A/HRC/10/5 page 11 emergency situations, the development of objective needs-based assessments will be required as part of the disciplines imposed under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), since the current proposals under discussion within the Doha development round of trade negotiations aim to place emergency food aid in a “safe box” with more lenient disciplines, once the emergency is declared or appealed by relevant international organizations. The non-emergency forms of food aid are also disciplined under the AoA to prevent the aid from displacing commercial trade, which again implies that it be based on needs assessment. New mechanisms may be needed for the definition of commitments under the FAC rules of procedure to be coordinated with the WTO disciplines, as would be the case if needs assessments both triggered certain responses under the FAC (such as an obligation for each State party to provide a certain percentage of food aid) and shielded the food aid provided through such responses from the WTO disciplines. C. Assisting net food-importing developing countries facing the negative impacts of the reform programme in agriculture 20. In the Decision on Measures Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform Programme on Least-Developed and Net Food-Importing Developing Countries (“Marrakesh Decision”), which is part of the WTO agreements adopted following the Uruguay round of trade negotiations, the WTO members committed themselves to establishing a number of mechanisms in order to ensure that the least-developed countries (LDCs) and net food-importing developing countries (NFIDCs) would be able to continue to afford normal levels of commercial imports of basic foodstuffs, despite the impact on prices which could result from the reform programme in agriculture. The four response mechanisms provided for under the Marrakesh Decision are: (a) the provision of food aid at a level sufficient to continue to provide assistance in meeting the food needs of developing countries; (b) the provision of technical and financial assistance to least-developed and net food-importing developing countries to improve their agricultural productivity and infrastructure; (c) favourable terms for agricultural export credits; and (d) short-term financing facilities benefiting developing countries in order to allow them to maintain normal levels of commercial imports. Regrettably, WTO members have not adequately implemented these mechanisms. 21. The Marrakesh Decision refers to the need to review the level of food aid established periodically by the Committee on Food Aid under the FAC and to “initiate negotiations in the appropriate forum to establish a level of food aid commitments sufficient to meet the legitimate needs of developing countries during the reform programme”. It also included a commitment to “adopt guidelines to ensure that an increasing proportion of basic foodstuffs is provided to [LDCs and NFIDCs] in fully grant form and/or on appropriate concessional terms in line with article IV of the Food Aid Convention 1986”. However, as regards the NFIDCs which are neither LDCs nor low-income countries, more restrictive conditions are stipulated under article VII of the 1999 FAC than would be required in order to ensure an adequate implementation of the Marrakesh Decision,32 a discrepancy that should be eliminated. In addition, the guidelines referred to in the Marrakesh Decision could be adopted, in order to impose an obligation on the States parties to the FAC to provide food aid at levels which ensure that NFIDCs will at all times be able to ensure an adequate protection of the right to food under 32 The countries concerned are Barbados, Mauritius, St. Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago.