| |
India:ITCB - rich nations flouting textiles agreements |
|
2004-10-12
|
 |
The International Textiles and Clothing Bureau (ITCB) has expressed regret over the introduction and maintenance of certain measures by the US, European Union (EU) and Turkey disregarding the disciplines of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC).
ITCB comprises India, Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, Guatemala, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Macao, Maldives, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uruguay and Vietnam. ITCB made a submission at the recently-concluded meeting of the the Goods Council of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) which met to review ATC under which all remaining quota arrangements in the sector would be removed on January 1, 2005.
Led by India, the ITCB in its submission noted that during the ATC’s implementation the US substantially changed its rules of origin relating to the import of textile and clothing products, creating significant adverse effects on trade.
Textile quota phase outs product wise, have been effected as following in the respective countries:
• Of 937 textile and clothing products from WTO members for which US fixed quota, only 103 items have been phased out. These include 17 of Kenya and Mauritius, which were phases out recently. US would abolish 834 quotas, or 89% of total, in the end in one go.
• EU carried over 303 quotas, phased out 91, and
would abolish 212, or 70%, on January 1. US suspended 13 quotas in return for market access that it secured from 2 WTO members.
• Out of 368 quotas carried over by Canada, 76 has been phased out. It would abolish 292, or 79%, in the end.
• But Norway has abolished all 54 quotas (46 before end of 1997 and remaining 8 in early 2001).
Meantime, US also enlarged the scope of certain cotton made-up products under coverage.
Products that were exported under US Category 666 (other man-made fibre furnishings) now came to be classified and counted under Categories 360, 361 and 362 (cotton, pillowcases, cotton sheets and bedspreads respectively) in which a number of exporting members had high rates of quota utilization said ITCB.
In addition, EU introduced new restrictions in the territories of the newly acceding member states including the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, lithuania, Malta, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia. Curiously, these states did not apply any quota restrictions before their accession to the EU.
“The imposition of these quota by the EU is incompatible with article 2.4 of the ATC according to which no new restrictions in terms of products or members shall be introduced except under the provisions of the ATC or relevant GATT 1994 provisions,” India noted in its submission.
ITCB also objected to Turkey’s move to maintain restrictions, which these countries claimed, as inconsistent with its obligations and amounted to a disregard of the ATC’s disciplines.
Turkey’s move is also against various declarations and decisions of Ministers, especially as the dispute resolution panel and the appellate body ruled them to be unjustified. These changes by the US, EU and Turkey resulted in effective diminution of access (in enlarging the scope and incidence of relevant restrictions) in violation of ATC’s article 2.4 and causing disruption to established trade.
Moreover, ITCB strongly emphasised the need to recall the Doha Ministerial Decision that members should exercise care before initiating anti-dumping investigations on textile and clothing products previously under quota, and exercise close oversight of process until full and faithful implementation of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC).
“Unfortunately, the major developed countries to refuse to shoulder their responsibility resulting from the manner in which they chose to implement their commitment to phase out the quota regime, despite the fact that Ministers in Doha had pledged to reject the use of protectionism,” ITCB said.
Disappointment was also expressed by ITCB over the manner in which the major restraining members implemented their integration programme during the integration process, especially by postponing the elimination of bulk quota restrictions until the end of the implementation process and by not giving meaningful effect to ATC provisions with regard to special and biased treatment of small suppliers, least developed countries and cotton producing exporting countries. |
|
|
|
|
|
浙公網(wǎng)安33010602010414
