Compte rendu ‒ Conseil des ADPIC ‒ Afficher les détails de l'intervention/la déclaration

Mr. S. Harbinson (Hong Kong)
Union européenne
B.2.i Procedures for giving effect to the obligation to notify implementing legislation under Article 63.2
21. The representative of the European Communities supported the suggestions made by the Chairman. However, he wished to flag one substantive issue. As suggested in paragraph 2.2 of the paper, any subsequent amendments of a Member's laws and regulations should be notified without delay after their promulgation, while in paragraph 2.1 the general principle had been reflected that the obligation to notify would only start when the corresponding substantive obligation kicked in. This meant that for those countries which would avail themselves of the additional transitional period of four years there would only be a notification obligation after the expiration of that period. Paragraph 2.2 could therefore imply, as it was drafted, that future changes in legislation in those countries would only have to be notified after the lapse of this additional period of four years, with the obvious exception of notifications relating to obligations on national and m.f.n. treatment which would enter into effect on 1 January 1996. He did not consider that satisfactory, since there was an obligation that had already entered into force, Article 65.5, which laid down the general rule that changes in legislation should not result in a lesser degree of consistency with the provisions of the Agreement. Common sense should lead to the conclusion that this implied that any changes in legislation after 1 January 1995 by any Member of the WTO should be notified. Otherwise it would be very difficult for other Members to examine whether others had acted in conformity with their obligations under Article 65.5.