The GPA Parties reached a political agreement and adopted a Decision whereby Markets among GPA members, removing the existing imbalance. The revision should lead to an overall improvement of access to the procurement In February 2007, the Council underlined in its conclusion the importance of a successfulĪnd quick conclusion of the then on-going revision of the GPA. Satisfactory outcome of the negotiation on the expansion of coverage (marketĪccess the coverage of the Agreement is determined with regard to each Party However, theĪgreement of the negotiators was provisional in that it was subject to mutually Understanding on the revision of the text of the 1994 GPA. The European Parliament has been informed regularly in writing via the INTA Meetings with Member States were held prior each negotiating session in Geneva. State of play of the negotiations via the Trade Policy Committee. The Council was regularly informed orally and in writing about the Of the 1994 GPA and (iii) to eliminate remaining discriminatory measures.Ĭommission. In information technology and procurement methods (ii) to extend the coverage Three-fold: (i) to improve and update the 1994 GPA in the light of developments Its adoption in 1994 (Article XXIV:7(b)). On Government Procurement (the “Committee”).Ĭommitment to negotiations on both the text and coverage of the Agreement since The Parties to the 1994 GPA are: Armenia, Canada, European Union with respect to its 27 Member States, Hong Kong-China, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands with respect to Aruba, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, United States. Uruguay Round in 1994, and entered into force on 1 January 1996 (the "1994 Its present version was negotiated in parallel with the Is to date the only legally binding agreement in the WTO on the subject of
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |