EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)

As agreed to on 30 March 2010


Comment on this article


  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA28-March-2011 | chaster matt

    Colombia regularly participates in international fora, including CICAD, the Organization of American States’ body on money laundering, chemical controls, and drug abuse prevention. Although the Colombian Government ratified the 1988 UN Convention on Narcotics in 1994—the last of the Andean governments to do so—it took important reservations, notably to the anti-money-laundering measures, asset forfeiture and confiscation provisions, maritime interdiction, and extradition clauses. Colombia subsequently withdrew some of its reservations, most notably a reservation on extradition.Custom kitchen cabinets

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)25-March-2011 | Phil Y

    Just wondering, is this in the ’initialling by the Commission’ stage yet, and if there are any indications as to when this stage might begin?


    Phil Y, Turks and Caicos Resorts

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)11-February-2011 | Paul-Emile Dupret

    Thanks for the comment.
    If you allow me to correct the text here above. The correct order at the EU side is the following :
    - end of negotiations (already occured in march 2010) and revision of texts
    - initialling by the Commission (not yet ocurred today (11/02/2011)
    - signature of the council (January 2012 ?)
    - ratification by European Parliament (and national and local parliaments if it is a mixed agreement)
    - conclusion of the agreement by the council

    Provisional entry into force can be any time proposed by the Commission after the signature by the Council. Most probably just after the ratification by the EP, for diplomatic reasons.

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)2-December-2010 |

    on what specifically?eu ftas?that would be european trade commision site..

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)5-November-2010 | Burghard Ilge

    This text is from end of March 2010 and has been confirmed to be an authentic draft used by the EU at that time.

    The upper claim that this text has been "signed" is not correct !!!

    EU commission public communication from 20 of Oct 2010 on the currents status of FTA negations with COLOMBIA and PERU reads a follows:

    Negotiations for a multiparty trade agreement (MTA) with Colombia and Peru were successfully concluded at a technical level in February 2010.
    Ecuador provisionally suspended its participation in the negotiations in July 2009 but contacts are maintained to explore the possibility to include Ecuador in the MTA.
    The text of the Agreement negotiated with Colombia and Peru is currently under legal and linguistic review.

    That the agreements have not yet been signed has been reconfirmed by The European Commission during a public meeting in Brussels "Ad hoc meeting - Bilateral Trade Negotiations: State of Play" 26 Oct 2010

    An EU FTA usually will have to be initialed on negotiators level, signed and ratified.

    So there might be a misunderstanding based on difference of legal status between "initialing" on the technical level and "signing" of an agreement.

    Once a treaty has been signed [authenticated], states cannot unilaterally change its provisions. This is the reason why a legal and linguistic review has to take place before signature.

    So while these texts give a clear picture of the final agreement it is not uncommon that during such a review process the fact emerges that the negotiators did unknowingly made commitments or chose formulations of which they did not oversee the full legal implications. Some recent examples for such a situation have been some of so called interim EPAs between the EU and ACP countries.

    It is unclear what will happen if the legal review leads to the conclusion that text might have to be changed and in how far this will lead to de facto re-negotiations.

    Important is that as long as the text has not been signed the text is still formally open for change. After signature this will be much more difficult.

    The transparency provided here by about what is (or has been) on the table still allows parliaments and civil society to control in how fare their governments fulfilled their given mandate and to demand (if necessary) changes in the text before decision makers are confronted with a "take it or leave it" position.

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)19-September-2010 | colo

    Well, the Commission policy on trade agreements is not to offer the texts of international agreements before the legal revision, that’s why you can’t find it anywhere.
    I’ve spoken with an EU functionary and he said to me that this text on this website is the signed text by the EU, Peru and Colombia.

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)8-September-2010 | Michal_pl

    I’ve been looking too, but also i can’t find it in any official source.

    Reply to this message
  • EU-Colombia-Peru FTA (2010)17-August-2010 | Tim Dost

    I was wondering what the scource is of these texts. Can anyone tell me whether there is an official channel providing these texts? I’ve searched quite extensively, but have not found the texts anywhere else than here on

    Thanks in advance,


    Reply to this message