Kenya accused of going against African position

Less than a week before hosting the World Trade Organisation ministerial conference, Kenya ratified the Trade Facilitation Agreement, against a call by African countries to be unanimous in the negotiations for modification of the deal. 

The deal proposed by UK, adopted and put into consideration at the WTO’s 2013 Bali Ministerial Conference, is expected to expedite movement, release and clearance of goods, including goods on transit.

It has now been ratified by 63 countries and it awaits another 45 for it to be enforced among member countries.

Activists advocating favourable African position at the WTO said it was puzzling why Kenya rushed to ratify the TFA without considering the benefits it could get from not accepting the deal.

“The agreed text on trade facilitation is the very opposite of what African countries need to address the fundamental and peculiar challenges that they face in moving goods and services across national borders,” said Mr Sylvester Bagooro, a political economy officer at Third World Network, a civil activist group.

UNDECIDED

He added that as Kenya signed the deal, bigger African economies like South Africa and Nigeria watched from afar and were yet to decide whether or not to ratify it.

“Not many countries have come here with a set mind to ratify the TFA,” South African Trade and Industry minister Rob Davies said in an interview. “Some are in the pipeline somewhere, which includes us.”

Ghana, where Mr Baagoro comes from, is also against the TFA, saying that it introduces new processes which stand to give foreign corporations undue domestic influence in the customs of African countries, diminishing the role of local officials.

This was even as India fought hard to push the ministerial council to force developed countries into a deal that would see the US and European Union (EU) completely drop their subsidies on agriculture.

“Since this is Ms Mohamed’s home ground, she must lead by example, by refusing to agree to proposals by developed countries until Africa’s needs are met,” said an activist from Sweden who sought anonymity because her government works closely with the Kenyan government.

INDIA

At the Bali ministerial conference, India kept the TFA agreement hostage, asking the US and EU to meet the promises made at the Doha Round in 2001.

At the WTO last week, India still stuck to its activist role, with the US accusing the Asian country of being the cause of failed talks in Bali.

Mr Biraj Patnaik, the Principal Adviser to the Commissioners of the Supreme Court in India told Smart Company that as late as Friday night, the US was blaming his country for failed deals for least developed countries.

“The Indian government is increasingly being perceived as working against farmers interests. They have just lost an election in the state of Bihar. Over 600 million Indians are involved in agriculture and they want an outcome,” Mr Patnaik said.

“My government owes its over 600 million farmers results in negotiations by developed countries to cut farm subsidies.”

He added that it is for that reason that India will not ratify the TFA until the farms subsidies are cut.

By Saturday morning, the ministerial council had not come to an agreement on the subsidies.

Majority of activists had held demonstrations even as the talks continued.

They insisted that the, “EU and US must be ashamed of themselves for riding on poor nations to grow their economies.”

CRITICS OF THE TRADE PACT

Majority of African countries have maintained that even as the US and EU push to have new issues on the WTO negotiations table, they must lift their subsidies or else they nations will not agree to the TFA deal.

“The commitments agreed on the TFA at the start of the Bali meeting were diluted furthermore.

The new binding rules adopted take away even the means by which African countries can mobilise their own resources to meet these custom changes e.g. references to financial support have been removed,” said a statement by Mr Baagoro.

Critics of the trade facilitation argue that the benefits are heavily tilted in favour of exporting countries. It is also said this deal would worsen Africa’s trade balance.

(READ: Amina declares victory but lobbies contest deal)

The activists contend that the agreement fails to address the productive and export constraints facing developing countries and least developed countries.

It is generally argued that countries that are export-ready will reap the immediate benefits of trade facilitation.

Experts have advised that African countries must prioritise value adding activities by promoting investment in areas which address immediate needs and are key in adding value to the local economy.

Issues that have been prevalent at the TFA negotiations are; non-tariff barriers, compliance with sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards, tariff escalation and tariff peaks on products of interest to African exporters.

These, the developing countries say, would continue to stifle Africa’s prospects to penetrate international markets and upgrade their economies as they deal in specific products of their interests.

It should now be a call of solidarity among the remaining 45 member countries of the WTO who have not ratified the deal, to now pull together their efforts in addressing these issues both in regional and global trade.