WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/W/413
11 October 2000
(00-4182)
General Council
GENERAL COUNCIL INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS ON EXTERNAL TRANSPARENCY
OCTOBER 2000
Submission from the United States
The following communication, dated 10 October 2000, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
The United States welcomes continued attention to the issue of transparency and looks
forward to consultations planned by the Chairman to make tangible progress in this area.  This
contribution supplements earlier submissions of the United States1. Earlier discussions in the General
Council have addressed communication among Members (“internal transparency”) and have resulted
in improvements to our daily working environment.   We believe that similar efforts are needed to
improve communications between the WTO and the public (“external transparency”), given the
increasing importance that trade and trade agreements play in the global economy and the
commitment to sustainable development.  Such efforts are essential to ensuring public understanding
and support of the WTO’s work.   Advances in external transparency will also help internal
transparency, particularly for Members with smaller delegations in Geneva.  Progress in this area is
clearly needed and can be accomplished while preserving the government-to-government character of
the WTO, an institution driven by its Members.
The United States intends to work constructively with the Chairman and other WTO
Members to build a consensus to improve external transparency.  U.S. comments here are focused in
two areas:  first, ways to enhance timely access to information about the WTO at the national level
and by Members acting collectively;  and second, important mechanisms to ensure the credibility ofthe dispute settlement system.  These include:
- sharing respective Member experiences of efforts to exchange information and views on
developments in the WTO at the national level;
- further building upon the good work of the WTO Secretariat in developing the WTO website;
- begin opening the various WTO council and committee meetings on an experimental basis,
including webcasting at least some meetings of the Trade Policy Review Body;
                                                     
1 In particular, see Communication from the United States concerning Preparations for the 1999
Ministerial Conference (WT/GC/W/139, 27 January 1999), page 5.  Most recently, see Letter of Ambassador
Rita Hayes to Ambassador Kare Bryn, Chairman, General Council, March 22, 2000.WT/GC/W/413
Page 2
- building upon previous efforts to strengthen the 1996 Derestriction Decision, so that Members
may consider experience to date and, as soon as possible, ensure that  WTO documents that
are most informative of WTO activities are circulated on an unrestricted  basis or derestricted
more quickly;
- strengthening the 1996 Guidelines on relations with non-governmental organizations,
undertaking a regular program of seminars and symposia, and considering the outreach
practices of other international organizations, to the extent they may be relevant; and
- in the dispute settlement area,  ensuring that all parties’ submissions to panels and the
Appellate Body are made available to the public, developing a mechanism to permit
non-governmental stakeholders to present their views on disputes, and permitting the publicto observe WTO panel and appellate proceedings.
I. Access to Information About the WTO
A. National Activity
In the 1996 Guidelines for Arrangements on Relations with Non-Governmental
Organizations
2, Members recognized that closer consultations and cooperation with the public can be
met constructively through “appropriate processes at the national level where lies primary
responsibility for taking into account the different elements of public interest which are brought  tobear on trade policy-making.”  While more external transparency in Geneva is essential, many
delegations have stressed the importance of efforts at the national level.  We share the view that more
can and should be done to enhance dialogue at the national level, along with additional collective
action by WTO Members.
The U.S. Government employs both informal and formal consultation processes to inform its
policies with respect to the WTO.  This year, for example, the U.S. Government twice solicited public
comment in order to develop U.S. positions in th e WTO, the first time with respect to the built-in
agenda and the negotiations on services and agriculture, and the second with respect to institutional
issues in the WTO, particularly the issues of transparency and outreach.  The requests were published
in the Federal Register  and also circulated through our formal private sector advisory committees
established under the Trade Act of 1974.  These supplemented the normal U.S. practice of requestingpublic comment to prepare U.S. positions in WTO dispute settlement proceedings.  Every time that
the United States submits or receives a request for consultations pursuant to the WTO Dispute
Settlement Understanding, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) solicits comment from
the public regarding the matters in dispute.  Submissions from the public in connection with all public
comment procedures are made available in USTR’s public reading room.  USTR also recentlyexpanded its website, with links to the WTO.  The Uruguay Round Agreements Act, the U.S.
implementing legislation for the Uruguay Round, mandated several other requirements, including
annual reports on the major activities and work programs of the WTO.  These are only some examples
of activities at the national level to increase public understanding of the WTO and ensure that views
of interested members of the public are taken into account.
Broad-based domestic discussions of developments in the WTO and the responsibilities
flowing from membership can help deepen understanding of the organization.  This year, pursuant to
Section 125 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, the President was required to report to the U.S.
Congress on the operation of the WTO over the first five years.  The U.S. Congress then undertook astatutory five-year review of U.S. experience in the WTO.   The result was an overwhelming vote of
                                                     
2 Decision adopted by the General Council on 18 July 1996 ( WT/L/162) (“1996 Guidelines”).WT/GC/W/413
Page 3
support for the continued participation of the United  States in the rules-based multilateral trading
system.  However, the area most singled out for criticism was the lack of transparency in the WTO’s
operations, particularly dispute settlement, and there was a serious concern that failure to address it
would further erode public support for the inst itution.  Accordingly, Congress urged the
Administration to seek further transparency in the WTO and improve public outreach.
While there is no one-size-fits-all approach to consultation at the national level, all Members
could benefit from an exchange of information on national experiences and approaches.  Clearly there
is a growing public interest in the work of the WTO,  and such a sharing of information will be useful
to Members in reflecting on how best to respond.  Accordingly, the United States recommends that
Members be invited to provide information on their respective approaches to providing their public
with information and opportunity for input on deve lopments in the trading system.  We note that a
number of accession applicants have found it useful  to develop national websites focusing on their
work to join the WTO.  Sharing information  in Geneva about respective national experiences should
facilitate work at the national level, particularly in providing useful information to small and
medium-sized enterprises about trade opportunities and issues of interest in the trade area.
B. WTO  Information on Agreements and Ongoing Activities
The WTO made important strides in 1996 when Members improved the process for
derestricting some WTO documents after specified time periods3 and recognized the importance of
contacts with non-governmental organizations4.  The process initiated by Singapore to advance
outreach in preparation for the WTO’s first ministerial was an important contribution to WTO
Members’ collective interaction and outreach efforts with the NGO community.
Subsequent meetings have shown the value of outreach efforts in broadening and informing
the debate about the value of the WTO.  The Secretariat has done excellent work in disseminating
information about the WTO, briefing non-governmental organizations on the WTO’s activities and
informing Members when documents are received from NGOs.  The WTO has also undertaken a
series of seminars and outreach programs designed to examine issues on trade and the environment,
development, electronic commerce and trade facilitat ion, to name only a few.  Nonetheless, providing
timely information about WTO activities to interested members of the public, including small and
medium-sized enterprises, remains a challenge.  The following are some further immediate steps that
could be taken to meet these challenges in the short term.
Continued Improvements in the WTO Website
We commend the Secretariat for the high quality of the WTO website and the staff’s ongoing
efforts at further improvement.  We see this as a continuing activity to which WTO Members cancontribute.  The use of electronic means to provide information on issues and developments in the
WTO is critical, particularly to the newly emerging economies and the development of small and
medium-sized enterprises around the world.
Various WTO documents provide important information about the trade regimes of different
Members, and should be of interest to traders around the world.  Many are not readily accessed
through the WTO website, however.  The TPRM reports are currently published as books;  making
their executive summaries available on the WTO website would help their dissemination.   Moreover,
                                                     
3 Procedures for the Circulation and Derestriction of WTO Documents (Decision adopted by the
General Council on 18 July 1996) (WT/L/160/Rev.1) (“Derestriction Decision”).
4 1996 Guidelines (WT/L/162).WT/GC/W/413
Page 4
to the extent the WTO website does include unrestricted documents on its website, the ease of use
could be improved.  For example, while the document dissemination facility includes notifications of
national legislation or regulations, only those aware of notification requirements in the WTO
Agreements will encounter them easily.    Improved mechanisms to locate and access such documents
would do much to assist small and medium-sized enterprises interested in market accessopportunities.
With the same purpose in mind – assistance to small and medium-sized enterprises – the
website could also be structured so as to expand the array of information on individual Members’
trade regimes (including the bound and applied customs duties for a given product, trade data and the
trade agreements to which they are party).  This kind of information is critical to traders around the
world.  We recognize that some of this information is not currently readily available, but at aminimum, the website could provide directories for obtaining information from Member governments
or provide hyperlinks to Members’ own national websites.
Written Communications from WTO Members and the Secretariat
While the Internet and the WTO’s website have accelerated access to unrestricted documents,
as a practical matter, many documents pertaining to the WTO’s core activities are not made available
to the public in a timely manner.  The WTO’s document policy falls short of what is needed to ensure
that the work of the WTO is fully understood – and appreciated.  Moreover, excessive restriction of
access to WTO documents impairs the ability of Members to consult broadly at the national level.
The General Council agreement to review the potential for improving our 1996 Derestriction
Decision permits us to proceed promptly, picking up from  efforts over the last year to strengthen the
1996 Derestriction Decision.  A great deal of progress has been made, and it is now time to  bring this
review to a successful conclusion.  It should be possible for Members  to agree, at a minimum, on thefollowing changes in current practices.
- Minutes of all formal council and committee meetings should be derestricted much more
quickly than under the current practice which provides for consideration of derestriction only
after 6 months.
- Secretariat background notes, which provide factual information that is important to
understanding issues being considered in the various WTO councils and committees, should
normally be issued as non-restricted documents.   These papers are often critical to obtaining
helpful input in consultations with domestic c onstituencies in preparation for WTO meetings.
- Dispute settlement panel reports should be made available to the public on a much more
timely basis.
Open Meetings of WTO Bodies
The United States suggests that the General Council explore the convening of some of the
WTO council and committee meetings as open to observers,  just as the plenary sessions of the
Ministerial Conference have been opened to observers.  This can readily be accommodated while
preserving the government-to-government character of the WTO.  It may be helpful, as suggested by
some other delegations, to have annual meetings of  WTO bodies to which non-governmental
organizations are invited, and to which they may make written submissions to contribute or respond tothe WTO Body’s analytical work.  The United States urges the General Council to consider which
council and committee meetings would lend themselves to more open practices on an experimental
basis.WT/GC/W/413
Page 5
Perhaps no WTO meetings reveal more of the central mission of the WTO than those of the
Trade Policy Review Body.  The WTO has already recognized the importance to the public of the
Trade Policy Review Mechanism.  The final TPRM reports of both the government being reviewed
and the WTO Secretariat are currently published in book form, and even the 1996 Derestriction
Decision designated the minutes of the Trade Policy Review Body as unrestricted5.  Neither these
reports, however, nor the TPRB minutes, do full justice to the comprehensive and constructive
interaction that takes place among the WTO Members in the exchange of views on a Member’s trade
policies within the framework of the numerous disciplines of the WTO Agreements.  The United
States very much supports Canada’s suggestion that the General Council consider opening Trade
Policy Review meetings as a general rule or at the initiative of the Member being reviewed.  We
welcome the suggestion that we explore use of webcasting these meetings.
Outreach on Current Developments
The General Council should consider how to strengthen the 1996 Guidelines for
Arrangements on Relations with Non-Governmental  Organizations, consistent with the WTO’s
government-to-government character.  It is important that the WTO build upon experience to date andconsider a variety of approaches.  This could include greater use of the Internet, to reach small and
medium-sized enterprises, and conducting regular symposia involving Members and interested
members of the public, covering a broad range of subject matters relevant to the work of the WTO.
The WTO should also consider establishing more formal channels of communication between the
WTO and non-governmental organizations.
In considering how to strengthen the 1996 Guidelines, some comparative perspectives may be
helpful.  Aside from reviewing the WTO’s own experience to date, Members may wish to consider
the practices of other international organizations for guidance, where they may be relevant.  Other
organizations have a variety of experiences in their approach to outreach.  We recommend that theSecretariat survey these organizations so that Memb ers may engage in a more informed discussion of
the merits and drawbacks of various approaches to outreach.  In addition, as mentioned above, in line
with the 1996 Guidelines, which highlight the importance of consultative processes at the national
level, it may be useful for Members to exchange information on, and discuss, their experiences with
such processes and the approaches they have found most helpful.
II.  Dispute  Settlement
During formal and informal discussions among delegations regarding reform of the WTO
dispute settlement procedures, the United States has advanced several proposals to improve the
transparency of the dispute settlement process.
The WTO dispute settlement procedures should ensure that all parties’ submissions to panels
and the Appellate Body are made available to the public, include a mechanism to permit
non-governmental stakeholders to present their written views on disputes, and permit the public to
observe WTO panel and appellate proceedings.  The United States has repeatedly proposed that WTO
panels and the WTO Appellate Body allow interested persons, on a first-come, first-served basis, toattend their meetings with the parties and listen while the parties make their presentations.  This could
also be accomplished through alternatives such as audio and video taping and webcasting.
                                                     
5 See also, Appraisal of the Operation of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism
(WT/MIN/(99)/2), paras.  4 and 13.WT/GC/W/413
Page 6
International bodies such as the International Court of Justice and the European Court of
Justice have open hearings for government-to-government disputes.  National courts also have open
hearings.  In each case, the court has rules that create and reinforce an atmosphere of decorum and
seriousness.  WTO panels could do the same.  The core caseload of the International Court of Justice
consists of matters that are essentially government-to-government in nature:  maritime and landboundaries, rights under treaties, and similar disputes about the rights and obligations of governments.
The oral phase of ICJ proceedings takes place in open court in the Hague, and the fact that any
interested party can attend has presented no interference with the government-to-government nature
of the disputes the ICJ handles.
Greater openness in WTO dispute settlement proceedings would also benefit smaller
Members and Members that are not frequently parties to disputes, because they could send theirdelegations to observe any dispute and gain knowledge about the particular dispute and know-how
about the dispute settlement process.  All WTO Members, as well as the general public, should have
this opportunity.
Increased transparency of the dispute settlement process is critical to the future of the WTO.
If WTO dispute settlement proceedings are to play the role of ultimate guarantor of the system, they
must be open to observation by the public, and open to receiving input from the public.  Openness of
this sort is essential to ensuring public support for the legitimacy of WTO dispute settlement.  As the
WTO takes on more complex and controversial cases, there is an ever-increasing need for such
transparency.  The lack of openness and public access to WTO dispute settlement makes it harder –not easier –  to settle disputes between WTO Members.
__________