In the India-UAE free trade agreement, it was consciously decided to keep investments and digital trade out of dispute settlement during negotiations between the two sides, India has said answering queries on the pact at the WTO.
Responding to questions on whether India had plans of joining the WTO Government Procurement Agreement since the chapter on GPA in the India-UAE FTA “largely mirrored” the WTO pact, New Delhi remained non-committal. “A number of WTO members, including Turkey, the EU, Canada and the UK asked India to share details on the India-UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (official name of the FTA), especially in sensitive areas such as investments, GPA and intellectual property rights at a recent meeting of the WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements,” an official tracking the matter told businessline.
The India-UAE CEPA operational from May 2022, under which both countries have provided substantial market access in goods and services, could increase bilateral trade in goods to over $100 billion and trade in services to over $15 billion within five years, per government estimates.
New Delhi’s response on including dispute settlement in the chapter on investments is important as it is a matter of deep contention in some of the bilateral investment protection treaties being negotiated parallelly with the FTAs with partners such as the EU and the UK. While India is keen that primacy be given to settling investment disputes locally, some countries are not willing to fall in line. The EU, for instance, favours an investment court model where the tribunal will comprise members from both the countries involved in the dispute and also a third country.
“Not subjecting chapters on investments and digital trade to dispute settlement under the India-UAE CEPA was a conscious outcome of negotiations between the two countries. In any event, parties can resolve any specific matters concerning these chapters through forums like the Technical Council on Investment and Trade Promotion and Facilitation, established under the Agreement,” according to India’s reply to a question posed by Turkey.
The EU pointed out to India that the government procurement chapter of the India-UAE CEPA “largely mirrored” the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) of which neither of the countries were signatories of and asked if indicated an intention to join.
Non-committal
India remained non-committal on the matter. “It is a matter of fact that India is not a party to GPA,” it said in its reply.
On IPRs, the EU asked whether the enforcement procedures to address infringements would only apply bilaterally or with all trading partners. India answered that per the agreement both sides had to ensure that domestic law permitted effective action against any act of infringement of IPR covered under the pact. “The scope and applicability of domestic law, as consistent with the TRIPS agreement, would be in terms of the provisions contained in such law,” it said.
The UK wanted to have more details on how India and the UAE were supporting SMEs owned by women and youth. In its response, India said that the government implements various schemes/programmes for the benefit of MSMEs, with particular focus on MSMEs led by youth and women. These include schemes for easy access to credit; technology upgradation; procurement and market support scheme; skill development and capacity building.