20. The expert from the Kingdom of the Netherlands presented informal document GRSP-78-44 with a proposal to remove transitional provisions 15.1.2. and 15.1.3. from the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 22. He argued that these transitional provisions, which prevent Contracting Parties applying the 06 series of amendments from granting approvals and extensions under the preceding series of amendments, were against paragraph 4 of article 12 of revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement. He noted that the provisions create an uneven playing field for manufacturers from countries who have and have not adopted the 06 series of amendments. He also argued that helmets approved under the 06 series of amendments were too expensive for many low-income countries.
21. A member of the secretariat reiterated these points and added that these provisions posed an obstacle for the widespread diffusion of safe helmets with a good trade-off between affordability and safety (05 series of amendments) in several regions of the World, including Africa. He urged GRSP to adopt this amendment.
22. The expert from Italy recognised that these transitional provisions seemed in contradiction with revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement but recalled that their original intent was to promote widespread harmonization to a higher level of safety and that removing them would carry certain risks for road safety since it would jeopardize national legislation among Contracting Parties applying the 06 series of amendments. He disputed the notion that helmets under the 06 series of amendments were too expensive. The expert from Italy agreed to discuss this proposal in the next session on the basis of a working document, in order to have enough time to weigh its consequences and he invited to bring data to justify the proposal to change the transitional provision.
23. GRSP agreed that in case of contradiction between the provisions of revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement and those of UN Regulation No. 22, the provisions of the 1958 Agreement should prevail and asked the expert from the Kingdom of the Netherlands to submit this proposal as a working document to the next session.
15. The expert from the Kingdom of the Netherlands introduced informal document GRSP-79-05 to delete transitional provisions 15.1.2. and 15.1.3. from UN Regulation No. 22, on the basis that they contradicted article 12.4. of revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement. The expert from Italy introduced informal document GRSP-79-17 arguing that it was desirable to prevent the type approval of helmets under the preceding series of amendments to limit their presence in the market and that helmets of the 06 series of amendments were not more expensive than those of the 05 series of amendments. The expert from the Kingdom of the Netherlands pointed out that article 15.1.4. of UN Regulation No. 22 already allowed Contracting Parties to prohibit the sale of helmets from preceding series of amendments 36 months after the official date of entry into force, and added that helmets of preceding series of amendments should be kept out of the market through effective market surveillance.
16. The expert from the Russian Federation supported deleting the transitional provisions to avoid having a contradiction between the two legal texts. Given the opposing views on the matter, GRSP considered taking a vote on the proposal, but the experts from Germany and Sweden preferred to have complete clarity on the correct interpretation of the current contradicting provisions before taking a decision. GRSP recalled that in its previous session it had concluded that “in case of contradiction between the provisions of revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement and those of UN Regulation No. 22, the provisions of the 1958 Agreement should prevail” but that this report had not yet been endorsed by WP.29.