Doha doc

1 | P a g e

Disclai

in any

sites da

e

imer: This

ways; it is

ata about

s docume

s just a co

t the even

ent does n

ompilatio

nt.

not expre

on of infor

ss our pe

rmation a

rsonal po

available f

oint of vie

from 50 p

ew

plus

2 | P a g e

World Trade Organization

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an international organization designed by its founders to

supervise and liberalize international trade. The organization officially commenced on January 1, 1995

under the Marrakech Agreement, replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which

commenced in 1947.

The World Trade Organization deals with regulation of trade between participating countries; it

provides a framework for negotiating and formalising trade agreements, and a dispute resolution

process aimed at enforcing participants' adherence to WTO agreements which are signed by

representatives of member governments and ratified by their parliaments. Most of the issues that the

WTO focuses on derive from previous trade negotiations, especially from the Uruguay Round (1986‐

1994).

The WTO's predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), was established after

World War II in the wake of other new multilateral institutions dedicated to international economic

cooperation ‐ notably the Bretton Woods institutions known as the World Bank and the International

Monetary Fund

The GATT was the only multilateral instrument governing international trade from 1948 until

the WTO was established in 1995.

Uruguay Round The Uruguay Round was the 8th round of multilateral trade negotiations (MTN) conducted

within the framework of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), spanning from 1986‐1994

and embracing 110 countries as “contracting parties”. The Round transformed the GATT into the World

Trade Organization.

The Round came into effect in 1995 and has been implemented over the period to 2000 (2004 in

the case of developing country contracting parties) under the administrative direction of the newly

created World Trade Organization (WTO). The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture, administered

by the WTO, brings agricultural trade more fully under the GATT. It provides for converting quantitative

restrictions to tariffs and for a phased reduction of tariffs. The agreement also imposes rules and

disciplines on agricultural export subsidies, domestic subsidies, and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS)

measures.

Goals The main objectives of the Uruguay Round were:

To reduce agricultural subsidies

To put restrictions on foreign investment, and

To begin the process of opening trade in services like banking and insurance.

3 | P a g e

They also wanted to draft a code to deal with copyright violation and other forms of

intellectual property rights.

History

The round was launched in Punta del Este, Uruguay in September 1986, followed by

negotiations in Montreal, Geneva, Brussels, Washington, D.C., and Tokyo, with the 20 agreements finally

being signed in Marrakech ‐ the Marrakesh Agreement ‐ in April 1994.

Background The 1982 Ministerial Declaration identified problems including structural deficiencies, spill‐over

impacts of certain countries' policies on world trade GATT could not manage. To address these issues,

the eighth GATT round (known as the Uruguay Round) was launched in September 1986, in Punta del

Este, Uruguay. It was the biggest negotiating mandate on trade ever agreed: the talks were going to

extend the trading system into several new areas, notably trade in services and intellectual property,

and to reform trade in the sensitive sectors of agriculture and textiles; all the original GATT articles were

up for review.

The round was supposed to end in December 1990, but the US and EU disagreed on how to

reform agricultural trade and decided to extend the talks. Finally, In November 1992, the US and EU

settled most of their differences in a deal known informally as "the Blair House accord", and on April 15,

1994, the deal was signed by ministers from most of the 123 participating governments at a meeting in

Marrakesh, Morocco. The agreement established the World Trade Organization, which came into being

upon its entry into force on January 1, 1995, to replace the GATT system. It is widely regarded as the

most profound institutional reform of the world trading system since the GATT's establishment.

Achievements

The GATT still exists as the WTO's umbrella treaty for trade in goods, updated as a result of the

Uruguay Round negotiations (a distinction is made between GATT 1994, the updated parts of GATT, and

GATT 1947, the original agreement which is still the heart of GATT 1994). The GATT 1994 is not however

the only legally binding agreement included in the Final Act; a long list of about 60 agreements, annexes,

decisions and understandings was adopted. In fact, the agreements fall into a simple structure with six

main parts:

An umbrella agreement (the Agreement Establishing the WTO);

Agreements for each of the three broad areas of trade that the WTO covers: goods and

investment (the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods including the GATT 1994

and the Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMS)), General Agreement on Trade in

4 | P a g e

Services (GATS), and Agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property

Rights (TRIPS);

Dispute settlement (DSU);

Agreement on Customs Valuation and

Reviews of governments' trade policies (TPRM).

Criticism Groups such as Oxfam have criticized the Uruguay Round for paying insufficient attention to the

special needs of developing countries. One aspect of this criticism is that figures very close to rich

country industries — such as former Cargill executive Dan Amstutz — had a major role in the drafting of

Uruguay Round language on agriculture and other matters. As with the WTO in general, Non‐

governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Health Gap and Global Trade Watch also criticize what was

negotiated in the Round on intellectual property and industrial tariffs as setting up too many constraints

on policy‐making and human needs.

After World War II, tariff and trade agreements were negotiated simultaneously by all interested parties through the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which ultimately resulted in the World Trade Organization in 1995.

Most favored nation

Benefits

Trade experts consider MFN clauses to have the following benefits:

A country that grants MFN on imports will have its imports provided by the most efficient

supplier. This may not be the case if tariffs differ by country.

MFN allows smaller countries, in particular, to participate in the advantages that larger

countries often grant to each other, whereas on their own, smaller countries would often not be

powerful enough to negotiate such advantages by themselves.

Granting MFN has domestic benefits: having one set of tariffs for all countries simplifies the

rules and makes them more transparent. It also lessens the frustrating problem of having to

establish rules of origin to determine which country a product (that may contain parts from all

over the world) must be attributed to for customs purposes.

MFN restrains domestic special interests from obtaining protectionist measures. For example,

butter producers in country A may not be able to lobby for high tariffs on butter to prevent

cheap imports from developing country B, because, as the higher tariffs would apply to every

country, the interests of A's principal ally C might get impaired.

As MFN clauses promote non‐discrimination among countries, they also tend to promote the

objective of free trade in general.

5 | P a g e

Specific countries' policies

MFN/NTR status for China, a non‐market economy, which had been originally

suspended in 1951, was restored in 1980 and was continued in effect through subsequent

annual Presidential extensions. Following the brutal suppression of pro‐democracy

demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989, however, the annual renewal of China’s MFN

status became a source of considerable debate in the Congress; and legislation was introduced

to terminate China’s MFN/NTR status or to impose additional conditions relating to

improvements in China’s actions on various trade and non‐trade issues. Agricultural interests

generally opposed attempts to block MFN /NTR renewal for China, contending that several

billion dollars annually in current and future U.S. agricultural exports could be jeopardized if that

country retaliated. In China’s case, Congress agreed to permanent normal trade relations (PNTR)

status in P.L. 106‐286, President Clinton signed into law on October 10, 2000.[2] PNTR paved the

way for China’s accession to the WTO in December 2000; it provides U.S. exporters of

agricultural products the opportunity to benefit from China’s WTO agreements to reduce trade

barriers and open its agricultural markets.

World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference of 1996 The World Trade Organizations’ Ministerial Conference of 1996 was held in Singapore on

December 9 ‐ December 13, 1996. The inaugural meeting for the organization, since its formation. The

event was hosted by the government of Singapore at the Singapore International Convention and

Exhibition Centre in Suntec City.

The conference established four permanent working groups:

Transparency in government procurement

Trade facilitation (customs issues)

Trade and investment

Trade and competition

These groups collectively are called the Singapore issues.

World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference of 1998 World Trade Organization was held in Geneva, Switzerland between 18 and 20 May 1998.

World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference of 2001 The Fourth Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization, also known as the WTO

Fourth Ministerial Conference, was held at the Sheraton Doha Hotel and Resort, Doha, Qatar from

6 | P a g e

November 9‐13, 2001. At this conference, ministers from all WTO members launched the Doha

Development Agenda.

At the conference, trade ministers agreed to undertake a new round of multilateral trade negotiations.

The ministers passed two declarations. The first, the main declaration folded the on‐going negotiations

in agriculture and services into a broader agenda, which is commonly known as the Doha Development

Round. In addition the Doha agenda included the topic of industrial tariffs, topics of interest to

developing countries, changes to WTO rules, and other provisions. The second declarations dealt with

the Agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and allow government

to be flexible of TRIPS to deal with health problems.

The meeting took place just two months after the World Trade Center attack. As a result, some

government officials called for greater political cohesion and saw the trade negotiations as a means

toward that end. Some officials thought that a new round of multilateral trade negotiations could help a

world economy weakened by recession and terrorism‐related uncertainty.

Ministerial Declaration The Doha Ministerial Declaration mandate for agriculture calls for comprehensive negotiations

aimed at substantial improvements in market access; reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms

of export subsidies; and substantial reductions in trade‐distorting domestic support. These topics —

domestic support, export subsidies, and market access — have become known as the three pillars of the

agricultural negotiations. The Declaration also provides that special and differential treatment for

developing countries would be an integral part of all elements of the negotiations. The Declaration took

note of non‐trade concerns reflected in negotiating proposals of various member countries and

confirmed that they would be taken into account in the negotiations. March 31, 2003 was set as the

deadline for reaching agreement on “modalities” (targets, formulas, timetables, etc.) for achieving the

mandated objectives, but that deadline was missed. During the rest of 2003, negotiations on modalities

continued in preparation for the fifth WTO Ministerial Conference held in Cancun, Mexico September

10‐14, 2003.

Intellectual property declaration The Doha Declaration on Public Health sought to alleviate developing country dissatisfaction

with aspects of the TRIPS regime. It delayed the implementation of patent system provisions for

pharmaceutical products for least developed countries (LDCs) until 2016. The declaration committed

member states to interpret and implement the agreement to support public health and to promote

access to medicines for all. The Declaration recognized certain “flexibilities” in the TRIPS agreement to

allow each member to grant compulsory licenses for pharmaceuticals and to determine what

constitutes a national emergency, expressly including public health emergencies such as HIV/AIDS,

malaria, and tuberculosis or other epidemics.

7 | P a g e

World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference of 1999 The WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999 was a meeting of the World Trade Organization,

convened at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center in Seattle, Washington, USA, over the

course of three days, beginning November 30, 1999. A week before the meeting, delegates admitted

failure to agree on the agenda and the presence of deep disagreements with developing countries.[1]

Intended as the launch of a new round of trade negotiations that would have been called "The

Millennial Round", the negotiations were marred by poor organization and controversial management

of large street protests.[2] Developing country representatives became resentful and uncooperative on

being excluded from talks as the United States and the European Union attempted to cement a mutual

deal on agriculture. The negotiations collapsed and were reconvened at Doha, Qatar, in November 2001.

The Doha venue enabled on‐site public protest to be excluded. Necessary agenda concessions were

made to include the interests of developing countries, which were learning how to form their own

powerful negotiating blocs. Thus, the current round is called the Doha Development Round.

Anti‐globalization activists made headlines around the world in 1999, when they forced the Seattle WTO

Ministerial Conference of 1999 to end early with direct action tactics. The goal that they had, shutting

down the meetings, was directly accomplished by placing their bodies and other debris between the

WTO delegates and the building they were meant to meet in. Activists also engaged in property

destruction as a direct way of stating their opposition to corporate culture.

Agreement on Agriculture

The Agreement on Agriculture is an international treaty of the World Trade Organization. It was

negotiated during the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and entered into

force with the establishment of the WTO on January 1, 1995.

8 | P a g e

DomestTh

every yea

small farm

while in th

subsidies

producers

Market

It

trade by W

1)

2)

Le

convert n

"ceiling" w

Export "E

reduce ex

2000.

e

tic supporhe AoA's dom

r on agricultu

mers but, acco

he US 70% of

is to flood glo

s in poor coun

t access

is the second

WTO membe

) 36% avera

15% over s

) 24% avera

10% over t

east Develope

on–tariff bar

which could n

subsidies Export subsid

xport subsidie

Gree

fixed paymenfor environm

rt mestic suppor

ural subsidies

ording to the

f subsidies go

obal markets

ntries – a pra

d pillar of the

r‐states. The

ge reduction

six years.

ge reduction

ten years.

ed Countries

riers to tariffs

not be increas

dies" is the thi

es by at least

en Box

nts to producers ental programs

rt system curr

s alone. "It is o

World Bank,

to 10% of pr

with below‐c

ctice known a

e AoA, and ref

1995 AoA req

by develope

by developin

(LDCs) were

s—a process

sed in future.

ird pillar of th

35% (by valu

Domes

(su

Am

domesticgovernmentreduce bu

rently allows

often still arg

more than h

oducers, mai

cost commod

as dumping.

fers to the red

quired tariff r

d countries, w

ng countries w

exempted fro

called tariffic

he AoA. The 1

e) or by at lea

stic support

ubsidies)

mber Box

subsidies that ts have agreed to ut not eliminate

Europe and t

gued that sub

alf of EU sup

nly agri‐busin

dities, depress

duction of ta

reductions of

with a minim

with a minimu

om tariff redu

cation—or "bi

1995 AoA req

ast 21% (by v

AoA Agreem

B

subsidieincreased w

as paymeproduction

Ma

the USA to sp

sidies are nee

port goes to 1

nesses." .The

sing prices an

riff (or non‐ta

:

um per tariff

um per tariff

uctions, but e

ind" their tari

uired develop

olume) over t

ment on agriculture

Blue Box

es which can be without limit, so long ents are linked to n‐limiting programs

rket Access

end $380 bill

eded to prote

1% of produc

effect of thes

nd undercutti

ariff) barriers

line reductio

line reductio

either had to

iffs, creating

ped countries

the five years

Ex

lion

ect

cers

se

ng

to

n of

n of

a

s to

s to

port subsidies

9 | P a g e

Criticism The AoA has been criticized by civil society groups for reducing tariff protections for small

farmers – a key source of income for developing countries. At the same time, the AoA has allowed rich

countries to continue paying their farmers massive subsidies which developing countries cannot afford.

General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)

The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) is a treaty of the World Trade Organization

(WTO) that entered into force in January 1995 as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations. The treaty

was created to extend the multilateral trading system to service sector, in the same way the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provides such a system for merchandise trade.

Historical background Before the WTO's Uruguay Round negotiations began in 1986, public services such as healthcare, postal

services, education, etc. were not included in international trade agreements. Most such services have

traditionally been classed as domestic activities, difficult to trade across borders, notwithstanding the

fact that for example educational services have been "exported" for as long as universities have been

open to international students.

However there are many sectors like maritime transport and international finance are open to across

economy since quite a long period of time. Also educational sector is open to all the people since

inception of universities.

While the overall goal of the GATS is to remove barriers to trade, members are free to choose which

sectors are to be progressively liberalized, under which mode of supply a particular sector would be

covered under, and to what extent to which liberalization will occur over a given period of time.

Criteria Supplier Presence

Mode 1: Cross‐

border supply

Service delivered within the territory of the Member, from

the territory of another Member Service supplier not

present within the

territory of the

member

Mode 2:

Consumption

abroad

Service delivered outside the territory of the Member, in

the territory of another Member, to a service consumer of

the Member

10 | P a g e

Mode 3:

Commercial

presence

Service delivered within the territory of the Member,

through the commercial presence of the supplier

Service supplier

present within the

territory of the

Member

Criticisms The GATS document has been criticized for tending to substitute the authority of national

legislation and judiciary with that of a GATS Disputes Panel conducting closed hearings. WTO member‐

government spokespersons are obliged to dismiss such criticism because of prior commitment to

perceived benefits of prevailing commercial principles of competition and 'liberalization'.

While national governments have an option to exclude any specific service from liberalization under the

GATS, they are also under international pressure, from business interests, to refrain from so excluding

any service "provided on a commercial basis". However, important public utilities including water and

electricity supply most commonly involve purchase by consumers and are thus demonstrably "provided

on a commercial basis". The same may be said of many health and education services which are sought

to be 'exported' by some countries as profitable industries.

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

Agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights The Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an

international agreement administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that sets down minimum

standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation as applied to nationals of other WTO

Members. It was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and

Trade (GATT) in 1994.

Specifically, TRIPS contains requirements that nations' laws must meet for: copyright rights,

including the rights of performers, producers of sound recordings and broadcasting organizations;

geographical indications, including appellations of origin; industrial designs; integrated circuit layout‐

designs; patents; monopolies for the developers of new plant varieties; trademarks; trade dress; and

undisclosed or confidential information. TRIPS also specify enforcement procedures, remedies, and

dispute resolution procedures. Protection and enforcement of all intellectual property rights shall meet

the objectives to contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and

dissemination of technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological

knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare, and to a balance of rights and

obligations.

11 | P a g e

The TRIPS agreement introduced intellectual property law into the international trading system

for the first time and remains the most comprehensive international agreement on intellectual property

to date. In 2001, developing countries, concerned that developed countries were insisting on an overly

narrow reading of TRIPS, initiated a round of talks that resulted in the Doha Declaration. The Doha

declaration is a WTO statement that clarifies the scope of TRIPS, stating for example that TRIPS can and

should be interpreted in light of the goal "to promote access to medicines for all."

The requirements of TRIPS

Copyright terms must extend to 50 years after the death of the author, although films and

photographs are only required to have fixed 50 and to be at least 25 year terms,

respectively.(Art. 7(2),(4))

Copyright must be granted automatically, and not based upon any "formality", such as

registrations or systems of renewal.

Computer programs must be regarded as "literary works" under copyright law and receive the

same terms of protection.

National exceptions to copyright (such as "fair use" in the United States) are constrained by the

Berne three‐step test

Patents must be granted in all "fields of technology," although exceptions for certain public

interests are allowed (Art. 27.2 and 27.3)[2] and must be enforceable for at least 20 years (Art

33).

Exceptions to the exclusive rights must be limited, provided that a normal exploitation of the

work (Art. 13) and normal exploitation of the patent (Art 30) is not in conflict.

No unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of the right holders of computer programs

and patents is allowed.

Legitimate interests of third parties have to be taken into account by patent rights (Art 30).

In each state, intellectual property laws may not offer any benefits to local citizens which are

not available to citizens of other TRIPs signatories by the principles of national treatment (with

certain limited exceptions, Art. 3 and 5)[3]. A TRIP also has a most favored nation clause.

Access to essential medicines The most visible conflict has been over AIDS drugs in Africa. Despite the role which patents

have played in maintaining higher drug costs for public health programs across Africa, this

controversy has not led to a revision of TRIPs. Instead, an interpretive statement, the Doha

Declaration, was issued in November 2001, which indicated that TRIPs should not prevent states

from dealing with public health crises. After Doha, PhRMA, the United States and to a lesser

extent other developed nations began working to minimize the effect of the declaration.

A 2003 agreement loosened the domestic market requirement, and allows developing countries

to export to other countries where there is a national health problem as long as drugs exported

12 | P a g e

are not part of a commercial or industrial policy.[4] Drugs exported under such a regime may be

packaged or colored differently to prevent them from prejudicing markets in the developed

world.

In 2003, the Bush administration also changed its position, concluding that generic treatments

might in fact be a component of an effective strategy to combat HIV. Bush created the PEPFAR

program, which received $15 billion from 2003‐2007, and was reauthorized in 2007 for $30

billion over the next five years. Despite wavering on the issue of compulsory licensing, PEPFAR

began to distribute generic drugs in 2004‐5.

Software and business method patents

Controversy Since TRIPS came into force it has received a growing level of criticism from developing

countries, academics, and Non‐governmental organizations. Some of this criticism is against the

WTO as a whole, but many advocates of trade liberalization also regard TRIPS as bad policy (see,

for example, Jagdish Bhagwati's In Defense of Globalization for a discussion on the detrimental

effect of TRIPS on access to medicines in developing countries). TRIPS' wealth redistribution

effects (moving money from people in developing countries to copyright and patent owners in

developed countries) and its imposition of artificial scarcity on the citizens of countries that

would otherwise have had weaker intellectual property laws, are a common basis for such

criticisms.

Agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures The Agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) are rules that apply to the

domestic regulations a country applies to foreign investors, often as part of an industrial policy. The

agreement was agreed upon by all members of the World Trade Organization. Policies such as local

content requirements and trade balancing rules that have traditionally been used to both promote the

interests of domestic industries and combat restrictive business practices are now banned. Trade

Related Investment Measures is the name of one of the four principal legal agreements of the WTO

trade treaty. TRIMs are rules, which restrict preference of domestic firms and thereby enable

international firms to operate more easily within foreign markets

Overview of Rules

(1) Trade‐Related Investment Measures:

In the late 1980s, there was a significant increase in foreign direct investment throughout the

world. However, some of the countries receiving foreign investment imposed numerous

restrictions on that investment designed to protect and foster domestic industries, and to

prevent the outflow of foreign exchange reserves. Examples of these restrictions include local

content requirements (which require that locally‐produced goods be purchased or used),

13 | P a g e

manufacturing requirements (which require the domestic manufacturing of certain

components), trade balancing requirements, domestic sales requirements, technology transfer

requirements, export performance requirements (which require the export of a specified

percentage of production volume), local equity restrictions, foreign exchange restrictions,

remittance restrictions, licensing requirements, and employment restrictions. These measures

can also be used in connection with fiscal incentives as opposed to requirement. Some of these

investment measures distort trade in violation of GATT Article III and XI, and are therefore

prohibited. Until the completion of the Uruguay Round negotiations, which produced a well‐

rounded Agreement on Trade‐Related Investment Measures (hereinafter the "TRIMs

Agreement"), the few international agreements providing disciplines for measures restricting

foreign investment provided only limited guidance in terms of content and country coverage.

The OECD Code on Liberalization of Capital Movements, for example, requires members to

liberalize restrictions on direct investment in a broad range of areas. The OECD Code's efficacy,

however, is limited by the numerous reservations made by each of the members. In addition,

there are other international treaties, bilateral and multilateral, under which signatories extend

most‐favored‐nation treatment to direct investment. Only a few such treaties, however, provide

national treatment for direct investment. Moreover, although the APEC Investment Principles

adopted in November 1994 provide rules for investment as a whole, including non‐

discrimination and national treatment, they have no binding force.

2) Legal Framework:

GATT 1947 prohibited investment measures that violated the principles of national treatment

and the general elimination of quantitative restrictions, but the extent of the prohibitions was

never clear. The TRIMs Agreement, however, contains statements prohibiting any TRIMs that

are inconsistent with the provisions of Articles III or XI of GATT 1994. In addition, it provides an

illustrative list that explicitly prohibits local content requirements, trade balancing

requirements, foreign exchange restrictions and export restrictions (domestic sales

requirements) that would violate Article III:4 or XI:1 of GATT 1994. TRIMs prohibited by the

Agreement include those which are mandatory or enforceable under domestic law or

administrative rulings, or those with which compliance is necessary to obtain an advantage

(such as subsidies or tax breaks).

Glossary

1) Market access

Market access for goods in the WTO means the conditions, tariff and non‐tariff

measures, agreed by members for the entry of specific goods into their markets. Tariff

commitments for goods are set out in each member's schedules of concessions on

goods. The schedules represent commitments not to apply tariffs above the listed rates

— these rates are “bound”. Non‐tariff measures are dealt with under specific WTO

agreements. WTO Members seek to continually improve market access through the

14 | P a g e

regular WTO work program me and through negotiations such as those launched at the

Doha Ministerial Conference in November 2001.

2) Customs Valuation: It is the process where customs authorities assign a monetary value to a good or service for the purposes of import or export. The Agreement was negotiated during the Tokyo Round, but at that time its acceptance was voluntary. Adherence to the Agreement became mandatory as part of membership in the WTO subsequent to the Uruguay Round.

3) Dumping:

A standard technical definition of dumping is the act of charging a lower price for a good in a

foreign market than one charge for the same good in a domestic market. This is often

referred to as selling at less than "fair value." Under the World Trade Organization (WTO)

Agreement, dumping is condemned (but is not prohibited) if it causes or threatens to cause

material injury to a domestic industry in the importing country. If the domestic industry is

able to establish that it is being injured by the dumping, then antidumping duties are

imposed on goods imported from the dumpers' country at a percentage rate calculated to

counteract the dumping margin.

4) Most favored nation:

Most favored nation (MFN) is a status or level treatment accorded by one state to

another in international trade. The term means the country which is the recipient of this

treatment must, nominally, receive equal trade advantages as the "most favored nation" by the

country granting such treatment. (Trade advantages include low tariffs or high import quotas.)

In effect, a country that has been accorded MFN status may not be treated less advantageously

than any other country with MFN status by the promising country. Most favored nation

relationships contrast with reciprocal bilateral relationships, since in reciprocal relationships a

particular privilege granted by one party only extends to other parties who reciprocate that

privilege, rather than to all parties with which it has a most favored nation agreement

5) Everything but Arms: Everything But Arms (EBA) is an initiative of the European Union under

which all imports to the EU from the Least Developed Countries are duty free and quota free,

with the exception of armaments. EBA entered into force on 5 March 2001. There are

transitional arrangements for bananas, sugar and rice until January 2006, July 2009 and

September 2009 respectively. It should be added the EBA is part of the EU GSP and therefore

the legal text can be found in the GSP regulation. Although the EBA program provides for duty

free imports from Least Developed Countries the Rules of Origin, especially pertaining to

apparel, severely inhibit imports because all phases of production do not occur within Least

Developed Countries. The aim of the scheme is to encourage the development of the world's

poorest countries.

15 | P a g e

6) National treatment:

It is a principle in customary international law vital to many treaty regimes. It essentially

means treating foreigners and locals equally. Under national treatment, if a state grants a

particular right, benefit or privilege to its own citizens, it must also grant those advantages to

the citizens of other states while they are in that country. In the context of international

agreements, a state must provide equal treatment to those citizens of other states that are

participating in the agreement. Imported and locally‐produced goods should be treated equally

— at least after the foreign goods have entered the market

7) Unilateralism:

It is any doctrine or agenda that supports one‐sided action. Such action may be in

disregard for other parties, or as an expression of a commitment toward a direction which other

parties may find agreeable. Unilateralism is a neologism, (used in all countries) coined to be an

antonym for multilateralism —the doctrine which asserts the benefits of participation from as

many parties as possible.

8) The International Monetary Fund (IMF):

It is the international organization that oversees the global financial system by following

the macroeconomic policies of its member countries; in particular those with an impact on

exchange rate and the balance of payments. It is an organization formed with a stated objective

of stabilizing international exchange rates and facilitating development. It also offers highly

leveraged loans, mainly to poorer countries. Its headquarters are in Washington, D.C., United

States.

9) World Bank is a term used to describe an international financial institution that

provides leveraged loans to developing countries for capital programs. The World Bank has a

stated goal of reducing poverty. The World Bank differs from the World Bank Group, in that the

World Bank comprises only two institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and

Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA), whereas the latter

incorporates these two in addition to three more International Finance

Corporation (IFC), Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), and International Centre

for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

10)

16 | P a g e

Sources

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement_on_Agriculture

2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Trade_in_Services

3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customs_valuation#Agreement_on_Implementation_of_Article_VI

I_of_GATT

4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)

5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement_on_Trade‐

Related_Aspects_of_Intellectual_Property_Rights

6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTO_Ministerial_Conference_of_1998




10) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_favoured_nation

11) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguay_Round

12) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_But_Arms

13) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_treatment

14) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unilateralism

15) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Related_Investment_Measures

16) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund

17) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank

Doha doc

Documents

Transcript of Doha doc