Political questions. In 1965, during the discussion of the request from the Government of the Republic of China (now known in the GATT and the WTO as the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, or Chinese Taipei18) to be represented by observers at sessions of the CONTRACTING PARTIES, the Chairman of the CONTRACTING PARTIES stated, inter alia, that “it had been the policy of the CONTRACTING PARTIES to avoid unproductive controversies over political questions which did not bear significantly on the many substantial questions with which the CONTRACTING PARTIES were concerned. For this reason the CONTRACTING PARTIES had followed the policy expressed in Article 86 of the Havana Charter, namely to avoid passing judgment in any way on essentially political matters and to follow decisions of the United Nations on such questions. “Consistently also with the practice of the United Nations, it was quite clear that for the CONTRACTING PARTIES to admit observers did not prejudice the position of the CONTRACTING PARTIES or of individual contracting parties towards recognition of the government in question. The Executive Secretary had based himself also upon the opinion of the Legal Department of the United Nations, which was that the question of representation in an international organization was distinct from the question of recognition of a government by other members of that organization.”19 In 1971, at the opening of the Twenty-seventh Session, the Chairman noted that in reaching their decision in 1965 to accede to the request of the Republic of China, the CONTRACTING PARTIES had agreed to follow decisions of the United Nations on essentially political matters, and suggested that the CONTRACTING PARTIES should follow the decision taken in United Nations Resolution 2758 (XXVI). It was agreed that for these reasons, representatives of the Republic of China should no longer attend sessions of the CONTRACTING PARTIES as observers.20 In the Council in 1992, in discussion of the establishment of a working party on accession of Chinese Taipei to the General Agreement, the Chairman of the Council noted that “All contracting parties had acknowledged the view that there was only one China, as expressed in the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 25 October 1971”. The Chairman stated that as part of the understanding reached on this matter, the titles carried by the representative of Chinese Taipei would not have any implication on the issue of sovereignty.21...
