RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/ADP/W/277
G/SCM/W/287
ORGANIZATION 7February 1996
(96-0458)
Original: English Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices
Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures
REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYAUSTRALIA1
CONCERNING THE NOTIFICATION OFLAWS AND
REGULATIONS OFBRAZIL2
Thefollowing communication, dated 23January 1996, hasbeenreceived fromthePermanent
Mission ofBrazil.
_______________
(a) What isthehierarchy between these WTO agreements andother Brazilian legislation,
regulations, andother administrative rules?
Having beenincorporated intotheBrazilian legalsystem bymeans ofaPresidential Decree
(Decree No.1355, dated 30December 1994), theWTO Agreements havethesame hierarchical level
aslaws, andaresubordinate onlytotheFederal Constitution. TheDecree No.1355/94 promulgated
theLegislative Decree No.30/94, dated 15December 1994, which approved theWTO Agreements.
Assuch, ithasadistinct character fromothersubsequent legalinstruments (decrees, ministerial orders)
having precedence overthem.
(b) Willsubsequent laws(including regulations andother administrative rules) takeprecedence
overtheWTO agreements? Forexample, would theforeshadowed newregulation take
precedence overtheWTO agreements ifacourt found thatthere wasaconflict?
No,because oftheafore-mentioned reasons. Itshould bestressed thattheregulations and
otheradministrative ruleswhich arepertinent toanti-dumping andcountervailing actions aresubordinate
toDecree 1355/94. Theregulations onlycomplement Decree 1355/94 which istheirbasis. Inthe
casethataconflict arises theDecree takes precedence overallother subsequent legalinstruments.
(c) Intheabsence ofaspecific provision inregulations, which levels ofofficials would havethe
authority tointerpret theWTO agreements todetermine procedure inananti-dumping or
countervailing dutyaction?
BothinLaw9019, dated 30March 1995, andinthedecrees which regulate theprocedures
fortheapplication ofanti-dumping duties orcountervailing measures, which arenowintheprocess
1G/ADP/W/84-G/SCM/W/93
2G/ADP/N/1/BRA/1-G/SCM/N/1/BRA/1
./.G/ADP/W/277
G/SCM/W/287
Page2
ofbeing translated, theMinistry ofIndustry, Trade andTourism, andtheMinistry oftheEconomy
havethecompetence toapply, through jointaction, complementary norms.
(d) Intheevent ofaconflict between theWTO agreements andother laws, could investigating
officials decide which lawshaveprecedence?
No,theWTO Agreements, which areanintegral partofBrazilian legislation, canonlybe
interpreted bytheJudiciary Branch. Only theJudiciary can,incaseofconflict, decide onmatters
oflegislative precedence.
(e) Cananinterested party appeal tothecourts about theinterpretation oftheWTO agreements
byofficials?
Anyinterested party canhaverecourse totheBrazilian judiciary system inwhatconcerns the
application ofspecific provisions ofthelegal instruments. Itisnotthecaseofarecourse onthe
interpretation oftheprovision. Theinterpretation ofthelegalinstrument isofthesolecompetence
oftheJudiciary. Therecourse would pertain totheapplication, bytheinvestigative authority, ofa
specific provision.