpose, is land expropriated under this 
legislation?  
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Land can be expropriated only for public purposes under Expropriation Law No. 2942  of 
Turkey .  WT/REG392/2  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Response from the d elegation of Singapore  
 
The key objective of the LAA is to make land available for public development projects to meet 
the needs of the people and the economy.  As set out in section 5 of the LAA, other than a public 
purpose, land may be expropriated (i) by  any person, corporation or statutory board, for any work 
or an undertaking which, in the opinion of the Minister, is of public benefit or of public utility or in 
the public interest, or (ii) for any residential, commercial or industrial purposes.  
 
1.3.  Article  13.5 Industry Development  of the Agreement offers Turkey the flexibility to: 
"(a) provide a price preference to the suppliers of domestic goods and domestic suppliers 
of services; and (b) impose or enforce offsets."  
 Can Turkey provide information on the circumstances in which it will apply a price 
preference to domestic suppliers and impose offsets?  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Article 63 of the Public Procurement Law No: 4734 (PPL) states that:  
 
a. Price preference up to 15% can be applied in favo ur of domestic economic operators in 
procurement of services and work,  
b. Price preference up to 15% can be applied in favo ur of economic operators offering 
domestic goods in procurement of goods. Price preference of 15% in favo ur of tenderers 
offering domestic products shall be applied in procurement of goods, which are selected 
by the Ministry of Industry and Technology from among medium and high technology 
industry products and declared by the Public Procurement Authority (PPA). It  is also 
mandatory to provide a price advantage of 15% in favo ur of tenderers offering domestic 
software,  
c. All or a portion of the machinery, materials, equipment and software to be used in 
construction works may be required to be domestic goods. However, m achinery, material 
and equipment to be used in the work, which are selected from among medium and high 
technology products by relevant ministries and declared by the PPA shall be domestic 
goods.  
 According to this Article, contracting entities have discret ion regarding application of price 
preference in favo ur of domestic suppliers in procurement of services and works. Contracting entities 
have discretion to apply price preference also in procurement of goods, however for some medium 
and high technology pro ducts, it is mandatory to apply price preference. In procurement of goods, 
application of price preference is based on origin of the goods to be procured, rather than nationality 
of supplier.  
 
• According to Article 3(u) of the PPL, procurement of goods, ser vice and works, which includes 
industrial cooperation targeting innovation, localization and technology -transfer are not 
covered by the PPL. According to the secondary legislation on implementation of that Article, 
such contracts may include requirements o n domestic contribution, technological cooperation 
and exportation.  
• According to additional Article 9 of the PPL, public procurement can be used for regional 
development and technological progress. In this case, contracting entities may specify 
requiremen ts such as domestic production, domestic contribution, investment, employment, 
exportation and technology transfer to give purchase guarantee in procurement of goods 
carried out for the purposes of improving domestic production based on transfer of medium -
high and high technology which is not produced or produced to a limited extent in domestic 
market and in strategic sectors, promoting research, development and innovation and 
ensuring regional development and for project based investments. Secondary legisl ation for 
implementation of this Article has not been adopted yet.  WT/REG392/2  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.4.  Article 13.16 Transparency of Procurement Information  of the Agreement states: 
"Each Party agrees to communicate to the other Party the available and comparable 
statistics relevant to the p rocurement covered by this Chapter."  
 Will the statistics be published on an official website and will they be accessible to 
the public?  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 The statistics and relevant other data are publicly available through Public Procurement 
Monitoring Reports published by the Public Procurement Authority (PPA) semi -annually. These 
reports are also publicly accessible on the PPA 's official website (www.ihale.gov.tr) .  
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
The statistics for Turkey -Singapore FTA are not accessible to public. Nonetheless, as Singapore 
is part of WTO -GPA, results of Government Procurement tenders are published on GeBiz.  
 
Questions from the delegation of Chile  
 
Sanitary and phytosanitary measures  
 
1.5.  Paragraph 3.22: Chapter 4 of the Agreement governs SPS matters. Each Party 
reaffirms the SPS Agreement that is incorporated into the Chapter (Article 4.4). The 
Parties agree to a number of provisions on SPS including trade facilitation (Article 4.7), 
trans parency obligations (Article 4.8), emergency measures (Article 4.9), recognition of 
the principal of equivalence (Article 4.10), import requirements (Article 4.11), 
coordinators (Article 4.12) and technical cooperation (Article 4.14).  
 Regarding paragraph 3.4.1.1 on sanitary and phytosanitary measures, Chile 
requests the Parties to indicate why the Agreement does not provide for mutual 
notification by the competent authorities and focal points for the matters covered in 
Chapter 4.  
 
Response from the delegat ion of Turkey  
 
 There are provisions on mutual notification/communication in the Chapter 4 on Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) of the Turkey -Singapore Free Trade Agreement (FTA). For instance, 
the Parties shall notify each other of any change in their respective competent authorities in line 
with the Article 4.6 on Competent Authorities.  
 
 The Article 4.8 on Transparency has several provisions on mutual notification. First of all, "the 
Parties reaffirm their transparency obligations under the SPS Agreement " (Para graph 1 of the 
Article  4.8). This means that the Parties are committed to notify ing each other through the World 
Trade Organization (WTO) Sanitary and Phytosanitary Information Management System. Th ey are 
also committed to providing  each other "where possi ble, and upon request, […] information 
regarding the [SPS] measure(s) in English " (Paragraph 2 of the Article 4.8). Another mutual 
notification commitment is related to "import requirements that apply for the import of specific 
products as soon as possible " (Paragraph 3 of the Article 4.8). Furthermore, the Article 4.8 has a 
provision on technical consultations "[when] a Party has serious concerns regarding any risk to 
human, animal or plant life or health, affecting commodities for which trade takes place […].  
 Another mutual notification/communication possibility stems from the Paragraph 2 of the 
Article 4.9 on Emergency Measures. According to this Paragraph "either Party may request any 
information related to the SPS situation and any [emergency] measur es adopted. The other Party 
shall answer as soon as the requested information is available ".  
 
 In line with the Paragraph 5 of the Article 4.11 on Import Requirements "the information on 
the frequencies of import checks carried out on products imported fr om the exporting Party shall be 
made available on request ".  
 WT/REG392/2  
 
- 5 - 
 
   Finally, the Coordinators of the SPS Chapter are expected to perform several mutual 
notification/communication duties. They will be communicating "on all matters pertaining to [the 
SPS] Chapter  (Paragraph 1 of the Article 4.12). Their functions include "enhancing communication 
between the Parties ' competent authorities " (Paragraph 2.a of the Article 4.12), "facilitating 
information exchange so as to enhance mutual understanding of each Party 's SPS measures and the 
regulatory processes " (Paragraph 2.b of the Article 4.12) and "simultaneously informing the contact . 
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
The Chapter contains a number of provisions on information sharing and mutual notifications , 
relating to areas such as emergency measures, import requirements and changes in the respective 
Competent Authorities. The Chapter Coordinators will be responsible for coordinating and facilitating 
such communication among the Parties’ Competent Authorit ies. 
 
Technical barriers to trade  
 
1.6.  Paragraph  3.24: The Parties agree to use international standards as the basis for 
technical regulations and related conformity assessment procedures (Article 5.5); agree 
to make best use of good regulatory practice with regard to the preparation, adoption and 
appli cation of technical regulations (Article 5.6); and recognize that a broad range of 
mechanisms exist to facilitate the acceptance of the results of conformity assessment 
procedures (Article 5.7). The Parties elaborate on transparency requirements 
(Article  5.8); and agree to exchange information on market surveillance and enforcement 
activities (Article 5.9); and to procedures for marking and labelling (Article 5.10). In 
addition, the Parties have undertaken commitments on sector -specific non -tariff 
measures on electronics (Annex 5 -A) and motor vehicles and parts thereof (Annex 5 -B). 
 Regarding paragraph 3.24 on technical barriers to trade, Chile requests the Parties 
to indicate whether they are considering, in the future, strengthening the provisions of 
the A greement relating to good regulatory practices and regulatory cooperation.  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 In line with Turkey 's high level of alignment to the EU 's technical legislation under Turkey -EU 
Customs Union, Turkey seeks to commit to an d promote certain principles such as "Good Regulatory 
Practices (GRPs) " and "Regulatory Cooperation " to be followed while developing and implementing 
technical regulation for goods on both sides through its new generation of FTAs including the one 
conclude d with Singapore.  
 
Taking full account of the works and developments regarding GRP in the multilateral fora, 
particularly in the WTO, through GRP provisions, both sides promote good governance in the 
regulatory process in particular transparency, predictab ility and accountability of the technical 
legislation.  
 
 On the other hand, through provisions on Regulatory Cooperation, both sides aim to facilitate 
bilateral trade by elimination of technical barriers to trade. The se provisions provide a legal basis for  
a broad range of cooperation possibilities for the future.  
 
 However, for the time being, there are no concrete sectoral proposal s brought by either of the 
Parties  for developing the current regulatory cooperation in the near future.  
 
Response from the de legation of Singapore  
 
Parties have committed in the Chapter to make best use of good regulatory practice with 
regard to the preparation, adoption and application of technical regulations, as provided for in the 
TBT Agreement. The Chapter also contains pro visions on future cooperation between the Parties, 
with potential areas including good regulatory practice and other trade facilitating initiatives.  
 WT/REG392/2  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Questions from the delegation of the European Union  
 
Provisions on trade in goods  
Regulatory provisions on trade in goods  
Anti-dumping and countervailing measures  
 
1.7.  "Paragraph 3.34. They agree to a number of measures to facilitate transparency and 
information exchange (Article 3.2)."  
 Chapter on Competition of the Free Trade Agreement does not contain provisions on 
state aid control for subsidies to neither good or services that emphasizes transparency. 
However, chapter on anti -dumping and countervailing measures refer to measures to 
facilitate transparency and information exchange . Please clarify the scope of these 
measures and if such information will be available to the third parties.  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
The provisions of Article 3.2 of the Free Trade Agreement b etween Turkey and Singapore, 
exactly aim to improve the implementation of the "Anti-Dumping Agreement " (Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994) and "SCM 
Agreement " (Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures). Therefore, the provisions of 
Article 3.2 do not refer to specific measures. Instead, t hrough abiding by the provisions of this 
article, the Parties will contribute to the implementation of the relevant WTO Agreements.  
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
Article 3.2 of the Turkey -Singapore Free Trade Agreement (TRSFTA) aims to enhan ce 
transparency in certain procedural aspects in relation to anti -dumping and countervailing duties. 
This builds on Parties rights and obligations under the Agreement of Article VI of the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and the Agreement on Sub sidies and Countervailing Measures.  
 
Such information is generally not available to third parties unless otherwise provided for in 
the Agreement or the WTO Agreement.  
 
Provisions on trade in services  
Liberalization commitments  
Turkey  
Sector specific provis ions 
Educational services  
 
1.8.  "Paragraph 4.41. In education services Turkey has scheduled its commitments under 
the Agreement reflecting the Law on Private Educational Institutions (2006). Additional 
restrictions on the supply of higher education services are  introduced under the 
Agreement. Turkey reserves the right to adopt or maintain any measure affecting the 
supply of adult educational services, a subsector for which it has no GATS commitments."  
Table 4.2 Turkey: comparison between the GATS and Agreement -specific commitments   
 
 Higher education services – less compared to GATS.  
 
 Would Turkey agree with the WTO assessment on the Turkey 's commitments as 
regards higher education services? How Turkey would justify their GATS -minus provisions 
in the agreement?  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Compared with our GATS commitments there are two differences in our FTA with Singapore: 
First one is the elimination of the "approval requirement by the Council of Ministers " which is a  GATS -
plus commitment, and the second change is about the percentage of Turkish nationals within the 
administration board which is the decision making body of a non -profit organization, which could 
also be covered by Mode 4 context. Therefore, from our per spective, there is at least one GATS -plus WT/REG392/2  
 
- 7 - 
 
  item but the GATS -minus issue is arguable. Furthermore, the FTA includes additional obligations. In 
any case, we do not think higher education services as a whole is less committed in the FTA.  
 
General provisions o f the agreement  
 
Competition  
 
1.9.  Based on the WTO report it seems that the FTA does not include vertical restraints 
of competition in its scope of application, nor does there seem to be particular references 
to procedural fairness guarantees in competition enforcement. Could the Parties c onfirm 
this and if there are any specific reasons for this?  
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Turkey confirms that Chapter 14 of the FTA does not cover vertical agreements due to the 
specific requirements of the Singaporean Competition Act.  
 
 On the  other hand, the reason for the lack of provisions that guarantee procedural fairness in 
Chapter 14 is that neither Party requested their inclusion during the negotiations.  In fact, not every 
FTA signed by Turkey includes this provision.  
 
Response from th e delegation of Singapore  
 
Principles of procedural fairness are covered in Article 14.2 of the TRSFTA. Parties will apply 
their respective legislation in a transparent and non -discriminatory manner, respecting the principles 
of procedural fairness and rig hts of defence of the parties concerned, including the right of the parties 
concerned to be heard prior to deciding on a case.  
 
Each Party maintains its autonomy in developing and enforcing competition law. In Singapore, 
vertical agreements are excluded from the application of section 34 of the Competition 
Act (Chapter  50B). However, where the competent authority assesses that the anti -competitive 
effects of a vertical agreement will likely outweigh its pro -competitive effects, it will refer the matter 
to the Minister. The Minister may by order specify the application of section 34 of the Competition 
Act to the vertical agreement in question. This is without prejudice to the possibility of the competent 
authority in Singapore applying section 47 o f the Competition Act, which is applicable to vertical 
agreements concluded by a dominant firm.  
 
Questions from the delegation of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, 
Kinmen, and Matsu  
 
Provisions on trade in goods  
Regulatory provisions on tra de in goods  
Anti-dumping and countervailing measures  
 
1.10.   Paragraph 3.35: In Section 3 -B of Chapter 3 the Parties agree to a number of areas 
of cooperation geared at preventing the circumvention of trade remedies. Such provisions 
are not subject to the Agreeme nt's dispute settlement mechanism nor to Chapter 18 of 
the Agreement (Institutional, General and Final Provisions).  
 Could Singapore and Turkey please share with us their experiences and/or provide 
us with case examples of their bilateral cooperation geared at preventing the 
circumvention of trade remedies relating to Article 3.5 of the FTA?  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Provisions on cooperation in preventing circumvention are contained in Section 3 -B Article 3.5 
of Chapter 3 o f the Free Trade Agreement between Turkey and Singapore. Since the entry into force 
of the Agreement, there has been no circumvention related complaint or issue raised between the 
Parties. Hence, there has so far been no case or concrete example demanding a cooperation effort 
was realized relating to these provisions.  
 
 WT/REG392/2  
 
- 8 - 
 
  Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
To date, neither Parties have any concerns or complaints in relation to circumvention of trade 
remedies. As such, there is no case example of bilat eral cooperation in this regard.  
 
Provisions on trade in services and investment  
General provisions on trade in services  
Movement of natural persons  
 
1.11.   Paragraphs  4.15: Business visitors are defined as natural persons of a Party who 
are seeking entry into and temporary stay in the territory of the other Party for the 
purpose of engaging in activities related to trade in goods; establishing or acquiring an 
enterprise; or negotiating the sale of services or entering into agreements to sell services 
as em ployees or representatives of a service supplier of a Party. Singapore allows the 
temporary entry and stay of business visitors for a period of up to 30 days per entry.  
Turkey allows the temporary entry and stay of business visitors for a period of up to 
90 days within a 180 -day period (Article 11.3).  
 Paragraph 4.16: Intra -corporate transferees (ICTs) are defined as natural persons 
who have been employed by an enterprise of one Party, or in the case of a professional 
providing business services, have been  partners in it, for at least one year and who are 
temporarily transferred to that enterprise in the other Party. Three categories of ICTs are 
recognized: executives, managers and specialists. Singapore allows the temporary entry 
and stay of ICTs for an in itial period of two years that may be extended for up to three 
additional years, for a total term not exceeding five years. Turkey allows the temporary 
entry and stay of ICTs for an initial period of one year that may be extended for up to two 
years, for a  total term not exceeding three years.  
 
 In 4.3.6 (Movement of natural persons) of the Factual Presentation of the Free Trade 
Agreement between Turkey and Singapore, Singapore allows business visitors to enter 
and stay for a period of up to 30 days per en try. Singapore allows Intra -corporate 
transferees (ICTs) (which includes executives, managers and specialists) to enter and 
stay for an initial period of two years that may be extended for up to three additional 
years, for a total term not exceeding five y ears.  
 
 However, in Chapter 12, Temporary Entry for Business Persons of the 
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), 
Singapore makes commitments regarding Business Visitors and Investors only to those 
whom Singapore allows to stay for 30 days. It makes no special commitments to ICTs.  
  
 Could Singapore please describe the policy considerations and reasons for its 
different commitments to the movement of natural persons between the 
above -mentioned two FTAs?  
 
Response from the d elegation of Singapore  
 
The level of liberali zation under each FTA varies as each FTA will have its own unique 
negotiating dynamics. That said, Singapore’s commitments under the WTO General Agreement on 
Trade in Services (GATS) would continue to apply.  
 
Questions from the delegation of Thailand  
 
Provisions on trade in goods  
Regulatory provisions on trade in goods  
Safeguard mechanisms  
Bilateral safeguards  
 
1.12.   Paragraph 3.29: A Party shall apply a safeguard measure only following an 
investigation by its competent authorities in accordance with Articles 3, 4.2(a) and 4.2(c) 
of the Safeguards Agreement. An investigation must be completed within one year from 
its date of initiation. A bilateral safeguard measure may be applied for such period of time 
as may be necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury and facilitate adjustment. A WT/REG392/2  
 
- 9 - 
 
  measure can be applied for up to two years with an extension of another two years. A 
measure may only be applied beyond the transition period6 with the consent of the other 
Party. No safeguard measure shall be applied again to a good previously subject to such 
a measure during the transition period, unless a period of time equal to half of the period 
during which such a measure was previously applied has elapsed. (Article 3.9).  
 According to the Factual Presentation of the Free Trade Agreement between Turkey 
and Singapore para graph  3.29, article 4.2 (b) of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards 
regarding the casual link between increased imports of the product concerned and serious 
injury or threat thereof, was not referred to. Does it mean article 4.2 (b) may not be taken 
into considerati on when apply ing a bilateral safeguard measure?  
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 According to Article 3.8. of the Agreement, the Parties can apply bilateral safeguard measures, 
where as a result of reduction or elimination of a customs duty under the FTA, originating goods of 
a Party are being imported into the territory of the other Party in increased quantities that create 
serious injury/threat of injury. In this framework, the casual link between increased imports and 
serious injury or threat th ereof are considered together with the reduction or elimination of a 
customs duty from one Party.   
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
Paragraph 3.29 of the Factual Presentation of the Free Trade Agreement between Turkey and 
Singapore provides a br oad overview of the procedural requirements of the bilateral safeguard 
investigations. Substantively, the causal link between increased imports from the other party and 
serious injury or threat thereof is a requirement for the application of a bilateral sa feguard measure, 
and is expressly provided for in Article 3.9(3), read with Article 3.8, of the TRSFTA.  
 
Provisions on trade in services and investment  
 
Liberalization commitments  
Turkey  
Sector -specific commitments  
Business services  
 
Paragraph 4.37: Turkey  has made commitments under the GATS in professional 
services for legal services, accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services, architectural 
services and engineering services. Under the Agreement its commitments are broadly 
similar with a number of new s ubsectors opened up in other business services. For 
advisory services on foreign and international law (part of legal services) Turkey has 
introduced establishment and reciprocity requirements that are not present in its GATS 
schedule .  
Educational service s 
 
Paragraph 4.41: In education services Turkey has scheduled its commitments under 
the Agreement reflecting the Law on Private Educational Institutions (2006). Additional 
restrictions on the supply of higher education services are introduced under the 
Agreem ent. 
Health related and social services  
 
Paragraph 4.45: Under the Agreement, Turkey has added additional requirements 
for private hospitals that do not appear in its GATS schedule . For the supply of other health 
related and social services Turkey reserves  the right to adopt or maintain any measure.  
 According to Turkey's GATS schedule in advisory services on foreign and 
international law, Turkey has no restriction on market access. However, under the 
Agreement, for the supply of "advisory services on forei gn and international law", 
establishment in the form of "foreign attorney partnership" is required, and reciprocity is WT/REG392/2  
 
- 10 - 
 
  sought as a precondition for foreign lawyers to engage in the supply of such services 
through establishment of foreign attorney partnersh ip in Turkey.  
 
Please clarify whether Turkey has taken a step back on the liberalization regarding 
the supply of advisory services on foreign and international law under the Agreement.  
 According to the underlined phases for 1) accounting, auditing and bookkeeping 
services (paragraph 4.37); 2) higher education services (paragraph 4.41); and 3) private 
hospitals (paragraph 4.45), what are additional establishment requirements or 
restrictions or requirements for Singapore's suppliers and investors to perfo rm such 
services in Turkey under the Agreement, which are not present in Turkey's GATS 
schedule? Please indicate for each service.  
 
1.13.   Does it mean that Turkey has taken GATS -minus commitments in some services 
sub-sectors under Turkey -Singapore FTA. Please ex plain.  
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 For professional services Turkey has an MFN exemption for all countries for an indefinite period 
of time which states "If any foreign country lays down legal and administrative conditions against 
Turkish citi zens for performing arts and supplying services, the similar activities of the citizens of 
that country could be prohibited in Turkey. " Thus, the reciprocity requirement on advisory services 
on foreign and international law is not a new introduction.  
 
 The establishment in the form of "foreign attorney partnership " is not  a requirement of a 
specific type of legal entity as described in GATS Article XVI. According to the relevant law (Law on 
Attorneyship), it is openly stated in the law that attorney partner ships are not regarded as a 
commercial entities and the operations of these partnerships are not regarded commercial but 
professional. The same applies to foreign attorney partnerships. The regulation aims at facilitating 
registration at the relevant Bar A ssociation as a partnership which creates an exemption for lawyers 
working in that partnership to acquire Bar recognition that is reserved for Turkish nationals. Please 
make note that like Turkish attorneys, all foreign partners are still required to have a valid 
attorneyship licence from their respective countries. As such, this entry is not a GATS minus 
commitment but a further clarification of the existing regulation.  
 
In the case of higher education services, compared with our GATS commitments there ar e two 
differences in our FTA with Singapore: First one is the elimination of the "approval requirement by 
the Council of Ministers " which is a GATS -plus commitment, and the second change is about the 
percentage of Turkish nationals within the administratio n board which is the decision making body 
of a non -profit organization which could also be covered by Mode 4 context. Therefore from our 
perspective there is at least one GATS -plus item but the GATS -minus issue is arguable. Furthermore, 
the FTA includes ad ditional obligations. In any case, we do not think higher education services as a 
whole is less committed in the FTA.  
 
 Regarding health related and social services, there are no additional requirements other than 
those inscribed in Turkey 's GATS schedule.  The permission requirement for the private hospitals 
from the Ministry of Health is already inscribed in Turkey 's GATS schedule. The Turkey -Singapore 
FTA only clarifies the criteria that is used by the said Ministry in order to issue a permission.  
 
 The n ationality requirement for the responsible directors of private hospitals is also already 
inscribed in the horizontal section of Turkey 's GATS schedule. In Turkey -Singapore FTA, this 
requirement is inscribed under the service in question for the sake of cl arification under the negative 
list approach.  
 
General provisions of the agreement  
Dispute Settlement  
 
1.14.   Paragraph 5.19: In the event of an investment dispute, an investor -state dispute 
settlement mechanism (ISDS) is established in Section 12.B. The ISDS mechanism does 
not apply to any dispute concerning measures adopted or maintained or any treatment 
accorded to investors or investments by a Party in respect of tobacco or tobacco -related 
products.  WT/REG392/2  
 
- 11 - 
 
   Why does ISDS mechanism not apply to any dispute concerni ng measures or 
treatments accorded to investors or investments by a Party with respect to tobacco or 
tobacco -related products under Turkey –Singapore FTA? In addition, if there is any dispute 
between an investor and a Party over those issues, what channel w ould such dispute be 
solved? Please elaborate . 
 
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 The Parties agreed to exclude tobacco sector from the scope of this Agreement in order to 
provide policy space which is aimed at protecting or promoting human health for the governments. 
Disputes can be brought before domestic courts.  
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
Tobacco control is a long -standing public health priority in Singapore. While our commitment 
to free trade and foreign investment protection remains unwavering, we have a responsibility to 
protect the public from the medically -proven health risks of tobacco and tobacco -related products. 
The protection for foreign investment has to be balanced by th e need to unequivocally preserve 
regulatory space for the Government to protect the public from tobacco -related health risks. To this 
end, Singapore and Turkey agreed to exclude “any disputes concerning measures adopted or 
maintained or treatment accorded to investors or investments in respect of tobacco or tobacco -
related products, that is aimed at protecting or promoting human health” from the scope of disputes 
that a foreign investor is allowed to bring against a host Party under the Turkey -Singapore Fre e 
Trade Agreement.  
 
In the event that a dispute arises between an investor and a Party over measures adopted or 
maintained or treatment accorded to investors or investments in respect of tobacco or tobacco -
related products, the investor may seek local rem edies available in the host Party. The home Party 
of the investor may also invoke the dispute settlement mechanism between the Parties, if it considers 
the other Party to have acted inconsistently with its obligations under the Agreement, or to have 
failed  to carry out its obligations under the Agreement.  
 
Electronic Commerce  
Competition  
 
1.15.   Is there any implementation on Competition policy between both National 
Authorities?  
Response from the delegation of Turkey  
 
 Since the entry into force of the Singapore -Turkey FTA to date, Competition and Consumer 
Commission of Singapore and the Turkish Competition Authority did not collaborate on any matters 
within the framework of the relevant provisions of the Singapore -Turke y FTA and the competition 
authorities of the countries did not engage in any joint enforcement activities concerning competition 
policy within the framework of the Singapore -Turkey FTA.  
 
Response from the delegation of Singapore  
 
The Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore and the Turkish Competition 
Authority interact mainly at events of the International Competition Network, where they are both 
members.  
 
__________  