EPAs in limbo as Nigeria, others resist it
The Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union (EU) and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is in limbo, following the refusal of three countries in the sub-region to sign onto the agreement.
Thirteen out of the 15-member states have appended their signatures to the EPAs, which is a package of treaties that will govern bilateral trade between the EU and the ECOWAS.
As at February, this year, West Africa’s economic powerhouse, Nigeria, and two other countries – The Gambia and Mauritania – had refused to sign the agreement, almost two years after the negotiations ended.
Although Mauritania is no longer part of ECOWAS, it was added to the sub-region for the purposes of the agreements.
The refusal of the three countries to sign onto the EPAs has made it impossible for the implementation to start. This is because the agreements require the signatures of all countries of the region before it can be ratified by the various parliaments of member states.
As a result, the Director of Multilateral, Regional and Bilateral Trade at the Ministry of Trade and Industry, Mr Anthony Nyame-Baafi, said some of member states were holding consultative meetings at the ECOWAS level aimed at convincing Nigeria, The Gambia and Mauritania to sign.
“Mauritania has indicated its readiness to sign and we hope the rest also do same,” he concluded.
Nigeria unlikely to sign
Meanwhile, a political Economist from Third World Network (TWN), a civil society organisation, Mr Sylvester Bagooro, explained in a separate interview that Nigeria was unlikely to sign onto the agreements.
He said Nigeria currently wanted to grow its industrial sector by adding value to its raw materials and was, therefore, not likely to sign the EPA.
“The manufacturing sector is the backbone of every economy and Nigeria now wants to industrialise its economy,” he stated.
He said to build the manufacturing sector, it had to impose taxes and tariffs on the importation of some products in order to protect the local economy and, therefore, did not see the likelihood of Nigeria signing.
He said the EU was currently using various means just to get Nigeria on board, including the invitation of the country’s President, Mr Muhammadu Buhari, to address its parliament.
"They know there has been a change in government and they are trying to put diplomatic pressure on Buhari to sign because they know he is new and might not really understand the issues,” he stated.
Legal obligation
The EU Ambassador to Ghana, Mr William Hanna, told the GRAPHIC BUSINESS in an interview that this legal obligation resulted from West Africa's choice to act as a block.
He said other EPA regions opted for more flexibility and the EU had always respected the partners' choices.
That notwithstanding, Mr Hanna said the EU was still fully committed to the regional EPAs as all of its member states had already signed the agreement since December 2014.
He said it had accomplished all the necessary processes in record time and was currently waiting for the finalisation of the signature process in West Africa.
Ghana’s readiness
The Director at the Trade and Industry Ministry explained that Ghana had already come up with the accompanying measures necessary for the country to maximize full benefits while minimising the risks of the agreements.
Mr Nyame-Baafi said the country was, therefore, waiting for the go-ahead from the EU to forward the agreement to Parliament for ratification, which will pave the way for implementation.
He said there were alternative means available to Ghana which made more economic sense than the EPA but it opted for the easier path.
He explained that the country could have continued trading under the Generalised System of Preferences which allowed it a 72 per cent duty free access to the EU market.
“The country would have, however, lost 28 per cent of duty free goods for three major categories of goods, including horticulture, tuna and cocoa products which would have amounted to over US$50 million annually,” he said.
“However, this would also have saved the country about US$ 400 million in revenue annually since it would be able to charge tariffs on the products that will come from the EU market,” he added.