EPA Review Annex Documents - DFID

In October 2005, The EC and Central Africa agreed that a CEMAC Customs Union will
sign the EPA. The EC and Central Africa agreed to discuss environment, labour and
consumer standards the following year. This was a particularity of Central Africa since it
did not exclude these issues from their EPAs. The Democratic Republic of Congo
decided to join the CEMAC region in the framework of EPA negotiations and left ESA
EPA configuration.
By the beginning of 2006, the RPTF considered studies, including on production
capacity and export potential and asked for legal assistance to the CEMAC secretariat to
draft legal texts. The EC and CEMAC presented “non-papers” on the table as the basis
of discussions to fill in the chapters of the agreement. However, there was some
disagreement respect the EPA’s link to the Cotonou Agreement on the application of the
non-execution clause. These divergences slowed down the negotiations since the region
did not proceed to the subsequent stage of the negotiation. There were also objections
to EC proposals to include references to elements of the Cotonou Agreement (human
rights, democracy and the rule of law) and to good governance. 21
By September 2006 negotiations had made very little progress. The EC considered that
CEMAC proposed a far reaching approach that was covered by DG DEV and outside
DG TRADE’s negotiation mandate. CEMAC refused an exchange of sensitive products
in preparation of the market access offers. By the end of 2006, there was still not an
advance in negotiations. 22
The beginning of 2007 did not bring about any particular progress. To the divergences
already highlighted, CEMAC considered that the proposition of 10-12 years for transition
periods was not long enough for the region to adapt, respond and make the necessary
adjustments for the EPA. They proposed a period of 25-30 years. 23
In March 2007 both parties decided to advance to the next phase of negotiations (which
included drafting legal texts and discussing market access offers). The unresolved
issues (instruments and mechanisms focuses on overall productive capability building)
would continue in parallel with the next phase of negotiations.
In July 2007 both parties agreed to establish a Regional EPA fund to channel EU-EPA
support funds. CEMAC also called for a compensating mechanism that would address
the initial loss of customs revenue. The fund, however, would be limited to boost
competition, diversify production, absorb the impact of fiscal reforms and implement
rules. 24 Moreover, CEMAC requested that tariff liberalisation be conditional on EU
support for a development package. CEMAC had not presented, by this time, their
market access offer.
By October 2007 CEMAC countries were struggling to finish their list of sensitive
products and some countries preferred to put forward provisional lists to avoid delay.
The issue of the lack of commitments on additional resources and financial mechanisms
has led some LDCs in the region to think about opting for the EC’s EBA initiative. Both
sides remained divided about the rules of origin. While CEMAC wanted to use Cotonou’s
21 Trade Negotiations Insights, Vol. 5, No. 2, April 2006 and TNI, Vol. 5, No. 4, August 2006.
22 Trade Negotiations Insights, Vol. 5, No. 5, October 2006.
23 Trade Negotiations Insights, Vol. 6, No. 1, February 2007
24 Trade Negotiations Insights, Vol. 6, No. 4, August 2007.
13