In principle, those commitments would comply with WTO non-discrimination rules (“most-favoured nation”), meaning they would apply to service suppliers from all WTO members, including free-riding non-participants.
Members’ individual commitments are drafted according to a “reference paper” released yesterday.
That reference paper will probably not be legally binding (wait for tomorrow’s announcement), but the “schedules” of commitments will be, when certified
WTO agreements have 2 parts: general “rules” + members’ specific commitments (“schedules”), attached to the rules.
WTO members already have commitments attached to the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). These new commitments would be added to the existing ones.
4/5
Participants in this deal on domestic services regulation were ready to announce it at the now-postponed WTO Ministerial Conference.
So, it’s done, and they didn’t even need to do it at a WTO ministerial conference
(Is it 67 or 68 members? Depends on how you count the EU. EU+27 member states = 28 WTO members. But for obscure legal reasons, the EU wants to be counted as 27.)
Confirmed, it's an urgent informal meeting of the WTO General Council at 9.30 (in about 14 minutes) to discuss the deteriorating health situation, travel restrctions and possible alternative arrangements for the Ministerial Conference
1. The two strands of WTO work on trade and the pandemic are not mutually exclusive. The letter says ditch one in favour of the other. That’s not what most developing countries want
1. Trade-distorting domestic support—go for a numerical target or try to agree on words; a timetable for reducing the support; special treatment for developing countries.
So rules on amendments apply—WTO Agreement, Art.10, Par.3:
“Amendments … shall take effect for the Members that have accepted them upon acceptance by two thirds of the Members and thereafter for each other Member upon acceptance by it.”