Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 6 • Number 9 • 19th May 2006
WTO: New Mechanism Proposed to Deal With NTBs
Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say
The EU and eleven developing countries on 15 May called for the establishment of a new WTO mechanism to arbitrate conflicts over non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to trade in goods. At an informal meeting of the WTO Negotiating Group on Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) on 15 May, a proposal from the EU (TN/MA/W/11/Add.8) and one from Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Namibia, the Philippines, South Africa, Tunisia, and Venezuela (the “NAMA-11″ group) (TN/MA/W/68/Add.1) were presented. They argue that the current avenues that exist under current WTO rules for addressing NTBs — which some argue can include regulatory measures for environmental purposes such as the EU’s proposed chemicals legislation (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 25 November 2005) — are inappropriate and insufficient to address NTB problems. According to the procedure proposed by the NAMA-11 to rectify the situation, a Member facing an NTB would describe how its trade was being affected in the relevant WTO committee, and ask for the matter to be referred to the “NTB Resolution Mechanism”. The country imposing the measure in question would be obliged to cooperate with the process. A mutually-approved facilitator from a roster of experts maintained by each committee would then examine the case; consult with Members, affected industries and other specialists; and provide non-binding, non-obligatory recommendations on possible solutions within 60 days. The EU proposal suggests a similar procedure, noting that a supplemental mechanism “to facilitate progressive and more rapid resolution” of problems related to NTBs appeared to be necessary, in part because it is often difficult to determine whether or not they are compliant with WTO rules and address legitimate economic, social, environmental or developmental objectives (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 28 April 2006). At the meeting, Canada, Japan and the US along with others questioned the need for a new mechanism, and wondered whether it might undermine the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Undertaking (DSU). Sceptics suggested that the bilateral consultations that take place as part of the first stage of pre-existing WTO formal dispute settlement procedures could be used by Members to solve problems resulting from NTBs, rather than creating a new process.
ICTSD Reporting.
Add a comment
Enter your details and a comment below, then click Submit Comment. We’ll review and publish the best comments.