By: Dr. H.K. Sehgal


With the voting of its member-states totemporarily withdraw the preferential trade terms over Sri Lanka's poor humanright record, EU had set a deadline for withdrawing the country's GSP+trade benefits that expire on 15 August 2010. This would mean that frommid-August, Sri Lanka will lose its GSP+ benefits, which have given apparelexports zero duty access to the EU since 2005.


The Issue


Receiving reports of gross human right abusesduring the final sages of Sri Lanka's civil war, the European Union wanted toinvestigate the issue. Sri Lanka claimed all along that allegations about humanright abuses were unfair, and thereby refused outright to co-operate with ECinvestigators.


It may be pointed out that Sri Lanka's access to duty-free exports to the EU under he GSP+ was totally dependent on its abilityto honour 27 international human rights conventions, and by breaking the rules,the preferences will vanish.


In fairness, it must be stated that the EU hasbeen quite accommodative on the issue. In a statement prefacing its decision tosuspend GSP+ benefits, the EU has described its decision as"temporary" and hoped that Sri Lanka "will sit with us" toaddress the problems identified. It reiterated that it "remains open to afull dialogue with the Government of Sri Lanka" and will closely monitorand regularly re-evaluate developments or the steps taken by Sri LankaGovernment on the human rights issues, and would even recommend restoration ofGSP+ benefits, "once sufficient progress has been made" .


Sri Lanka's response


Sri Lanka's response has been anything, but affirmativeand positive. It remained stuck with its earlier stand that no human rightviolations have occurred; hence no need for any investigation. A Foreign AffairMinistry statement said that the GSP+ discussions would be hampered by setting"unattainable targets and shifting goal posts." The Economic Advisorto the President Mahinda Rajapaksa let the decision of the Government out, whenhe said, "We have been prepared for this for a long time. We have to dealwith this risk at some stage or the other."


What makes Sri Lanka Belligerent?


There are a number of reasons, which need to befactored in understanding as to why Sri Lanka, whose major part of employment isattributable to exports, particularly garments, is so belligerent.


It is noted that garments like bras, which arethe main strength of Sri Lankan garment exports, are subjected to only5.2"10 duty, which reduces the impact of denial of GSP+ level. Further,about one third of the garments that -Sri Lanka exports to Europe do notqualify for duty-free entry.


Then, European Union is not the only exportdestination for Sri Lankan garments, as it is exporting almost 40-45% garmentsto the US.


Sri Lanka has not staked everything on the EUand it looks like that more the Western countries (read EU) impose conditionsor cuts on their aid to Sri Lanka, more it turns to allies elsewhere like Iran,Pakistan and even China, who have been providing funds to Sri Lanka for theireconomic development.


Impact of withdrawal of GSP+ status


What would this mean to Sri Lanka? It would mean that Sri Lanka's exports will now be subjected to a duty of up to 9.6%, asthe country now falls back to GSP levels which is the same as India and Pakistan. However, it would still be lower than 12%, which most of the clothing importedin the EU is being subjected to.


Thisis certainly going to impact the exports of Sri Lanka, on which the industrialand economic growth and employment in the country rest. It is not only thedomestic garment manufacturers and exporters who would be impacted; it is goingto be much beyond that. Many international retailers had set up garmentproduction units in Sri Lanka on heavy investments, on account of severalfactors like duty free benefits, skilled workers and good track record ofethical trading, of which Sri Lankans were rightly proud of. Now, all ofsudden, these advantages would disappear and the exporters would have tocompete with countries like India, Pakistan, which are formidable competitors.

Such international retailers, which have set up their manufacturing facilities in Sri Lanka might not pull off completely, but they are likely to reduce their scale of production, depending upon the comparative costs in Sri Lankan factories or their competitors abroad.


Even more important ramification of withdrawal of GSP+ status lies in the blunting of price edge that Sri Lankan garment exports had had over their competitors, who would be able now to give Sri Lankans exports a tough competition.


Uncertain future


Though there is no official version available on the chances of Sri Lanka giving in to the EU demands, but it is most likely that it might prefer to stick on its stand of "no human rights violations" in the course of civil war and that "the shining example of a trade policy regime that really, really worked" may fade away, sooner than later.


Originally published in The Stitch Times: April 2010