SIDESTEPPING HONG KONG, GMO RULING DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY 2006

The WTO dispute panel adjudicating the case brought by the US, Canada, and Argentina against EU regulations on genetically-modified products has once again pushed back the date for issuing its preliminary ruling, this time to January 2006. Panel Chair Christian Haberli informed the parties to the dispute on 3 October that the panel would be unable to meet the 10 October deadline that it had announced in July (see BRIDGES Weekly, 3 August 2005). This means that the much-awaited ruling will not be released before the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December.

The controversial case springs from the complainants' allegation that the EU's failure to approve any genetically-modified organisms (GMO) between 1998 and 2004 constitutes a de facto moratorium that, along with marketing and import bans within the EU, is not scientifically justified and thus contrary to WTO rules. Some see the dispute as a test case for how the WTO will deal with precautionary decision-making. The panel was originally expected to make its report in September 2004.

Haberli's statement cited the same reasons that had been given in the previous three postponements, namely that the panel had to consider a large volume of information, including analyses from specialists and experts.

Trade sources speculate that the ruling was delayed out of fear that its findings could adversely affect negotiations in Hong Kong, especially given that civil society reactions to the verdict are expected to be significant.

ICTSD reporting; "WTO Postpones Ruling on EU Restrictions On GMOs Until After Hong Kong Ministerial," WTO REPORTER, 5 October 2005.

LDCs, AFRICANS ASK FOR MORE TIME TO REVISE S&D PROPOSALS

The Committee on Trade and Development Special (negotiating) Session (CTD-SS) adjourned after less than an hour on 12 October because least-developed countries (LDCs) and the African Group asked for more time to redraft their proposals for enhanced special and differential treatment (S&D). Chair Faizel Ismail of South Africa expressed disappointment and concern that they were unable to table the modified proposals at the meeting, noting that formal meetings of the committee had already been postponed several times for the same reason (see BRIDGES Weekly, 5 October 2005).

The LDCs and African Members have been revising the texts of their agreement-specific S&D proposals for several weeks, in response to calls for the documents to better express the needs that motivated them. The LDC group appears to be closer to new language, since they asked other Members for new comments. The Egyptian delegate said that he was unable to express a collective position on behalf of the African Group, because the countries had not started consulting amongst themselves.

Pointing out that only two weeks remained before Members are supposed to start putting together draft text for the December Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong, Ismail urged the two groups to accelerate their work.

The EU suggested that one part of the development package to be considered at Hong Kong could be duty-free and quota-free market access for LDC products, suggesting that it could partially relieve the effects of the erosion of their preferential access to some markets, an issue that was brought up in CTD-SS negotiations in July (see BRIDGES Weekly, 27 July 2005).

EU LINKS PROGRESS ON AG TO DEEP NAMA TARIFF CUTS

The EU has called for the Doha Round WTO negotiations on non-agricultural market access (NAMA) to cap industrial tariffs at 10 percent for developed countries and 15 percent for certain developing countries, in a statement circulated to representatives of influential WTO Member governments during a 10 October meeting in Zurich.

The EU is effectively proposing a 'simple Swiss' formula (which cuts higher tariffs more steeply than lower ones, leaving final tariffs 'harmonised,' or closer to each other) with dual coefficients: 10 for developed countries and 15 for developing countries that "can afford to offer greater market access." Notably, the EU explicitly supports allowing "some developing countries" to make lower tariff cuts than others -- such differentiation among non-LDC developing countries has generally been a politically explosive issue in the WTO.

Senior US government officials suggested at a 7 October press conference in Geneva that they too would like to see industrial tariffs for developed and developing countries capped at 10 and 15 percent respectively.

The average industrial tariff for developed country WTO Members is close to 6 percent. However, the corresponding figure for developing country Members is closer to 30 percent -- roughly twice as high as the potential cap.

Meanwhile, WTO NAMA Chair Ambassador Stefan Johannesson of Iceland told delegations at an informal 11 October meeting of the Negotiating Group that there had been no breakthroughs in the talks. Members remain divided on the on the structure of the tariff reduction formula and the flexibilities in its application to be accorded to developed countries (see BRIDGES Weekly, 28 September 2005, http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/05-09-28/story2.htm).

In Zurich, EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson warned participants that if the EU is not satisfied with the level of cuts to industrial tariffs, "there will be no outcome on agriculture or other parts of our negotiations."

ICTSD reporting.

CTD ADOPTS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PLAN, EXAMINES OVERALL NEGOTIATIONS

The WTO Committee on Trade and Development adopted the Technical Assistance and Training Plan (TATP) for 2006 (WT/COMTD/W/142, available online at http://docsonline.wto.org) at a meeting on 5 October. Delegates praised the plan's focus on high-quality technical assistance, emphasising that it must be driven by nationally-determined needs and priorities. In contrast to previous years, when arguments over the content of the plan have delayed its approval, Members adopted the 2006 TATP promptly (see BRIDGES Weekly, 22 December 2004). The plan will now move to the WTO budget committee, which will attempt to secure funding for its implementation.

Delegates also examined a new WTO Secretariat paper (WT/COMTD/W/143) that they had commissioned in May. It reviews the developmental aspects of most Doha Round negotiating areas, looking at the different arguments and proposals that have been made.

Some Members asked for changes to the document: Canada for the inclusion of geographical indications in the section on intellectual property rights; Benin, Cote d'Ivoire and Burkina Faso for modifications to the text on cotton; and the African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries for greater attention to issues such as public health and technology transfer, which are part of the Doha Agenda but not the subject of formal negotiations. Colombia and Costa Rica suggested that the document's analysis of the farm trade talks focused excessively on developing countries' defensive interests, even though they have a number of offensive interests in agriculture, such liberalising trade in tropical products. The US urged Members to minimise interventions in order to preserve the document's neutrality.

Countries disagreed about how the CTD should move forward with the document. Japan opposed China's suggestion that the CTD regular session should be the focal point for the developmental aspects of the talks, arguing that it was not a negotiating body.

ICTSD reporting.

MEMBERS RENEW DOHA MANDATE ON TRADE, DEBT, AND FINANCE

At a very brief meeting on 10 October, the WTO Working Group on Trade, Debt, and Finance (WGTDF) adopted a report that it will submit to the General Council (though not to the session scheduled for next week). The General Council will ask the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December to simply renew the WGTDF's mandate in the Doha Declaration. This formally ends a disagreement among some Members about the group's future work that had been preventing them from agreeing on the text of the report. A compromise was reached at a 5 October informal consultation hosted by Chair Ambassador Kweronda Ruhemba of Uganda, as reported last week (see BRIDGES Weekly, 5 October 2005).

The report's recommendations to the General Council will repeat, word for word, the mandate given to the WGTDF when it was created in Doha.

A new addition to the report was a four-page paragraph in the section on the group's work since the Cancun Ministerial Conference. The addition summarises the different positions Members have taken in discussions over the past year. Specifically, it mentions submissions from the group of African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries (WT/WGTDF/W/30 and W/32) and Argentina (W/33), which called for the group to be transformed into a permanent WTO Committee on Trade, Debt, and Finance with a specific mandate. The report refers to the positions that different countries voiced during the meetings, notably that Members including the US opposed the ACP and Argentine ideas.

ICTSD reporting.