Panel established to review EU duties on imports of fatty acid from Indonesia

DS622: European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports of Fatty Acid from Indonesia

Indonesia submitted its second request for the establishment of a panel to review the European Union's imposition of anti-dumping duties on fatty acids from Indonesia.  The EU said it was not ready to accept Indonesia's first request for the panel at a DSB meeting on 25 November.  Indonesia reiterated its right to protect its national interests and urged the EU to bring its measures into conformity with WTO provisions.

The European Union said it regretted Indonesia's decision to submit its second request, stating it firmly believed the measures were justified, and that it was confident it would prevail in the dispute.  The EU also said it stands ready to preserve the availability of appeal review in this dispute through the Multi-party interim appeal arrangement (MPIA), a contingent measure to safeguard the right to appeal in the absence of a functioning Appellate Body. 

The DSB agreed to the establishment of the panel.  Brazil, Japan, Canada, Australia, China, the United States, the United Kingdom, Türkiye and the Russian Federation reserved their third party rights to participate in the proceedings.

Appellate Body appointments

Colombia, speaking on behalf of 130 members, introduced for the 82nd time the group's proposal to start the selection processes for filling vacancies on the Appellate Body. The extensive number of members submitting the proposal reflects a common interest in the functioning of the Appellate Body and, more generally, in the functioning of the WTO's dispute settlement system, Colombia said.

The United States once again said that it does not support the proposed decision. The US said it commended the substantial amount of work that has been undertaken on dispute settlement reform, but regretted that members did not seize this window of opportunity to bring about fundamental reform, which is a necessary starting point in the process to restore confidence and trust within the United States in the dispute settlement system.  The US said it has no confidence in the functioning of the old system of dispute settlement in light of unchecked overreach by the Appellate Body and subsequent panels, and that calls for the restoration of the Appellate Body undermine collective efforts for reform.

Twenty-four members then took the floor to comment. Many who spoke underlined the importance of having a two-tiered fully-functioning dispute settlement system and regretted that members were not able to fulfill the mandate set by ministers at the 12th and 13th Ministerial Conferences to deliver on this in 2024.  Many also welcomed the progress made in the reform discussions and thanked former Ambassador Usha Dwarka-Canabady of Mauritius for serving as facilitator for the formal discussions over the past six months. They also welcomed the proposal by the General Council Chair to initiate consultations with interested delegations early next year to hear views on how to build on progress made in a manner that would further advance dispute settlement reform work. 

Colombia said on behalf of the 130 members it regretted that for the 82nd occasion members have not been able to launch the selection processes. Ongoing conversations about reform of the dispute settlement system should not prevent the Appellate Body from continuing to operate fully, and members shall comply with their obligation under the Dispute Settlement Understanding to fill the vacancies as they arise, Colombia said for the group.

The DSB Chair, Ambassador Saqer Abdullah Almoqbel of Saudi Arabia, concluded by thanking former Ambassador Dwarka-Canabady as well as her co-convenors for “brilliantly steering” the dispute settlement reform technical discussions. This allowed work on the issues of appeal/review, accessibility and “works done thus far” to take shape and move forward, he said.  Their contributions, along with the hard work and dedication of member technical experts, have established a solid foundation and structure towards having a fully and well-functioning dispute settlement system accessible to all members, the Chair added.

Surveillance of implementation

Australia presented a status report regarding its implementation of the panel ruling in the case brought by China in DS603, “Australia — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain Products from China.”  Australia said that it provided members with a status report on 6 December on its implementation efforts and that on 9 December Australia's Minister for Industry and Science signed a notice declaring that the anti-dumping measures applying to deep drawn stainless steel sinks imported from China be revoked with effect from 25 June 2024.  With this, Australia has completed implementation of the ruling in the DS603 dispute, it said.

China said it welcomed Australia's action and that this case underscored the vital role of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism in helping members to resolve their trade disputes amicably and upholding the rules-based multilateral trading system in general.

The United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan”,  DS160, “United States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act”, DS464, “United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea”, and DS471, “United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China.”

The European Union presented a status report with regard to DS291, “EC — Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products.”

Indonesia presented its status reports in DS477 and DS478, “Indonesia — Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal Products.”

Other business

Malaysia said that it has been in discussions with the European Union on a reasonable period of time for the EU to implement the panel ruling in DS600, “European Union and certain Member states — Certain Measures Concerning Palm Oil and Oil Palm Crop-Based Biofuels.”  Malaysia said that it has agreed with the EU on a period of time for the EU to ensure compliance with the ruling and that the end date of the reasonable period of time would be communicated to members in due course.  The European Union noted that it was working with Malaysia to finalize the communication and will work towards resolving the dispute in line with the panel's conclusions.

Next meeting

The next regular DSB meeting will take place on 27 January 2025.

Share