 RESTRICTED  
  
IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
25 May 2023  
(23-3582) Page: 1/63 
Council for Trade -Related Aspect of  
Intellectual Property Rights    
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 16-17 MARCH 2023  
Chair: H.E Ambassador Dr Lansana Gberie (Sierra Leone)  
Addendum  
The present document contains the statements made during the Council for TRIPS meeting held on 
16-17 March 2023.  
 
_______________  
Contents  
1   NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT  ................................ ........  4 
2   REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION  ................................ ............  17 
3   IP AND COVID -19 ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 17 
4   REVI EW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B)  ................................ ...................  18 
5   RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY  ................................ ................................ ................................  18 
6   PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE  ................................ ... 18 
7   NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS  ................................ .......................  23 
8   REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT UNDER  
ARTICLE 71.1  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  24 
9   REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2  ................................ ....................  24 
10   FOLLOW -UP TO THE TWENTIETH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 
DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT  ...... 24 
11   TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY -BUILDING  ................................ ............  34 
12   PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE MINISTERIAL DECISION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT 
ADOPTED ON 17 JUNE 2022  ................................ ................................ ...........................  35 
13   INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INNOVATION: CROSS -BORDER COOPERATION 
AMONG IP OFFICES  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  43 
14   INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO  ...............  59 
15   OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL  
ORGANIZATIONS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  59 
16   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 59 
17   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ...................  59 
  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  INDEX OF THE STATEMENTS MADE  
AT THE MEETING OF COUNCIL FOR TRIPS 16-17 March 2023 * 
Australia  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  32 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  48 
Notifications  ................................ ........  5 
Bangladesh  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  28 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  19 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  61 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  56 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Technical Cooperation  ..........................  34 
Bangladesh, on behalf of the LDC Group  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  25 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  37 
Technical Cooperation  ..........................  34 
Benin  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  28 
Brazil  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  63 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  40 
Cambodia  
Election of Chairperson  ........................  62 
Canada  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  32 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  62 
IP and Innovation  .........................  50, 57  
Notifications  ................................ ........  4 
Chairperson  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  22 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  60 
China  
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  39 
Costa Rica  
Notifications  ................................ ....... 14 
Egypt  
Election of Chairperson  ........................  62 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  37 
European Union  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  31 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  60 
IP and Covid -19 ................................ .. 18 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  52 
Notifications  ................................ ........  7 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  42 
Haiti  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  30 
Hong Kong, China  
IP and Innovation  ...............................  51 
Notifications  ................................ ........  6 
India  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  18 
IP and Covid -19 ................................ .. 18 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  55 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  39 
Indonesia  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  62 Non-violation and situation complaints  .. 23 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 38 
Japan  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 32 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  22 
Election of the Chairperson  ..................  61 
IP and Innovation  ..........................  43, 58  
Notifications  ................................ ...... 13 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 41 
Kenya  
Election of Chairperson  .......................  62 
Kenya, on b ehalf of the ACP Group  
Non-violation and situation complaints  .. 23 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 38 
Korea, Republic of  
Election of Chairperson  .......................  63 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  54 
Notifications  ................................ ........  7 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 42 
Malawi  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 33 
Mali 
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 30 
Nepal  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 28 
Election of Chairperson  .......................  61 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 37 
Norway  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 33 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 43 
Peru  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  55 
Russian Federation  
Notifications  ................................ ...... 16 
Sierra Leone  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 27 
Singapore  
IP and Innovation  ...............................  46 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 42 
South Africa  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 34 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
IP and Covid -19 ............................  17, 18  
IP and Innovation  ...............................  56 
Non-violation and situation complaints  .. 23 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 35 
Sudan  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 33 
Switzerland  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 29 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  47 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 40 
Chinese Taipei  
IP and Innovation  ...............................  49 
Notifications  ................................ ........  7 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  42 
Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 26 IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  61 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  35 
Thailand  
Election of Chairperson  ........................  59 
The Gambia  
Notifications  ................................ ....... 15 
Ukraine  
Notifications  ................................ ........  5 
United Kingdom  
Article 66.2  ................................ ........  27 
Election of Chairperson  ........................  61 
IP and Covid -19 ................................ .. 18 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  50 
Notifications  ................................ ........  5 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ........  41 
 United States of America  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 30 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  22 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  22 
Election of Chairperson  .......................  62 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  45 
Para 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision  ....... 40 
World Intellectual Property Organization  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  22 
IP and Innovation  ...............................  57 
WTO Secretariat  
Article 66.2  ................................ ....... 24 
Election of Chairperson  .......................  63 
Information on Releva nt Developments 
elsewhere in the WTO  ......................  59 
Notifications  ................................ ........  4 
Notifications  ................................ ...... 16 
Technical Cooperation  .........................  34 
 
 
*A record of statements as delivered in the formal session of the Council. Some statements have been lightly 
edited as appropriate to ensure the consistency of presentation.  
  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT  
1.1  WTO Secretariat  
1.  The Council has received the following notifications from Members since its meeting in October 
2022. Under Article 63.2:  
• A number of the member States of the European Union have notified a significant number 
of primary and secondary domestic laws relating to the substance and the administration 
of their respective IP systems. These EU member States are Bulgaria, Latvia, Austria, 
Lithuania, Denmark, Italy, Portugal, and Ireland. Given the number and diversity of 
notifications I will not attempt to summarize them here – also because we know that 
Members will provide a brief introduction of their  submissions  shortly . 
• Canada has notified an amended set of patent rules.  
• Ukraine has notified two laws relating to geographical indications and a cabinet resolution 
addressing issues of the National Intellectual Property Authority.  
• Costa Rica has notified  a significant number of laws and regulations relating to the entirety 
of its substantive IP system.  
• Japan has notified consolidated versions of the Trademark Act and the Designs Act.  
• Hong Kong, China has notified Rules and an Ordinance related to Registered Designs.  
• Chinese Taipei has notified its Copyright Act, its Patent Act, as well as Enforcement Ru les 
of the Patent Act.  
• Saudi Arabia has notified the Law and implementing regulations relating to Arbitration. It 
has also notified Executive Regulations relating to the Copyright Law and the Patent law.  
• Australia has notified amended Copyright Regulatio ns which extend protection for 
secondary uses of foreign sound recordings to additional countries that provide equivalent 
protection to Australian sound recordings.  
• The United Kingdom has notified regulations related to the market organization and 
protect ion of agricultural products, food and drink after its withdrawal from the 
European  Union.  
• The Gambia has notified its 2021 Intellectual Property Bill and related 2022 Regulations.  
• The Republic of Korea has notified its Agricultural and Fishery Products Q uality Control 
Act. 
Under Article 69 , which regards contact points for IP enforcement  Ireland, El Salvador, the European 
Union and The Gambia have notified such contact points since the last meeting.  
2.  Finally , the Council for TRIPS has also received respons es to the Checklist on issues of 
Enforcement, which are part of Members ' obligation under Article 63.2. Since our last meeting, 
Austria, El Salvador, Botswana and The Gambia have submitted new or updated responses this 
Checklist.  
3.  This concludes the overvie w of notifications received since our meeting in October 2022.  
1.2  Canada  
4.  Canada would like to briefly take the floor to notify Canada 's recent regulatory amendments to 
the Patent Rules, as provided under document IP/N/1/CAN/P/20 . These amendments streamline the 
patent examination process to better ensure efficient and timely processing of patent applications. IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 5 - 
 
  The amendments also enable Canada to meet certain inte rnational commitments under the Patent 
Cooperation Treaty.  
5.  By way of brief overview, the amendments introduce reasonable limits on patent application 
processing and application sizes, while also providing the flexibility to exceed those limits, subject 
to the payment of additional fees. For instance, new to the Canadian patent system is a request for 
continued examination, which will enable continued examination of the application after the 
three-report limit is reached. This is expected to encourage faster  disposition of patent applications. 
A new fee for excess claims for applications that exceed more than 20 claims is intended to 
encourage applicants to file compact applications and discourage the filing of an unnecessarily large 
number of claims. Lastly,  a new notice from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office to applicants 
named a "conditional notice of allowance " will serve to fast -track the granting of a patent when only 
minor defects remain in the application.  Canada would be pleased to provide fur ther information on 
these amendments to any interested Member or Observer at their request.  
1.3  United Kingdom  
6.  The United Kingdom considers the WTO notification system to be an essential element of 
transparency between WTO  Members.  Since our last update we have notified on several new items, 
largely relating to geographical indications and the 'UK's exit from the European Union.  
7.  We also notified two amendments to the UK Trademarks  Act 1994 which, firstly, will provide the 
right for holders of unregistered -Known Marks to prohibit the use of a conflicting trademark , where 
it is being used on dissimilar goods or services.  
8.  It also amends a nuance in our existing trademark  law which me ans that now the "well-known 
mark" provisions will apply to the UK as well as third countries. Historically, UK -based individuals 
and businesses have been able to rely on alternative provisions within common law and the 
Trademarks  Act to enforce their righ ts. For example, where they hold a registered mark or can seek 
recourse through the tort of passing off. We therefore took this opportunity to extend the well -known 
mark provisions to ensure that existing well -known mark provisions under the Trademarks  Act 1994, 
will now include the UK in scope.  
9.  We would again like to thank the Secretariat for the efficiency and ease of use of the e -TRIPS 
system and continue to encourage other Members to use it.  
1.4  Australia  
10.  The Copyright (International Protection) Amendment Regulations 2022 extended protection for 
secondary uses of sound recordings in Australia to recordings from an additional seven countries 
which provide equivalent protection to Australian sound recordings.  These countries are Belize, 
Congo, C ook Island s, Kiribati , Sao Tome and Principe , Senegal and Vanuatu. Australia will be pleased 
to provide further information to these seven countries or other interested Members upon request 
and would also like to extend our thanks to the Secretariat for its assistance in submitting this 
notification.  
1.5  Ukraine  
11.  Ukraine is pleased to present its three notifications of recent institutional and legislative 
developments in the field of intellectual property. Let me start  with the notification IP/N/1/UKR/14  
which  informs about institutional changes in the per formance of the functions of the National 
Intellectual Property Authority, established by the Law of Ukraine № 703 -IX of 16 June 2020.  
12.  Since 8 November 2022, according to the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine , the 
state organization ""Ukrainian National Office of Intellectual Property and Innovations "" (UANIPIO) 
has been fulfilling above -mentioned functions, while, from the same date, the State Enterprise 
""Ukrainian Intellectual Property Institute "" has stopped all its activities as Nationa l IP office.  
13.  The UANIPIO is now responsible for registration of intellectual property rights, maintaining state 
registers, support of the activities of collegial bodies  and international cooperation. It performs 
informational and publishing activities, giv es consultations on IPRs granting procedures and IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 6 - 
 
  protection, assists in search for an investors and IP commercialization, and provides other state 
services in the IP sphere based on the principles of transparency, professionalism, decency and 
support. By t ransferring these functions, Ukraine is completing the institutional reform of national 
IP system and the implementation of relevant legislation. We strive for our National IP office to 
become a modern, professional, technological and transparent full -cycle hub as a "single -window " 
for innovators that constitutes the conceptually new approach to providing services in the field of 
intellectual property.  
14.  As regards  to Ukraine 's other notifications IP/N/1/UKR/13  and IP/N/1/U KR/15 , these concern 
laws of Ukraine, recently adopted in the area of geographical indications (GIs).  Particularly, the Law 
of Ukraine N °2572 defines peculiarities of legal protection of GIs for agricultural products and 
foodstuffs. It lays down rules for application of quality schemes, establishes criteria for granting legal 
protection, and sets out registration requirements and the conditions for the use of registered GIs 
and traditional specialties  guaranteed. The Law also includes provisions on control measures and 
provides for liability for its violation. Implementation of provisions of this Law should  enable 
consumers to distinguish and to be better informed about quality specifics, characteristics and 
features of products while also supporting produce rs in promotion of their sales.  
15.  The Law of Ukraine N ° 2800 aims to determine the specifics of the registration, use and 
protection of GIs for spirit drinks. It includes definitions, categories of spirit drinks, provisions on 
registration procedure, includi ng requirements for the content of specifications and application 
process . Also provides for the rules on certification, labelling, state control and liability for violations 
in order to prevent the unauthorized use of registered GIs of spirit drinks.  
16.  The above -mentioned  laws were developed with the view of implementing provisions of 
appropriate Regulations of the European Union and adopting the EU ''s best practices and experience 
in area of GIs. Taking this opportunity, I would also like to thank the WTO Secretariat for the 
assistance provided in processing notifications. To conclude, let me reassure the WTO Members that 
IP continues to be of vital importance to Ukraine 's economy placed on a war footing.  
17.  Acknowledging the necessity of improvement of the IP system, these days we are fighting for 
the preservation of principles of freedom and independence while the terrorist regime of the 
Russia n Federation  continues terrorizing Ukrainian civilians. The war of aggression conducted by the 
Russian Federation aga inst Ukraine directly influences the IP sphere as well. For example, the 
protection of some  geographical indications is in fact suspended because the  respective regions are 
under the temporary  Russian occupation. We are honored  to join the discussions under the proposed 
Agenda but it is unacceptable to do it with a country that has been violating international law, kill ed 
civilian people, destroyed civilian infrastructure facilities, including educational and medical 
institution s, cultural and religious buildings.  
18.  We are confident, that development of effective IP system and improvement of national 
legislation in this area, despite the full -scale Russia 's invasion, will provide proper level of IP rights 
protection and foster add itional opportunities for producers and creators, promoting innovations and 
investments that are essential for Ukraine 's reconstruction and recovery following our victory. We 
would like to thank all WTO Members who continuously support not only us, but als o the very 
democratic principles of peaceful development . 
1.6  Hong Kong, China  
19.  Pursuant to Article 63.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, Hong Kong, China submitted two notifications 
IP/N/1/HKG/38  and IP/N/1/HKG/39  on 18 November 2022.  The first notification is related to the 
amendment to the Registered Designs Ordinance introduced under the National Flag and National 
Emblem (Amendment) Ordinance 2021 to the effect that a design is not registrable if it consists of 
or contains the national flag or the national emblem of the People 's Republi c of China or their designs.  
20.  The second notification is related to the amendment to the Registered Designs Rules to provide 
that evidence of consent to the registration of a design (on which any armorial bearings, etc. 
appears) is subject to the new prohib ition under the Registered Designs Ordinance.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 7 - 
 
  1.7  Korea , Republic of  
21.  Korea provided a notification to the WTO on 23 February  2023, regarding the amendment of 
'Agricultural and Fishery Products Quality Control Act ' in accordance with Art. 63.2 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement, which can be found in document IP/N/1/KOR/23 . 
22.  Although the law contains provisions on geographical indications , making it subject to the WTO 
notification, the amendment at issue is not related to a GI, and it is only administrative in nature , 
such as safety inspection . However, we provide this notification on the general transparency 
dimension. In case we have  an amendment directly related to GI, we will certainly provide a 
notification  accordingly . Regarding other TRIPS -related amen dments and notifications  recently 
provided , we will provide explanation in the next regular TRIPS meeting.  
1.8  Chinese Taipei  
23.  The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu would like to make a 
brief introduction on one of our three notifications circulated recently. IP/N/1/TPKM/36  
(Amendments to the Enforcement Rules of the Patent Act). Articles 67 and 80 of the Enforcement 
Rules of the  Patent Act were amended. The key points of the amendments include the following:  
when requesting for recordation of pledge establishment of a patent right, the patentee or the 
pledgee is exempt from providing a patent certificate, streamlining the adminis trative process. Under 
circumstances when there are changes to the particulars in the patent certificate, the patentee may 
file an application for a replacement or a re-issuance. When the Specific Patent Agency replaces or 
reissues a new patent certificate , the nullification of the original patent certificate shall be published 
in the Patent Gazette.  
1.9  European Union  
24.  Before introducing the notification made by the European Union and its member States we 
would like to than k the Ukrainian authorities for their intervention today and for complying with the 
notification obligations of the TRIPS Agreement under the unprecedented circumstances caused by 
the brutal and unprovoked illegal invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federat ion. The European Union 
can only admire efforts of Ukrainian authorities in a situation where even the Ukrainian capital is 
under constant fire from Russian attacks on no n-military targets and where Russia illegally occupies 
parts of the Ukrainian territor ies – I think the sandbags in Mr Ovechkin 's office during his earlier 
remote intervention were quite telling  – and also the impact of the Russian occupation on GIs.   
25.  The EU appreciates that one of the notifications, namely IP/N/1/UKR/15 , concerns the 
implementation of EU Regulation 2019/787 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the 
definition, description, presentation and labelling of spirit drinks, the use of the names of spirit drinks  
in the presentation and labelling of other foodstuffs, the protection of geographical indications for 
spirit drinks, the use of ethyl alcohol and distillates of agricultural origin in alcoholic beverages, and 
repealing Regulation (EC) N ° 110/20. This impl ementation is one important step in the process of 
Ukrainian accession to the EU as , indeed, on 23 June 2022 the EU granted Ukraine the status of a 
candidate for accession to the European Union. The EU stands firmly by Ukraine and its people in 
this unpara lleled crisis and will provide further political, financial, military and humanitarian 
assistance to Ukraine.  
26.  Now, moving to the EU and its member States ' notifications , the European Union and its member 
States place a high emphasis on notifications as an important tool to increase transparency in the 
WTO including in the IP context. We are therefore happy that as many as eight EU member States 
have since October 2022 provided extensive notifications to the WTO in the area of intellectual 
property to make s ure that their notification record in this area is fully up to date. I will no w present 
the notification made by Bulgaria, Latvia and Austria , and the remaining notification s will be 
presented online by my colleague Pierre -Yves who is in Brussels . I start with the Bulgarian 
notifications and here we are talking about all together 18 notifications from IP/N/1/BGR/3  until 
IP/N/1/BGR/21 . 
27.  In 2022 Bulgaria kept up with the continuing notification obligations and supported th is Council 's 
monitoring function b y providing updates to its initial submissions. The noti fied laws and regulations 
under Article 63.2 of the TRIPS Agreement can be grouped in two categories:  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 8 - 
 
  • The main laws and regulations  
• Secondary  laws: national laws which are not dedicated to intellectual property rights as 
such, but which nonetheless pertain to the availability, scope, acquisition, enforcement 
and prevention of abuse of intellectual property rights.  
28.  The main IP legislation includes the following:  
1) Copyright and Related Rights Act; notification IP/N/1/BGR/3 , 
2) Industrial Design Act; which is IP/N/1/BGR/4 , 
3) Trademarks and Geograph ical Indications Act; notification IP/N/1/BGR/5 , 
4) Act on Patents and Registration of Utility Models; notification IP/N/1/BGR/6 , 
5) Act on Protection of New Plant Varieties and Animal Breeds; notification IP/N/1/BGR/7 , 
6) Act on The Topology of the Integrated Circuits;  notification  IP/N/1/BGR/8 , 
29.  These acts consolidated or replaced previous versions of notified legal acts. They incorporate 
all amendments that have been made in the period from 2010 until 2022. These are not initial 
notifications by their nature but rather upda ted versions that refer back to laws that have been 
notified earlier.  
30.  The other pieces of main IP legislation are:  
7) Regulation of the Council of Ministers N ° 102 of 30 May 2022 for the Repeal of 
Legislative Acts of the Council of Ministers; IP/N/1/BGR/19 , 
8) Regulation of the Counci l of Ministers N ° 242 of 27 December 1999 on the Tariff of Fees 
Collected by the Patent Office of the Republic of Bulgaria; IP/N/1/BGR/21 . The aim of notifying 
the abovementioned regulations is to inform the membership that previously notified 
regulations have been repealed.  
9) Regulat ion of the Council of Ministers N ° 120 of 25 March 1997 on the establishment of 
Council for copyright and neighboring  rights protection; IP/N/1/BGR/9 . This Regulation has 
been amended as of 8 July 2022 in line with the initiated institutional changes in Bulgaria 
which led to amendments i n the composition of the Council for Copyright and Neighboring  
Rights Protection.  
31.  Now, moving to the secondary legislation. It includes the following:  
1) Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria;  
2) Protection of Competition Act;  
3) Code of Civil Procedure ; 
4) Administrative Violations and Penalties Act;  
5) Administrative Procedure Code;  
6) Judiciary System Act;  
7) Penal Code;  
8) Penal Procedure Code;  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 9 - 
 
  32.  All of the abovementioned legal texts have been submitted initially in 1998. The notified last 
versions incorporate all amendments and consolidations until 2022.  
9) Regulation of the Council of Ministers N ° 233 of 8 November 2000 on the Foreign Trade 
Regime of the Republic of Bulgaria;  
10) Regulation of the Council of Ministers N ° 15 of 31 January 2006 Amending Regulatory 
Acts of the Council of Ministers.  
33.  The aim of notifying the abovementioned regulations was to inform that previously notified 
regulations have been repealed.  This concludes the presentation of Bulgarian notifications.  
34.  I will now move on to notifications made by Latvia and here we have 14 notifications ranging 
from IP/N/1/LVA/2  until IP/N/1/LVA/15 . The most significant changes have been the new Trademark 
Law and corresponding Cabinet Regula tions. Regarding the new Trademark Law, Latvia is preparing 
the official translation and therefore, the notification will be submitted at a later stage. On the 
Cabinet Regulation N ° 266 which is IP/N/1/LVA/2 :  
• Cabinet Regulation N ° 266 Adopted 27 April 2021 Regulations Regarding Applications for 
the Registration of Trademarks, Transfer of Rights and Licensing Thereof has been 
elaborated on the basis of the delegation established in Article 28, Paragraph 8, Article  29, 
Paragraph 11 a nd Article 30, Paragraph 6 of the Trademark Law, thus applying the 
provisions of the Trademark Law which transposes the provisions of the Law of the 
European Parliament and of the Council of 16 June 2015 on the Trademark Registration, 
Transitional and Lice nsing of Rights to a Trademark. Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of 
the member States relating to trademarks , as well as on the basis of the Singapore 
Agreement on Trade marks of 27 March 2006, in force in Latvia since 16 March 2009, 
which sets out the elements of the administrative procedures for the registration of 
trademarks in the member States of that Agreement.  
35.  I will now provide a dditional information on Trademark Law:  on 6 March 2020, the Trademark 
Law entered into force and the Law on Trademarks and Indications of Geographical Origin expired. 
The Trademarks Law implements Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council of 16 December 2015 to appro ximate the laws of the member States relating to trademarks. 
The Trademark Law regulates legal relations in the field of registration and protection of trademarks 
and collective marks, as well as protection of geographical indications. However, it also reg ulates 
legal relations in the field of the protection of the registration of certification marks.  
36.  As regard of some o ther changes:  the latest amendments to the Patent Law in IP/N/1/LVA/3  
have been drafted in order to provide for the introduction of a unitary European patent, which will 
coexist with national patents and the classical European patent. Unitary Patents will make it possible 
to get patent protection in up to 25 EU member States by submitting a single request to the E uropean 
Patent Office (EPO) , making the procedure simpler and  more cost effective for applicants. 
Considering that on 1 June 2023 Unified Patent court will enter into force, the Patent law has been 
amended accordingly.  
37.  Another change is t he latest amendments to the Law on Industrial Property Institutions and 
Procedu res, notification IP/N/1/LVA/4 , that implement s Directive (EU) 2015/2436 as mentioned 
before . The latest amendments will further provide for the possibility for interested parties to lodge 
an application with the Board of Appeal for Industrial Property for the revocation or cancellation of 
a trademark . 
38.  As regards Copyright Law , which is notificat ion IP/N/1/LVA/9  - majority of t he amendments 
were the result of the transposition of the European Union directives in the field of copyright and 
related rights.  As for Law on Collective Management of Copyright , notification IP/N/1/LVA/10  – the 
law was elaborated to implement the European Union directive N ° 2014/26/E U on collective 
management of copyright . 
39.  Finally , some further information on the remaining notifications:  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 10 - 
 
  • Notification IP/N/1/LVA/5  is Cabinet Regulation N ° 732 Adopted 15 December 2015 on 
Price List of Paid Services of the Industrial Property Board of Appeal. The Rules determine 
fees, payment procedures and concessions for the services provided by the Industrial 
Property Board of Appeal.  
• Notification IP/N/1/LVA/6  is Cabinet Regulation N ° 719 Adopted on 15 December 2015 on 
Procedures by which a Person Handling Registration or Post -registration Procedures shall 
Submit Documents to the Patent Office.  
• Notification IP/N/1/LVA/7  is a Law on Designs. The law regulates legal relations in the field 
of registration, use and protection of designs.  
• Notification IP/N/1/LVA/8  is a Law on the Protection of Topographies of Semiconductor 
Products. The law determines how topography in the Republi c of Latvia is protected and 
registered in the Patent Office.  
• Notification IP/N/1/LVA/11  is a Cabinet Regul ation N ° 556 Adopted 2 September 2020 on 
the Procedures for the Registration, Protection, Supervision and Control of Geographical 
Indications, Designations of Origin and Traditional Specialties  Guaranteed of Agricultural 
Products and Foodstuffs. The Regula tion prescribes the procedures for the registration, 
protection and supervision of geographical indications of agricultural products and 
foodstuffs, including spirit drinks and wines and also the procedures for the supervision 
and control of the scheme of protected designations of origin and the scheme of traditional 
specialties guaranteed in conformity with the EU law.  
• Latvian notification then IP/N/1/LVA/12  is a Law on the Supervision of the Handling of 
Food. The Law determines the competent authority to supervise and control the pro tection 
of geographical indications and names of the place of origin, and also of traditional 
specialties.  
• Notification IP/N/1/LVA/13  is Cabinet Regulation N ° 764 - Adopted 22 December 2015 - 
Regulations Regarding the Sample Forms of the Registration Procedure of Designs and the 
Sampl e Registration Certificate Thereof. The Regulation determines specimen of 
application forms required for the registration of designs and a specimen of the design 
registration certificate.  
• Notification IP/N/1/LVA/14  which is Customs Law and Amendments were made to the 
Customs Law to ma ke sure that disputes regarding the violation of intellectual property 
rights are resolved in a civil procedure.  
• Final notification, IP/N/1/LVA/15  which is Cabinet Regulation N ° 468 from 2017 on the 
Rules on certain types of customs control that includes procedure described in 
Section  14.5 of the Customs Law.  
40.  That concludes the Latvian notifications, and the next notifying member is Austria and here we 
have six notifications. Austria notified a rather wide variety of laws, namely the latest versions of 
their Patent Act, Copyright Act, Trademark Protection Act, Design Law and Collecting Societies Act 
and the EU on behalf of Austria is happy that all these measures are now completely up to date in 
the WTO 's files.  
41.  The Copyright Act, the Trademark Protection Act and the Design Act have been amended various 
times since 1996. These amendments are based in particular on the implementation of the European 
directives. As regards copyright, most recently, in 2021, Directiv e (EU) 2019/790 on copyright in 
the digital single market was implemented. As for trademarks, most recently Directive (EU) 
2015/2436 mentioned already before was implemented and f inally, as regards designs, one of the 
later amendments concerns the implemen tation of EC Directive 2004/48/EC on the Enforcement of 
Intellectual Property Rights, inter alia , by changing the procedure in regard to registration and 
cancellation of designs by entrusting the "Oberlandesgericht Wien ", with appeal procedures in 
second i nstance.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 11 - 
 
  42.  When it comes to patents, the Patent Act 1970 was amended by the Federal Law Gazette 
N° 149/2004 which changed the structure of the patent application procedure (formal grant, 
publication of patent applications after 18 months) and combined the fe e provisions regulated in 
individual acts into a single act. The amendment Federal Law Gazette I N ° 126/2013 changed the 
system of instances in connection with invention protection rights. The second instance is now the 
Vienna Higher Regional Court; if a t hird instance decides, it is the Supreme Court. The amendment 
Federal Law Gazette I N ° 71/2016 abolished the dual structure of the Patent Office and dissolved 
the partial legal capacity. Furthermore, it was clarified that not only conventional breeding met hods 
of animals and plants are excluded from patenting, but also the conventionally -bred animals and 
plants themselves.  
43.  Finally, with regard to Austria, the Austrian Collecting Societies Act 2016 specifies the rights 
and obligations of collective managemen t organizations and Independent collective management 
organizations towards their beneficiaries, users and the regulatory authorities.   
44.  This concludes my part of the notifications made by the EU and its member States and I hope 
my colleague Pierre Yves in Brussels  will raise the flag and continue with the presentation of 
notifications by Lithuania, Denmark, Italy, Portugal, and Ireland. Pierre -Yves's flag is up so, thank 
you. 
45.  Thanks a lot Martin. Yes, Lithuania notified five pieces of law ranging from IP/N/1/LTU/2  until 
IP/N/1/LTU/6 .  
• IP/N/1/LTU/2  is Law on Designs concerns procedural amendments, in concreto  technical 
amendments concerning link to other state registers. There is also a special provision 
concerning calculation of time limits during the state of emergency.  
• IP/N/1/LTU/3 . The Law on the Legal Protection of Topographies of Semiconductor 
Products. It contains technical amendments  concerning the management of the register.  
• IP/N/1/LTU/4  is a Law on Trade marks. It is an implementation of the EU Directive 
2015/2436 on Trademarks . 
• IP/N/1/LTU/5  on Patent Law. The law is an alignment with Patent Law Treaty and is 
supplemented with provisions concerning Unitary patent. Again, there are technical 
amend ments concerning link to other state registers and a special provision concerning 
calculation of time limits during the state of emergency.  
• IP/N/1/LTU/6  is a Law on Fees for the Registration of Industrial Property Objects sets out 
amendments of amounts and payment of applicable fees.  
46.  That is it for Lithuania. Now switch to Denmark. Denmark notified ten pieces of law ranging 
from IP/N/1/DNK/3  until IP/N/1/DNK/5 . 
• IP/N/1/DNK/3:  the Consolidated Plant Variety Protection Act, N ° 1131 of 3 July 2020. The 
Act contains provisions on the rights for plant breeders to have their new plant varieties 
protected and to the entitlement to charge royalty for the use of propagating material of 
the protected variety and liability to punishment.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/4  is The Consolidated Patents Act, N ° 90 of 29 January 2019 . The Act contains 
provisions and basic principles on patents. Included are provisions on patent applications 
and examination, licensing and transfer, termination of patent, liability to punishment and 
liability for damages.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/5  is the Consolidated Secret Patents Act, N ° 107 of 24 January 2012 . The Act 
contains provisions for inventions relating to war material or processes  for the 
manufacture of war material.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/6  - The Consolidated Employees ' Inventions Act, N ° 104 of 24 January 2012 . 
This Act contains provisions on the inventions made by employees. Included are provisions IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 12 - 
 
  on the employee 's right to apply for patent and the employer 's right to tr ansfer of the 
right to the invention.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/7 . The Consolidated Utility Models Act, N ° 91 of 29 January 2019 . The Act 
contains provisions relating to utility models.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/8 . The Consolidated Inventions at Public Research Institutions Act, N ° 210 of 
17 March 2009 . The Act contains provisions on patents relate d to research results 
produced with the help of public funds.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/9 . The Consolidated Tra demarks Act, N° 88 of 29 January 2019 . This Act 
contains provisions on trademarks in respect of goods or services which are the subject 
of registration or of an application for registration, or to which rights are acquired through 
use, and international re gistrations with validity in Denmark.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/10 . The Consolidated Designs Act, N ° 89 of 29 January 2019 . The Act contains 
general provisions and basic principles on designs. Included are provisions on applications 
and examination, licensing and transfer, termination of registration s, liability to 
punishment and liability for damages.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/11 . The Consolidated Protection of Topographies of Semiconductor Products 
Act, N ° 92 of 29 January 2019 . This Act contains provisions on the protection of 
Topographies of Semiconductor Products.  
• IP/N/1/DNK/12 . The Trade Secrets Act, N ° 309 of 25 April  2018 on Trade Secrets .  
47.  I switch now from Denmark to Italy. Italy provided one notification:  
• IP/N/1/ITA/8/REV .1. As for Italy, the point on the agenda is not new in substance and it 
was already presented at last Council for TRIPS in October  2022. The translation in English 
we provided last year was incomplete, therefore a revised version with the complete 
translation  has been put in the agenda of the March  2023 Council for  TRIPS . But in 
substance there are no changes compared to the legislation presented in October  2022. 
48.  In 2020, the Industrial Property Code of 2005 was amended by the Legislative Decree N ° 34 of 
19 May as regards the historic national brand. The procedure introduced in 2019 concerning 
companies owing historic national brands deciding to relocate abroad was repealed, together with 
the corresponding support fund.  
49.  The next EU member State is Portugal : 
• IP/N/1/PRT/2  is the Decree -Law N ° 110/2018 of 10 December (approving the new 
Industrial Property Code). This is a General Code on IP comprising general rules on all 
industrial property and specific rules on patents, utility models, semiconductor 
topographies, designs or models, trademarks, appellations of origin and geographical 
indications and trade secrets. The general rules contain provisions on administrative and 
judicial processes, transfers of licenses , extinctions of rights or infractions.  
• IP/N/1/PRT/3 . It is Order N ° 112 — A/2019 of 1 July and Resolution N ° 680/202 2 of 
9 June 2022 updating industrial property fees. As the title indicates, the order provides 
fees linked to the filing of industrial property rights.  
50.  Finally, I take the floor on behalf of Ireland : 
• IP/N/1/IRL/2  - this particular notification relates to the Irish Trademarks  Rules 1996 
legislation, which prescribes for the practices and procedures to be used in relation to the 
provisions of the Trade marks Act 1996. The Rules prescribe for:  
o the forms to be used for an application for registration of a Trademark ,  
o the fees payable in relation to any matter under the Act and Rules,  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 13 - 
 
  o the renewal, restoration, division and merger applications or registrations,  
o Collective and Certification Marks,  
o the rules regarding the Trademarks  Register and the revocation, invalidation and 
rectification of the Register,  
o the registration of Trademark  Agents,  
o the powers and duties of the Controller of Intellectual Property Rights,  
o application to and Orders of the Court and a number of ot her miscellaneous matters.  
• IP/N/ 1/IRL/3  called t he "COMMUNITY TRADEMARK REGULATIONS, 2000 (Statutory 
Instrument Number 229/2000) " which extends the provisions of section 25 of the 
Trademarks  Act, 1996 which deals with infringing goods, materials or articles and the 
power of seizure and s earch in relation to such goods to cover a community trademark as 
well as a registered trademark.  Community trademark is European Union trademark.  
• IP/N/1/IRL/4 . It is the "COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT, 1924 ". The Act for the establishment 
of Ireland 's Courts of Justice, pursuant to Ireland 's Constitution, which provides for the 
establishment of the High Court of Ireland and the Supreme Court of Ireland, which under 
the "COMMUNITY TRADEMARK REGULATIONS, 2000 " are respectively designated as 
community trademark courts of first instance and second instance.  
• IP/N/1/IRL/5 . The "COURTS (SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS) ACT, 1961 " provides 
supplementary provisions on certain staffing and jurisdictional issues related to all levels 
of Ireland 's Courts, including the High Court of Ireland and the Supreme Court . 
• IP/N/1/IR L/6. It is t he "CONSUMER INFORMATION ACT, 1978 " which provides for the 
establishment of Ireland 's Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs and makes provisions 
in relation to the information given in connection with goods, services, accommodation or 
facilities, provided in the course trade which intends to protect consumers against false or 
misleading claims about goods, services and prices. The Act provides that the fact that a 
trade description is a trademark , or part of a trademark, within the meaning of the 
Trade marks Act, 1963, does not prevent it from being a false trade description when 
applied to any goods, except where certain conditions, which are set out in the Act, are 
satisfied.  
• IP/N/1/IRL/7 . The "JURISDICTION OF COURTS AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS ACT, 
1998" which  is an Act  to consolidate the jurisdiction of Ireland Courts and enforcement of 
Judgements Acts, from 1988 to 1993. 
• IP/N/1/IRL/8 . Ireland 's "COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS ACT, 2000 " which contains 
provisions in respect of copyright, protection of the rights of performers and rights in 
performances.  It also contains provisions for licensing and registration schemes for 
copyright and related rights. Th is Act restates the law in respect of Council Directive 
91/250/EEC on the legal protection of Computer Programs and Council Directive 
93/98/EEC on Harmo nizing  the Term of Protection of copyright and certain related rights 
(giving effect to Article 2.1). It also gives effect to several other EU directives.  
51.  That finishes the notification from the EU and the EU member States.  
1.10  Japan  
52.  This delegation is pleased to inform the Council  for TRIPS  that Japan recently amended both its 
Design Act and its Trademark Act. The amendments have been notified to this Council in accordance 
with Article 63.2. The reference num bers are IP/N/1/JPN/65  for the  Design Act and IP/N/1/JPN/66  
for the Trademark Act.  We would like to take this opportunity to briefly explain these amendments.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 14 - 
 
  53.  The amendments to both the Design Act and the Trademark Act are based on one primary 
factor, which is to prevent the influx of counterfeit goods from oversea s in response to the increase 
in counterfeit goods being imported for private use.  
54.  Textual amendments were made so that acts by overseas vendors such as commercially 
bringing counterfeit goods into Japan via postal mail shall be treated as infringements of  design and 
trademark rights. The Government of Japan will continuously fulfill its obligation to ensure the 
accessibility and transparency of the Japanese intellectual property system.  
1.11  Costa Rica  
55.  Costa Rica is grateful for the opportunity to discuss the notifications that we have submitted 
under this item on the Council 's agenda. Firstly, we wish to point out that the notifications were 
submitted as part of my delegation 's efforts to bring us up to date. In this  connection, we would like 
to thank the Secretariat for the annual reporting on notifications, as this helped identify the need 
for the notifications that we had previously sent to the TRIPS Council to be updated.  
56.  There have been significant intellectual p roperty rights related regulatory developments in Costa 
Rica since we last submitted notifications on our legislation, which is reflected in the wide range of 
notifications under consideration today. Most of the legal reforms mentioned in these notificatio ns 
stem from the implementation of the commitments taken on by Costa Rica under the Free Trade 
Agreement between the Dominican Republic, Central America and the United States, which entered 
into force in Costa Rica in 2009.  
57.  These reforms include regulatory  amendments in various intellectual property related spheres, 
including, inter alia , copyright and related rights, trademarks and other distinctive signs, 
geographical indications, patents, new plant varieties and the enforcement of intellectual property 
rights. They are part of wider efforts to recognize the importance of intellectual property as a driver 
of innovation and inclusive economic development and to meet the highest international protection 
standards.  
58.  As part of these efforts, the Interinstitutional Coordination Commission for the Protection of 
Intellectual Property was established under Executive Decree No. 35631 J COMEX MICIT SP H of 
30 September 2009 as an interinstitutional coordination body fosteri ng the coordination of the work 
carried out by various state entities on intellectual property matters. This Commission is made up 
of representatives from the Ministries of Justice, Foreign Trade, Public Security, Science and 
Technology and Culture and You th. They also form part of the Registry of Intellectual Property, the 
Directorate General of Customs, the Public Prosecutor 's Office, the Judicial Investigation Body and 
the Judicial Academy.  
59.  In view of the large number of regulations notified and the time  constraints, we will focus in 
this meeting on introducing the reforms of the regulatory frameworks for copyright and related 
rights, trademarks and distinctive signs and geographical indications. We will address the reforms 
introduced in other relevant ar eas at the next meeting of the Council.  
60.  With regard to copyright, the legislation on copyright and related rights was updated by 
increasing the scope of protection to include scientific works in addition to works in the literary and 
artistic fields (Law No . 8686 of 21 November 2002). Furthermore, the basic principle of 
non-discrimination is explicitly incorporated to ensure that the works of authors, artists, performers, 
producers of phonograms and other foreign right holders, whether or not domiciled in Co sta Rica, 
are granted protection no less favourable than that accorded to the works of Costa Ricans, including 
any benefit arising from this protection.  
61.  Pursuant to the commitments taken on under trade agreements and multilateral instruments, 
the definitio ns of "broadcasting ", "cinematographic work " and "performer " have been introduced into 
the Law, while certain concepts relating to the ownership of different types of works have also been 
delineated. Furthermore, a number of clarifications regarding moral rights have been incorporated.  
62.  The legislation guarantees that the author 's consent does not negate the need for the 
performers ' consent and vice versa . The baseline legislation on trademarks and distinctive signs is 
Law No. 7978 on Trademarks and Other Di stinctive Signs and its implementing regulations IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 15 - 
 
  (Executive Decree No. 30233 J). A number of the Law 's articles were amended by Law No. 8632 of 
28 March 2008.  
63.  Trademark legislation is far -reaching and recognizes collective trademarks, certification marks, 
design marks, sound marks, three dimensional marks and well -known trademarks, to name a few 
examples.  
64.  Stricter rules were established on the registration of signs, with a view to preventing the 
registration of identical or similar signs likely to cause con fusion due to similarity, even where the 
products or services are different but may be associated with those protected by a trademark or 
geographical indication previously registered or whose registration is pending.  
65.  It is important to point out that well -known trademarks do not need to have been registered in 
order for the Registry of Intellectual Property to reject identical or similar signs for any good or 
service. Our Registry has developed procedures to ensure that these processes are handled properly 
and in a timely manner.  
66.  Title VIII of Law No. 7978 on Trademarks and Other Distinctive Signs includes provisions on 
geographical indications and appellations of origin. These regulations were amended by Law 
No. 8632 of 28 March 2008. The rules and procedur es for the implementation of this Title were laid 
down in Executive Decree No. 33743 COMEX J issued on 17 May 2007 and subsequently amended 
by Executive Decree No. 41572 COMEX J of 6 February 2019. The above -mentioned regulations 
established a sui generis system to protect geographical indications. In our legal system, trademarks 
do not prevail over geographical indications or vice versa. Instead, priority is afforded to whichever 
was registered first.  
67.  Geographical indications and appellations of origin are  registered with the Registry of 
Intellectual Property. The relevant application may be submitted by the production sector or by a 
competent public authority, depending on its statutory powers and whether it has been duly 
authorized to do so by producer gr oups.  
68.  Protection does not extend to any generic terms contained in a geographical indication. A term 
is deemed to be generic when it is considered as such by experts and the general public in Costa 
Rica. Monitoring the use of signs is the responsibility of  the regulatory councils, which are private 
bodies made up of producers.  
69.  With regard to foreign geographical indications, the procedure is simplified because such 
indications are duly registered in their country of origin and, as a result, there is no need  for an 
additional technical study. The regulations indicate that a summary of specifications and proof of 
registration in the country of origin should be provided.  
70.  Before closing my statement, I would like to extend my delegation 's thanks to the Secretari at's 
Intellectual Property, Government Procurement and Competition Division, whose collaboration has 
been key in the submission of these notifications. We also wish to highlight how useful the e -TRIPS 
tool was in this process, allowing for its quicker completion. On that note, I wish to conclude my 
statement and express our readiness to respond to Members ' questions.  
1.12  The Gambia  
71.  The Gambia has notified the Intellectual Property Bill 2021 which was informed by th e studies 
and consultations carried out during the development of the intellectual property policy. Some of 
the right s that  will be protected under new IP bill include geographical indications, traditional 
knowledge and genetic resources, unfair competitio n, and trade secrets. The bill merges the 
industrial property office and the copyright office to streamline the efficient administration of 
intellectual property rights in The Gambia. It also provides an opportunity to domesticate all  the IP 
protocols and treaties that The Gambia is a signatory to , or plans to sign in the future. The bill is 
now before the national assembly for enactment.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 16 - 
 
  1.13  Russian Federation  
72.  My delegation did not plan to intervene on this item of th e agenda however I have to comment 
some statements made. The Russian Federation wants to attract once again Members ' attention that 
the inappropriate and misleading political statements made by some Members integrated in the 
agenda are out of the mandate o f the Council for TRIPS. They only impede the work of the Council.  
1.14  WTO Secretariat  
73.  The significant work of delegations going into the submission of notifications is monitored and 
recognized in the Annual Report on Notifications and other Information Flows that the Secretariat 
prepares annually. This is the third year that we are preparing this overview and I hand over to my 
colleague Natalie Carlson who is primar ily responsible for an introduction of this year's report.  
74.   The Secretariat circulated a note entitled "Annual Report on Notifications and Other Information 
Flows " on 2 March 2023, carrying document symbol IP/C/W/696 . This report updates the first two 
such reports, which were warmly received by Members in 2021 and 2022. Like those rep orts, this 
year's report offers a factual overview of submission rates and trends for each of the primary TRIPS 
transparency mechanisms: notifications of laws and regulations; contact points; responses to the 
checklist on enforcement, and checklists relati ng to the reviews under Articles 24.2 and 27.3(b). It 
also discusses developed Members ' annual reports under Articles 66.2 and 67.  
75.  The reports in this series are a continuation of the Secretariat 's efforts to improve the factual 
information available to M embers regarding the operation of the Council 's transparency function. 
They seek to help Members make use of the publicly available e -TRIPS data, and to offer the Council 
for TRIPS a service of annual reporting on transparency mechanisms that is customary in other 
comparable WTO bodies. The current report covers submissions circulated from 1995 to the end of 
2022, with a particular emphasis on 2022 submissions.  
76.  Following a brief introduction, the Report begins by updating Members on the rate at which they 
have taken up the e -TRIPS system. Since its 2019 launch, Members have increasingly opted to use 
the e-TRIPS Submission System to efficiently make transparency -related submissions to the Council 
online. In 2022, 86% of submitting Members used the system to submit 95% of all submissions.  
77.  The companion e -TRIPS Gateway, in turn, also continued to grow as a popular resource for 
Members who seek to access and analy se the data contained in Members ' submissions. The number 
of daily page views for the Gateway nearl y doubled from 2021 to 2022.  
78.  Having updated Members on e -TRIPS usage, the report then addresses each TRIPS 
transparency mechanism in turn in section 3. Each sub -section begins with a brief overview of the 
nature of the commitment (which stems either from t he TRIPS Agreement itself, or subsequent 
decisions of this Council), and then summarizes the submissions circulated since 1995, with an 
emphasis on those circulated in the last year. We identify discernible trends and offer supporting 
charts, graphs, and t ables. I will highlight a few key points related to each transparency mechanism 
on the next few slides.  
79.  First, with respect to notifications under Article 63.2 of the Agreement, it is evident that from 
1995 through 2002 Members exerted significant efforts to submit initial notifications of their laws 
and regulations. However, given the ongoing nature of these obligations, and Members ' continuously 
evolving IP systems, fewer notifications of subsequent and revised legislation have been received 
than would be  expected. 36% of Members subject to the Article 63.2 obligation have not notified a 
new or amended law or regulation in over 15 years.  
80.  Although the total number of submitted laws and regulations declined in 2022 after the 
United Kingdom  completed its considerable two - year effort to update its legislation, 2022 saw a 
record level of Member engagement. More Members – 30, or 18% of the membership – notified a 
law or regulation in 2022 than in any year since 2004. The notifying Members come  from diverse 
regions around the globe and are at different stages of development. Significantly one -third of those 
who notified a law or regulation in 2022 did so for the first time in 10 or more years – recognizing 
that it is never too late to reengage a nd reinvigorate the monitoring function of the Council  for 
TRIPS .  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 17 - 
 
  81.  We also observed more activity in 2022 with respect to the companion checklist of issues on 
enforcement. The blue trend line on this slide, showing the cumulative number of Members who 
have submitted responses, is fairly flat from 2002, indicating that most Members submitted their 
initial responses over 20 years ago. The yellow trend line, showing the cumulative number of updates 
received, ticked upward in 2022 after two Members, Switzerland  and El Salvador, updated their 
earlier responses – the first such submissions since 2019.  
82.  The data also show that some contact point submissions may be in need of updating. Most 
Members under the obligation to notify contact points under Articles 69 and 67 of the Agreement 
have done so, but over 50% were submitted more than 10 years ago – and s ome date back over 20 
years. Ten members submitted new or updated Article 69 contact points for cooperation on IP 
enforcement in 2022, 3  times  more than in 2021. But only one Member, Austria, updated its contact 
point for technical cooperation under Articl e 67.  
83.  In addition to notifications, the report also provides information regarding developed Members ' 
annual reports and information submitted pursuant to built -in reviews. Developed Members are to 
submit annual reports on actions taken or planned in purs uit of their commitment under Article 66.2 
to provide incentives to enterprises and institutions for the purpose of promoting and encouraging 
technology transfer to LDCs. Developed Members have also agreed to annually report on 
programmes and projects unde rtaken to provide technical and financial cooperation in favour of 
developing and LDC Members under Article 67. The report identifies the number of these reports 
that were received each year, as well as the frequency with which individual Members have 
subm itted reports. During the 2022 reporting cycle, 16 developed Members reported programmes 
under Article 66.2, one more than the prior year, and 15 developed Members reported programmes 
under Article 67, two more than the prior year.  
84.  The final transparency mechanisms addressed in the report relate to the Council 's review under 
Article 24.2 of the application of the TRIPS Section on geographical indications, and the review under 
Article 27.3(b), relating to domestic frameworks for protecting biotechnology inv entions and new 
plant varieties. The data show only sporadic submissions since Members first agreed to provide 
information in support of these reviews over twenty years ago. In 2022, Switzerland submitted 
updated responses to the checklist of questions in the context of the review under Art icle 24.2. No 
responses were received to the checklist of questions in the context of the review under 
Article  27.3(b). There is potential for more engagement in both of these reviews – fewer than one -
third of Members hav e submitted responses to the checklist established by the Council under 
Article  24.2, and fewer than one -sixth of Members have submitted responses to the checklists 
established under the Council 's review of Article 27.3(b).  
85.  Much more information on each o f the transparency mechanisms introduced during this brief 
presentation, as well as information on less frequent ad hoc  notifications, can be found in the report 
itself. Detailed tables in the Annex to the report supplement the main text by offering data b y 
submission type and by individual Member.  
86.  We trust that this document will assist Members in enhancing the benefits of the transparency 
mechanisms set up under the TRIPS Agreement and by decisions of this Council. We encourage 
Members to review the repo rt closely and to contact us with any questions regarding the data or the 
procedures for making a notification or other submission.  
2  REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION  
87.  No statements were made under this agenda item.  
3  IP AND COVID -19 
3.1  South Africa  
88.  In the MC12 Declaration on the WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic and preparedness 
for future pandemics, Members acknowledged that the pandemic has highlighted the importance of 
working towards enhancing time ly, equitable and global access to safe, affordable and effective 
COVID -19 vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics and other essential medical goods. We recognized the 
role of the multilateral trading system in supporting the expansion and diversification of p roduction IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 18 - 
 
  of essential goods and related services needed in the fight against COVID -19 and future pandemics. 
We underscored the critical role  that the WTO can play in promoting inclusive growth including 
industrialization, and development.  
89.  We wish to recal l the statement of the 65 co -sponsors of the TRIPS waiver proposal,  at the 
General Council  of March 2023 where the co -sponsors outlined the concerns they have with the 
scope of the MC12 outcome and the time it has taken the WTO to deliver comprehensive out come s 
that are relevant and  in the interest of humanity. Importantly, the co -sponsors emphasized that the 
pace of discussions have outlined the importance of trigger -ready mechanism s to deal with future 
pandemics and called upon the TRIPS Council to urgent ly engage on this issue with a view to take 
this matter  forward. We propose that agenda I tem 3 be broadened to IP and COVID -19, and 
Preparedness for Future Pandemics to take into account bullet point 3 on document WT/L/1142 . 
3.2  India  
90.  Addressing inequitable access to  health products remains a challenge in the context of the 
current pandemic, and therefore as mandated in the paragraph 23 of the MC12 WTO 's response to 
the pandemic document , a solution to this critical issue is imperative to build resilience for future 
pandemics. The protracted discussions on the TRIPS waiver proposal and its delayed and limited 
outcome have highlighted  the importance of a mechanism to deal with future pandem ics. My 
delegation hopes that the TRIPS Council will engage on this issue in earnest and good faith to avoid 
repetition of the past mistakes and learn from our experiences. Further, we have a suggestion to 
make with respect to the title of this agenda item , which reflects both documents, WT/L/ 1141 and 
document WT/L/1142 , the Minis terial Declaration on the WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic 
and preparedness for future pandemics . As this agenda deals with implementation of MC12 outcomes 
with respect to this particular Council , this should get reflected in the title itself as this is not just 
limited to the COVID -19 pandemic.  
3.3  European Union  
91.  I think the item 3, IP and Covid -19 refers to documents that actually pertain narrowly to 
COVID -19 as such, to the pandemic that we have been discussing in  this Council now for a number 
of meetings, a number of years, and the expansion to future pandemics at this stage does not 
necessarily seems to be useful, because this is something that we would like to, of course, also 
discuss internally. So, at this stage, on behalf of the E uropean Union, I would like to fu rther discuss 
with my capital, with Brussels, and of course we are open also to discussing with our colleagues 
from South Africa and India about this idea.  
3.4  United Kingdom  
92.  Similar to the European Union, we align ourselves with their comment, and we would also want 
to take this proposal back to capital to discuss further with colleagues there.  
3.5  South Africa  
93.  Just to th ank the EU and the UK. We would like to indicate that the proposal is wholly in line 
with the Ministerial mandate in paragraph 23 of the Ministerial Declaration on the WTO response to 
the pandemic. Having said that, we are open to discussing with the colle agues with a view to finding 
out whether they would like to, at our level, reverse the Ministerial mandate.  
4  REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B)  
5  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY  
6  PROTECTION OF TRADI TIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE  
6.1  India  
94.  Traditional knowledge continues to play crucial roles in economic, social and cultural life and 
development not only in traditional societies but also in modern societies. Contribution of traditional IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 19 - 
 
  knowledge to human development especially in food produc tion, crop yields, health care transforms 
biodiversity into bioresources. Biodiversity and associated traditional knowledge are an integral 
strength of today 's developing countries,  particularly in the areas of agriculture, horticulture , as well 
as health and wellbeing. Traditional medicine has been an integral resource for health for centuries 
in communities around the world and it is still a mainstay for some with inequities in access to 
conventional medicine. The sociocultural practices and biodiversity heritages are invaluable 
resources to evolve inclusive, diverse and sustainable development. However, biopiracy and 
misappropriation of traditional knowledge remains a grave threat not only for the traditional, local 
communities but also for  the environmen t and sustainable development.  
95.  This speaks to the mutual supportiveness of the two agreements , TRIPS and the CBD, and the 
need for a linkage. India reiterates its demand of an international enforceable regime to contain 
misappropriation. Patents should not  be granted for existing traditional knowledge and associated 
genetic resources. Further , where traditional knowledge and associated genetic resources form the 
basis of scientific development, it is important to have disclosure of source or origin of the 
resource/knowledge along with disclosure that the access was on mutually agreed terms , thus 
enhancing transparency about the utilization of genetic resources and/or associated traditional 
knowledge . 
96.   Article 16.5 of the Convention on Biological Diversity cl early recognizes "that patents and other 
intellectual property rights may have an influence on the implementation of this Convention ". It 
mandates that the Parties "shall cooperate in this regard, subject to national legislation and 
international law, in o rder to ensure that such rights are supportive of , and do not run counter to , 
its objectives. " Furthermore, the Doha Ministerial Declaration in paragraph 19 has mandated that 
the TRIPS Council examine the relationship between TRIPS and the CBD, and the pro tection of 
traditional knowledge and folklore.  
97.  However, regrettably , the TRIPS Agreement continues to sideline  various IPR -related 
obligations in the CBD despite a vast majority of the WTO membership being the demandeurs of 
this. Despite several submissions , two of which being TN/C/W/52  submitted in June 2008 with  the 
support of 109 Members , followed by the last submission on this issue TN/C/W/59  in April 2011 , as 
well as several rounds of in -depth discussions , progress on this file remains elusive. Some Members 
have argued that the TRIPS Council is not an appropriate forum for these discussions as WIPO, 
where the IGC process has not been able to make much headway since years , is the right forum for 
this discussion. While the same argument could be extended to – as an example – the climate -
related discussions at the WTO , since UNFCCC is the mandated forum for climate discussions, we do 
see the WTO membership engaging on climate -related issues. Given the enforceability of the TRIPS 
Agreement and the fact that much of the misappropriation is a consequence of trade, there is both 
the mandate and the need  to build the linkage between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD under 
the aegis of this Council.  
98.  Chair, therefore, considering the mandate from the Doha Ministerial Declaration and the 2030 
Sustainable Development Goals, targets 2.5 and 15.6, that specifical ly call for promoting access to 
and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and 
associated traditional knowledge, it is our responsibility to take these discussions forward towards 
an outcome. India is of th e view that a formal briefing by the CBD Secretariat on the latest 
developments of the Nagoya Protocol will be useful for Members. We also support updating the three 
factual briefs by the Secretariat on these issues , and  India remains committed to construc tively 
engage and build momentum on these important issues.  
6.2  Bangladesh  
99.  The delegation of Bangladesh delivers this statement in its national capacity. On agenda items 
4, 5 and 6, or the so -called Triplet s, the position of Bangladesh has not changed. In this regard, to 
avoid repetition, I refer to my delegation 's statement delivered during the previous TRIPS Council 
meetings. Bangladesh supports discussions towards a progress on these issues and stands ready to 
engage constructively with Members.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 20 - 
 
  6.3  Indonesia  
100.  On this agenda item, we would like to refer to our previous statements on agenda items 4,5 
and 6 as our position remains unchanged. Although Article 27.3(b) exclu des patentability for animal s 
and plants, our delegation further stresses the need to amend this article. Indeed, we need to 
prevent misappropriation and misuse of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. The impact of 
patentability of microorganisms o n genetic resources can have both positive and negative effects. 
At the same time, there is a need to balance the protection of intellectual property rights with the 
fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources.  
101.  Given th e potential for misappropriation and exploitation of traditional knowledge and genetic 
resources, we need to ensure that the patenting of microorganisms derived from genetic resources 
should also respect the rights of the countries and communities that pro vide these resources. This 
could involve the inclusion of provisions that require the disclosure of the origin of genetic resources 
used in patent applications, as well as guidelines for the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising 
from the use of ge netic resources.  
102.  This is also in line with the proposal contained in document TN/C/W/59 , in which Indonesia 
and other like -minded Members, ha ve proposed to add a mandatory disclosure requirement with a 
view to strengthen ing the effectiveness of Article 29 of the TRIPS Agreement. In reviewi ng the TRIPS 
Agreement, Members should strive to strike a balance between the promotion of innovation and the 
protection of traditional knowledge and genetic resources, while also facilitating access to technology 
and knowledge transfer, particularly for d eveloping countries and LDCs.  
103.  Indonesia further emphasizes the importance of balancing the implementation of the TRIPS 
Agreement with the importance of fulfilling the CBD commitments. It would be in our best interest 
to invite the CBD Secretariat to brief the Council on the Nagoya Protocol and its developments.  
6.4  Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group  
104.  On behalf of the African Group, I would like to briefly reite rate our long -standing position on 
the three agenda items which is clearly known by this Council:  
• It is important to review Art 27.3(b) to incorporate among others, a limit to protection of 
certain life forms, oblige s disclosure requirement on origin of genetic resources, tradition 
knowledge and folklore, and right holders to be held responsible to share benefits with 
custodian s or owners of genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore.  
• Members should also be obliged to prohibit misappropriation  of genetic resources and 
traditional knowledge.  
105.  Furthermore, the African Group would like to continue to insist on the need to invite the CBD 
Secretariat to update Members of the Council on the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol .  This 
request is in line with the WTO mandate stipulated in the Marrakesh Agreement with respect to 
cooperation with other international organizations on matters relating to the WTO. Once again, we 
urge Members to act amenably on this matter.  
6.5  Peru  
106.  Peru's position on agenda items 4, 5 and 6 has not changed. We would like to stress, however, 
that while there are still no substantive discussions in this Council, countries such as Peru continue 
to experience misappropriation of our genetic r esources and traditional knowledge.  
107.  According to the National Commission for the Protection of Access to Peruvian Biological 
Biodiversity and to the Collective Knowledge of Indigenous Peoples, 285 cases of biopiracy related 
to 42 genetic resources of Peruv ian origin have been identified to date. This represents an increase 
of almost 40 cases since our last meeting in this Council  in October. Moreover, 2022 saw the second 
highest number of biopiracy cases since this Council began its work, reflecting the imp ortance, 
timeliness and urgency of addressing this issue.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 21 - 
 
  108.  The solution that we have consistently proposed , and believe could address this international 
issue, is the inclusion of an obligation to disclose the origin of resources. Article 29 of the TRIPS 
Agreement does not suffice, as it does not require patent applicants to disclose the country of origin 
or provide evidence of compliance with prior informed consent and benefit -sharing. We are aware 
of the diverging positions, which is precisely why we belie ve it is necessary to reinitiate the dialogue 
and discussions that will enable us to make progress on this matter. We thus reiterate our support 
for the participation of the CBD Secretariat, so that it can shed more light on the issue and on how 
both instr uments can support and reinforce each other. We also think that it would be worthwhile to 
update the Secretariat 's notes.  
109.  Lastly, regarding the position of some Members that WIPO is the best forum for addressing 
these issues, we believe that those discussi ons do not preclude discussions from being held in this 
House, from our own perspective, and see them as complementary.  
6.6  South Africa  
110.  We would like to recall our previous statements on these items. As indicated previously, in this 
discussion we often lose the relative importance of the individual components making up the 
'Triplets '. The Doha Ministerial Declaration instructed the TRIPS C ouncil as part of its work 
programme to review Article 27.3(b) as well as examine the relationship between the TRIPS 
Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the protection of traditional 
knowledge and folklore. These are important ma ndated issues which remain an integral part of the 
Doha round single undertaking.  
111.  Biopiracy remains a pervasive problem and  in the absence of a multilateral solution, as 
applicable under the TRIPS Agreement, national disclosure requirements will remain ina dequate. It 
is encouraging that WIPO is making progress in the area of genetic resources,  and we would urge 
that the WTO does not make this another area of interest to developing countries , where we adopt 
a siloed and non -responsive approach.  
112.  Discussions i n this forum and those under the auspices of the IGC at WIPO are complimentary 
and not mutually exclusive. In this regard, we welcome the progress made at the recent WIPO 
General Assembly where consensus was reached on a diplomatic conference dealing with genetic 
resources. The WTO membership should certainly take note of such developments. As indicated 
previously, our delegation would welcome a briefing from WIPO in this regard. Similarly, it would be 
useful for the CBD Secretariat to brief the TRIPS Counc il on the CBD and other implementation issues 
under the Nagoya Protocol as well as  any new developments.  
113.  We also wish to raise once more the issue of the update of the three technical notes contained 
in documents IP/C/W/368/Rev.1 , IP/C/W/369/Rev.1  and IP/C/W/370/Rev.1 . It would be appropriate 
for the Secretariat to update the information contained in these notes in a neutral manner to further 
facilitate discussions among Members.  
114.  Finally, we are concerned about the lack of progress on issues of interest to developing 
countries due to the blockage of discussions by a few Members. This does not augur well for a system 
that is balanced and is expected to address the interests of all. We would like to suggest that we 
revive our discussions by encouraging Members to share experiences on how they regulate R&D on 
genetic resourc es, what measures they have put in place to incentivize benefit -sharing between the 
providers and the user prior to access, mechanisms that have been put in place to strengthen the 
ability of indigenous people and local communities to benefit from the use of traditional knowledge , 
and measures implemented to promote technology transfer and cooperation to build research and 
innovation capacity in developing countries , among others.  
6.7  Brazil  
115.   As other delegations, I wou ld like to reaffirm Brazil 's statements on these topics. As our 
position remains the same, I would like to seize this occasion to reaffirm our position on the 
importance of the predisposal of disclosure and benefit -sharing. We understand , as other delegati ons 
that have taken the floor before, that it would be very useful for the discussions that we have here 
in the TRIPS Council, that we could count on the support and guidance of the CBD Secretariat on 
the relationship between the IP agenda that we have her e and those related to biodiversity.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 22 - 
 
  116.  We also understand that the existence of ongoing negotiations at WIPO should not be 
understood to preclude discussions on these topics at the TRIPS Council . The mere fact of reading 
the TRIPS Agreement , that makes reference to several of the topics that we also have at WIPO,  
means  if those topics are in the TRIPS Agreement and they are also at WIPO there is no reason for 
them not to be also discussed here.  
117.  In this connection I would strongly encourage M embers to fully engage in the preparatory 
work for the diplomatic conferences on genetic resources and intellectual property rights that is 
expected to take place early in the next year. This was a mandate that was given by the Nagoya 
Protocol and at that time the agreement that all Members had was that those discussions would 
have been dealt with at WIPO . Therefore,  we are really positive on a final result on that at WIPO.  
6.8  Japan  
118.  Japan 's position also remains unchanged. There are concerns that the introduction of the 
disclosure requirement in the IP system  would discourage industries from conducting research and 
development activities on biological materials.  
119.  This delegation believes the WIPO IGC is the most ap propriate forum for holding technical 
discussions on genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore from IP aspects. Given that 
detailed discussions have been continuously held at WIPO IGC, we should avoid duplication of 
discussion. The delegation o f Japan remains willing to contribute to evidence -based discussions on 
these issues in a constructive and effective manner.  
6.9  United States of America  
120.  The position of the United States is well -known  from our previous statements, so I will be 
brief. Regarding genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural express ions, we 
continue to believe that WIPO is the best forum to address these issues under the IGC current 
mandate. The WIPO I GC is tasked with addressing unresolved issues and working on a common 
understanding of core issues based on an evidence -based approach and examples of national 
experiences. While the 2022 General Assembly of WIPO took a decision to convene a diplomatic 
conference to conclude an international legal instrument related to intellectual property, genetic 
resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources no later than 2024, significant 
gaps in views, positions and scope of the subject matter remain. The United States will continue to 
engage constructively in technical discussions at WIPO 's IGC . With respect to the various requests 
made today, the United States is not in a position to support these requests, but remains open to 
discussions, inc luding bilaterally with delegations, in-between , and at the margins of the TRIPS 
Council meetings.  
6.10  Chair person   
121.  To go back to the statement by the United States. If you recall South Africa introduced a new 
element – to have WIPO brief the Council. Is that also something that could be discussed ? Is this 
agreeable ? It is a new element entirely , I believe.  
6.11  United State s of America  
122.  We will consider that, but we are not in a position today to support that request.  
6.12  World Intellectual Property Organization  
123.  WIPO is ready to supply this briefing. We have taken note of the reque st at the last session of 
the TRIPS Council, and at this session, and we remain available to provide this briefing at the 
required time.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 23 - 
 
  7  NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS  
7.1  South Africa  
124.  It is well established that proponents of the applicat ion of non-violation complaints  under the 
TRIPS Agreement have not provided concrete examples of the kind of scenarios under which an 
otherwise TRIPS -consistent measure would impair or nullify benefits beyond those arising from the 
obligations set out in t he Agreement.  Having said this Chair and as we  have indicated in the past, 
we stand ready to discuss our ideas with delegations on NVCs.  
7.2  Bangladesh  
125.  The delegation of Bangladesh delivers this statem ent in its national capacity. As an interim 
arrangement, Bangladesh supported the extension of the moratorium until the 13th Ministerial 
Conference. Bangladesh is in favor of establishing a permanent moratorium on this issue. To avoid 
repetition, I refer to our delegation 's previous statements on this issue. Bangladesh is ready to 
engage with Members on this issue.  
7.3  Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group  
126.  Non-violation and situation complaints remain a priority issue for the African Group, and our 
long-standing position has not changed on the matter. In our view, the moratorium should remain 
as a permanent feature of the TRIPS Agreement. It is clear with the African Group that , should the 
moratorium expire, it will not trigger an automatic application of subparagraphs  1(b) and 1(c) of 
Article XXIII of GATT 1994 on the dispute settlement mechanism, without having adopted by 
consensus the scope and moda lities.  For this, the proponents have not brought any proposal on that 
matter, and that clearly indicates the difficulties which were predicted from the very beginning of 
the establishment of the Agreement, that non -violation and situation complaints shoul d not be 
applicable for this particular agreement due to the flexibilit ies that have been well considered, so to 
speak.  Nevertheless, the African G roup remains committed to work with other Members on the in -
built mandate to examine the scope and modalities.  
7.4  India  
127.  India's position on the issue of non -violation complaints under the TRIPS Agreement remains 
unchanged. India looks forward to working with like -minded Members in making non -violation 
complaints inapplicable to the TRIPS  Agreement . 
7.5  Kenya, on behalf of the ACP Group  
128.  The ACP Group recalls its position on this issue and continues to call for the making of the 
moratorium permanent. The ACP Group recalls its position on this issue and continues to call for the 
making of the moratorium permanent. We however remain open to further discussions on the  
moratorium.  
7.6  Indonesia  
129.  Indonesia 's position remains unchanged from the previous meeting regarding the extension of 
the moratorium of non -violation and situation complaints (NVSC) to the upcoming MC 13. We would 
also like to reiterate on the negative impact of such complaints, particularly its linkages with the 
development issue.  
130.  As we all know, the NVSC provision allows a WTO Member to file a complaint with the WTO 's 
Dispute Settlement Body even if the measures at hand do not technically violate the TRIPS 
Agreement. While this provision can be important for protecting intellectual property rights, it is 
prone to misuse and can create uncertainty for businesses and investors. That is why Indonesia 
believes it is importan t to maintain the moratorium on NVSCs. This moratorium has been in place 
since the TRIPS Agreement came into force in 1995, and it provides a degree of stability and 
predictability in the international trade system. It is especially imp ortant for developing countries, 
which often have weaker economies and less bargaining power in international trade negotiations.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 24 - 
 
  131.  By maintaining the moratorium on NVSCs, developing countries and LDCs will have a degree 
of protection against potential trade  disputes with more powerful countries. This will allow them to 
focus on implementing their development objectives and promoting innovation, without the threat 
of costly legal challenges.  
8  REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 71 .1 
132.  No statements were made under this agenda item.  
9  REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2  
133.  No statements were made under this agenda item.  
10  FOLLOW -UP TO THE TWENTIETH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 
DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT  
10.1  WTO Secretariat  
134.  Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to present the Secretariat 's report on the sixteenth 
Annual Workshop on the  Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement: Incentives for 
Technology Transfer to LDCs, which took place over the past two days.  
135.  We offer our sincere thanks to you, and to their excellencies Ambassador Hassan of Djibouti 
and Ambassador Rahman o f Bangladesh, for your invaluable support for the Workshop. This 
high-level engagement has been indispensable in ensuring that the Workshop contributes 
substantively to the work of this Council and is responsive to the needs and priorities of 
LDC Members . 
136.  We are also most grateful to each of the representatives and experts of the participating LDC 
and developed country Members. Participants included capital - and Geneva -based experts from 
18 LDC Members and from nine developed country Members. Their substant ive contributions, active 
engagement and commitment to dialogue ensured the success of the Workshop.  
137.  As part of the continuous efforts to respond most effectively to the needs and priorities for 
technology transfer identified by our LDC Members, and at the  request of the LDC Group, the 
Secretariat prepared a note comprising a summary of responses to the survey that the Secretariat 
developed and circulated as an optional tool in 2021 and 2022. This note is circulated as room 
document RD/IP/52  in both English and French. Th e Secretariat would welcome comments, 
suggestions as well as further input for improvement.  
138.  We would like to highlight several general observations. The four fields of technology that 
LDC Members most commonly reported as priorities for technology transfer  were environment and 
climate change, agriculture and food, public health and pharmaceuticals, and information and 
communication technologies or ICT. These priority fields of technology coincided to a significant 
extent with the actual technology program mes reported. Other priority technology fields include  
manufacturing, construction, infrastructure and transport, and mining.  
139.  Concerning the range of incentives presented in the reports, the survey of LDC Members most  
commonly identified as relevant governm ent-sponsored and funded joint research and development 
activities, including the dissemination of knowledge and skills.  Building on these survey results, this 
year's Workshop focused on further strengthening the capacity of LDC Members to identify their 
priority needs for creating a sound and viable technological base. This, in turn, would enable the 
more precise focusing and tailoring of incentives for promoting technology transfer to LDCs to 
enhance their relevance and impact. Attention was also paid to how to measure impact, with some 
discussion covering the importance of tracking sustained impact.  
140.  To this end, we also invited our sister international organizations to share their experience and 
expertise as well as to report on their activities in suppor ting LDCs to undertake needs assessments 
for technology transfer in various priority fields. We therefore warmly thank our WIPO, WHO and IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 25 - 
 
  UNCTAD colleagues who significantly enriched the discussion, and welcome th e further strengthening 
of our collaboration  and practical cooperation in this vital area.  
141.  The Workshop was also grounded in the considerable practical insights provided by experts 
from LDC Members who presented on their national experiences and challenges in identifying needs 
and priorities for tec hnological development, and in seeking to respond to those needs , once 
identified.  Experts from developed country Members also shared their experience s with tailoring 
technology transfer programmes , and their impact on LDCs ' priority needs whilst providing updated 
and complementary information to their respective reports submitted in 2022. The Workshop 
concluded with a roundtable discussion which enabled LDC participants to give their feedback on 
these reports.  
142.  In an effort t o improve the value and impact of this annual dialogue between LDC Members 
and developed country Members, the Secretariat compiled key messages from Workshop 
participants and speakers in the form of an informal resource document, which was made available 
in both English and French. The Secretariat also continued its practice of preparing a summary on 
the technology transfer programmes reported by the developed country Members. The summary 
presented at the Workshop provided an overview of these programmes reported in 2021 and 2022, 
as part of one reporting cycle, with a focus on agriculture, environment, and public health as the 
three priority fields for technology transfer.  
143.  This summary only seeks to build on the continuous efforts to enhance transparency, a nd to 
provide an overview of the detailed and diverse information contained in the reports. The compilation 
is purely a factual resource , and it does not attempt to analyse or interpret the reported information.  
As advised to the Council at its last meetin g, the Workshop comprises a workshop segment and a 
reporting and review segment within the formal meeting of the Council. Therefore, we have arranged 
for the attendance of capital -based  LDC participants at today 's Council meeting as their national 
delegati ons, and again thank them for participating in this agenda item.  
144.  We conclude by expressing deepest appreciation to our Members for their continuing guidance 
and support for this work, and in particular , the close guidance and engagement of the LDC Group. 
We look forward to Members ' further guidance arising from today 's Council discussion.  
10.2  Bangladesh, on behalf of the LDC Group  
145.  Under this item, the delegation of Bangladesh delivers this statement on behalf of the 
LDC Group. The LDC Group thanks the reporting countr ies for submitting their respective  report s of 
2022 to the Council  for TRIPS  on how each is implementing its obligation under Art icle 66.2 of the 
TRIPS Agreement. The LDC Group also thanks the Secretariat  for its report today. The LDC Group is 
grateful  to the Secretariat , particularly,  the team of the IP Division  and ITTC , for organizing the 
annual Workshop held on 14-15 March 2023 . This is a unique opportunity for informal dialogue 
between the LDC s and developed country Members on the necessity of the right kind of technology 
required for the LDCs. Our Group thanks all the participants, from the LDCs and develope d countries, 
for their contribution to the Workshop.  
146.  We fully understand the effort involved in compiling a large part of the relevant programmes 
out of the many valuable projects that are implemented under each country 's official development 
assistance  (ODA). The LDC Group acknowledges the valuable socio -economic benefits generated by 
each of the projects reported and urge s other developed country Members  who also have valuable 
development cooperation project s or programmes , to share these . Last year, on behalf of the LDC 
Group, we provided opinions to each individual reporting delegation on their 2021 reports. We trust 
that those comments were helpful for their reports in the next cycles.  
147.  The LDCs are looking for new specific incentives in troduced by developed countries to 
encourage companies, enterprises, institutions or other entities located in their territories to promote 
technology transfer to LDCs, in fulfilment of the ir obligation un der Article 66.2 of the TRIPS 
Agreement. The LDCs a re specifically looking for technologies and skills to improve the quality, local 
value addition and global competitiveness of their products, as well as integration into global supply 
chains.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 26 - 
 
  148.  We know that several national and international entities are wo rking towards achieving the 
UN-led sustainable development goals (SDGs), and we would call for closer coordination as the same 
developed country governments are involved in these efforts. Where "capacity building " is mentioned 
in the programme or project d escription, and where a conscious effort is made to upgrade skill levels 
and to transfer technology to LDCs, it would be worth knowing what actual impact was made with 
respect to technology absorption in the LDC s concerned. In other words, could the report ing 
countries kindly share with the LDCs the final project evaluation report? This is a necessary tool for 
evaluating all such ODA projects related to capacity building.  
149.  While almost all reporting countries have reported on a large number of very useful O DA 
projects aimed at meeting social or other laudable objectives (such as improving health, education, 
gender equality, community integration/democratic participation, road safety, climate change, 
environmental/biodiversity conservation, natural disaster m anagement, infrastructure, effective 
administration, governance or regulation, implementation of WTO agreements, or meeting SDG 
objectives, other than SDG 17), and while these may very well have one or other  useful technologies 
applied or used (such as dig ital/ICT tools), we would not assume that this would automatically lead 
to the promotion and encouragement of technology transfer to LDCs in the projects that ought to 
be reported under the TRIPS Art icle 66.2 obligation unless this was the principal object ive of these 
projects.  
150.  While a number of reported ODA projects may involve introducing new products into the 
industrial or agricultural sectors of LDCs by foreign consultants or companies or entities, if these do 
not involve any actual technology absorptio n in the LDC concerned, even if it does result in the use 
of new products in that LDC, these should not be reported under the Art icle 66.2 obligation.  
151.  The LDC Group accepts that many projects reported have a mix of developing countries and 
LDCs as benefici aries. However, we request developed countries to separate the budget and goal 
allocation for LDC beneficiary countries and not to report the names of developing country 
beneficiaries. For regional integrated projects, the names of these developing country  beneficiary 
countries may be relevant but should always be placed in parentheses. It is necessary to have the 
final allocation for each LDC , and the LDC Group very much appreciates the EU 's effort to do so for 
the EU projects. The LDC Group encourages oth er reporting Members to follow this excellent 
example.  
152.  While most reporting countries have, in recent years, separated the Art icle 66.2 and Art icle 67 
reports to avoid duplication, some reporting Members still duplicate these projects/programmes on 
IP training etc. The LDC Group requests reporting Members to avoid such double counting in their 
future reports.  
153.  The LDC Group requests more specific information and th e correct websites with contact points 
for each relevant project, which should include, at the minimum, the name of the persons responsible 
for the project and their emails. Many reporting countries have  already  provided this. Therefore, it 
should not be d ifficult for other reporting Members . We also hope that the priority technology sectors 
highlighted by the LDCs will be considered by the developed countries wh en initiating the next 
targeted projects and programmes in this regard.  
154.  Articles 7 and 8 of the TRIPS Agreement provide that IP rights should contribute to the 
promotion of technological innovation and transfer and dissemination of technology. We understand  
that the aim is clearly to support the socio -economic development in developing countries and LDCs. 
This also matches  with the core objective of the 2030 Agenda for the SDGs: leave no one behind.  
155.  Some LDC  Members are in the row of graduation from the LDC category. Their GDP may have 
increased, but this does not necessarily mean that they have full y developed their institutional 
capacity to access and regulate technologies required for creating a viable technological base. They 
need technology transfer support and realistic timeframe for applying the provisions of the 
TRIPS  Agreement. The LDC group stands ready to engage constructively with Members.  
10.3  Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group  
156.  The African Group welcomes the reports submitted by some developed countries in relation to 
the impl ementation of Art icle 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Also, we commend the Secretariat for IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 27 - 
 
  once again having successfully organised the Workshop on this matter, bringing in colleagues from 
capital to participate as a means of promoting information sharing and  frank exchange of views. We 
welcome this practice to continue and encourage beneficiaries to thoroughly examine the impact 
and deficiencies of the reported implementation projects in their respective countries.  
157.   Furthermore, we would like to echo the LDCs ' call on the need to establish clear definitions , 
parameters a nd indicators to evaluate the implementation efficacy of Article  66.2. We also urge 
developed countries to align their reports to the LDCs proposed template  as described in document 
IP/C/W/ 664. Apparently, most of the reports do not discern elements of technology transfer , except 
for reports from few developed Members contain ing meaningful implemented projects , other than 
merely producing list of workshops and trainings  which are meant to address different objectives.  
158.  The African  Group would like to insist on the importance of ensuring that this obligation is 
honoured and thus we will continue to follow -up with great interest on the implementation of 
Article 66.2, to ensure that the intended benefits for LDCs are accrued.  
10.4  Sierra L eone  
159.  Sierra Leone thanks the Secretariat, particularly the team of the IP Division  and ITTC , for 
organizing the annual Workshop on the implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement from 
14 to 1 6 March 202 3. We are particularly grateful that despite the ongoing global challenges, the 
Secretariat was able to organize the Workshop and continue the exchange on this important issue. 
We believe this platform provides an unapparelled opportunity for the  participants, both from the 
LDCs and developed countries, to have a need -based and focused discussion on technology transfer 
issues. We trust these dialogues will inform the Secretariat and developed country Members on 
future technical assistance and tech nology transfer programmes.  
160.  While acknowledging the valuable socio -economic benefits generated from previous and 
ongoing projects under Article 66.2, we request support in the form of technology transfer in the 
following sectors: agriculture and trade; health; education in the form of specialized skills training; 
tourism and energy and infrastructure to meet the government of Sierra Leone 's development 
agenda that aims to achieve middle -income status by 2039. Sierra Leone thanks developed country 
Members fo r their annual reports under TRIPS Article 66.2 and encourage s them to continue 
assisting LDCs and increase their outreach and the level of assistance in the transfer of technology 
under Article 66.2.  
161.  In the interest of promoting the effective implementat ion and impact of Article 66.2, my 
delegation kindly suggests reporting countries to share with LDCs the final project evaluation 
report s, particularly with respect to technology absorption in the LDCs concerned. We also encourage 
that the priority technol ogy sectors highlighted by the LDCs in our respective presentation during 
the Workshop be considered by the developed countries wh en initiating the next targeted projects 
and program mes in this regard. We stand ready to continue our constructive engagement  with 
Members.  
10.5  United Kingdom  
162.  The United Kingdom remains committed to implementing Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement 
aimed at promoting and encouraging technology transfer to LDC Members. The UK was pleased to 
be able to participate in the recent Workshop, held over 14 -15 March, on t he implementation of 
TRIPS Article 66.2, where an expert from the UK provided an overview of some of our programmes 
to promote and encourage technology transfer, including both national and international 
partnerships; as well as research priorities; and Pr oduct Development Partnerships.  
163.  The UK would like to extend our gratitude to delegations who attended and contributed to the 
discussions in this workshop. The sessions were an excellent forum for sharing Members ' experiences 
on programmes and ways in which  transferring technology to LD Cs has been incentivised and we 
look forward to participating in future sessions to help LDCs build their viable technological base.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 28 - 
 
  10.6  Nepal  
164.  I am delivering this statement as a capital -based Workshop participant from Nepal. I would 
like to thank the WTO ITTC for organizing this important Workshop. I also thank the focal point of 
the LDC Group, Mr Deva from Bangladesh. I commend the report of th e Secretariat.  
165.  I would like to thank the Members who have been providing incentive s as can be seen in the 
annual reports. LDCs lag behind  industrial development due to a limited  technological base as well 
as other structural problems. As a preliminary observation , the incentives offered  seem to be limited 
in view of the spirit of the TRIPS Agreement.  
166.  I request developed Members to provide incentives which are implementable, precise, and 
effective. The support should create a sound and viable technological base in the LDCs including 
Nepal. I have already shared Nepal 's needs and priorities during my presentation at the Workshop, 
Now I would like to highlight a few points again:  
• Technology transfer on the priority exportable goods identified in the Nepal Trade 
Integration Strategy , including geographical indications . 
• Support for technology to institutions involv ed in innovation and development.  
• Assist ance to establish the National Gateway on Technology Tran sfer. 
• Technology transfer  on the commercialization of geographical indications  
10.7  Benin  
167.  The delegation of Benin would like to thank you for having convened the Council for TRIPS and 
takes this opportunity to express its profound gratitude for your initiatives and the constructive 
interaction, which have enabled LDCs to enjoy certain opportuni ties in the context of implementing 
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement.  
168.  Our thanks also go to the Members of the Organization, developed countries and the heads of 
partner institutions and organizations that have launched and implemented projects benefit ing 
Benin. My delegation is grateful to the WTO for its invitation to this Workshop, which is highly 
rewarding in terms of the sharing of experiences and good practices. Benin associates itself with the 
statement made by the LDC Group and by the African Gr oup. We look forward to continuing existing 
partnerships and remain available for ever more fruitful collaborations.  
169.  Lastly, my delegation invites all Members to work to further increase visibility and diversify 
opportunities in order to enable our countr y to meet the numerous existing challenges with regard s 
to the transfer of technology and expertise in important fields such as agriculture, environment, 
public health and training of our country 's young professionals.  
10.8  Bangladesh  
170.  Bangladesh aligns with the statement delivered on behalf the LDC Group. I deliver this 
statement at national capacity. My delegation thanks the Secretariat, particularly the team of the IP 
Division  and ITTC , for organizing the annual Workshop on  the implementation of Article 66.2 of the 
TRIPS Agreement from 14 to 15 March 2023. This was neatly designed with the most  relevant 
sessions and speakers.  
171.  During the time of pandemic, with travel restrictions and other sanitary measures in place, we 
could no t come to Geneva in person. The Workshop provides an opportunity  for participants, from 
both the LDCs and developed countries, to meet each other in Geneva. This is truly a good 
opportunity to learn from each other.  
172.  The capital based  LDC colleagues provide d feedback through a voluntary survey. The 
information shared by the LDCs may be helpful for the Secretariat to know the priorities of the LDCs 
and design future technical assistance program mes in this regard. My delegation requests the IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 29 - 
 
  Secretariat to comp ile the list of technologies identified by the LDCs in the Workshop and report to 
the next meeting of the Council  for TRIPS . 
173.  My delegation has tentatively prioritized the following sectors for technology transfer to my 
country:  
• Agriculture and Food;  
• Environment and Climate Change;  
• Public Health and Pharmaceuticals;  
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) , e-commerce ; 
• Construction/Infrastructure/Transport;  
• Manufacturing and Mining.  
174.  Bangladesh hopes that developed country Members will be able to initiate targeted activities 
and projects to transfer specific technologies in those specific priority areas in my country. My 
delegation thanks the developed country Members for their annual reports under TRIPS Article 66.2 
and we are happy that most of t he 2022 reports are following the format suggested by the LDC 
Group. My delegation acknowledges the valuable benefits generated by the projects presented by 
the developed country delegates in the Workshop.  
175.  We expect that the annual reports should specify t he beneficiary LDCs and identify the specific 
technology that has been transferred. There is also a mixture of technical assistance (under Article 
67) initiatives like legal training and drafting. We request the reporting countries to kindly share 
with the LDCs the final project evaluation report. This is a necessary tool for evaluating the projects 
related to capacity building. In conclusion, the delegation of Bangladesh strongly suggests the 
Secretariat to continue to organi se this annual Workshop in the future.  
10.9  Switzerland  
176.  Switzerland was pleased to participate in this year 's interactive Workshop on Article 66.2 of 
the TRIPS Agreement. We welcomed th is opportunity to hear from LDC delegations about their needs 
and experiences in technology and knowledge transfer. We appreciated the sharing of LDCs ' 
perspectives on the challenges they face in undertaking needs assessments . The Workshop resulted 
in multiple opportunities for direct contact and ri ch discussion s among participants.  
177.  One of the key challenges LDCs mentioned in identifying needs and in taking full advantage of 
technology transfer, was the lack of technical skills, training and human capacity. We are pleased 
that many of the Swiss activities reported under Article 66.2 address this need and contribute to the 
capacity building of LDCs  and transfer of technology to them . We will continue our efforts in this 
regard.  
178.  Switzerland made a presentation a t this year 's Workshop, comprising a brief  update on our 
latest report under Article  66.2. In that presentation , we highlighted two program mes in areas of 
priority  for LDCs: sustainable agriculture and information and communications technology  (ICT). 
The first presentation, made by the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, focused on the 
e-commerce and Digital Economy Program me. The second, delivered by the Swiss Agency for 
Development and Cooperation, highlighted the Solar Irrigation for Agr icultural Resilience Project , 
including relevant technology transfer . 
179.  My delegation  would like to thank the Secretariat for the organization of the Workshop. The 
constructive discussions held throughout the Workshop contribute to the continued collaboratio n on 
technology and knowledge transfer  between LDCs and developed country Members . We also thank 
the Secretariat for  its summary list ing all incentives and projects implemented by the donor countries 
as well as for including LDCs' valuable feedback  in that  summary . IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 30 - 
 
  180.  Switzerland remains actively committed to engage in the TRIPS Council 's discussion on the 
implementation of Article 66.2 and to encourage technology and knowledge transfer to LDCs, 
thereby increasing , hopefully,  LDCs partner s capacities to create , and enabling  an environment to 
promote investment and attract  technology and knowledge transfer.  
10.10   Haiti  
181.  Let me begin, on behalf of the Haitian delegation, by thanking the WTO Secretariat for 
organizing this important Workshop. My delegation would like to commend the efforts of developed 
country Members for providing general assistance in the area of technolo gy transfer to LDCs through 
their various technical assistance programmes aimed at LDCs.  
182.  However, in line with the implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement on incentives 
for technology transfer to LDCs, my delegation would encourage other dev eloped  country  Member s 
to fulfil their commitments to these small economies, with a view to helping them reduce the existing 
gaps between developed country Member s and LDCs in the area of technology. Today, the issue of 
technology transfer is of paramount importance to developing countries, in particular LDCs. The 
issue is also cross -cutting, insofar as it relates to other areas, including security, infrastructure, 
renewable energy, climate change, agriculture, health, education and e -commerce.  
183.  My delegatio n aligns itself with the statement delivered by the LDC Group to follow up on the 
TRIPS Agreement, and more specifically Article 66.2, relating to technology transfer concerns. We 
would also like to point out that LDCs are still waiting for the implementat ion of certain provisions, 
which has yet to take place since the Agreement was concluded.  
184.  My delegation would also like to stress the importance of technology transfer in addressing 
illegal immigration and employment -related challenges faced by both devel oping and developed 
countries alike. We would also like to take this opportunity to draw Members ' attention to the current 
lack of security in the country, which is having detrimental consequences across all areas because 
it threatens the very existence of  the country 's rights, including industrial and intellectual property 
rights. This situation should have been acknowledged some time ago. The field of intellectual 
property faces many challenges. Industrial property as a whole poses a major obstacle to eco nomic 
development, and patent law, which dates back over a hundred years, does not reflect present -day 
realities and opportunities in the field of intellectual property.  
185.  Given the situation, the Haitian delegation would also like to draw the attention of developed 
country Members to the cross -cutting role of technology transfer in peacekeeping, treating diseases 
and developing the country 's economic and industrial sector. In accordance with Article 66.2, the 
Haitian delegation would like developed country M embers to pay considerable attention to Haiti in 
relation to these issues.  
10.11   Mali 
186.  My name is Ms. Kourtoume Ba and I am the head of the Technique and Technology Transfer 
Department at the Malian Centre for the Promotion of Industria l Property (CEMAPI) in Bamako, Mali. 
It is a great pleasure and honour for me to present to you my report on the state of the environment, 
technology and food in some Asian, Middle Eastern and sub -Saharan regions, especially Mali, at the 
Workshop on the im plementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. There are five main points 
that have caught my attention. The first is whether my country can receive assistance for the 
development of human resources in environmental studies. The second concern  is agricultural 
training for young people. The third is improving road conditions in sub -Saharan areas, particularly 
in Mali. The fourth is ensuring the financial autonomy of women. The fifth is improving and increasing 
the number of health structures.  
10.12   United  States of America  
187.  Just over a year ago , the Russian Federation began its brutal and unprovoked full -scale 
invasion of Ukraine. The Russia n Federation  continues to inflict death and destruction on Ukraine 
and the Ukrainian people. The United States of America reiterates its condemnation of Russia 's 
brutal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine. The United States will continue 
to support Ukraine 's courageous efforts to defend itself , uphol d its territorial integrity and protect IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 31 - 
 
  its population. As President Biden reconfirmed during his visit to Kiev our long-term commitment  to 
Ukraine is unwavering and we will work to build a coordinated approach to assistance and to help 
Ukraine to use the rebuilding process to achieve best practices for laws, regulations and standards 
across  sectors . We call on Russia to immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine,  refrain from 
any further threat or use of force against any other Member and immediate ly withdraw all its military 
forces from the territory of Ukraine.  
188.  The United States attributes great importance to this review with respect to the obligations 
under Article 66.2. I would also like to take a moment to thank the Workshop participants and th e 
Secretariat for its smooth organisation . The presentations and statements by all those involved were 
interesting and insightful and we look forward to continuing  this dialogue. Our 2022 submission is 
an update to our 2021 report, detailing progress in th e past year to our program mes aimed to 
support LDCs in fostering the necessary environment to encourage the effective, voluntary transfer 
of technology to LDC Members on mutually agreed terms.  
189.  The US submission details program mes ranging from intellectual property and trade capacity 
building to the health, labour , and environmental sectors. Similar to previous submissions, this 
report includes comments from host country governments and private sector representatives 
regarding the value of several of the pro grammes listed in the report.  
190.  The United States believes that , for Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement to function effectively, 
there must be a robust dialogue between developed countr y and LDC Members. Strong 
communication between partners is critical to ensure targeted incentives remain responsive to the 
self-identified technology transfer interests and needs of LDC Members. The United States strives to 
make this a priority in all our engagements with our host government partners around the world 
and will continue to explore ways to improve upon the process as we go  forward.  
191.  Our 2022 report describes over 135 program mes that show how the US Government is working 
to transform lives. However, no report can truly represent every activity that directly or indirectly 
incentivizes enterprises and institutions for the purpo se of promoting and encouraging technology 
transfer. Our report attempts to describe the most significant activities and program mes and to 
convey the breadth and depth of efforts by the United States.  
192.  We thank the Secretariat for the opportunity to highlig ht a few of program mes at the 
Workshop. The United States is proud of our rich heritage of private sector -led ingenuity and 
innovation. We fully support voluntary technology transfer on mutually agreed terms.  
10.13   European Union  
193.  I would like to congratulate and thank the Secretariat for the organi sation of the Workshop 
and the  LDCs for their  kind and very proactive participation. The very frank and positive dialogue  
we had was very useful , and I look forward to contributing to our  discussi on further . As mentioned 
several times , the European Union and its member States  take our commitment under Article 66.2 
of the TRIPS Agreement very seriously. We provided proof year after year of having promptly and 
attentively reacted to nat ural, social, health, climate, food, agricultural and economic changes by 
implementing projects specifically tailored to the current needs of LDCs individually , or their regional 
organizations. We t ry to match with  the needs and priorities as identified by the survey.  
194.  The EU has submitted its annual report which provides a detailed update on the EU technology 
transfer programmes. This document was circulated in accordance with the Decision of 
19 February  2003. Our program mes cover the period of July 2021 to July 2022 and can be found in 
the e-TRIPS portal. I would like to thank again the Secretariat for the help and support with the us e 
of this tool because it is not very easy to manage having many member States and also our own 
program mes. 
195.  As said, in add ition to the EU -financed program mes, this year , Austria, the Czech  Republic , 
Finland, Germany, Ireland, Spain and Sweden sent reports to the European Commission on 
technology transfer. As the United States of America said , our report submitted is not an ex haustive 
list of all the programmes provided but gives a vast range of examples. More over, it is quite complete 
even if we cannot cover all the initiatives done and maintained between private entities. Our report IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 32 - 
 
  has a total of 123 technology transfer prog rammes, including 24 projects funded by the EU 
institutions.  
196.  In our view, t he main incentive to promote technology transfer provided to EU enterprises, 
companies or universities are the grants , but also the public -private partnerships financed by the EU 
institutions and the EU member States. Our main financial source is the Horizon Europe framework 
programme with a total budget of EUR 96 billion.  At the workshop , the Secretariat mentioned the 
EU several times , as an example , the E U support s the financ ing of 39 environment program mes 
benefitting around 41 LDC s, and around 20 agriculture program mes in the period of 2021--2022.   
197.  Considering the  packed agenda for today ’ for the meeting, and as we have already presented 
our report in autumn last year, we would like to refer only to our interventions on this topic in 
previous meetings and in the last Workshop. I would like just to mention that something was shared 
with the  LDCs on the importance of absorptive capacity of LDCs  for successful technology transfer . 
We agree with many LDCs that absorption capacity is very important and notably the training as 
highlighted by Swi tzerland . 
198.  Finally , I would like to mention two topic s or issues raised by the LDCs. The first is the definition 
of clear evaluation  and the shar ing of this evaluation tool which is certainly  something we have to 
progress on and the need to raise and organise a dialogue at national level  in the LDCs  for them to 
be ready to receive and manage properly all the technology transfer program mes provided by the 
developed countries. On a more practical aspect , we will try next time to improve our reporting, and 
I know that we were congratulated for the quality o f our report , but it can be improved with the 
links, people and contact points. We will also improve the drafting of the potential or the act ual 
output for the next report. Thanks a lot for the open, kind and very positive debate we had.  
10.14   Australia  
199.  Australia would like to thank the Secretariat and other Members for their efforts in ensuring a 
successful Workshop. Our impression is that the Workshop has become more focused over the years, 
and this reflects the strong leadership of the LDC Group as well as the hard work of the Secretariat.  
200.  Australia was pleased to present on technology transfer projects under the Regional 
Cooperative Agreement  for Research, Development and Training related to Nuclear Science and 
Technology for Asia Pacific. Project s relate to the use of radiation technology in the fields of 
medicines , wetlands management, with Bangladesh, Nepal, Cambodia and Lao PDR, all partic ipating 
LDCs. We would again like to thank colleagues for this opportunity share our own experiences, and 
to hear experiences from other Members, particularly those from the LDC Group on their own 
experiences and importantly their priorities for technology  transfer.  
10.15   Japan  
201.  The delegation of Japan would like to thank the Secretariat for organizing the Workshop on 
the implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Japan also participated in the Workshop , 
which worked to adva nce cooperative activities and enhance mutual understanding between LDC 
and developed country Members.  
202.  Japan believes that activities in our report contribute to creating a sound and viable 
technological base in LDCs, which will bring about further technol ogy transfer by enterprises and 
institutions in developed countries. Japan will continue to make its utmost efforts to improve the 
business environment and make it even more conducive to transfer technology. We look forward to 
working further with LDC Memb ers in this context.  
10.16   Canada  
203.  As the G7 leaders recently noted and other Members noted today , Canada condemns Russia 's 
illegal, unjustifiable and unprovoked war , disregard for the charter of the United Nations and 
indifference to  the impact that this war is having  on people worldwide , including through undermin ed 
global food and energy security. Russia 's actions are also contravening the principles and values of 
the foundation of the WTO including other Members shared notion of fa irness and openness. We 
reiterate our call for  the Russia n Federation  to end its invasion.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 33 - 
 
  204.  Canada would like to thank the Secretariat for organizing the thematic discussions during th e 
annual Workshop on the implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Canada welcomes 
the exchange of views and experiences on the implementation of this commitment, including the 
opportunity to hear directly from LDC Members on their tech nology  transfer i nterests and priorities 
in meeting their respective national development objectives.  
205.  This exchange remains key to ensuring that LDC Members have an opportunity to provide 
feedback on specific projects and on their priority needs, and to help provide that t echnology  transfer 
incentives continue to enable LDCs to address emerging development challenges in creating a sound 
and viable technological base. We similarly benefit from hearing the experiences of other developed 
country Members, in sharing and identif ying best practices and commonalities, to better inform how 
future incentives for technology transfer can respond to LDC Members ' priorities over time.  
206.  Canada is pleased to have the opportunity to present on key updates from its 2022 annual 
report (which c an be found under document IP/C/R/TTI/CAN/3) , and to participate in this week 's 
panel discussion on developed country Members ' experiences in providing incentives to promote and 
encourage technology transfer. In this spirit, Canada would be pleased to discuss our report, and 
any of the projects or initiatives detailed therein, with any interested Member.  
207.  We look forward to further dialogue through the annual Workshop and discussions here in the 
TRIPS Council, and once again thank the Secretariat for convening this week 's Worksho p, and all 
Members for their constructive engagement on this important commitment.  
10.17   Norway  
208.  On the Workshop , I would like to say  thanks to the Secretariat and the LDC participants. The 
Workshop was really an excellent opportunity  to exchange directly with LDCs and engage in frank 
dialogue. One useful take away, from our perspective, was that LDCs rightful ly called for needs -
based  programming o f the incentives and tech nology transfer within the identified priorit y areas, 
and this is actually matched by our insistence that our actions are demand -driven and the fact that 
LDC priorit y areas for technology transfer in agriculture, renewable energy and health are also within 
Norway 's priorit y areas.  
209.  Bottom line , I want  to encourage LDC participants to reach out to the contacts of the Norwegian 
incentive providing agencies provided in my presentation; to investigate potential for further 
support. I would also like to state that we hear you to a larger degree on the need to include the 
actual results of our activities  and to try to tailor our future reporting  to better fit with incentives 
and technology transfer. This point is well taken, in general , and we should try to do that.  
210.  Lastly , I would like to reiterate that we strongly condemn Russia 's illegal war on Ukraine , and 
we stand in solidarity with Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.  
10.18   Malawi  
211.  Malawi would like to express its sincere gratitude to  both the WTO and developed countries 
for the multiple efforts and work done th us far on the implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS 
Agreement. The level of implementation may seem low due to multiple challenges faced in the 
continent as well as at the national level. Malawi would like to guarantee the implementing partners 
as well as all developed countries offering these incentives that it is keen to coordinat e with all local 
authorities involved in these various incenti ves to own, as well as to successfully implement these 
incentives. The Workshop organised this week is proof as to how important these discussions are to 
all LDCs. It is our hope that these efforts continue so that we will gradually be able to see a number  
of countries graduating from the LDC status. I would like to end my statement with a quote from 
Henry Ford: "Coming together is the beginning, keeping together is progress but working together 
is success ". 
10.19   Sudan  
212.  I would like to  thank the Secretariat for holding a very interesting and successful Workshop 
on the implementation of Article 66.2 on incentives for technology transfer. Sudan  aligns itself with 
the statement made by  the LDC Group and would  like to stress for considerati on the importance of IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 34 - 
 
  technology transfer relat ed to the priority needs in LDCs' infrastructures, renewable energy, 
agriculture, health, education, capacity building and technical support. I thank the WTO for giving 
the LDC Group this opportunity to attend this meeting.  
10.20   South Africa   
213.  We would like to reiterate that Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement places a legal obligation 
on developed country Members to provide incentives to enterprises and institutions in their territories 
for the purposes of promoting and encouraging tech transfe r to LDCs. Fulfilment of this obligation 
would contribute to the objectives of the TRIPS Agreement, in particular Article 7, which posits that 
the protection and enforcement of IPRs should contribute to the promotion of technological 
innovation and the tra nsfer and dissemination of technology. Clarification of various issues could 
amplify the impact of technology transfer -related initiatives that have been undertaken. These 
include, inter alia , definitional issues around what constitutes technology transfer , to what extent 
incentives provided can be considered additional to official development aid and the robustness of 
evaluations undertaken to understand the impact of initiatives that have been taken.  
11  TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY -BUILDING  
11.1  Bangladesh , on behalf of the LDC Group  
214.  Bangladesh delivers this statement on behalf of the LDC Group. The LDC Group  welcome s the 
programs report ed by d eveloped country Members under Article 67 of the TRIPS Agreement . These 
reports provide information on a wide range of program mes and activities customized for the 
beneficiary Members. These program mes are critically important for the LDCs. Our G roup also thanks 
the Secretariat for managing the e -TRIPS gateway regarding TRIPS related data and information.  
215.  We sincerely thank the developed country Members and IGOs for their help and would like to 
encourage  them to continue their valuable support for the developing countries and particularly the 
LDCs and  those on the graduati on track . 
11.2  WTO Secretariat  
216.  During the Council meetings of October 2021 and March 2022, the delegation of Bangladesh 
requested the WTO Secretariat to organize a dedicated annual workshop to  monitor progress on IP -
related technical cooperation under Article 67 of the TRIPS Agreement , similar to the workshop we 
organise for the implementation of Article 66.2 . In response to this request, the Secretariat is 
planning to organize such a workshop on 12 -14 June 2023 to help inform dialogue among Members. 
The aim is also to provide specific input to the Council with a view to improving overall coordination 
and the matching of programs with priority needs. Thirty places are available in this workshop for 
allocation to a selection of applicants from beneficiary LDC and Developing Members and Observers.  
217.  The programme is envisaged to  consist of two segments: a two -day workshop segment on 
12 and 13 June, and a final segment, on 14 June, involving participation in, and contribution to, 
deliberations under Council agenda item "Technical Assistance and Capacity Building ". The final 
segment of th is workshop is optional, but participation is strongly encouraged. The Secretariat will 
reach out to delegations  in the near future  in regarding possible speakers and topics and f urther 
detail s will be communicated to delegations in due course.  
11.3  Bangladesh  
218.  Thank you Chair and thanks to the Secretariat for initiating this. As you referred to 
Bangladesh 's request on this matter , in fact . one of the critical elements would b e, and we strongly 
urge to include , that it is basically to avoid the dupli cation of reporting between Article 66.2 and 
Article 67. If you can take note of our request.   IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 35 - 
 
  12  PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE MINISTERIAL DECISION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT ADOPTED 
ON 17 JUNE 2022  
12.1  Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group  
219.  I am taking the floor on behalf of the African Group. First, to continue to register our 
disappointment with the December 2022 decision to extend the deadline set by Ministers during 
MC12. As alluded by the African Group Coordinator in the General Council meeting last week, the 
extension clearly indicates the absence of political will to duly implement consensual decisions taken 
by our Ministers. Indeed, the failure to timely address a critical issue like this  does not instil optimism 
needed to address contemporary challenges that the W orld Trade Organization  faces. The longer it 
takes to deliberate on the extension of the MC12 TRIP S Decision to cover the production and supply 
of diagnostics and therapeutics, the less credible contribution WTO will make to the lifesaving efforts 
for COVID -19 patients.  
220.   The African Group did show maximum flexibility in agreeing to the extension of the six-month 
continuation. It was done in good faith to accommodate the request of some Members to undertake 
domestic consultation s, which apparently some Members are using as an excuse from engaging and 
establishing new narratives , which we find somehow di sturbing . We call on those Members to finalize 
their domestic processes as soon as possible for the decision to be adopted well before MC13.  
221.  We believe the decision will guarantee developing Members and LDCs equitable and affordable 
access to therapeutics and diagnostics through diversified production and supply. We would like also 
to call upon the Council  for TRIPS  to commence discussions in any format, formal or informal, small 
groups or larger groups , to discuss  substantive issues on this matter as soon as possible  towards 
concluding the matter . I would like to assure you, Chair, and Members , that the African Group  is 
commit ted to work collaboratively with other Members for an expeditious outcome on this agenda 
item. 
12.2  South Africa  
222.  My delegation is fully aligned with the statement just delivered by my brother the distinguish ed 
delegate of Tanzania on behalf of the African Group. As at 7 March, COVID -19 had claimed over 
6.8 million lives. Despite being the product of publicly -funded research, COVID -19 vaccines were 
subjected to IP -backed monopolies that greatly enriched a handful of companies  that experienced 
record profits . Some of these entities are unsure of what to do with the profit garnered . 
223.  According to a study published in Nature  by Moore and others in 20 22, an estimated 1.3 million 
fewer people would have died in 2021 alone if COVID -19 vaccines were distributed equitably.1 This 
led the U nited Nations  Secretary General to describe vaccine inequity  as "the biggest moral failure 
of our times ".2 The prioritization of monopoly profits over the lives of people in developing countries 
fuelled vaccine inequality and has been carried over to COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics.  
224.  Against this backd rop, the co -sponsors of document IP/C/W/669 /Rev.1  are disappointed that 
the membership is yet to decide on extension of the MC12 Decision on the TRIPS Agreement to 
cover therapeutics and diagnostics. The extension of the MC12 Decision is a credibility issue for the 
World Trade Organization . A solution on vaccines alone is not sufficient.  
225.  As stated by co -sponsors in our 12 December draft decision contained in document 
IP/C/W/694:  "diagnostics and therapeutics are essential tools for a comprehensive approach to fight 
the pandemic, that it is not over. Omittin g these tools will deter the effectiveness of the decision 
that aims at timely and affordable access to effective vaccines against the ongoing COVID -19 
pandemic ". 
226.  A decision on vaccines only was agreed on the understanding that Members are committed to 
take a decision on extension to therapeutics and diagnostics no l onger  than six  months , as entailed 
in paragraph 8 of the MC12 Decision. This was accompanied by assur ances that certain Members 
merely required a few months to conduct domestic consultations. It is disappointing that we have 
 
1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591 -022-02064 -y 
2 https://press.un.org/en/2022/sgsm21137.doc.htm  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 36 - 
 
  been engaged in circular discussions and the WTO is yet to take a decision in this regard.  The 
co-sponsors engaged in good faith in all discussions and provided ample evidence on the IP -related 
challenges to accessing therapeutics and diagnostics and these were also highlighted by the W orld 
Health Organization  in its input to the Council  for TRIPS . 
227.  The Act -A Facilitation Council Workin g Group Report on Diagnostics and Therapeutics of 
September 2022 confirmed the concentration of manufacturing which contributes to inequitable 
roll-out of COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics , which threatens to undo public health gains 
achieved throughou t the pandemic. Mo re recently, in February 2023, the ACT -A Monitoring and 
Tracking Task Force noted that there is a gap in access to oral antiviral licence  agreements to generic 
suppliers, as they do not apply to upper middle-income countries (UMICs ). Access to antivirals by 
many UMICS remains limited to their ability to reach agreement with originator companies.3 
228.  Addressing inequitable access to health products remains a critical issue in the context of the 
current pandemic and to help us build res ilience for future pandemics. The only sustainable means 
of achieving this objective and bolstering health security is to diversify the quantity and geographical 
scope of countries that can produce the needed products.  
229.  The co -sponsors have spent over two y ears demonstrating how intellectual property barriers 
have hampered these efforts through extensive written and oral submissions. Our submissions have 
been supported by peer reviewed academic research, civil society and Nobel laureates alike. In 
contrast, the only contrary data that has been provided by the opposing perspective is from the  
stakeholder s with an interest in the retention of intellectual property  barriers.  
230.  The inordinately delayed and limited MC12 outcome was a missed opportunity for the WTO t o 
make a meaningful contribution to global efforts to contain the COV ID-19 pandemic. As stated in an 
open letter by current and former heads of state, Nobel laureates and leaders of intergovernmental, 
and non -governmental organizations that was published just last week on 11  March  2023, and I 
quote: "Governments at the World Trade Organization (WTO) took too long and did too little to 
address this barrier for COVID -19 vaccines. WTO Members should move to approve an intellectual 
property waiver for COVID -19-related vaccines and extend that decision to cover COVID -19 tests 
and treatments. That would dramatically improve access to all of these lifesaving products. 
Developing countries should exercise their rights to use the full flexibilities of the TRIPS agree ment 
to protect public health ". 
231.  Global health experts have been consistently clear about the need for a comprehensive 
approach to dealing with the pandemic. This is exemplified by various drafts of the pandemic treaty 
developed under the auspices of WHO. T hey are centred on an approach that deals with all pandemic 
products.  
232.  In contrast, the WTO has prioriti zed an artificially limited scope that protects monopolies and 
super profits, rather than global public health. This dismal failure to respond in a timel y manner to 
the call for a multilateral solution in the form of a comprehensive waiver necessitates that Members 
consider trigger -ready mechanisms as part of preparedness for future pandemics.  
233.  Many of us feel that our lives have returned to normality,  and some may be tempted to simply 
move on. However, COVID -19 is not over and all of us remain vulnerable, more so people in countries 
that have low vaccination rates , as they are vulnerable to variants.  The words of Ambassador Tovar 
da Silva Nunes of Brazil ar e apt, and I quote:  "We owe to present and future generations equitable 
and timely access to medical countermeasures when fighting the next pandemics, ensuring that the 
most vulnerable people, especially the underprivileged and indigenous peoples, are save d." 
 
3 https://www.who.int/docs/default -source/coronaviruse/act -accelerator/tmt f-report -
2.pdf?sfvrsn=c275dd3b_2&download=true   IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 37 - 
 
  12.3  Bangladesh, on behalf of the LDC Group  
234.  I deliver this statement on behalf of the LDC Group. Regarding paragraph 8 of the Ministerial 
Decision on TRIPS waiver, the LDC Group aligns with the statement delivered by the delegation of 
South Africa on behalf of the co-sponsors of document IP/C/W/669/ Rev.1. 
235.  We are disappointed that Members could not agree within the dead line to follow the good 
gesture of our Ministers on extending the TRIPS waiver decision to cover COVID -19 diagnostics and 
therapeutics. In December 2022, the Council  for TRIPS  recommended that the GC would extend the 
deadline that ended on 17 December 2022 . We earlier pointed out that the extended deadline must 
not change the MC12 Decision and its scope. It is unfortunate that till the last General Council on 
7 March 2023, we could not make a decision on this  issue. 
236.  We cannot ignore the threat of the future  pandemics and the necessity of affordable and timely 
access to diagnostics and therapeutics. We do not want more deaths, human sufferings, shutdowns , 
travel restrictions and disruptions. Preparedness is always better than the last minutes ' efforts.  
Theref ore, the MC12 Decision on the TRIPS waiver should be extended to cover COVID -19 
therapeutics and diagnostic s, as soon as possible. The LDC Group looks forward to continuing 
meaningful discussion s on this important file.  
12.4  Nepal  
237.  I align with Bangladesh, the focal point of the LDC Group and wish to add few points:  
• A pandemic is a global problem; it may appear anytime , in any place , and radiates 
throughout the world. Therefore, dealing with the present and the preparation for the 
future is also necessary.  
• We cannot forget the wounds and scars caused by the C OVID -19 pandemic . There are still 
many cases identified in many countries and  viruses may appear in other forms.  
238.  Our Ministers at MC12 mandated to accomplish the work within the six months , but the 
discussion was inconclusive in the given time by the MC12. C OVID -19 vaccine s are part of a set ; the 
vaccine alone cannot save lives. Th erefore, we are urging Members to consider the extension of the 
TRIPS waiver to the production and supply of COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics. We call upon 
Members to engag e constructively and demonstrat e flexibility at the maximum possible level.  
12.5  Egypt  
239.  Egypt aligns itself with the statement delivered by South Africa on behalf of the co -sponsors, 
and Tanzania on behalf of the African Group, and other co -sponsors ' statements.  We regret that we 
did not reach a decision on the extension of the TRIPS waiver to cover therapeutics and diagnostics 
by the deadline of 17 Dec ember  2022, as per the mandate in para graph 8 of the MC12 Decision. We 
showed maximum flexibility in agreeing to continue the discussions f or six months. We tried to 
accommodate some Members who expressed a desire to conduct domestic consultations. We urge 
Members that are conducting domestic consultations to expedite their internal processes and  give 
due consideration to the technical input of the W orld Health Organization (WHO) , World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO)  and other relevant international organizations.  
240.  In this regard, we are calling on the Council  for TRIPS  to invite the WHO, and other relevant 
organizations to provide us with the recent developments of the situation, from the substantive and 
technical point of views. My delegation would like to refer to the submission of the co -sponsors at 
the General Council of document WT/GC/W/860  that calls on the membership to agree on the 
extension of the Ministeri al Decision to cover COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics, and we call on 
the Council  for TRIPS  to embark on the discussion on this proposal , and we expect our trade partners 
to engage constructively with us in the discussion.  The extension of the MC12 TR IPS Decision to 
therapeutics and diagnostics is "unfinished business " regarding its development dimension. It was 
put on a fast track as a post -MC12 deliverable. We joined the consensus at the time to extend the 
deadline to reach a decision, but now we bel ieve that we should reach a decision to extend the 
decision to therapeutics and diagnostic . On the other hand, and in relation to the discussion on IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 38 - 
 
  Iinter tem 3 (IP and COVID -19), it should be noted that the pace of the discussions has outlined the 
importan ce of commencing discussions on a triggering mechanism to deal with future pandemics.  
12.6  Kenya, on behalf of the ACP Group  
241.  The ACP Group urges Members to fulfil the mandate from our Ministers of MC12 in paragraph  8 
of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement. We thank you for the report and look forward 
to the results of the ongoing deliberations in capitals that have been reported here and in the General 
Council. We remain  optimistic that the necessary discussion s can be expedited to arrive at a decision 
on this matter.  
12.7  Indonesia  
242.  My delegation would like to echo the statement of our colleagues from Tanzania and South 
Africa. On that note we also refer to our previous statements on this agenda item.  COVID -19 ha s 
inevitably shown the spectacular gap of inequality in and between countries, with an unprecedented 
worsening of poverty, particularly in developing countries.    
243.  It further revealed that despite how interconnected we are, the asymmetries among countries 
run deep. Such asymmetries can be seen in aspects such as mobilizing resources to deal with and 
recover from the crisis. Another example is in terms of getting equitab le and affordable access to 
vaccines and relevant countermeasures . 
244.  In this institution, we talk about development as a horizontal and cross -cutting issue and how 
the WTO could play a role in maintaining a path to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. 
Thus, the response to and recovery from COVID -19 and the execution of the right to development 
are intrinsically linked and should support the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.  
245.  The Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement has been an important catalys t for our 
government to further carry out the development of mRNA vaccines. This is conducted through 
government -to-government and government -to-business cooperation, which includes provision s on 
technological transfer for mRNA production.  
246.  In this regard, it is our hope that the extension of the TRIPS waiver could further support 
developing countries to further develop and gain access to the much -needed COVID -19 therapeutic s 
and diagnostics, especially in the view of pandemic preparedness, prevention, and r esponse. This is 
also in line with growing acknowledgement o f the importance of ensuring equitable and universal 
access to safe, affordable, quality and effective vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics , as stated in 
the G20 Bali Leaders Declaration agreed to last year.  
247.  But even if some Members have not utilized the Decision as argued, that does not negate the 
importance of having sufficient policy space at hand in time s of emergency. To illustrate this point, 
just because an airline has not experienced an a ccident, does not mean that they can take away the 
life jacket prepared for each passenger.  
248.  Having said that, solving vaccine availability, accessibility and affordability is not enough. As 
we have stated again and again, COVID -19 countermeasures also incl ude therapeutics and 
diagnostics. Without these , we only give the world a half -hearted solution at best.  
249.  With th is in mind, Indonesia would like to reiterate our suggestions for this issue moving 
forward:  
• One, the Council for TRIPS shall continue to conduc t substantive discussion s on extension 
to cover therapeutics and diagnostics. These discussions, whether in formal or informal 
settings, should be guided by WHO as the leading actor in the fight against the COVID -19 
pandemic.  
• Two, in the interim, Members t hat are conducting domestic consultations must update the 
membership on a regular basis.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 39 - 
 
  • Three, to avoid a prolong ed negotiation, it is necessary to be equipped with a trigger -ready 
mechanism to deal with future pandemics. The TRIPS Council, in this regard , will need to 
urgently engage on this issue on the basis of submissions by Members.   
250.  Indonesia stands ready to work with other Members constructively.  
12.8  China  
251.  In January  2023 Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director General  of the World Health 
Organization, pointed out that the COVID -19 response remains hobbled in too many countries, 
unable to provide vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics to those in need. The pandemic still 
constitutes a public health emergency  of international concern. As a populous developing Member 
with more than 190 million p eople  over 65 years old , China faces large demand for COVID -19 
therapeutics.  
252.  As Members may be aware, China has recently experienced an intensive outbreak of COVID -
19. D uring that time, people suffered from a severe lack of therapeutics , especially the vulnerable 
groups . The main reason was that the prices of some widely -recognised  oral antiviral treatment s, 
such as Paxlovid and molnupiravir , were too high to afford and the amount available was acc ordingly 
far from enough. To make things worse, China has been excluded as a potential beneficiary of the 
Medicines Patent Pool (MPP). T herefore , we fully understand the challenges and difficulties faced by 
the proponents. We believe that to improve accessibility and affordability of diagnostics and 
therapeutics is crucial for developing Members to combat COVID -19 and save more lives.  
253.  It is also indispensable for the global effort to ultimately conquer the pan demic. China has 
always actively participat ed in the discussion s on the issue of the TRIPS waiver and our substantial 
commitment to the waiver of COVID -19 vaccines safeguarded the successful conclusion of the 
Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement at MC12.  
254.  For the next step, China calls upon Members to further strengthen solidarity through collective 
efforts so as to bridge the gaps as early as possible and address the legitimate concerns of 
developing Members on COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics.  As always , China will continue to 
actively engage in future  consultations and make our due contribution.  
12.9  India  
255.  The enthusiasm and spirit of solidarity that Members exhibited to achieve the outcome on 
TRIPS at MC12, regrettably, could not be sustained  for long, it seems . On paragraph 8 of the MC12 
Decision , all we could achieve within the stipulated six months was to decide to extend the timeline. 
As we are aware, t he polycrisis is disproportionately impacting the developing countries , including 
LDCs. Uncertainties surrounding the pandemic, the persistent ine quities on access and affordability 
of therapeutics and diagnostics exacerbate these vulnerabilities and continue to challenge the global 
recovery , especially for developing countries including the LDCs , making it crucial to enable and 
empower these countr ies to combat the health crisis. We seem to ignore the warnings that 
pandemics similar to COVID -19 could be a more frequent occurrence as we face increased risk from 
emerging pathogens due to enhanced globali zation and other factors. We at the W orld Trade 
Organization (WTO)  however, could not deliver and respond timely in contributing to global 
interventions for combating COVID -19. And the longer it takes for us to decide, the less efficacious 
the outcome will be , as we have seen with the Decision on vaccin es. 
256.  Though  we note that one Member is undertaking an internal analysis on this issue , it does not 
limit in any  way other Members to engage at the Council  for TRIPS  for striving to achieve a common 
understandin g. This will make effective use of the period u p to October  2023 and enable us to build 
consensus to deliver on this issue. In this regard, our submission contained in document IP/C/W/694 , 
the decision text , is a good place to begin the conversation. The protracted discussions on this matter 
in unprecedented times like these , underscore the need for mechanisms that help deal with future 
emergencies in a timely and effective manner. We hope to see substantive discussions and good 
faith engagement in this regard as well at the Council for TRIPS . IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 40 - 
 
  12.10   United States of America  
257.  The United States of America supports extending the deadline for making a decision on 
whether or not to extend the Ministerial Decision to cover COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics. 
On 16 December 2022 we asked the US International Trade Commission to lunch an investigation 
into COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics and to provide information and market dynamics to help  
inform the discussion around supply and demand, price -points and the re lationship between testing 
and treating and production and access. The International Trade Commission issued a notice  in our 
Federal Register on 6 February which contains all the relevant dates and deadlines for the hearing 
and submissions. For your inform ation the key upcoming deadlines are as follows:  
• 29-30 March 2023: Public hearing.  
• 12 April 2023: Deadline for filing post -hearing briefs and statements.  
• 5 May 2023: Deadline for filing all other written submissions.  
258.  The International Trade Commission repo rt is due to USTR on 17 October 2023. The report 
will be public. We encourage all interest ed parties to participate in this process. Foreign governments 
are also welcome to submit their views. As we continue this process , we look forward to continuing 
to engage with WTO Members.  
12.11   Brazil  
259.  Brazil remains fully engaged in the debate on paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the 
TRIPS Agreement. Unfortunately, consensus was not achieved in December 2022 on the  extension 
of the June  2022 Decision to cover therapeutics and diagnostics. We support , however , the decision 
to defer the deadline in order to give Member s more time to reach consensus . But it is important to 
achieve a sounding result that reinforces the WTO's contribution to the capacity of Members in 
fighting COVID -19, particularly in the developing world. In the same sense , we should not lose the 
sense of urgency on this matter. COVID -19 continues to inflict a deadly and disproportionate toll on 
develop ing and least -developed countries. We urge , therefore , Members to work constructively on 
a positive and balanced outcome that provides for an enhanced  and timely access to COVID -19 
essential medical goods at affordable prices.  
260.  Finally, I would also want to highlight the importance of coherence between the positions that 
have been shown at the WTO and those shown here at the WTO and W orld Intellectual Property 
Organization , particularly in relation to the intellectual property  aspects that are being dealt with in 
the negotiation process of a global accord on pandemic prevention , preparedness and response in 
the context of the Intergovernmental  Negotiati ng Body (INB) of the W orld Health Organization . We 
also thank our colleague fro m South Africa for mentioning the comment s made by Ambassador Tovar  
at the INB where we are honoured  to have him a mong its members,  and we count with the strong 
support of the South Africa n delegation on the negotiation s taking place at the WHO in this aspect.  
12.12   Switzerland  
261.  During the meetings of  the Council  for TRIPS since September 2022 , Switzerland has made its 
position regarding an extension clear. In their joint communication  document  IP/C/W/693  dated 
1 November 2022 , Mexico and Swi tzerland presented ample evidence that demonstrates that there 
is no lack of  supply and that there is sufficient manufacturing capacity of COVID -19 therapeutics 
and diagnostics. There is no evidence whatsoever of an intellectual property ( IP)-induced acces s 
problem, which is why Switzerland does not support an extension. The developments of the recent 
months buttress our position.  
262.  Switzerland remains convinced that sustainable and equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines, 
diagnostics and therapeutics is only p ossible within the context of a valid, trustworthy and reliable 
WTO regulatory framework, of which TRIPS and IP protection are essential component s. IP is an 
access enabler. Through licensing, patents and other IP rights allow the legally safe and expediti ous 
sharing of technology and necessary know -how. Thus, patents function as bridges, bringing 
developers, manufacturers, research a nd development ( R&D) and generic pharmaceutical 
companies together in partnerships to fight the pandemic together more effect ively and more IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 41 - 
 
  expeditiously. Suspending IP  rights will block the bridges across which these partnerships can work 
with each other. This would be counterproductive.  
263.  By safeguarding  the TRIPS Agreement and ensur ing reliable international IP protection, the 
WTO maintains a key element of , and thus contribute s usefully to , the response and  preparedness 
for the present and future pandemic.  
12.13   Japan  
264.  Japan appreciates the efforts made by the Chair and the Secretariat to continuously provide 
us with opportunities to discuss this important matter. We also appreciate the contributions made 
by Members in terms of the documents submitted for this discussion : namely, documents RD/IP/49 , 
JOB/IP/64 , IP/C/W/693 , RD/IP/51  and IP/C/W/694 . 
265.  While Members have not reached consensus on this issue, we will be able to continue to 
advance this dis cussion in a more constructive manner based on the facts and evidence provided by 
these documents. In order to prepare for future pandemics, it is necessary to have mechanisms that 
provide strong incentives for the research and development of vaccines, dia gnostics and 
therapeutics. From this perspective, intellectual property rights (IPRs) and the TRIPS Agreement 
play a crucial role in the research and development of vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics.  
266.  With regard to paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decis ion, Japan continues to believe that 
consideration and discussion about its extension for diagnostics and therapeutics should be based 
on facts and evidence regarding the multifaceted impact of IPRs and the TRIPS Agreement upon the 
production and supply of  diagnostics and therapeutics in the context of COVID -19. In this regard, 
the documents submitted and the ongoing investigation by USITC provide facts and evidence that 
will allow Members to proceed more constructively in the discussions. We appreciate the se efforts.  
267.  Japan has shared various types of facts and evidence during previous meetings for the purpose 
of holding a constructive discussion to reach a consensus -based decision among Members, and we 
are ready to continue contributing to this discussion in a constructive manner.  
12.14   United Kingdom  
268.  The U nited Kingdom  welcomes a return to substantive discussions on this issue in the Council  
for TRIPS , which is the right venue for Members to consider the evidence relating to the potential 
extension of the MC12 TRIPS Decision to COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics. We recogni ze this 
as an important issue, and Members should have the opportunity to seek clarification on the issues 
that have been raised and to work towards a decision which is underpinned by evidence -based 
policymaking. We would like to stress the importance of op en, inclusive, and transparent processes 
going forward, as many Members have called for previously.  
269.  The UK has long maintained that the TRIPS Agreement strikes the correct balance between 
incentivi zing innovation and ensuring access through its flexibiliti es, including those enshrined in the 
Doha Declaration. We recognise the essential role of generic manufacturing and believe that, during 
the life of the patent, this should be enabled by voluntary licensing arrangements  which include the 
transfer of techno logy and know -how. This collaboration ensures that generic manufacturing adheres 
to regulatory practices that are internationally recogni zed so products meet the necessary quality 
and safety standards.  We have noted before that there are approximately 130  voluntary licensing 
arrangements in place for COVID -19 treatments, which cover most low - and middle -income 
countries, including important regional manufacturers of generic medicines. We would welcome 
being made aware of any evidence on how these arrangemen ts fail to meet current international 
demand.  
270.  We recogni ze the proposal for extension from December 2022.  The UK has considered this 
proposal carefully. Our view is we must first form consensus on whether extension is required, based 
on the  available  evide nce. We have also noted that a number of questions have been raised by 
Members in relation to this proposal, including, but not limited to, the scope of products covered by 
the proposal and the implications for dual and multiple use. As has been discussed,  COVID -19 
therapeutics and diagnostics rely on pre -existing treatments and testing technology, used in 
different contexts to test and treat other diseases.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 42 - 
 
  271.  In this regard, we consider the papers circulated in 2022 , by Mexico and Switzerland and by 
Chinese Taipei, as important contributions to address these unresolved issues. We understand that 
the questions raised in those papers  are yet to be addressed. These relate  to, among other things, 
questions  over the scope of the potential extension, as well as to the current supply and demand 
dynamics for these products.  
272.  As demonstrated by Chinese Taipei 's discussion paper, a key factor to increase production and 
to enhance access to therapeutics is closer industrial cooperation between originators and generic 
producers. The UK is ready to engage in conversations on ways to foster industrial cooperation with 
low- and middle -income countries to achieve this at the Council  for TRIPS  and in other relevant fora. 
The UK recognises that COVID -19 remains a seri ous challenge and that we need to promote 
equitable and effective distribution of COVID -19 products globally. A holistic response is needed to 
address the barriers to access, including better health infrastructure and health system readiness, 
harmoni zed regulatory mechanisms, as well as effective procurement and distribution strategies.  
273.  We maintain that changes to the international intelle ctual property  framework, if implemented 
without substantial  evidence, could weaken its ability to incentivi ze investmen t and innovation, thus 
risking our ability to tackle health and other emergencies both now and in the future. As ever, the 
UK stands ready to engage constructively in an evidence -based conversation  on this important 
question.  
12.15   Chinese Taipei  
274.  With regard to the current discussion on the possible extension to diagnostics and therapeutics 
it remain s our belief that the issues involved in COVID -19-related diagnostics and therapeutics are 
quite different from and much more complicated than the issues involved in COVID -19 vaccines. 
Therefore, it is necessary to have more in -depth discussions, in order to result in an appropriate 
decision on this impor tant extension issue. We encourage all Members to continue discussions in a 
transparent, inclusive and evidence - and science -based mode in the Council  for TRIPS . 
12.16   European Union  
275.  The European Union is  committed to find a way to advance the discussion of the Council for 
TRIPS by addressing the questions that remain open, identifying appropriate problems and the ways 
in which these problems can be addressed. It is clea r that at the current stage there is  no consensus 
in the Council for TRIPS. Therefore , the EU supports the continuation of the discussion s. 
12.17   Korea, Republic of  
276.  We have had a series of fact and evidence -based discussions on deciding  whether to extend 
the Ministerial Decision to therapeutics and diagnostics. But Members do not appear to have a 
common understanding regarding whether intellectual property  constitutes a barrier to the 
accessibility of COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostic s, which is one of the key issues on this matter. 
My delegation welcomes the continuation of substantive discussions in the Council for TRIPS as 
agreed in the March  2023 General Council and reiterates the importance of having fact - and 
evidence -based discu ssions in order to reach a conclusion that is suitable for the fast -changing 
circumstances of the COVID -19 pandemic.  
12.18   Singapore  
277.  Given that the deadline extension was unavoidable , we must use the additional time we have 
been granted in a pragmatic and productive manner. It is imperative that we take a fact -based 
approach in our discussion s here. In this regard, Singapore believes that the paper s tabled by 
Chinese  Taipei and Switzerland and Mexico s erve as useful bases for discussion s, and we look 
forward to engaging on the questions posed in these paper s.  
278.  We must also adopt a holistic approach and take into account the complex mix of factors that 
affects access to diagnostics and therapeutics. In a ddition to supply chains  bottlenecks , such as 
export restrictions an d other key barrier s, including regulatory bottlenecks , lack of demand 
forecasting  and simply  a low demand for COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics. We must also 
consider th ese multifacet ed challenges in order to achieve our shared objective of improving access IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 43 - 
 
  to diagnostic s and therapeutic s. Lastly while we consider the extension  of the TRIPS Decision, we 
must preserve incentives for innovation, which enable pharmaceutical companies to r espond quickly 
to the current pandemic and to future pandemic s. 
12.19   Norway  
279.  Norway 's point of departure is that we need to strike a balance between , on the one hand , 
ensuring that IP -rights do not constitute a barrier to solving the current or future health crises, and 
on the other hand , preserving incentives for innovation.  We do see possible challenges posed by an 
open-ended mechanism. The lack of definitions or a c learly defined scope can lead to legal 
uncertainty for governments and businesses alike. This clarity will not be achieved if the decision is 
extended mutatis mutandis . Norway will continue to engage constructively.  
13  INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INNOVATION: CR OSS-BORDER COOPERATION AMONG 
IP OFFICES  
13.1  Japan  
280.  On behalf of co -sponsors of our submission IP/C/W/697 , I am delighted to outline our proposal. 
This year, Friends of IP and Innovation members are planning to make IP and Innovation series 
focus on cross -border co operation. As the first of this series, we thought it would be interesting and 
beneficial to discuss cooperation efforts among intellectual property offices or IP offices at this 
meeting.  
281.  IP office in each country or region plays a significant role in ensu ring an IP system suitable to 
effectively promote and protect IP rights in accordance with respective laws and regulations which 
comply with the TRIPS Agreement. Through these activities, IP offices encourage the creation of 
inventions and designs, protect ing business credibility in trademarks, and contributing to the 
development of each region or country 's economy.  
282.  However, it should be also recognized that IP offices do not focus only on the activities in their 
own jurisdictions. IP offices may also seek to actively cooperate with each other, toward enhancing 
legal certainty and predictability, and in turn support cross -border trade and investment. By 
encouraging IP offices to improve their IP systems, and by fostering an environment that promotes 
certaint y and predictability, the trade and investment environment in each region  or country can be 
improved. As a consequence, such cooperation leads to regional economic development as a whole. 
For better discussion, we proposed several guiding questions as show n in our submission.  
283.  These are just examples of discussion points. We hope that this topic will facilitate information 
sharing among Members, help to learn from each other, and support the development of policies in 
their countries/region that will promote  future innovation. We wish many Members could contribute 
to the discussion by introducing your initiatives. As a kick -off of the discussion, please allow my 
colleagues to introduce the Japanese experience.  
284.  Thank you for giving us the opportunity to share our experiences and national policies 
regarding this agenda item. As presented in the concept paper, building an environment that enables 
the global protection of industrial property rights can help us to support enterprises in expanding 
their business out side of their home countries, while also promoting direct investment from abroad 
into different regions. In other words, cross -border cooperation among Intellectual Property (IP) 
Offices can help to facilitate industrial development. In addition, the Japan  Patent Office (JPO) has 
been leading various types of cooperation to increase the operational efficiency of IP Offices. The 
JPO has also been actively assisting the human resource development of foreign IP Offices by 
providing training program mes. Today, I would like to introduce the initiatives of the JPO and  provide 
an opportunity for other Members to understand the objectives and advantages in order to promote 
further cooperation in the future.  
285.  Let me now outline the JPO 's initiatives. The Patent Prosec ution Highway (PPH) is a program me 
based on agreement between IP Offices, which enables applicants to request accelerated 
examinations with simplified procedures in the Office of Second Filing (OSF) when their patent claims 
have been determined to be paten table in the Office of First Filing (OFF). Applicants can thus enjoy IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 44 - 
 
  the benefits of shortened examination pendency and reduced response costs, as well as an increased 
grant rate.  
286.  Meanwhile, IP offices can reduce the burden of patent examinations, and impr ove the quality 
thereof, by improving the availability of prior art searches and examination results of the First Office 
through the PPH. This international work -sharing program me will be of great help, particularly for 
IP Offices in emerging countries, in  terms of managing their examination workload more efficiently 
by allocating additional personnel to non -PPH applications. Moreover, they can expect more patent 
applications from overseas applicants who prefer the ease of PPH procedures. We would like to 
emphasize that in all types of PPH, decisions about whether to grant patents remain under the 
control of the individual offices.  
287.  The JPO came up with the idea of this work -sharing programme and  launched the first pilot 
program me together with the USPTO in 2 006. Since then, the JPO has been working to expand the 
PPH network and enhance the usability of this framework. A total of 54 IP offices are participating 
as of today. In addition, the JPO serves as the secretariat of the Global Patent Prosecution Highway  
(GPPH), a multinational framework launched in 2014.  
288.  Other initiatives to utilize the examination results of the JPO include the PPH  Plus and 
Cooperation for facilitating Patent Grants (CPG). Under these program mes, applicants who have 
patent rights at the JPO can apply to have their patent applications for the same invention examined 
with simplified and accelerated procedures at other  offices. The JPO is currently implementing these 
frameworks with the IP offices in Brunei, Cambodia, and Lao P eople 's Democratic Republic . 
289.  These initiatives are established following mutual agreements of both parties and  are the 
results of willingness of both o ffices to work together to improve application pendency and 
examination quality with respect to the examination systems of each countr y. 
290.  The JPO has also been taking the lead in the field of IT systems. The JPO has advocated the 
establishment of a system to share dossier information, including the status of procedures, as well 
as examination and document -related data. We have been promot ing this initiative named One 
Portal Dossier (OPD) among the IP 5 offices, the IP office in Japan ; the U nited States of America;  
Europe ; China and Korea , Republic of . This system enables examiners to refer to the dossier 
information of member countries for the purpose of more efficient examinations.  
291.  The OPD is also now available to applicants on the Internet. In addition, the JPO has 
contributed to the global expansion of this system through the world 's first linkage of OPD with 
WIPO -CASE, WIPO 's dossier in formation -sharing system, following joint technological development 
together with WIPO.  
292.  In addition, the JPO was the first to initiate a framework to electronically exchange priority 
documents with other IP Offices. This framework significantly reduced the  burden and cost of filing 
procedures for applicants, as well as the burden of document delivery procedures in the respective 
IP offices. Since the WIPO subsequently developed the Digital Access Service (DAS), the JPO has 
cooperated with WIPO to develop a DAS environment. The improvement of IT systems is the 
foundation for examination operations at all IP Offices, and we are eager to continue to promote 
international discussions on this matter.  
293.  Along with developing frameworks and systems, the JPO is placin g efforts into human resource 
development in cooperation with foreign IP offices. To this end, the JPO is facilitating direct 
discussions among examiners, as well as providing trainings for examiners in cooperation with other 
IP offices.  This program me aims to promote mutual understanding and trust -building and improve 
the harmonization of examination practices among IP offices.  Since 2000, the JPO carried out these 
program mes together with 34 IP offices and organizations, and in 2022 conducted online excha nges 
with 22 examiners from the IP offices in Europe, China, and the U nited Kingdom . They compared 
their examination methods and practices and also exchanged information on search systems, 
operation of examination guidelines  and quality contro l. 
294.  The JPO 's team of international training instructors, which consists of examiners with extensive 
examination experiences, provides training program mes for patent examiners from emerging 
countries. The training program me is tailor -made to meet the needs of every Offi ce, combining IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 45 - 
 
  lectures and exercises. In 2022, approximately 230 examiners in emerging countries participated in 
the trainings. In addition, the JPO has various programs focused on developing human resources in 
emerging countries. Specifically, the JPO wor ks with the WIPO to conduct high -level policy dialogues; 
fellowships and IP master 's program mes; and to provide support for the development of IT 
infrastructure.  
295.  In terms of IP utilization, for example, the JPO has been helping with brand -building in the 
African region. For the Taita Baskets project conducted in cooperation with the IP office in Kenya, 
we assisted women in rural areas to acquire a collective trademark for their traditional baskets, draft 
rules for the use of the collective trademark, and qu ality control of the basket products.  Furthermore, 
the JPO offers training courses for government officers and IP experts in the private sector in 
emerging countries. Through these training courses, we aim to support human resources who play 
central roles in developing their respective IP systems, as well as build networks among those talents 
in emerging countries.  
296.  Finally, the JPO dispatches its staff members to various regions in order to facilitate 
communication with other IP offices to promote the above -mentioned initiatives. Specifically, IP 
attachés are stationed in China, Brazil, Germany, India, Korea, Thailand, Singapore, the 
United  Arab Emirates, and the United States to closely communicate and coordinate with the 
counterparts of the IP Offices in t heir respective regions.  The above -mentioned initiatives of the JPO 
can help to build an environment where applicants in Japan and other countries are able to protect 
their IP rights more smoothly, as well as to streamline the operation of IP offices. Goin g forward, 
the JPO is determined to continue promoting these initiatives in cooperation with other IP offices. 
We sincerely hope that this presentation will be of some use to other Members, and we look forward 
to listening to other Members share their experiences.  
13.2  United States of America  
297.  The United States  of America  thanks Japan for drafting this paper on cross -border cooperation 
among IP offices, and we thank Members for engagement on this important topic. Cross -border 
cooperation between our IP offices is one of the best ways we can seek to improve IP systems for 
the benefit of all.  The US Patent and Trademark Office engages in ext ensive cooperation with IP 
offices around the world. Such cooperation includes experience sharing regarding examination, 
research collaboration in economic research, exchanges of information regarding IT systems and 
tools, and establishing a telework envir onment.  
298.  The USPTO has also collaborated and shared information with other offices in meeting 
challenges like handling increased filing periods or responding to the COVID -19 pandemic, whether 
it be by extending deadlines or accelerating examination for COVI D-19 related products. Several of 
those initiatives have been shared here in this Council.  In broad terms, the USPTO maintains several 
memoranda of understanding with foreign IP offices, which underpin a lot of our cooperation. For 
example, we maintain a m emorandum of understanding with the Canadian Intellectual Property 
Office, which features ongoing cooperation between operations divisions on trademark and patent 
examination efficiencies.  We also have MOUs with the Uganda Registration Services Bureau, the  
Department of Intellectual Property of the Kingdom of Bhutan, the Department for the Promotion of 
Industry and International Trade (DPIIT) in India, and the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property 
(SAIP). These are just few examples of the cooperations we maintain. We recently signed an MOU 
with the IP office of Ecuador, and recently renewed a memorandum  with the IP office of Chile for an 
additional four years. With the IP office of Panama, we have completed a Joint Statement of Intent 
on Cooperation on Accelerating the Grant of Panama -Related Patent Applications.  
299.  The USPTO also has significant cooperation with the IP office in Brazil, which includes ongoing 
information exchanges on a variety of administration and operation topics, including telework, 
performance management, and quality management, as well as quarterly patent technical calls. 
Such cooperation may include sending or receiving representatives from or to the foreign offices to 
observe an office 's operations first -hand. During the COVID -19 pan demic, the USPTO has also 
developed customized educational webinars in support of trademark examination operations for a 
variety of countries, including El Salvador, Guatemala, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica , and Haiti.  
300.  On IP enforcement, the USPTO collabo rates with other IP offices in educating consumers about 
the dangers of counterfeit goods and reducing the demand for these goods. For example, the USPTO IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 46 - 
 
  makes its "Go for Real " public awareness anti -counterfeiting campaign materials available to other 
IP offices, and Mexico 's IP office, IMPI has been able to adapt those materials for th eir own  public 
awareness campaign.  
301.  The USPTO is also an active participant in IP5, ID5, and TM5:  
• The IP5 launched in 2007 as a forum for the world 's five largest patent offi ces (China, EU, 
Korea, and Japan) to exchange views and identify opportunities for cooperation with 
regard to common challenges, including patent examination workloads, backlogs, patent 
quality, and inefficiencies in the international patent system. At its  annual meetings, it 
also meets with industry and stakeholders to hear their views.  
• The Industrial Design Forum (ID5) brings together the five largest industrial design offices 
in the world: the China National IP Office (CNIPA), the European Union IP Offic e (EUIPO), 
the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Korea Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) and the 
USPTO.  
• TM5 (Trademark 5) is the name given to a forum of the world 's five largest trademark 
offices. Its mission is to promote cooperation and collaboration amo ng its members. Th e 
partners  of TM5 exchange information on practices and programs that facilitate 
increasingly user -friendly and, if possible, interoperable trademark systems. Projects 
undertaken by TM5 — such as the TM5 ID List and Common Status Descript ors — aim at 
harmonization and improvement of trademark procedures. Other projects, such as 
Combatting Bad Faith Trademark Filings and Describing Goods and Services, aim to 
compare the practices of the partner offices.  
302.  In terms of cooperation among IP offi ces that would provide additional benefit, USPTO believes 
that reciprocal recognition of the validity of priority information for patents and trademarks found 
on an office 's publicly offered website, would be beneficial. In trademarks, reciprocal recogniti on of 
the acceptability of classification and identification of products and services in trademark applications 
would be valuable, such as those found in the ID list maintained by the TM5 partners.  The benefits 
of cooperation among offices are numerous. Ma ny IP offices face similar challenges, and the 
information sharing that occurs between offices can offer valuable solutions. Cooperation and 
communication benefits IP office operations, and ultimately stakeholders, by clearing up 
misconceptions and conveyi ng procedural and substantive details directly between the experts.  
13.3  Singapore  
303.  Singapore thank s Japan for drafting  the discussion paper and sharing its experiences on 
cross-border cooperation among IP offices. We are ple ased to be a co -sponsor of this paper. 
Singapore invests heavily in the innovation ecosystem and has develop ed strong partnerships with 
many global innovation hotspots. Recognising that IP is a key enabler in delivering successful 
innovation outcomes, the Singapore Government launched the Singapore IP Strategy (SIPS) 2030 , 
which is a national blueprint that suppor ts enterprises and the wider innovation community. A 
cornerstone of SIPS 2030 is to forge an IP ecosystem that supports innovation activities and connects 
well to global markets by strengthening collaboration with our global partners. This collaboration 
takes place on multiple fronts and have helped to promote greater uniformity and participation in 
IP, particularly at the regional level.  
304.  As Chair of the ASEAN Patents Task Force (PTF), Singapore has developed instruments such 
as the ASEAN Patent Examination  Cooperation (ASPEC), which facilitates patent work -sharing 
cooperation among IP offices in ASEAN. In 2022, the number of ASPEC filings saw a ten -fold increase 
in applications since 2012 and crossed the 1000 -mark for the first time.  Singapore also spearhea ds 
the development of the ASEAN IP Portal, which houses the online ASPEC platform, to promote access 
to IP services, databases and information for the region. As Singapore and IP offices in ASEAN 
continue to work in tandem, plans are also underway to bring  on board more useful elements to the 
ASEAN IP Portal, such as IP training and a directory listing of IP service providers, for the innovation 
community.  
305.  We have also partnered with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)  through the 
WIPO Singa pore Office to promote innovation an IP in Southeast Asia. Since 2005, the partnership IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 47 - 
 
  has concluded more than 160 technical assistance programmes and over 80 events for some 1,600 
participants. In February 2023, Singapore launched the Mentorship for Intan gible Asset 
Transformation (MINT) programme – a joint pilot between WIPO and IPOS that builds upon WIPO 's 
existing IP Management Clinics (IPMC). The MINT programme enables businesses in Singapore to 
draw on a pool of international IP experts for their entr epreneurial activities. There are ongoing plans 
to replicate this programme in other parts of the region.  
306.  Beyond Southeast Asia, Singapore works closely with IP offices and organisations around the 
world to foster a strong IP community and exchange best pr actices. In February 2023, Singapore 
held the 14th Community of Practice (CoP) for patent examiners with generous support from the 
WIPO Japan Funds -In-Trust. The programme brought together patent examiners from the region 
and beyond to share knowledge and improve patent prosecution process collaboration in the region.  
307.  Lastly, Singapore welcomed the establishment of the International Valuation Standards 
Council (IVSC) Asia Office last year. The new IVSC  setup – the first outside of Europe – will contribute 
to the development of international standards and valuation professionalism across all asset classes, 
including IP and intangible assets.  Singapore is fully committed to working with our innovation 
partners, including IP offices and organisations, to foster a vibrant IP environment for our 
businesses, entrepreneurs, and creators.  
13.4  Switzerland  
308.  Let me begin by thanking Japan for introducing  submission IP/C/W/ 697. Switzerland is pleased 
to be a co -sponso r and would like to thank the Members, who  shared  today  their national experiences  
with the Council for TRIPS.  
309.  Why is the Swiss IP office cooperating cross border with other IP offices?  For three reasons. 
Let me start with the  Swiss IPO perspective . A well-functioning, up -to date IP system is key for an 
innovative economy and sustainable growth. A regular exchange with Partner IP offices helps the 
Swiss IPO to keep abreast with the fast pace of developments in the legal, technical , and operational 
field of intellectual property , sharing lessons, learning from others, exchang ing on what worked for 
them and what did not, to draw relevant conclusions for our own strategy and vision and taking 
necessary measures to adapt to these new developments. We consider th is cross-border  cooperation 
a win –win for both offices involved and beneficial for their efforts to develop the national IP system 
in an efficient and effective manner . 
310.  Now, to t he right holders ' perspective . Transnational protection of intellectual property can be 
a complex and challenging affair for right holders , particularly MSMEs . Cooperation at the bilateral, 
regional and international level with other IP offices, including efforts to harmonize, simplify  and 
facilitate procedures for the application, registration and administration of IPRs, keeping the 
operations and services of the IPO fit for purpose, benefits such the users of the IP system.  
311.  Thirdly, o ur technical cooperation partners ' perspective . Just as the Swiss IPO learns from 
others through cross -border cooperation, we share our own experiences and lessons learned with 
partner offices requesting assistance. Multi -year technical cooperation programmes enable targeted 
and result -oriented support to achieve progress in a specific field of priority of that partner, be in 
the IP norm -setting process, building up efficient IPR operations or training expert personnel to more 
successfully accomplish day -to-day work that their IP office performs.  
312.  A couple o f concrete examples hopefully help illustrate what my delegation just said in a very 
general manner about the benefits of cross border IPO cooperation . At the regional level, Switzerland 
interacts extensively with the European Patent Office  (EPO) , recogniz ing early the potential of 
regional cooperation in the field of IP and patents in particular, Switzerland is a founding member 
of EPO, which , exactly 50 years ago  – in 1973 - was funded . EPO acts as the patent examination 
and granting authority for the vas t majority of patents that are valid in the territory of Switzerland. 
On the one hand, this discharges the Swiss IPO from a considerable workload, delegated to the EPO, 
allowing for economies in both financial and human resources. And on the other hand, th is 
cooperation provides considerable added value from the right holders ' perspective to apply for a 
patent with a single application not only for protection in the territory of Switzerland but at the same 
time for up to 40 more EPO member or extension coun tries. Clearly, this collaboration is the closest 
and strongest cross -border cooperation the Swiss IPO has with another IP office. Switzerland being IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 48 - 
 
  a Member of EPO, is thus also closely involved in institutional and organizational EPO matters, next 
to the  operational collaboration  described .  
313.  In the sphere of regional cooperation, we also mention the European Intellectual Property 
Office (EUIPO) as a valued cooperation partner of the Swiss IP office. Although an EU institution, the 
Swiss IPO is in a regula r exchange with the EUIPO, be it on substantive or procedural aspects in the 
fields of shared IP responsibility, and thus predominantly in the field of trademarks and designs. Via 
the EUIPO, Swiss IP rights holders can directly file a design or register a trademark with effect in all 
27 member States of the European Union.  
314.  Moving to examples of cross -border cooperation with other IP offices at the bilateral level, let 
me briefly introduce the collaboration that the Swiss IP O has with the UK IP office . In annual 
meetings at top management level, but also in a continuing and implementing mode at expert level 
throughout the year, we work on topics of joint interest and priority. We examine together IP 
developments with a direct impact on the functioning and th e services of our IP offices, such as the 
digitalization of processes and services offered to our customers, the IP right holders.  On the policy 
level, we discuss issues such as IP and frontier technologies, Big Data, A rtificial Intelligence  and 
Intellectu al Property , the I nternet of Things  or the metaverse and how our IP offices can prepare 
and respond appropriately to these technological developments. Exchange of examiners allow for 
the sharing of experience and learning from each other for the mutual ben efit. 
315.  A practical example of a technical assistance cross border cooperation is the Colombian –Swiss 
IP Project, phase II. The overall goal of this 4 year -project is to ensure that entrepreneurs, creators, 
researchers and producers in Colombia benefit from an improved IP system. With this goal in mind, 
the project provides advice and support in selected areas where the Swiss IPO is able to offer 
expertise and can help to achieve a tangible impact. Technical capacity building may happen in the 
form of trainin gs, workshops and experience sharing. One feature of the project was support for the 
establishment of Colombia 's national IP policy 2022 -2031. Moreover, the project promoted the 
national GI system  in Colombia  and conducted a legal gap analysis on the indus trial design legislation 
in order to prepare Colombia 's accession to the Hague Agreement  of WIPO . 
316.  In another example of a cross border cooperation and assistance among IP Offices, Switzerland 
and Ghana worked together on topics such as:  
• The commercializati on of IP rights of research institutions and SMEs . 
• The pilot registration of selected Ghanaian geographical indications products, to promote 
better market access of high -quality agricultural products and handicraft products for the 
benefit of rural and art isanal communities.  
317.  As a concluding remark: we note that while the COVID -19 pandemic has been a strain on 
cross-border cooperation of IP Offices, established partnerships have been able to continue their 
collaboration, helping the parties involved to better master the challenges they were confronted with 
in this extraordinary period.  
13.5  Australia  
318.  We also like to thank Japan for coordinating and introducing this communication.  IP Australia  
works with other national IP o ffices and international organizations such us the World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO) on various issues relating to the implementation of the IP system. 
Some of those cooperative efforts include : 
• memoranda  of understanding;  
• comment and exchang es of patents ' examiner;  
• hosting of study visits; and  
• other capacity building activities.  
319.  We found a cooperation with other IP offices has many benefits , which includes : IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 49 - 
 
  • sharing information and experiences on common issues;  
• improving examination practices;  
• enhancing the functioning of the international IP regime, particularly with regard to 
cross-border issues.  
320.  Cooperative efforts that harmonise IP office practices and systems directly benefit users of the 
IP system, through simplifying the process of obtaining IP rights.  Users also benefit when IP offices 
work together to raise awareness of the IP system.  And in that regard I would like you to know that 
IP Australia and WIPO will soon be  hosting a series of webinars targeting SME exporters  and I will 
be happy to share the dates of those with any interested delegation . We look forward to further 
exchanges with Members on their experiences, and how we can all benefit from cross -border 
cooperation among IP offices.  
321.  This will be my last intervention in this  meeting Chair . I want to say thank to you for all your 
excellent and goo d work  of this Council over the last year.  
13.6  Chinese Taipei  
322.  We would like to thank Japan for preparing the paper and we are pleased to be a co -sponsor. 
The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu is an open and free market 
economy with a thriving industrial property landscape. In 2022, the number of invention patent 
applications received by TIPO exceeded 50,000, representin g a 2% annual growth rate. Global 
statistics indicate that in 2021, TIPO ranked 8th among patent offices in terms of invention patent 
applications received, with non -resident applications accounting for approximately 60% of the filings. 
Japan, the US, Chin a, the Republic of Korea, and Germany were the top five countries of origin of 
said applications. Our local enterprises have been actively developing global patent portfolios. In the 
past five years, the numbers of invention patent applications from our ju risdiction received by the 
IP5 reached over 30,000 invention patent applications annually; of these, the majority were received 
by the USPTO ( approximatively 19,000 applications), followed by the CNIPA (11,000 applications), 
and the JPO, EPO, and KIPO (1,0 00 applications each).  
323.  TIPO places great importance on examination efficiency and quality  to provide better services 
to our patent applicants, TIPO is actively cooperating with other IP offices to accelerate examination 
process and reduce costs.  
324.  To streaml ine the patent examination process and allow applicants to obtain patent rights 
swiftly, we have been actively cooperating with other IP offices under the Patent Prosecution 
Highway (PPH) program and sharing examination results. Additionally, TIPO also wor ks with other 
IP offices to enhance examination efficiency and minimize time and costs associated with submitting 
priority documents for cross -border applicants. The Electronic Priority Document Exchange (PDX) 
Program is another collaboration with our glob al counterparts, allowing patent and design applicants 
to transmit their priority documents electronically.  In addition, to simplify the procedure for patent 
applicants to deposit biological materials and reduce the cost arising from making duplicate depos its, 
we actively promote mutual cooperation with other IP offices on biological material deposits.  
325.  Apart from efficiency, maintaining high examination quality is of utmost importance to TIPO. 
We organize activities to exchange information with WTO Members about our legal systems and best 
practices. We conduct examiner exchanges on a yearly basis with major IP offices to keep abreast 
of recent developments and to exchange experiences. We also jointly hold IP dialogues and seminars 
with other IP offices to discuss issues of concern, exchange information, and arrange for our 
examiners to participate in training courses offered by other IP offices.  
326.  We have ample resources and expertise in information technology and TIPO is glad to 
exchange our exper iences in establishing IT infrastructure with other IP offices. TIPO has established 
two patent search information systems, i.e., the TWPAT and GPSS, providing free access for the 
general public. To optimize the search system, TIPO has signed patent data e xchange agreements 
with major IP offices. TWPAT is a search system for our published patent data, while GPSS collects 
published global patent data.  Collaborative efforts in industrial property across borders can bring 
mutual benefits to all participating I P offices. TIPO is committed to pursue opportunities to cooperate IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 50 - 
 
  with other IP offices, aiming for establishing more comprehensive cross -border IP collaborations that 
can benefit our IP service users.  
13.7  United Kingdom  
327.  The United Kingdom would also like to thank Japan for drafting the interesting and informative 
paper on Cross -Border IP Cooperation among IP Offices. The UK IPO greatly values working in close 
cooperation with the World Intellectual Property Organizatio n, European Patent Office and national 
IP offices across the world. Innovation is a key driver of economic growth, which facilitates progress 
and trade across the world.  
328.  In our view, it is crucial that we work effectively with our global partners in areas  of common 
interest, and to create a positive framework to share and expand expertise and knowledge. We see 
our collective role as supporting innovators around the globe through enhancing understanding and 
cooperation between Members as well as the sharing  of advice and know -how about the role of IP 
in different cultures.  
329.  Therefore, the UK regularly engages in activities to foster direct cooperation, share best 
practice and to facilitate learning from one another.  We already h eard about  some of the  UK-Swiss  
collaborations in addition n otably we have productive co -operation activity on trademark practices 
across Asia. Most recently holding a successful expert -level exchange with colleagues in China. We 
are also very proud of our partnership with the Brazilian  IP office, where our comprehensive 
collaboration on developing an IP office for the 21st Century has delivered significant improvements 
to the quality and waiting times of rights granting services for both domestic and overseas 
applicants.  
330.  The UK also rec ognises that the value of international IP co -operation extends beyond the 
registration of IP rights. The global community of innovators and creators will also benefit from 
concerted efforts to build the IP knowledge and skills to fully maximise the opport unities that IP can 
bring to society. As such, we  have helped to set -up and taken part in sessions on IP awareness, 
such as conferences and seminars, as well as sharing information around developments in relevant 
laws, policies, and regulations. For exampl e, the UK IPO and Indian IP office enjoy a longstanding 
relationship underpinned by a joint workplan which underlines the commitment by both partners to 
enhance the impact of IP protection across our economies.  
331.  As TRIPS Council Members, we have an opportu nity to further our existing cooperation to 
ensure we can address the challenges that rapid changes in technology, society and the global 
economy herald. One of those changes has been the rapid growth of e -commerce over the past 
5 years, which itself prese nts both risks and opportunities for rightsholders. Infringing content and 
counterfeit goods know no borders. Sharing best practice, for example, in anti -counterfeiting 
activities and provisions is essential to tackle IP infringement online. An example of which is a recent 
workshop, held in summer last year, on online and offline enforcement best practices for IP 
enforcement agencies in Viet  Nam. 
332.  By such efforts, we are continuing to improve the capacity and effectiveness of IP enforcement; 
and laying the f oundations to build a comprehensive co -operation programme to prevent and combat 
infringement of IP rights. The UK continues its commitment to engage with other IP offices more 
actively.  Through this we will continue to build a stronger IP landscape, to be nefit and promote 
innovation, both at home and abroad.  
13.8  Canada  
333.  Canada would like to thank the delegation of Japan for its leadership in drafting the discussion 
paper on cross -border cooperation among intellectual property o ffices (under 
document  IP/C/W/697), and for providing us with the opportunity to speak about this important 
topic today. Canada would like to thank the Secretariat for circulating the discussion paper for 
today 's topic. Canada is pleased to share its natio nal experiences in this area and looks forward to 
an exchange of views from interested Members on this topic.  
334.  Canada, through the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (or CIPO), recognizes the 
importance of cross -border cooperation among IP offices and be lieves that such efforts are vital to IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 51 - 
 
  promoting innovation and the balanced protection of IP rights globally. Indeed, CIPO actively 
collaborates with other IP offices in various ways. For example, CIPO has delivered the Canadian 
Patent Law and Examination Workshop (or CPLEW), a 7 -day workshop for patent examiners around 
the world, run by CIPO patent examiners. The CPLEW provides an opportunity to share best practices 
between IP offices and to engage in in -depth discussions on various patent -related topics a ffecting 
all examiners across various offices. Since visiting examiners already possess the knowledge and 
skills regarding patent examination, the program focuses on Canadian particularities and on 
delivering interactive activities, such as case studies. D uring the workshop, Canadian patent law and 
examination practices are explained and compared with those of participant offices. Guest examiners 
are also invited to share information on their respective patent office, at their discretion. These 
topics range  from office organization and structure to training programs, and typical workdays or 
business offerings. Through the CPLEW, patent examiners are able to share best practices with 
respect to examination under the Patent Prosecution Highway (or PPH).  
335.  The Pa tent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is another example of cross -border cooperation 
between intellectual property (IP) offices. The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) currently 
has partnerships with 25 IP offices under the global PPH pilot programme, a nd five IP offices under 
the bilateral PPH pilot programmes. The PPH programme allows participating offices to avoid 
duplications and improve quality thanks to work -sharing among offices. Patent applicants whose 
applications are considered receivable by a patent office may request an accelerated examination of 
the relevant applications by a participating office through a simple procedure, based on the results 
of the examination by the first office. The growing number of patent offices  that are  implementing 
the PPH programme underscores the advantages of cooperation among offices and the transparency 
within the global system of patents. From the applicants ' perspective, use of the PPH reduces waiting 
time and may also reduce agents ' fees due to the potentiall y lower number of actions needed to be 
taken by the office to process their application. Furthermore, Canadian applicants are among the 
most diligent users of the PPH programme.  
336.  In addition, CIPO has also participated in many bilateral exchanges and interc hanges over the 
years with other IP offices to discuss harmonization of substantive laws, provide training, identify 
best practices, and collaborate on initiatives to improve the timeliness and quality of granted patents. 
For instance, CIPO 's Programs Bran ch had an opportunity to engage with the United Kingdom 's 
Intellectual Property Office and the Japan Patent Office to share information and best practices as it 
relates to the modernization of intellectual property systems and tools. This provided an oppor tunity 
to exchange views on the priorities of other offices, as well as the approaches adopted to modernizing 
and increasing their e -service catalogue.  
337.  We continue to encourage more cross -border cooperation on the development of common 
tools, products and processes that could improve patent examination. This type of cooperation could 
extend beyond the substantive work of examiners to include other operational areas such as IT 
infrastructure and data -driven decision -making. Cooperation on AI tools for IP off ices is also possible. 
Some offices invest heavily in this area and exchanges of national experiences could be useful to 
other IP offices. It is also useful to share best practices on how IP offices gather and use data and 
what tools they use to do so to b etter inform their clients and allow them to take informed IP 
decisions. Moreover, it may be useful to discuss the approaches of IP offices in the area of quality 
and data standards. In closing, Canada would like to reiterate our commitment to internationa l 
cooperation as we continue to improve the global IP ecosystem.  
13.9  Hong Kong, China  
338.  I would like to first thank Japan for taking the lead in co -ordinating the paper, which 
Hong Kong, China is pleased to support. As pointed out in the paper, while the industrial property 
system is based on the principle of territoriality, we see merits in cross -border cooperation among 
IP offices, as it can greatly contribute to enhancing legal certainty and predictability , thereby 
supporting cross -border trade and investment.  
339.  For Hong Kong, China, our Intellectual Property Department has been active in forging ties 
with IP offices over the world. Such cross -border cooperation takes different forms. First, to 
strengthen coo peration and exchange with other IP offices, we have signed a number of memoranda 
of understanding with other IP offices and organisations over the years (such as the IP offices in 
Australia, Republic of Korea and Mexico respectively, as well as the Intern ational Trademark 
Association).  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 52 - 
 
  340.  Second, to promote awareness of IP among businesses, we held different workshops and 
seminars in collaboration with other IP offices. For example, we organised a workshop together with 
the Republic of Korea and Mexico in 201 8 to promote the best practices in licensing for SMEs in the 
creative industries. We also organised an online workshop with ASEAN in December 2022 to share 
the best practices in IP commercialisation in a knowledge -based economy.  
341.  Third, we benefit from cros s-border collaboration in human resource development. Following 
a fundamental review of Hong Kong, China 's patent system, we launched an original grant patent 
system in 2019. The new patent system, which runs in parallel with the existing re -registration 
system, provides a direct filing route for seeking standard patent protection in Hong Kong , China . 
To build up the capability of our patent examiners in conducting substantive examination, they have 
been joining a 4 -month comprehensive training provided by the China National Intellectual Property 
Administration (CNIPA), covering different areas such as patent searches, classification , and 
substantive examination. In this regard, we are very grateful for the support rendered by the CNIPA.  
With the benefit of the memorandum of understanding with IP Australia, our Intellectual Property 
Department also appreciates the collaboration on capacity building, in particular the exchanges and 
sharing with our patent examiners on different patent issues.  
342.  Last but not leas t, Hong Kong, China has been spearheading development as a regional IP 
trading centre. Our Intellectual Property Department collaborates with the respective IP authorities 
in Mainland China and the Macao Special Administrative Region in organising exchange s, seminars, 
symposiums and IP expos for promoting IP awareness, protection, management, commercialisation 
and our IP professional services, notably in the Guangdong -Hong Kong -Macao Greater Bay Area. 
Such efforts would not only enhance protection of indust rial property across the three jurisdictions, 
but also contribute to regional economic development through trade and investment.  
343.  Hong Kong, China will continue to foster collaboration with other IP offices on capacity building 
and promoting public awarenes s of the importance of IP in world trade. We look forward to learning 
about other Members ' experiences as we work together to develop a more globalised industrial 
property system.  
13.10   European Union  
344.  The E uropean Union delegation is  very pleased to co -sponsor this agenda item  and I would 
like to thank in particular Japan for the active role in the drafting of the document submitted today 
to the TRIPS Council. We also thank the US delegate for her full involvement in the coordination of 
the Group.  We are all convinced that IPRs play an increasingly important role in corporate strategy. 
The intangible assets created through innovation represent a major share of the value of today 's 
businesses. The IPRs associated with intan gible assets are the legal guarantee for potential returns 
on investment in innovation and a means to get funding.  
345.  In this context, the cooperation between IP offices beyond the frontiers is of a great 
importance. Within the EU, this cooperation is very in tense , not to say "raison d 'être" of our group,  
but also our IP offices (EUIPO), but the national offices as well, have a close relationship with their 
counterparts all around the world. Our friend from Switzerland evokes the memorandum  of 
understanding wi th EUIPO but, EUIPO has many memoranda assigned and many memorand a with 
many , many countries in the world. I will present two examples of cooperation originating in two EU 
member States; Spain and France , but first, let 's talk about the cooperation managed by the EUIPO 
as such.  The EUIPO, the IP agency of the EU, through the European Union Intellectual Property 
Network has created tools and practices so that businesses, big and small, can benefit from more 
efficient regis tration services and increased legal security when applying for a trademark or design.  
346.  The EU IP Network brings together the EUIPO with the EU national and regional IP offices, as 
well as international partners, to make IPRs, mainly trademarks and designs more accessible, user 
friendly and effective. Over the last 12 years, the EUIPO, together with the valuable support of the 
EU IP network, has been able to drive a cut in registration fees, save costs, create global search 
tools and modernise the IT infrast ructure of IP offices in Europe and worldwide.  The EUIPO and the 
IP offices of the EU member States operate in a two -tier system in which EU rights and national 
rights work together and complement each other. This means that the EU trademark exists along 
with national trademarks . This is to say that  trademarks registered in the EU member States, and IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 53 - 
 
  companies can choose where to protect their brands depending on their business needs.  This is an 
original system of coexistence of property titles.  
347.  The EU IP network strengthens this whole system connecting IP offices and working to develop 
online tools that make it easier to apply for a trademark or design, and, on the other, converge on 
practices so that the process of registering a trademark and design is as s imilar as possible 
everywhere in Europe.  Currently there are eight projects and 25 subprojects all focused on 
cooperation and convergence: from developing state of the art online tools for the registration of 
trade arks and designs to converging the way in tellectual property offices register these rights.  This 
is a growing and strong joint effort managed by all our IP offices.  
348.  The EU IP network entails a massive cooperation effort that needs both creativity and diverse 
viewpoints to flourish. Around 200 exp erts make up the network who come from national and 
regional IP offices, user associations and international organisations like the World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO) , the European Commission and the European Patent Office. The EUIPO 
experts c omplement this input with regular technical visits to the IP offices.  Internally, within the 
EU Single Market, we are , frankly speaking, beyond the cooperation stricto sensu  but rather in a 
process of convergence.  In short, convergence helps reduce, if not  eliminate, incidents in which 
similar trademark and design applications are treated differently. This means that IP offices agree 
to follow common guidelines regarding certain aspects of how they examine trademarks and designs. 
These agreements are called  common practices and they look into matters like what is considered 
an acceptable trademark and what is not, or how the passing of a new legal instrument, like a 
regulation or directive, affects examination of trademarks and designs.  
349.  Harmonising a specifi c trademark and design practice takes into account the input from 
relevant court decisions and the outcome of the EU  IP network  working groups, where IP experts 
share their views. The resulting common practices help trademark and design applicants and 
exam iners alike to have a clearer understanding of the principles that are applied in examination. 
This way anyone can reasonably predict the outcome and benefit from a comparable decision both 
at EU and national level.  To date, 12 common practices have been a greed upon between the 
members of the network: nine in the field of trademarks and three in designs.  But convergence does 
not stop here, in a fast -evolving world like that of intellectual property there are now also new 
convergence projects that specifical ly look into updating the existing practices to the changing 
circumstances.  
350.  In respect of online activities, for instance, the EU IP network has been working to create the 
world 's largest databases of trademarks and designs so that anyone interested in IP can search for 
millions of trademarks and designs from around the world in a single place: TMview, the network 's 
flagship database contains a colossal 100 million trademarks, and there are more than 20 million 
designs in DesignView. Both tools are availabl e in more than 35 different languages.  These databases 
are complemented by two twin tools, TMclass and DesignClass, which allow applicants to know for 
what goods and/or services can be registered as a trademark or design.  
351.  The next step touches upon the exa mination process. The application is received at the EUIPO 
or at any of the national IP offices in a back -office system created with the valuable support of the 
EU IP network. Having a similar back office helps to increase consistency in the decision -makin g 
process. The back -office is currently used in 15 IP offices with Sweden joining in December  2022. 
352.  Let's take now an example of cooperation in one individual EU member State: Spain.  
Cooperation of the Spanish IP office within the framework of agreements with EPO and EUIPO is 
common. These agreements include cooperation projects related, in particular, to the development 
of computer tools and common databases as seen before. Spain has been a pilot, for example, in 
the development of the Front Office programme developed by the EPO for the management of patent 
applications. It also participates in the implementation of systems developed by EUIPO, such as, for 
example, the Back Office programme for designs.  The converge nce of practices is another of the 
usual practices carried out by these organisations, with the aim of achieving greater harmonisation 
in the granting and protection of IP rights in Europe.  
353.  On the other hand, bilateral cooperation takes place with differen t States, both within and 
outside the EU. Within the EU, we could mention the cooperation with Portugal, with whom a MoU 
was signed in 2022 and, among other issues, within the framework of this collaboration, a joint IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 54 - 
 
  study on "Patents and forest fire contr ol" has been carried out.  Outside the EU, it is worth mentioning 
the outstanding cooperation between the Spanish office with  Latin America. Within the framework 
of bilateral agreements with Latin American offices, the Oficina Española de Patentes y Marcas 
(SPTO) set up the Ibero -American Training Programme for Technological Information Searches 
(CIBIT). The main objective of this programme is to promote the accession of the maximum number 
of Ibero -American countries to the P atent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) , as well as to participate in the 
training of examiners from those offices of Ibero -American countries that already belong to this 
Treaty in international search procedures and techniques. In 2022, three  Ibero -American patent 
examiners (specifically from Cub a, Mexico and Uruguay) participated. The main benefits of this kind 
of cooperation are the harmonisation that comes with the development of similar practices, as well 
as making it easier for citizens to apply for rights outside their country of origin.  
354.  Finally, the IT cooperation developed so far has proven to be very effective  in Spain . A 
deepening of these practices, with extension to more countries, could be beneficial for applicants 
and right holders.  I switch now from the Spanish example to the  French in order to present an 
example of cooperation of a European IP office with a regional office in Africa.  
355.  INPI-OAPI (African Organization for Intellectual Property) cooperation has been long -standing 
between the two institutes that are connected through the ir history, their laws and their language. 
This was consolidated and boosted by the creation in 2019 of a Regional Counsellor for Intellectual 
Property attached to the Embassy of France in Côte d 'Ivoire for West and Central African countries. 
Currently, co operation is built on three main pillars: training, support for businesses and 
geographical indications. Training to upskill OAPI and national IP network officials includes:  
• Funding of three candidates per year to pursue CEIPI training (training of patent or 
trademark engineers in Strasbourg);  
• Active participation in the first edition of OAPI 's master 's degree programme in "Patents 
and Innovation " aimed at training engineers specializing in supporting innovation through 
IP; 
• Training of magistrate trainers a t magistrate academies in the three pilot countries (Côte 
d'Ivoire, Cameroon and Senegal) in cooperation with WIPO, ENM, INPI and OAPI.  
356.  Support for businesses:  
• Pre-diagnostic training in IP for better IP management in businesses;  
• Assistance with structuring OAPI client offer in providing support for businesses;  
• Support for implementation, labelling and enhancing the value of geographical indications;  
• Co-organization of the ministerial seminar on geographical indications in Abidjan  in June 
2022 aimed at fostering the promotion and international protection of geographical 
indications. Following this seminar, OAPI acceded to the Geneva Act of WIPO 's Lisbon 
Agreement (December 2022).  
• French structural aid for geographical indications a s part of development assistance 
programmes in partnership with CIRAD and AFD.  
• Development aid for industrial and artisanal geographical indications in which INPI has a 
long and solid experience.  
• In conclusion, it is with this very elaborate example of coo peration led by France with a 
sizeable portion of Africa that I will conclude my remarks.  
13.11   Korea, Republic of  
357.  I would like to extend our appreciation to co -sponsors for preparing the discussion paper and 
sharing national experiences . Although Korea  did not join as co -sponsor this time,  the Republic of 
Korea supports the paper, and we recognize the necessity of the relevant discussion. We hope that IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 55 - 
 
  today 's exchange  makes an important step towards discussing  further the various methods of 
cooperation, and thereby enhancing participation of Members and cooperation among their IP 
offices.  
13.12   Peru  
358.  We wish to thank the co -sponsors for their draft and Japan for presenting the document we 
are discussing. We also appreciate the valuable information shared yesterday that reflects the 
various initiatives that are being taken at different levels to strengthen cooperation between IP 
offices. We agree on the importance of and need to strengthe n ties between offices in order to 
promote certainty and predictability, as well as foster creation and innovation, which will have a 
positive impact on the promotion of trade and investment.  
359.  For our National Institute for the Defence of Competition and th e Protection of Intellectual 
Property (INDECOPI), other IP offices are strategic allies for strengthening the IP ecosystem at all 
levels, including through the transfer of knowledge, technical skills and capacities, and direct support 
for specific projects . There are three categories of cooperation in which INDECOPI participates:  
• First, those aimed at enhancing information exchange, for example, our Office 's 
participation in the European Union Intellectual Property Office 's (EUIPO) DesignView or 
the Europea n Patent Office 's Latipat search engines. We also wish to highlight, as the EU 
delegate mentioned yesterday, cooperation with EUIPO to ensure the integration of data 
on national trademarks into the online information and classification systems developed 
by EUIPO known as "TMview " and "TMclass ".  
• A second category is cooperation to enhance the skills of examiners of patents and 
industrial designs through workshops, seminars, webinars and internships organized by 
various offices with whom we have agreements, such as internships with the Spanish 
Patent and Trademark Office (OEPM).  
• The third category of cooperation is aimed at improving the quality of the service provided, 
for example, mechanisms to accelerate the examination of patent applications concluded 
with the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, the European Patent Office, the Pacific 
Alliance countries and PROSUR members, as well as countries and member offices of the 
PPH Global Agreement. Another case is implementation of computer systems, where we 
wish to highlight the support of EUIPO, which granted INDECOPI the source code for the 
non-commercial use of "Cesto ", a tool used by trademark examiners.  
360.  At the regional level, cooperation is maintained among the IP offices of the countries that 
make up the A ndean Community (CAN). For example, just days ago, we launched the Andean 
Opposition Protocol, which seeks to provide faster processing of trademark applications. We also 
maintain cooperation among IP offices belonging to the Ibero -American Programme on In dustrial 
Property and Development Promotion (IBEPI) and APEC. Benefits include skills development of our 
examiners, improved management, examination and processing of applications, enhanced 
implementation of public policies and adoption of strategies linke d to different aspects of IP.  
361.  Lastly, we wish to highlight the significant impact of cooperation on specific projects that focus 
on areas such as MSMEs, digitalization, and implementation and use of IT tools for the purpose of 
simplifying access and expedi ting procedures for users.  
13.13   India  
362.  At the outset I would like to thank the co -sponsors of document IP/C/W/697  for their paper 
Cross -Border Cooperation among IP offices  and also the delegations who made this presentation . 
My delegation would wish to share some initial thoughts and  also some questions on the paper . 
363.  IP offices establish various forms of collaboration, and cooperation at bilateral, regional as well 
as international (WIPO) level, which this paper also acknowledges . The questions proposed for 
discussion in the paper can be useful to assess the existing forms of collaboration among IP offices. 
In this context it would be interesting for us to understand the purpose and intent of the paper  
overall . Further, the document  implies a harmonized approac h on IP protection for artificial IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 56 - 
 
  intelligence and since this is an evolving and complex area where many countries are analysing the 
nature, scope and impact for their domestic policy making  and, we believe is the right approach for 
now as it is crucial to  have the policy space and freedom for countries to build a domestic landscape. 
In this regard, it would be good to understand if the co -sponsors are looking at any substantive 
outcomes in this area in the Council for TRIPS. We look forward to learning  and understand ing more 
from the co -sponsors on these issues that we raised.  
13.14   Bangladesh  
364.  Under this item I  deliver this statement under my  national capacity . Bangladesh  thanks Japan 
and other co -sponsors for the presentati on of the document  IP/C/W/679 . Of co urse, our capital is 
examining this paper but here are some preliminary observations.  
365.  Innovation is important for all Members including the LDCs. Article 7 of the TRIPS Agreement 
provides , and I quote: "The protection and enforcement of intellectual proper ty rights should 
contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of 
technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a 
manner conducive to social and economic welfare , and to a balance of rights and obligations ". 
366.  From our perspective, as an LDC , gap in productive capacities, infrastructure and finance, 
digital divide, and cross -border data governance are some of the major  challenges when we think 
of the  digital trade. This paper proposes, among some  key ideas, establishing global IT infrastructure 
to share information among IP offices as a base. This is a reality that a large portion  of our Members 
lack such a base. In addition, we continue to struggle with inherited challenges including in human 
and institutional capacity.  The paper  mainly proposes, as its title suggests, cross -border cooperation 
among the IP offices. In my delegation 's understanding, this may primarily be a subject of further 
examination in WIPO. The paper talks about  WIPO 's relevan ce.  
367.  There are several issues proposed in this paper. We are not sure whether all would fit under 
the scopes of the IP offices. For example, the paper includes the intricate issues of advanced 
technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and metaverse. W e need more information to understand 
their trade linkages and scopes of our work in the W orld Trade Organization . In conclusion, 
Bangladesh supports the idea of exploratory and inclusive discussion through the guided questions 
listed at the end of the pap er. We also look forward to working  with interested Members.  
13.15   South Africa  
368.  Before thanking the co -sponsor and sharing our national reflections please allow me to extend 
best wishes to the people of Ireland and all peo ple celebrating Saint Patrick 's day today.  
369.  With regards to the paper, w e thank the co -sponsors,  and our capital is still considering the 
paper and the questions entailed therein.  We recall the paper prepared by the Africa Group on policy 
space for industr ial development submitted to the G eneral Council . The paper emphasizes the need 
for the W orld Trade Organization (WTO)  to ensure that trade rules pro mote a better balance between 
protection and incentives to promote research and innovation on the one hand and the unfolding 
needs of society on the other. It emphasizes that the COVID -19 pandemic has exposed this 
imbalance. Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that Members m ust take steps to safeguard 
the public interest in economic and technological deve lopment. Articles 7 and 8 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement  express the intention of the drafters of the TRIPS Agreement to allow countries to 
pursue measures protecting their societal needs. However, Members have not developed 
mechanisms to achieve these objectives.  We are considering this submission in the context of this  
background . In our view we need to enhance our discussions on how we bring a better balance to 
ensure that the IP system , while supporting research and development , enables an effective 
response to  societal challenges and is not an obstacle.  
370.  South Africa is in the process of developing its system of Substantive Search and Examination 
(SSE) of patents and has already been cooperating with other IP offices in developing its capacity . 
Could the co -sponsors advise how they see the WTO playing a role in the context of cooperation 
between IP offices given the initiatives taking place under the World Intellectual Property 
Organization (WIPO) ? Furthermore, g iven the nature of the TRIPS Agreem ent, the recognition of 
different levels of development, the link of the IP system to economic policies and development IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 57 - 
 
  trajectory of Members, we need to caution against one size fits all approaches and I believe 
colleagues would recall such discussion s within the context of the substantive patent law treaty. 
There are concerning objectives outlined in the submission such as the need to ensure that applicants 
obtain the same scope of rights for the same invention in multiple regions/countries based on the 
same standards. The implications of this need to be properly discussed and unpacked.  
13.16   Canada  
371.  Our approach in terms of cooperation , as was reflected in our statement , goes back to what is 
at the core of the mandate of our int ellectual property office , and that is  the delivery of quality IP 
rights. We have mentioned quality a number of times in our statement. Quality IP rights , which is a 
priority for us, is what inspires market confidence and what promotes investments and prom otes 
recognition abroad, promotes confidence, and that is the  trade link there. So, just to reassure 
everyone when we talk about cooperation it is the objective, at least for Canada, to promote 
approaches that lead to the delivery of quality rights , and th at is at the core of our approach.  
13.17   World Intellectual Property Organization  
372.  The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)  would like to thank the co -sponsors of 
document IP/C/W/697 , which draws attention to the role of IP offices in creating an environment for 
innovation and IP to flourish. I would like to express our deep gratitude to all delegations that have 
mentioned that cooperation with the World Intelle ctual Property Organization. For WIPO, engaging 
in and facilitating cross -border cooperation is at the core of our mission to lead the development of 
a balanced and effective global intellectual property ecosystem.  
373.  WIPO is the home of cross -border intellec tual property cooperation because of its responsibility 
for, among others, the Patent Co -operation Treaty (PCT), the Madrid System and the Hague System. 
They are registration systems based in longstanding multilateral treaties, which depend on national 
and regional IP offices being able to work together effectively. To support the proper functioning of 
these systems, WIPO actively collaborates with IP offices as part of carrying out the required 
functions under those respective systems . For example , the PCT  system currently includes 157 
Contracting States, and in 2021 PCT applications were filed in 83 IP offices and 24 of those offices 
also act as International Searching and International Preliminary Examining Authorities. The Madrid 
System currently has 114  members, covering 130 countries, and the Hague System has 79 
members, covering 96 countries.  
374.  WIPO offers training , workshops and seminars for national IP offices on relevant systems, such 
as Madrid post -accession training for IP offices across the globe, most recently providing training to 
the IP offices of Algeria, Botswana, Cabo Verde, Liberia, Malawi, Mozambique, and the 
United  Arab Emirates. Online Regional Workshops on the Hague System for IP offices including of 
the ASEAN, Latin American, OAPI and AR IPO countries to provide pre -accession and post -accession 
training to the IP Offices.  
375.  WIPO notes the reference in document IP/C/W/697  to record levels of international 
applications and registrations under its systems in 2021. As outlined in WIPO 's press release of 
28 February 2023, the deman d for international patent applications under the PCT and international 
design registrations under the Hague System has continued to grow in 2022. International 
applications under the Madrid System, in turn, have declined in 2022, having seen exceptional 
growth in 2021. Notwithstanding short -term filing fluctuations due to the broader macroeconomic 
context, international patent, trademark and industrial design filings have over the long term trended 
upward, highlighting the importance of supporting the cros s-border cooperation that makes these 
systems function. While respecting the territoriality of IP rights, WIPO systems facilitate the process 
of seeking multinational protection and likewise facilitate public access to a wealth of technical 
information rel ated to those rights, building up knowledge repositories and contributing to future 
innovation.  
376.  WIPO cooperates with IP offices by providing technical assistance and training on relevant 
WIPO back -office systems, which help IP offices to make best use of t echnological developments to 
support efficient rights application and registration. In this regard:  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 58 - 
 
  • WIPO has provided technical support to IP offices, including OAPI and ARIPO on using 
WIPO IPO Business Solutions. This includes the WIPO Industrial Property  Administration 
System Suite, currently being used by 90 IP offices in all regions of the world.  
• WIPO supports IP offices in developing countries make best use of publicly accessible 
WIPO AI systems such as the AI image trademark search.  
377.  Various WIPO commi ttees provide our member States the opportunity to share information 
and experiences relating to the development of industrial property systems and their operation, as 
well as institutional and human capacity building and agree on any type of convergence t hey see fit. 
For instance, the Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) provides a forum for discussion 
of pertinent topics on both substantive and procedural matters and collects information about 
international work sharing and collaborative activit ies relating to examination of patent applications 
by IP offices. Topics under discussion also include the patentability of AI inventions and questions of 
inventorship, expedited patent examination and sufficiency of disclosure.  
378.  The use of new technologies  in IP office procedures, for example, the use of AI for patent 
examination procedures, blockchain and digital transformation, is also a topic that WIPO member 
States actively discuss within various WIPO fora, including the WIPO Conversation on IP and Fron tier 
Technologies, SCP and the Committee on WIPO Standards.  
379.  WIPO shares with IP offices its ongoing initiatives, learnings and best practices as well as 
engages with them to go beyond its work as a register of IP rights and to become a more active 
particip ant in the innovation ecosystem. In this regard it has recently begun implementing projects 
to support IP offices create or strengthen business support services for SMEs. WIPO is also building 
the capacity of underserviced communities including women, yout h and SMEs to create a conducive 
environment for innovation and creativity. Some examples include:  
• Annual regional meetings among focal points of national networks of Technology and 
Innovation Support Centres , or TISCs, in Africa, Latin America and the Car ibbean, 
South -East Asia, and Arab countries, which aim to promote exchange of experiences and 
best practices in managing and delivering technology and innovation support services for 
local inventors, researchers, and entrepreneurs.  
• A Roundtable on the results of the managing  and landscaping of the SME Support Services 
of National IP Offices in the Central European, Baltic States and Mediterranean countries 
region . 
380.  WIPO remains committed to working with IP Offices in all parts of the world to build a reliable, 
predictable environment for innovators and creators. We have taken note of the discussion today 
and yesterday and look forward to enhancing and strengthening o ur cooperation with IP offices to 
facilitate more targeted technical activities that achieve our shared objectives.  
13.18   Japan  
381.  With regards to some comments from some Member please allow me to clarify the intentions 
of our paper. We, of course, do not disagree with the basic notion that cooperation of IP system 
should be promoted based on mutual understanding . Regarding the specif ic comment on possible 
harmonization in areas of emerging technologies such as AI, or metaverse, we shared that there are 
many Members where the  policy direction is not yet set. I totally agree with that. So, this is why we 
need that cooperation. The coope ration includes , of course , information sharing as a reference to 
consider a future policy direction in each country. So , this is why we consider that this meeting 
opportunity is already a good occasion to learn more about how IP offices all over the world  are 
positively cooperating with each other in order to achieve a win -win situation that promotes 
innovation within the framework of the TRIPS Agreement and other instruments.  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 59 - 
 
  14  INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO  
14.1  WTO Secretariat  
382.  As in previous occasions and for Members ' information, the Secretariat will provide a brief 
update of the issues related to intellectual property policy that have come up in the m ost recent 
Trade Policy Reviews.  Since our last report during the TRIPS Council Meeting in October 2022, the 
Trade Policy Reviews of Djibouti, Barbados, Brazil, Seychelles, the United States of America, the 
Dominican Republic, Malaysia, and Japan took plac e. During these reviews, delegations engaged in 
the discussions and sought further details on:  
• The domestic implementation of the TRIPS Agreement;  
• Institutional arrangements for the administration and enforcement of intellectual 
property;  
• Copyright and rel ated rights regimes;  
• Trademark regime;  
• Protection of geographical indications;  
• Patent regime;  
• Enforcement, online and at the border; and  
• Measures taken in response to the COVID -19 pandemic.  
383.  We have also started to work on the upcoming Director -General 's Trade Monitoring Report. On 
10 March, the Director -General invited delegations to submit information on measures implemented 
between mid -October 2022 and mid -May 2023. This request covers trade - and intellectual property -
related measures. In her communicatio n, the Director General announced the new online platform 
for the submission and verification of measures, which the Secretariat developed in response to 
requests by delegations during the 7th Appraisal of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism to modernize 
and digitalize the exchange of information. This new online platform is part of the WTO Trade 
Monitoring Database (TMDB) ( https://tmdb.wto.org ). 
384.  Delegates responsible for the Trade Monitoring Exercise are receiving this week an email with 
a secure and individual link to access the Trade Monitoring Platform. This link will allow delegates to 
access their respective space for the submission and verification of measures. Therefore, and as 
flagged at the beginn ing of this meeting, it is essential that delegates update their information on 
the Registration System. Delegates will also receive an invitation to the launch of the Trade 
Monitoring, envisaged for next Thursday, 23 March  2023, at 2pm in the afternoon, i n Room E. We 
look forward to receiving your submissions on TRIPS -related measures.  
15  OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS  
385.  No statements were made under this agenda item.  
16  OTHER BUSINESS  
386.  No statements were made under this agenda it em. 
17  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  
17.1  Thailand  
387.  With your permission, Chair, I do not have much to say but I think I am going to give the 
Secretariat and interpreters a hard time because I rarely read from a script , and I hav e noticed that IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 60 - 
 
  all delegates and also representatives from other organizations read from script s. Maybe next time 
we can do it a little bit more lively.  
388.  It is my great pleasure to be entrusted by WTO Members to chair this important issue. For me , 
I am afr aid this was not my first choice because I know how difficult it is, but I took up the challenge. 
People are saying – this is a great issue,  but it is very difficult, very challenging . Maybe the 
experience of wanting to be challenged arose in me , and so I said ok, I will do it. But I think for me 
personally , intellectual property is a very  important area for LDCs, for developing countries,  and for 
developed countries alike. I think this is an issue on which WTO Members must work very hard 
together to achieve something because  this is an issue of the future , and I am very humbled that I 
will be serving Members. So, I cannot say that as a Chair my doors will be open – because  I do not 
have an office in the building – but I am available to everyone, to al l Members . You can reach out 
to me, do not wait for me to reach out to you , as I am here to serve Members .  
389.  My last word will be of course to sincerely thank Ambassador Gberie for his contribution as the 
Chair. I am not sure everyone ha s been participating in the run -up to MC12 , but I can say that 
Ambassador Lansana Gberie had a very difficult job, but he did his work greatly and admirably , so 
I hope I am speaking on behalf of all WTO Members and not only from m y delegation that we are 
very thankful for your contribution and your active and very dedicated role that you have played 
before MC12 , as well as since then . And thanks to the Secretariat as well . I wish you will have good 
time, have a good rest and , of course, we will see you around.  
17.2  Chair  
390.  Thank you very much for your kind words and congratulations again. I would like to thank all 
delegations for your trust and your cooperation during my term as Chair. It has be en very 
interesting, very exciting, very challenging, but I think th at you are a much nicer person than I am, 
and you will be treated more nicely, frankly. I am very grateful for the chance that I have had, and 
I would like to thank particularly the Secret ariat, the very hard -working Secretariat that guided me 
through the year and supported my work. I am grateful also to the African Group who pushed me 
to do this, and who stood by me with the LDC Group, a very active LDC Group in the Council for 
TRIPS, and I am grateful to all Members.  
391.  I am particularly grateful to a few Members that have been very much supportive: Australia, 
New Zealand and there are several other countries. I thank you all, the UK, the United States , Brazil,  
and everyone  for the support. I have enjoyed this, but  all go od things must come to an end, and  I 
think I will enjoy the afterlife better, the after -TRIPS life. We have no further items on the agenda, 
we are coming to the end of this meeting, and this is the place for the customary farewells to those 
delegates who a re leaving their posts. We are informed that Mr Assan Touray from the delegation 
of The Gambia is leaving us. He has been a n active member of the Council and we would like to 
thank him for his contribution to the work of the WTO and the Council for TRIPS , in particular, and 
I wish him all the very best in his future endeavours.  
17.3  European Union  
392.  Thank you Chair, I regret  that you did not mention the European Union as your suppo rter 
because we tried to support yo u as much as we could , but we really wanted to express our sincere 
gratitude for your outstanding leadership and contributions during your time as the Chair of this 
Council. We think that your dedication , professionalism,  and expertise have been invaluable  to the 
success of this Council and to the success of MC12 in the first place. Your ability to guide discussion s, 
keep the parties engaged and facilitate constructive dialogue have been really remarkable and your 
patience , tact and diplomacy have helped us  navigate through difficult issues and achieve important 
compromises in particular on the TRIPS waiver discussion. So, I think you set a very high standard 
for future Chairs, that is clear for the EU and on behalf of the EU again we would like to thank you  
for your service to this Council and wish you all the best in your future endeavours.  
393.  We would, of course, like to take the opportunity to congratulate Ambassador Pitfield on her 
appointment as the Chair of this Council . The EU is eager to work with you and to support you in 
the same manner as we supported Ambassador Gberie and we wish you all the best in your new 
role. IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 61 - 
 
  17.4  Bangladesh  
394.  My delegation welcomes HE Pimchanok Pitfield  of Thailand as the new Chair of the Council  for 
TRIPS . We can  assure  you our full support and cooperation and we wish you all success in the work 
of the TRIPS Council. With that we also wish goodbye to  our good colleague Assan T ouray from The 
Gambia. Finally, the delegation of Bangladesh,  commends you, Excellency Ambassador Dr Gberie, 
for your guidance and leadership in the Council  for TRIPS , particularly  during the most difficult time . 
I should say  that this Council, during MC12 , was the toughest  one and you were very courageous 
because as I feel  – I have been working here for almost 4 years – I have full respect for all other 
colleagues, but you are very courageous for taking the leadership during the most difficult time of 
MC12. So special congratulation s and gratitude  to you,  and we  hope that you will continue to support 
the works of the Council for TRIPS with your wisdom and do stay in Geneva with us . 
17.5  Nepal  
395.  We congratulate the new Chair HE Ambassador Pitfield and w e wish her all the best. She can 
count on Nepal 's full support while  discharging  her responsibilities. I extend the sincere thanks to 
Ambassador Gberie for your excellent role.  
17.6  United Kingdom  
396.  I am really happy to deliver my first ever statement to sincerely thank you for the hard work 
you have been doing during these really complex discussions I have been closely following since last 
year, both to MC12 and also in the last month. We truly appreciate d also the transparent manner 
that has inspired your mandate. We also take the chance to welcome Ambassador Pitfield from 
Thailand  for her appointment . We are confident that her experience and leadership will help us in 
moving the discussions forward . 
17.7  Tanz ania, on behalf of the African Group  
397.  I take this opportunity to express our appreciation , and speaking on behalf of the African Group 
we are really appreciative of your commitment an d particularly , your Excellency, the way you have 
guided the Council for TRIPS. The leadership generally you have provided is really appreciated , 
especially last year during the negotiations of the decision which was adopted during MC12. In the 
process tow ards that decision,  you really provided very commendable  guidance for which we really 
grateful . The way you worked in a very transparent manner , also the zeal and commitment were 
really exemplary , and being a brother from the continent we feel really happy  and express our 
confidence and wish you all the best as we continue to work with you perhaps in different 
configurations. We want you to continue to be with us  with that  zeal and commitment and we look 
forward to working with you in other council or committees . So, we wish you all the best.  
398.  For the incoming new Chair we want to express our confidence and assure her of the African 
Group 's commitment to work with her. We have al ready started working on the issue of the extension  
of the MC12 Decision to cover therapeutics and diagnostics and we have called the Council to 
commence some discussions,  so we are looking forward to your guidance , your Excellency , in taking 
that process towards conclusion. We are available and ready to extend our cooperation and with 
those few words your Excellency we welcome you and wish you all the best also in leading the 
Council for TRIPS as we will be working down towards that decision which is expec ted to be decided 
ahead of MC12 and perhaps  in few months . Good luck if it happens, good luck to the Council if it 
happens and we will be looking  forward. For the African Group, this really is one of the issues  that 
we are looking forward and are eager tha t we commit our work towards that . I want to thank all the 
Members for the ir cooperation that was extended to HE Lansana Gberie for the success obtained.  
17.8  Japan  
399.  I changed my s eat position today in order to show my face toward you in order to express our 
gratitude to your great chairmanship. Let me join the preceding speakers in thanking Ambassador 
Gberie for the tremendous efforts you put forth to get us through a really difficult phase. We are 
very grateful for you r efforts in organizing many of the meetings to ward consensus at the Council  
for TRIPS  and we wish you all the best.  I would also like to echo previous speakers in congratulating IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 62 - 
 
  Ambassador Pitfield for her appointment and  welcoming you as the new Chair of  the Council for 
TRIPS. We very much look forward to working with you.  
17.9  United States of America  
400.  I was actually inspired by Ambassador Pitfield 's comments about going off script . We actually 
have a point for this, but I am going a little bit off of them , unfortunately I was not able to turn 
around to face you directly but hope this is ok. Ambassador Gberie , I just want to say thank you for 
your lea dership as other s have said. I think this has been a very challenging year, especially with 
MC12 and you helped the Council for TRIPS navigate that through . And to come out with a very 
successful MC12 despite multiple extensions of days of negotiations, ho t mosquito -filled green 
rooms, you know, Members with a lot of domestic consultations and domestic dynamics to deal with. 
Your leadership has been greatly appreciated , so thank you. Ambassador P itfield, congratulations , 
or condolences, depending on the par ticular perspectiv e. We look forward to potentially having TRIPS 
Council karaoke sections like you chaired at MC12 but hopefully with properly licenced public 
performances of videos and music. But in any case, congratulations and then finally as other have  
noted , thank you to the Secretariat for your support – often behind the scenes , but still very 
important.  
17.10   Indonesia  
401.  Inspired by my colleague I purposely changed my seating so that I can face you and the 
incoming Chair. Just want to take this opportunity to convey appreciation to you , Chair, for your 
leadership. I know that it has been a very difficult and complex negotiation s when we got to the 
follow -up of the MC12 Decision . We also want to extend our most sincere congratulations and best 
wishes to Ambassador of Thailand. I always enjoy your interventions in other sessions , so I am sure 
that under your leadership , it will be another productive session of the Council for TRIPS. Rest 
assured of Indonesia 's continued collaboration with you.  
17.11   Cambodia   
402.  I think you are probably not hearing a lot of statement s from me but as part of the LDCs Group 
we have contributed to discussions a lot and  thank you for your guidance and contribution to the 
Council for a year, particularly during MC12 , and wish you success in your future  endeavours . At the 
same time, I would like to congratulate the new Chairperson, Her Excellency Pitfield for her 
appointment and wish her the best for her responsibilities in this Council. As my colleagues in the 
room have said, it is a very challenging Council indeed. Please rest assured of our support and 
engagement from the LDCs Group particularly from the Asian Member states . 
17.12   Canada  
403.  I think my s eating is ok . I will be remiss if I did not share in the congratulations which are 
indeed in order, for having navigated us and guid ed us through what was one of the Council 's most 
complex vintages  in several years. Few people would switch seat s with you or at least not voluntarily, 
but Ambassador Pitfield is, perhaps even i nvoluntarily . Canada certainly looks forward to working 
with Amb assador Pitfield in the coming year.  
17.13   Kenya  
404.  Thank you Chair for ably steering the Council for TRIPS during  your tenure.  We commend your  
leadership , especially in the run -up to MC12 and the outcomes that we achieved. We  also take this 
opportunity to welcome the incoming Chair and we wish you all the best  in your tenure . We look 
forward to working with you and assure you our unwavering support.  
17.14   Egypt  
405.  We wish you all the best in your future endeavours and we believe that your expertise , wisdom  
and your sense of humour provide a strategic exit from some difficult situations sometimes during 
the TRIPS waiver negotiations. Also, we congratulate Ambassador Pitfield for her new role, and we  
express our commitment to support her during the Council and looking forward to engaging  IP/C/M/107/Add.1  
 
- 63 - 
 
  constructively in the next meetings. For my brother and my friend Assan  Touray we want to say 
goodbye to him, and we wish him all the best in his future endeavours.  
17.15   Korea, Republic of  
406.  I would just like to simply add my voice to thanking you , Chair, for your dedication and service 
to this Organization. A lso taking this opportunity, I would like to welcome incoming Chair and look 
forward working under your guidance.  
17.16   Brazil  
407.  Just want to also add our voice in support and full recognition of the work you have done in 
the last ye ar in the Council for TRIPS. It was very important the role you have played in guiding us 
in achieving consensus during MC12. It was really tough, we all know . Looking forward to the year 
ahead , Ambassador Pitfield , we welcome you as well. Our pending issu e is one of the several pending 
issues that MC12 has left for us to be working toward MC13 , and you can count first of all on Brazil, 
on our work and our full support . We are fully confident o f your guidance , as did Ambassador Lansana 
last year , for achiev ing consensus in the Council for TRIPS.  
17.17   WTO Secretariat  
408.  I have no choice on where to sit , but I would not choose any other place than between two of 
the most distinguished diplomats and Ambassadors in the W orld Trade Organization (WTO)  
ecosystem. I would just like, very briefly, to express our deep appreciation to Ambassador Gberie. 
We are very conscious of the sacrifices that delegates  and particularly heads of delegation make in 
stepping -up to the post of Chair of a Council such as this. It is a n act of true, pure contribution to 
the multilateral system,  and it is deeply appreciated by all of us. It has been honestly a real pleasure 
to work with you, Sir, in what have been indeed challenging time s, but with some remarkable 
achievements to your remarkable CV. So, thank you very much and I think I can say on behalf of 
all of us it is deeply appreciated and , Ambassador Pitfield , we are del ighted at the vote of confidence 
that you have made to seek to  head-up this Council. We, of course, think it has got a lot of potential , 
it can do  some  wonderful things and we look forward to working with you to fulfil that.  
 
__________  