Trade Facilitation Agreement

The book focuses on special and differential treatment (SDT) of developing countries in the World Trade Organisation. It is carefully researched, draws on a breadth of literature and legal analysis, and presents an original argument on for reforming the system of differentiation within the World Trade Organization (WTO). What Aniekan Ukpe calls a 'differentiated differentiation' approach seeks to resolve contentious and deadlocked debates about the rights and obligations of developing country members. It is on this original approach that the rich historical, ideational and legal analysis of the early chapters of the book builds. The proposed evidence-based and case-by-case system adds a new perspective to academic debates on differential treatment. It has real potential to contribute to ongoing debates in the WTO on reforming differentiation among its members.

One of the longest running debates at the World Trade Organization (WTO) is how to best account for and address the unique needs of developing countries as they become integrated into the world trading system. This has raised a broad range of questions centering around three key issues— what are the specific needs of developing countries, what flexibilities are required to help members meet their commitments, and what support can be given to build capacity where it is needed most? But underlying these considerations that helped frame individual discussions was always the bigger question of whether the approach to special and differential treatment (SDT) was sufficient to account for the diversity of the organization’s membership.

WTO Members have discussed WTO reform since the collapse of the WTO Appellate Body (AB) in 2019, which was caused mainly by the US opposition to appointing new AB members. The US attacked the AB for its performance and its interpretation of WTO rules. The US has also consistently criticized the WTO’s incapability to reach agreements and reform itself. Nonetheless, this Western discomfort towards the organisation and the AB began at the Third Ministerial Meeting in Seattle (1999) when developing countries opposed the Global North’s attempt to open new trade negotiations. This push continued during the Fourth Ministerial Conference in Doha(2001), where the membership loosely agreed on a mandate for “Global and Sustainable Development”, albeit one without clear expectations to cut a deal in line with such a mandate of achieving a fair balance between trade and development at the multilateral trading system. One ministerial conference after the other, there was a failure to agree on Western driven “Development Agenda” until the Members agreed on the Trade Facilitation Agreement and the agricultural subsidies exports prohibition in Bali (2013) and Nairobi (2015), respectively. However, and even after the collapse of the AB, a criticised agreement on fishery subsidies (2022) was reached with a sunset clause of 5 years, making it in turn a chimera because of the short term.

It is important that the Global South countries and particularly African countries device approaches that aim at entrenching integration in their own regions. This is absolutely crucial now that African States have the ambition of increasing intra- African trade. Secondly, African governments need to approach FTA and EPAs with the countries in Global North with extra caution and with their development needs, economic situations, and integration ambitions in mind.

Trade security is an important component of Customs work. Customs administration should adapt to the environment they operate and the commencement of the AfCFTA is a new development which calls for adaptation. The AfCFTA presents challenges to trade security due to the large volumes of cargo whose movement should be as unhindered as possible. Various international instruments seek to promote trade security through promoting collaboration, capacity building for Customs administrators, as well as simplification and harmonization of procedures. Interestingly, all trade instruments discussed have demonstrated that trade facilitation and trade security are intrinsically inter-linked. Even though Customs administrations in the AfCFTA have embraced digital technologies they continue to have implementation challenges.

The Southern African States are encouraged to continue with their laudable efforts of implementing transparency measures. They should strive to meet the implementation deadlines that they have set for themselves. They should seek assistance to mitigate any capacity constraints that are preventing them from making necessary reforms. Fortunately both the TFA and the AfCFTA recognise the importance of special and differential treatment (S&DT) and technical assistance to improve prospects of compliance. This gives some assurance that members will continue to achieve greater success in improving transparency going forward.

There are no two ways about this. Kenya’s Parliament must reject the UK-Kenya Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA). Kenya and the UK must from scratch renegotiate a new agreement that reflects Kenya’s interests. The current agreement is heavily tilted towards the interests of the United Kingdom and its multinationals stationed in Kenya. There are three major reasons why Parliament must reject and renegotiate this agreement.

This blog aims to present some of the challenges being faced within Africa’s trade landscape and some of the workable policy instruments for overcoming these barriers in the digital post-COVID-19 age. In other words, the broad objective is to propose innovative solutions for enhancing post-COVID-19 economic resilience across businesses and households in a sustainable fashion.

Noting the challenges in implementation of commitments under this Agreement by developing and least developed countries, I argue that there is potential for Customs administrations to act as conduits for WTO TFA implementation through their reform and modernisation initiatives. To demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, I highlight the achievements realised through Customs reforms and modernisation by Lesotho in the area of trade facilitation.

Noting the different levels of economic development amongst AfCFTA State Parties, this post intends to shed light on implementation of Annex 4 to the benefit of all. This is in part due to the fact that the TFA steers away from the ‘one size fits all’ approach and instead introduces new, unique and innovative features to facilitate Members’ integration into the global value networks. Furthermore, I contend that the features discussed could serve as a model to further elaborate on Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) as a guiding principle within the context of trade facilitation measures.