WTO Members continued to differ on the role that a monitoring mechanism should play in the implementation of special and differential treatment (S&D) for developing countries, at a 7 July meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development Special (negotiating) Session (see BRIDGES Weekly, 12 April 2006). Some delegates said that there needs to be more clarity about the objectives of the mechanism. While certain Members want the mechanism to evaluate how much S&D provisions are being used, others said it was more important for it to examine how developing countries are benefiting from them.

However, Kenya called for Members to also consider the possibility of a Framework Agreement for the operationalisation of S&D, as proposed in 2001 by a number of developing countries (WT/GC/W/442). The 2001 proposal calls for a stand-alone agreement that would make all S&D provisions legally binding and enforceable through the dispute settlement system. It also seeks to protect sufficient policy flexibility for developing countries to promote economic development.

Chair Ambassador Burhan Gafoor (Singapore) indicated he would hold consultations on both issues in advance of the next meeting. At that gathering, Members will examine a new paper from the African Group that proposes changes to the S&D texts that were present in the never-adopted Cancun Ministerial Declaration, in order to make them more effective and enforceable (TN/CTD/W/29).

On behalf of the Group of Least-developed Countries, Zambia made a submission to the meeting (TN/CTD/W/31) that suggests that the 97 percent tariff-free coverage of LDC exports required by the Hong Kong mandate on duty-free quota-free market access should be defined as 97 percent of the tariff lines in which positive duties are still applied to existing LDC exports. This would vastly reduce the number of products covered by the 3 percent exception. There was little discussion on the proposal.

ICTSD reporting.

A number of environmental and human and animal rights groups have submitted two 'amicus curiae' ('friends of the court') briefs to the WTO dispute panel examining the EU's complaint against Brazil's import restrictions on retreaded tyres. Both supported Brazil's defence of the policies under WTO provisions protecting measures taken to safeguard health and the environment (see BRIDGES Weekly, 14 June 2006).

Brazil has argued that since retreaded tyres have a shorter lifespan than new ones, and cannot be reprocessed for subsequent use, they are more strongly linked to the adverse environmental and health effects caused by waste tyres. It has thus banned imports of retreaded tyres, except from its Mercosur partners Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay.

Picking up on this, the amicus briefs lay out a number of legal arguments claiming that the measures were indeed necessary, and therefore justifiable. One of the documents, submitted on 3 July, came from the Center for International Environmental Law and several Brazilian human rights and pollution control groups, including the Centre for Human Rights and the Environment (CEDHA). The other, dated 16 June, was sponsored by US-based animal rights organisation Humane Society International.

Whether the panel will take the briefs into consideration is uncertain. To date, WTO dispute authorities have maintained that they have the right to accept and consider amicus briefs, but no obligation to do so. Brazil is currently considering making the two briefs part of its submission in the case.

Meanwhile, Brazilian Environment Minister Marina Silva met with civil society representatives in Geneva on 7 July, following the first panel hearing. She suggested that an adverse ruling in the case could open the door for poor countries to become waste dumping spaces for rich ones. To avoid such a scenario, she said, the principle that waste should be managed in proximity to where it is used should be applied to retreaded tyres, even if they are not yet 'waste' per se.

The amicus briefs are available at http://www.hsus.org/web-files/PDF/Brazil-Retreaded-Tyres-Submission-of-Non-Party-Humane-Society-International.pdf and http://ciel.org/Publications/Brazil_Tires_Amicus_3Jul06.pdf.

The EU's submission, which has now also made public, is available at
http://trade-info.cec.eu.int/wtodispute/show.cfm?id=285&code=1.

ICTSD reporting.

WTO MEMBERS FORMALLY ADOPT AGREEMENT ON RTA TRANSPARENCY

WTO Members formally approved a new set of rules for examining each others' regional trade agreements (RTAs) at a 10 July meeting of the Negotiating Group on Rules. They had agreed to the deal in principle at the end of June (see BRIDGES Weekly, 5 July 2006).

The 'transparency mechanism' sets out a series of notification requirements for signatories of RTAs. Members are to inform the WTO of the pending conclusion of RTA negotiations and provide factual information on the agreement, such as its scope and implementation timetables. Individual Members will be required, for example, to outline the pact's rules of origin requirements, specific tariff concessions, and import data. One trade diplomat said that the transparency procedures would help Members establish a "clearer picture" of the rapidly-growing 'spaghetti bowl' of overlapping RTAs.

"This decision will help break the current logjam in the WTO on regional trade agreements," said Director-General Pascal Lamy following the adoption of the mechanism. "Hopefully this decision is a good omen for much needed progress in other areas of the talks, such as agriculture and industrial goods trade, where agreement is urgently needed."

The new mechanism will be implemented on a provisional basis. If necessary, Members will modify the decision and replace it with a permanent mechanism as part of the overall results of Doha round negotiations.

ICTSD reporting; "Lamy welcomes WTO agreement on regional trade agreements," WTO NEWS, 10 July 2006.