 RESTRICTED  
  
IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
28 June 2022 
(22-5002) Page: 1/73 
Council for Trade -Related Aspects of  
Intellectual Property Rights    
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 9-10 MARCH , 6 MAY AND 1 JUNE 2022 
Chair: H.E. Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli  (Norway)  
Chair: H.E . Ambassador Lansana Gberie (Sierra Leone)  
Addendum  
The present document contains the statements made during the Council for TRIPS meeting held on 
9-10 March  2022 and 6 May 2022 . No statements were made in the meeting held on 1 June 2022.  
 
_______________  
 
 
Table of Contents  
STATEMENTS AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  ................................ ......................  5 
1   NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT  ................................ ........  8 
2   REVIEW OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION  ................................ ..............  15 
3   IP MEASURES IN THE CONTEXT OF COVID -19 ................................ ...........................  16 
4   REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B)  ................................ ...................  19 
5   RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY  ................................ ................................ ................................  19 
6   PROTECTION OF TRADITIONA L KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE  ................................ ... 19 
7   NON-VIOLATION  AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS  ................................ .......................  21 
8   REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  UNDER 
ARTICLE 71.1  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  23 
9   REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2  ................................ ....................  23 
10   FOLLOW -UP TO THE NINETEENTH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 
OF THE DECISION ON THE  IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE  66.2 OF THE 
TRIPS  AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  25 
11   TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY -BUILDING  ................................ ............  38 
12   PROPOSAL FOR A WAIVER FROM CERTAI N PROVISIONS OF THE 
TRIPS  AGREEMENT  FOR THE PREVENTION, CONTAINMENT AND TREATMENT OF 
COVID -19 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  39 
13   DRAFT GENERAL COUNCIL DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  AND 
PUBLIC HEALTH IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF A PANDEMIC  ................................ ...........  39 
14   INTELLECT UAL PROPERTY, INNOVATION, AND MICROFINANCE  .............................  57 
15   INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO  ...............  71 IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  16   OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL 
ORGANIZATIONS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  72 
17   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 72 
18   ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ............  72 
  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  INDEX OF THE STATEMENTS MADE  
AT THE MEETING OF COUNCIL FOR TRIPS 9-10 MARCH 2022  AND 6 MAY 2022 * 
Australia  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  37 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  65 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Notifications  ................................ .........  9 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda ................................ ..............  7 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 46 
Bangladesh  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  30 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
Election of the Chairperson  ...................  73 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 22 
Technical Cooperation  ..........................  38 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 42 
Bangladesh on behalf of the LDC Group's 
focal point on TRIPS  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  30 
Bolivia, Plurinational State of  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 45 
Brazil  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  69 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 21 
Notifications  ................................ .........  9 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 45 
Canada  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  37 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...... 57, 70  
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 22 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda ................................ ..............  7 
Chad on behalf of the LDC Group  
Article  66.2 ................................ ... 28, 37  
Election of the Chairperson  ...................  72 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  68 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 50 
Chile  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
IP and Innovation - Microfi nance  ...........  67 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 22 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 43 
China  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  19 
COVID -19 ................................ ..........  19 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  69 
Waiver - COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 53 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC  
Declaration  ................................ ...... 45 Colombia  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 44 
Ecuador  
TRIPS Amendment  ..............................  71 
Egypt  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 42 
European Union  
Article 24.2  ................................ ........  24 
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  32 
Election of the Chairperson ...................  73 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  60 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  6 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 40 
Georgia  
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  8 
Hong Kong, China  
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  69 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 46 
India  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  19 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 22 
India on behalf of the co -sponsors  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 44 
Indonesia  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Waiver - COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 54 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 42 
Japan  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  35 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  62 
Notifications  ................................ ....... 10 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  7 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 51 
Korea, Republic of  
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  7 
Malaysia  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 43 
Maldives  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 41 
Namibia  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Decla ration  ................................ ...... 52 IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Nepal  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  31 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 48 
New Zealand  
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda ................................ ..............  7 
Nigeria  
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 22 
Waiver - COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaratio n ................................ ...... 56 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 47 
Norway  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  32 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda ................................ ..............  7 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 47 
Pakistan  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 45 
Peru  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 53 
Russian  Federation  
Notifications  ................................ ....... 13 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda ................................ ..............  8 
Waiver - COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 57 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 52 
Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  
Notifications  ................................ ....... 13 
Sierra Leone  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  27 
Election of the Chairperson  ...................  72 
Singapore  
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  62 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ . 45, 51  
South Africa  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  35 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
COVID -19 ................................ ..........  18 
Non-violation and situation complaint s ... 23 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ . 39, 53  
Sri Lanka  
Article 24.2  ................................ ........  24 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 46 
Switzerland  
Article 24.2  ................................ ........  23 
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  35 
Election of the Chairperson  ...................  73 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  65 Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Notifications  ................................ ....... 11 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  7 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 48 
Chinese Taipei  
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  64 
Tanzania on behalf of the African Group  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  31 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  20 
Election of the Chairperson ...................  73 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 22 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 43 
Togo  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  31 
Trinidad and Tobago  
Notifications  ................................ ....... 10 
Turkey  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 52 
Ukraine  
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  5 
Waiver - COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 55 
United  Kingdom  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  34 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  63 
Notifications  ................................ ....... 12 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  6 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 47 
United  States  of America  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  36 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK  ......................  21 
COVID -19 ................................ ..........  19 
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  59 
Non-violation and situation complaints  ... 23 
Notifications  ................................ ....... 12 
Statements after the adoption of the 
agenda  ................................ .............  6 
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 53 
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of  
Waiver – COVID -19 and Draft GC 
Declaration  ................................ ...... 53 
World Intellectual Property Organization  
IP and Innovation - Microfinance  ...........  70 
Technical Cooperation ..........................  38 
WTO Secretariat  
Article  66.2 ................................ ........  25 
COVID -19 ................................ ..........  16 
Information on developments in the WTO
 ................................ ......................  71 
Notifications  ................................ .... 8, 13 
 
* 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 pr esentation.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 5 - 
 
  STATEMENTS AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
Ukraine  
Before we begin our meeting, I would like to make a statement with regard to the current 
circumstances in my country and their effects on Ukraine 's participation in this Council. Ukraine has 
always been a strong supporter of the multilateral trading system  engag ing with Members on topics 
of interest, contributed to discussions, and shared our expertise on a variety of topics in th is very 
Council, as well as in other WTO bodies. Been under pressure already, on 24 February, the 
circumstances have further drastically changed. Is already 14 days that the Russian  Federation  
continues to commit a blatant act of aggression against my coun try through its unprovoked and 
unjustified military invasion, an attack on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine in a 
brutal violation of international law, as well as of the purpose and principles of this Organization. 
And while this meetin g is underway, many of my colleagues in Kyiv, as well as their families, are 
either hiding from attacks in bomb shelters or were forced to flee their homes along with more than 
two million of other Ukrainians.  
The humanitarian consequences of the Russian  Federation 's war of aggression are so grave and 
appalling that, on 28 February 2022, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in The Hague 
announced an investigation into possible war crimes or crimes against humanity in Ukraine. 
Following Russian  Federation 's invasion, the Government of Ukraine severed its diplomatic relations 
with the aggressor, decided to impose a complete economic embargo and no longer apply the WTO 
agreements in its relations with the Russian  Federation . Ukraine considers that  these steps are 
consistent with its national security rights under, inter alia , Article 73 of the TRIPS  Agreement . 
The ongoing aggressive military invasion of Ukraine by the Russian  Federation  and its constant 
attacks on my territory jeopardise the very a bility of my country to further participate in a 
substantive dialogue referred to by the Russian  Federation  during WTO meetings and in its 
communication s. Ukraine is convinced that a military aggression of one WTO Member towards 
another WTO Member puts the  trading system in an unprecedented situation that cannot allow us 
to conduct 'business as usual '. This military aggression defeats the object and purpose of the 
WTO Agreement to promote trade and peace among WTO Members. Ukraine recalls that the very 
first objective listed in the Havana Charter for an International Trade Organization was 'to create 
conditions of stability and well -being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among 
nations '. 
The Russian  Federation  has called Members to refr ain from 'politicising ' the WTO and proposed 
that Members instead adhere to their commitment to 'multilateralism ' and the 'global trade agenda '. 
Would not the best way to avoid 'politicising ' the WTO be for the Russian  Federation  to stop invading, 
bombarding, and killing? How can a Member that is bombing another Member with no regard for its 
integrity or its citizens claim to be opposed to politicisation and to be committed to multilateralism? 
If the Russian  Federation  wished to k eep politics outside of this Organization, it should not have 
started its illegal war against another WTO Member. However, Ukraine and other WTO Members are 
not helpless in the face of this threat.  
We are very grateful to all Members that have stood with U kraine in these terrifying times and 
have adopted – or are in the process of adopting – strong economic sanctions against the 
Russian  Federation . We also thank the Developed Countries Coordinating Group, which recently 
excluded the Russian  Federation  from its deliberations. We call on other Members not to remain 
indifferent in the face of this unprecedented and illegal aggression of the Russian  Federation . 
Given that the Russian  Federation  has clearly abandoned the basic principles and values that the 
GATT and the WTO have promoted for almost 80 years, since the end of World War II, we urge 
Members to consider whether the Russian  Federation 's continued participation in this Organization, 
including this and other WTO meetings, would be consistent with the obj ect and purpose of the WTO. 
Ukraine does not see how Members can conduct economic relations with the Russian  Federation  
within the WTO on a 'business as usual ' basis in the present awful circumstances.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 6 - 
 
  European Union  
At the outset let me express the E uropean Union and its member States ' full solidarity with 
Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. The E uropean Union condemns in the strongest possible terms 
Russian  Federation 's unprovoked and unjust ified military aggression against Ukraine, which grossly 
violates international law and the UN Charter, and undermines international security and stability. 
The EU demands that  the Russian  Federation  immediately ceases its military actions, withdraws all 
its troops from the entire territory of Ukraine and fully respects Ukraine 's territorial integrity, 
sovereignty and independence within its internationally recogniz ed borders. The E uropean Union 
resolutely supports Ukraine 's inherent right of self -defence, and the Ukrainian armed forces ' efforts 
to defend Ukraine 's territorial integrity and population in accordance with Article 51 of the UN 
Charter. At all times  the Russian  Federation  must respect its responsibilities under international 
humanitarian law.  The Russian  Federation  also needs to stop its disinformation campaign and cyber -
attacks.  
United  States  of America  
The United  States  thanks the delegate from Ukraine for her statement and reiterates its strong 
support for Ukraine during this unimaginably difficult time. We wish to pay tribute to the heroism of 
the Ukrainian people, their armed forces, and their leaders. We also express  our appreciation to the 
many Members around the globe that are taking action in cooperation and coordination with the 
United  States . Our important work together will continue. The United  States  condemns  the 
Russian  Federation 's premeditated and unprovoked  attack on Ukraine, and the United  States  equally 
condemns Belarus ' regime for aiding  the Russian  Federation 's war of aggression. President Putin 's 
premeditated war has brought catastrophic loss of life and human suffering.  The Russian  Federation  
is solely  responsible for this death and destruction, and the world must hold Russia accountable.  
The Russian  Federation 's actions constitute a clear violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations 
Charter, which states that all Members shall refrain in their inter national relations from the threat 
or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. We call upon  
the Russian  Federation  to immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine and refrain from any 
further unlawful thr eat or use of force against any UN member state. We are united with our allies 
and partners in our commitment to ensure the Russian Government pays a severe economic and 
diplomatic price for its further invasion of Ukraine.  
Our work at the WTO focuses on t rade, but this Organization cannot be neutral toward the 
struggle at hand. The WTO is predicated on certain values, among these that a fair and just 
international order is one built on rules, not power; on reciprocity, not predation, and on 
transparency, n ot perfidy. The actions of  the Russian  Federation  are incompatible with the 
rules-based system we have built and work to improve.  
United  Kingdom  
Before we proceed with the agenda of this TRIPS  Council , this delegation needs to speak to a 
matter of much gravity. In the World Trade Organization, as an international institute upholding 
international rules, it  is important that we recogniz e what is curr ently happening in Ukraine. This 
delegation expresses full solidarity with Ukraine and its population.  The Russian  Federation 's assault 
on Ukraine is an unprovoked, premeditated attack against a sovereign democratic state. The UK and 
our international part ners stand united in condemning the Russian government 's reprehensible 
actions, which are an egregious violation of international law and the UN Charter.  
As a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council,  the Russian  Federation  has a particular 
responsibili ty to uphold international peace and security. Instead, it is violating the borders of 
another country and its actions are causing widespread suffering. The Russian Government has 
shown that it was never serious about engaging in diplomacy – it has deliber ately worked to mislead 
the world, in order to mask its carefully planned aggression. As the UN Secretary -General has said, 
such unilateral measures conflict directly with the United Nations Charter - the use of force by one 
country against another is the repudiation of the principles that every country has committed to 
uphold.  The Russian  Federation  must urgently de -escalate and withdraw its troops. It must be held 
accountable and stop undermining democracy, global stability, and international law.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 7 - 
 
  Canada  
Canada strongly condemns  the Russian  Federation 's unjustifiable and unprovoked invasion of 
Ukraine, the attacks are causing widespread humanitarian consequences and resolving in the 
senseless death  of innocent people . The international community must be seized of this issue, this 
is not just an attack on Ukraine, this is an attack on international law, including the UN Charter  as 
well as democracy, freedom and human rights . 
Australia  
Australia would like to express its strong support for the statement issued by the delegate of 
Ukraine, as well as the statements issued by the EU -US UK and Canada . Australia condemns  the 
Russian  Federation 's ongoing , unprovoked and unjustified attack in Ukraine in the strongest possible 
terms . Australia also strongly supports Ukraine and the Ukrainian people in opposing Russians 
hostilities.  
Norway  
Norway condemns in the strongest possible terms the unprecedented military aggression of the 
Russian  Federation  against Ukraine. By its unprovoked, unjustified and premeditated military 
actions, the Russian  Federation  is grossly violating international law, the core principles on which 
the international rules -based order is built, and the fundamental principles of the UN Charter that 
have prevailed since W orld War II. It is an attack towards what the UN, WTO, and Geneva as a 
capital of multilateralism, stand for. 
New Zealand  
New Zealand strongly condemns  the Russian  Federation 's unjustifiable and unprovoked invasion 
of Ukraine. Russia 's action breaches international law and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of 
a neighbouring state. New Zealand strongly supports Ukraine in opposing the Russian assault. The 
attacks are causing widespread humanitarian consequences and resulting in the senseless deaths of 
innocent people. New  Zealand supports collective action by the international community to impose 
costs on Russia and on those in Russia who bear responsibility.  
Japan  
The delegation of Japan shares a common concern abo ut this currently ongoing conflict. We 
would like to echo and add voice to the preceding colleagues ' interventions, including the delegation 
of Ukraine. The aggression by  the Russian  Federation  this time is an attempt to unilaterally change 
the status quo  by force, and shakes the foundation of the international order. Japan condemns in 
the strongest terms Russia 's act of aggression and has been promptly implementing tough 
measures, aligning closely with the international community.  
Switzerland  
Switzerland condemns  the Russian  Federation 's military attack on Ukraine in the strongest 
terms. This attack constitutes a violation of Ukraine 's territorial integrity and sovereignty, and is 
thus a clear violation of international law, in particular the United Nations Charter. Switzerland calls 
on Russia to honour its international obligations, reconsider its actions, withdraw its troops and help 
to de-escalate the situation. Switzerland calls on all actors to respect international law, in particular 
humanitarian international law.  
Korea, Republic of  
The Republic of Korea supports  the statements delivered by Ukraine and by other  delegations 
before me. My Government strongly condemned  the Russian  Federation 's armed invasion, against 
Ukraine, as a violation of the principles of the UN Charter . The use of war that caused innocent 
casualties can not be justified under  any circumstances . Ukraine, sovereignty, territorial integrity and 
political  independence, should be respected . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 8 - 
 
  Georgia  
On 24 February 2022  the Russian  Federation  unleashed a debt stating full -scale m ilitary 
aggression against Ukraine leading to death, destruction and humanitarian disasters. Fundamental 
human rights of Ukrainians, passing foremost, the right to line are being massively violated and 
court displacement is on search. Russia unprovoked and  unjustified military aggression against 
Ukraine, attacks on civilian infrastructure, including kindergartens is an assault at the key principles 
of the UN Charter. We call on the Russian  Federation  to immediately and without any preconditions, 
since its m ilitary aggression against a sovereign, independent, and democratic state and withdrawal 
all forces from the territory of Ukraine. In conclusion, we reiterate our unwavering support to the 
independence, sovereignty and territorial of Ukraine within its int ernational recognized borders.  
Russian  Federation  
Responding to statements made by some Members,  the Russian  Federation  wants to reiterate 
its communication to the WTO General Council d ated from 7 March 2022. The WTO is a rules -based 
trade Organization and shall remain such. Russia notes with regret the efforts of certain Members 
towards politicization of the WTO and fragmentation of the multilateral trading system instead of 
engaging co nstructively in a substantive dialogue on the key issues of the global trade agenda. The 
Russian  Federation  would like to stress that in WTO bodies Members should refrain from discussing 
political issues. They are out of the scope of the World Trade Organi zation and are under the focus 
of dedicated international organizations and subject to a diplomatic process.  
1  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT  
WTO Secretariat  
Since its meeting in October 2021, t he Council has received the following notifications from 
Members:  
Under Article 63.2  
Australia has notified amendments to its Designs Act that implements recommendations from 
a review of its designs systems, providing more flexibility to designers in the earl y stages of getting 
registered design protection.  
Japan has notified revisions to its Trademark Act, its Design Act and its Patent Act.  
The Russian  Federation  has notified amendments to its laws permitting compulsory licensing 
with regard to patents, industrial designs and layout -designs, and introducing provisions that allow 
compulsory licensing of pharmaceutical products for export.  
The Kingdom  of Saudi Arabi a has notified a Law on Commercial Courts that establishes rules 
and procedures for commercial courts that include claims and violations arising from the 
implementation of intellectual property laws.  
The United Arab Emirates have notified a new law on the Regulation and Protection of Industrial 
Property Rights encompassing patent, utility model, industrial design, integrated circuit layout 
design, as well as undisclosed information  protection .  
The United  States  of America  have notified the Trademark Modern ization Act 2020, which 
provides, inter alia , new procedures to challenge federal applications and registrations with bogus 
or inaccurate claims of use.  
Trinidad and Tobago has notified a consolidated version of its Trade mark Act, which modernized 
numerous  aspects of the trademark law system, including definitions, well -known marks, registry 
organization and border enforcement protection against counterfeit trademark goods.   
The United  Kingdom  has notified a Trade mark and international Mark Amendment Regula tion 
2021, addressing questions of retained EU law pertaining to trademarks. It has also notified two 
Orders amending the 2016 Copyright and Performances Order extending further protections to IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 9 - 
 
  certain countries ' nationals in order to implement recent UK fr ee trade agreements and in response 
to countries recently joining the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)  Performances and 
Phonograms Treaty.  
 Switzerland has notified a significant number of laws relating to patents and to medical 
products.  
Brazil has notified amendments to its Industrial Property Act, its Plant Variety Protection Law, 
and several other laws and regulations in order to promote the ease of doing business.  
Under Article 69  
The United Arab Emirates , Brazil and Hungary have notified or updated their contact points for 
IP enforcement under Article 69 . 
Other notifications  
Switzerland has also notified updated responses to the Checkl ist of Issues on Enforcement.  
This concludes the overview of notifications received since our meeting in October.  
Let me already mention the "Annual Report on Notifications and other Information Flows " which 
is also listed under this agenda item, and whi ch once again illustrates submission rates and trends 
in Members ' notifications since 1996, with a particular focus on 2021. With your permission, Chair, 
I would suggest that the Secretariat be given the floor again later under this agenda item , to provide  
a more thorough introduction to that rather substantive document.  
Australia  
Australia would like to introduce notification IP/N/1/AUS/24  which we submitted  on 
12 November 2021. In response to the recommendations from a review of the Australian designs 
system, certain amendments were recently made to Australia 's Designs Act. Minor amendments 
clarifying the standards for the assessment of substantial similarit y and clarifying circumstances 
when a registered design can be revoked, came into effect on 11 September 2021. The substantial 
similarity provisions were amended to clarify the standard applied when assessing both the 
registrability and infringement of des igns. The revocation provisions were amended to ensure 
greater certainty and fairness in applying grounds of revocation relating to entitlement to a design, 
and in relation to fraud, false suggestion or misrepresentation. The remaining amendments will come  
into effect on 10 March 2022, and will:  
a. Introduce a 12 -month grace period to file a design application after the design is disclosed ; 
b. Protect third parties from infringement, so long as they start using a design before an 
application for registration is filed; 
c. Remove the option to publish without registration, and simplify the process of requesting 
registration ; 
d. Protect those who innocently infringe a design between filing and registration ; 
e. Allow exclusive licensees to take action against infringers ; 
f. Streamline the process for changing formal requirements for design applications ; and  
g. Make other minor technical changes.  
Brazil  
Thank you, Chair, for giving me the opportunity to introduce Brazil 's notifications IP/N/1/BRA/5 , 
IP/N/1/BRA/ 6 and IP/N/1/BRA/ 7. 
In general terms, Law 10,695 of 1 July 2003, known as  the "Law to Combat Piracy ", amends 
the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code regarding crimes of violation of copyright and 
related rights. The Law modifies Articles 184 and 186 of the Penal Code, which typify the crime of 
violating copyright and rel ated rights and establish the nature of the criminal action. Eight new IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 10 - 
 
  provisions are introduced in the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the procedures for the search, 
seizure and destruction of goods produced or reproduced in violation of copyright. With  the 
publication of this amendment, holders of copyright and related rights now have specific legal 
provisions for the investigation and punishment of crimes against copyright, which are no longer 
treated as crimes of small offensive potential.  
Notificati on IP/N/1/BRA/6  refers to Law No . 13,606 of 9 January 2018. The s aid text was 
proposed by the Brazilian Congress and mainly concerns changes to agricultural fees and taxes. 
Nevertheless, Article 27 amends the Plant Variety Protection Law, including by adding one exception 
to the plant -breeder rights and by adding a provision that exempts small farmers from paying fees 
when applying for protection.  
Notification IP/N/1/BRA/7  refers to Law No. 14,195 of 26 August 2021, which amended a series 
of commercial laws and regulations with a view to improving the ease of doing busi ness in Brazil. 
One of the main changes brought by the law is the revocation of Article 229 -c of Law No. 9,279 of 
14 May 1996 (LPI), ending the need of prior consent of the National Health Surveillance Agency 
(Anvisa) for the granting of patents for pharma ceutical products and processes. The amendment 
also revoked the sole paragraph of Article  40 of the same Law, which guaranteed a post -grant 
minimum period for patents ( ten years) and for utility models ( seven  years). This last provision had 
been considered unconstitutional by the Supreme Court before it was formally removed from the 
Law. 
Trinidad and Tobago  
As this is the first time I am taking the floor, I take this o pportunity to express the concern and 
condemnation of Trinidad and Tobago regarding the military aggression by the Russian  Federation  
within the internationally recognized borders of  Ukraine.  Trinidad and Tobago roundly rejects this 
flagrant with regard fo r international law and for the territory integrity of the Ukraine. We urge the 
aggressor to immediately  discontinue the military actions and uncondition ally withdraw the military 
presence. We also underscore the primacy of diplomacy and dialogue as the on ly acceptable way 
forward,  such as Trinidad  and Tobago urges calls for good fees, engagements and intensified 
diplomatic dialogue  and securing a peaceful resolution.  
On our notification IP/N/1/TTO/2  relates to the repeal of the Trade marks Act Chap. 82:81 and 
the proclamation of Trade mark Act, No. 8 of 2015. Trade mark Act, No. 8 of 2015 and its 
accompanying regulations came into effect on 25 June 2020. Trinidad and Tobago became a party 
to the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks on 4  October 2019. The subsequent entry into 
force of the new Trade mark Act has allowed for the modernisation of our legislation, providing agents 
and users with a more efficient, cost -effective and convenient delivery of trademark related services. 
This includes online filing and the registration of non-conventional trademarks, reflecting the most 
modern global developments in trademark s legislation.  
In addition, and thanks to the invaluable support provided by WIPO, the Madrid Protocol became 
operational in Trinidad and Tobago on 12 January 2021. Alo ngside the numerous designations in 
Trinidad and Tobago, we are pleased to report that the Madrid System has already been utilised 
locally by entrepreneurs in the Carnival industry and by local inventors. We continue to modernise 
our trademark framework to  adhere to international best practices and standards.  
Japan  
The delegation of Japan is pleased to inform the Council that Japan recently amended its 
Patent  Act, Design Act, Trade mark Act, and Copyright Act. The amendments have been notified to 
this Council in accordance with Article 63.2. The reference numbers are IP/N/1/JPN/58 , 
IP/N/1/JPN/ 59, IP/N/1/JPN/ 60 and IP/N/1/JPN/ 61. These are now available from the WTO website . 
Taking this opportunity, we  would like to briefly explain some major points about the amendments . 
The Patent Act was amended to allow the parties subject to oral proceedings for a trial or appeal 
to complete required procedures using a video conference s ystem without physically appearing in 
the trial court for the proceedings, provided that the chief administrative judge indicates his/her 
decision to allow such options. The revised act is also to stipulate a new rule for the exemption of 
patent surcharges  during a predetermined period targeting right holders who, due to the COVID -19 IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 11 - 
 
  pandemic, natural disasters, or other similar reasons, have failed to meet the due date for the 
payment of patent fees.  The Design Act and Trademark Act were also revised in th e same way.  
The Copyright Act was revised from two perspectives. One is reviewing provisions on rights 
restrictions relating to libraries. The other is facilitating rights handling for streaming of broadcast 
programme s on the Internet such as simultaneous streaming service. The amendment enables 
enhancing access to information in libraries by the public and promoting research activities. In 
addition, the amendment enables increasing viewing opportunities for high -quality contents 
equivalent to TV broadcasti ng on the Internet, and the convenience of viewers can be improved.  
The Government of Japan will continuously fulfil its obligation to ensure the accessibility and 
the transparency of the Japanese intellectual property system.  
Switzerland  
Notification under Article  63.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement  (Laws and Regulation)  
I would like to thank the WTO Secretariat for circulating to the membership the recent update 
of our notification under Article 63.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement . This update contains all IP and TRIPS 
relevant changes in the Swiss legislation between February 2017 and December 2021. For the sake 
of brevity, I will not present the notified changes in a comprehensive manner. Short descriptions of 
every notifie d modification are included in the written document submitted to the WTO Secretariat. 
Two points may nevertheless deserve mentioning.  
First, on 1 December 2021, Switzerland acceded to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on 
Appellations of Origin and Ge ographical Indications. Under the Geneva Act, beneficiaries of 
geographical indications can obtain effective protection in the contracting parties through a single, 
simple and inexpensive notification procedure. The Swiss Federal Law on the Protection of 
Trademarks and Indications of Source and its ordinance were amended accordingly to implement 
Switzerland 's adherence to the Geneva Act.  
Second, the Swiss Copyright Act was partially amended and entered into force early 2020. The 
revised Act strengthens the  rights of creative artists and cultural industries. The main objective of 
the revision was to step up the fight against Internet piracy. Furthermore, the revised Copyright Act 
extends the term of protection for performers and producers from 50 to 70 years  and brings 
important innovations for photographers, namely the protection of all photographs, both analogue 
and digital, whether photographers are professionals or amateurs. The revised Copyright Act also 
takes into account Switzerland 's ratification of t wo international treaties administered by WIPO: the 
Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances and the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to 
Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled.  For 
further informatio n on our notification up -date, we refer Members to the documents indicated in the 
Council 's agenda for the present meeting under agenda item 1 . 
Checklist of issues on enforcement  
By decision of 21 November 1995, the TRIPS  Council  agreed on a checklist of questions and 
issues for Members to provide responses regarding their national enforcement laws and practices, 
as well as on the status of national implementation of the provisions on enforcement as contained 
in Part III of the TRIPS Agreement . Switzerland submitted its response to the Checklist in 
communication IP/N/6/CHE/1  in 1997 and in an up -dated version in 2014 in document 
IP/N/6/CHE/2 . 
Since 2014, IP enforcement rules in Switzerland have again undergone a number of changes. 
Accordingly, the present up -date of our answers to the checklist  of questions as contained in 
document  IP/N/6/CHE/3  reflects the state of laws and regulations in relation to IP enforcement in 
Switzerland as of 1 January 2022. Again, we will not present these changes in detail and refer 
Members to document IP/N/6/ CHE/3 , as notified.  
As one illustrative example, let me nevertheless mention that the so called "Swissness " 
legislation, which strengthens the protection of the "Swiss Made " designation and of the Swiss cross, 
came into force on 1 January 2017. This new legislation lead also to a number of amendments on 
enforcement. More sp ecifically, criteria applicable for the use of Swiss indications of source in relation IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 12 - 
 
  to goods or services were specified and simultaneously, the Swiss Federal Institute of IP has been 
empowered with further competences to enforce these rules.  
We encoura ge Members, which have not yet done so or which, at their domestic level, have 
made changes in their enforcement laws and practices to update this information. Members thereby 
contribute to transparency in this Organization, a key commitment Members agreed  to when 
founding the WTO for the sake of promoting a regulatory environment that fosters global trade for 
the benefits of Members.  
Finally, my delegation would like to thank the WTO Secretariat , specifically Ms Natalie Carlson 
and Ms Sandra Smith , for the ir much appreciated assistance in the process of up -dating our 
notification and answers to the checklist through the e-TRIPS Submission System  and for making 
them available through the e-TRIPS  Gateway.  While this required some adjustment to our previous 
approach to notifications, we see the benefits of the e-TRIPS Submission System . It supports 
Members in notifying promptly and efficiently new laws and regulations instead of doing so in bulk 
and in longe r time intervals.  
United  States  of America  
The Trademark Modernization Act (TMA), signed into law on 27 December 2020, gives the 
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)  and trademark owners additiona l tools to reduce 
trademark clutter and better protect the integrity of the US trademark register. The federal 
trademark register must be accurate as to claims of use to be helpful to entrepreneurs, innovators, 
and brand owners as they make marketing and b randing decisions. In recent years, the USPTO has 
received an increasing number of trademark filings with questionable and sometimes bogus claims 
of use, raising concerns about invalid registrations which cause clutter and "deadwood " on the 
register. To ad dress these concerns, the USPTO has launched several initiatives to better protect the 
accuracy and integrity of the US trademark register, including the initiatives found in the Trademark 
Modernization Act.  The TMA provides new tools that can be used to c hallenge applications or 
registrations containing inaccurate or false claims of use.  
Some of these tools include l etters of Protest  which allows third parties to submit evidence to 
the USPTO, prior to registration, relevant to a ground for refusal in examination.  This also provides 
for Expungement and Reexamination: The legislation provides new registration cancellation 
mechanisms, namely Expungement and Reexamination , so that third parties or the USPTO Director 
may challenge registrations that are not  in use as required by our statute.  In particular, these new 
post-registration procedures provide powerful tools to contest trademark registrations obtained or 
maintained through inaccurate claims of use that currently cannot be cleared from the trademark 
register except through costly, time -consuming cancellation.  
Under the n ew ground of expungement for Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) 
cancellation proceedings: Parties may now request the cancellation of a registered trademark 
through the USPTO 's TTAB, specifically that a registered trademark has never been used in 
commerce.  The TMA and its implementing regulations provide other changes to existing procedures, 
for example : 
a. Shortening deadlines  which allow applications to move more quickly through the  system;  
b. Fraudulent designation of an attorney that may not be recognized;  and 
c. Court orders concerning registrations: The final rule codifies the USPTO 's longstanding 
procedures concerning action on court orders cancelling or affecting a registration . 
Regulations implementing the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA) went into effect on 
18 December 2021  and we will be happy to provide any additional explanation or information 
regarding this Act .  
United  Kingdom  
As you know, the United  Kingdom  considers the WTO notification system an essential 
component in promoting transparency between WTO Members . We have notified Members  of three 
recent legislative changes enacted to keep the UK 's IP system u p to date, to meet international 
obligations and to reflect the UK 's exit from the European Union. In previous sessions, this delegation IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 13 - 
 
  has outlined the overall effort as well as spoke to selected individual notifications. We are ready to 
respond to any q uestions Members  may have on notifications submitted to this Council.  We would 
once again like to thank the Secretariat for the efficiency and ease of the e-TRIPS  system. We 
continue to encourage all Members to avail themselves of this system.  
Saudi Arabia , Kingdom of  
According to the obligations under Article  62.3 of the TRIPS  Agreement , we would like to inform 
the Council that the Kingdom  of Saudi Arabia  submitted through e-TRIPS  system, two notifications 
which are related to the Commercial Courts Law and the implementing regulations of the Law.  The 
Commercial Courts Law was officially approved by the royal decree No.  M/93 dated on 8 April 2020 
and published on 17 April 2020 in th e Saudi Official gazette. The provisions of the Commercial Courts 
Law governs:  
a. All disputes that fall within the jurisdiction of Commercial Courts; and  
b. The procedures of the Commercial Courts which includes claims; and  
c. Violations arising from the implemen tation of different commercial laws including 
intellectual property laws.  
The Saudi Ministry of Justice has approved the Implementing Regulations for the  Commercial 
Courts Law, aiming to enhance the commercial judiciary, fast -track decisions, and boost the  business 
environment in Saudi Arabia.  The Regulations provide for a special agreement between the parties 
and the organization of court panels according to the type of cases. They also define the works of 
court assistants, controls of employing the privat e sector, and expansion of expert witnesses to 
include merchants. The Regulations also set forth e -litigation procedures, the jurisdiction of 
commercial courts, mediation and adjudication procedures, case management, and the quorum of 
judicial panels.  They also provide for grievances and appeals, the judgments and decisions requiring 
pleadings, the duration of small claims, and the rules of class actions.  
We are pleased to announce that the Commercial Courts Law and the Implementing Regulation 
officially ca me into force 60 days from the date of publication . The Kingdom  of Saudi Arabia  treated 
the matters in those provisions in order to fulfil its obligations under the TRIPS  Agreement . The 
submitted notifications are under document symbol IP/N/1/SAU/6  and IP/N/1/SAU/7 . 
Russian  Federation  
Notification № IP/N/1/RUS/6  
On 11 June 2021, the Russian  Federation  adopted the Federal Law № 212 -FZ, which introduces 
provisions allowing compulsory licensing for export purposes implementing Article 31 bis of the 
TRIPS  Agreemen t. The measure is intended to prevent deficit and to incentivize supply of 
pharmaceuticals, especially for developing and least developed countries.  
Notification № IP/N/1/RUS/5  
The second notificati on relates to amendments to the Federal Law that specifies the cases when 
the Government has the right to issue a compulsory license, clarifying it for cases of emergency in 
public health. Ultimately, in accordance with this Law the Government Resolution №  1767 dated as 
of 18 October 2021 sets out some methodology for remuneration.  
WTO Secretariat  
The Secretariat1 circulated a note entitled "Annual Report on Notifications and Other Information 
Flows " on 1 March 2022, c arrying document symbol IP/C/W/678 , as revised on 7 March. This report 
builds upon the first such report, which was circulated around this same time in 2021  and warmly 
received by Members. Like 2021's report, 2022's report offers a factual overview of submission rates 
and trends for each o f the primary TRIPS transparency mechanisms: notifications of laws and 
regulations; contact points; responses to the checklist on enforcement, and checklists relating to 
 
1 Slide 1 . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 14 - 
 
  the reviews under Articles 24.2 and 27.3(b). It also discusses developed country Membe rs' annual 
reports under Article 66.2 and Article 67.2  
The reports in this series are a continuation of the Secretariat 's efforts to improve the factual 
information available to Members 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 extend to the 
TRIPS  Council  a service of annual reporting on transparency mechanisms that is customary in other 
comparable WTO bodies. The current report covers submissions circu lated from 1995 to the end of 
2021, with a particular emphasis on 2021 submissions.  
Following3 a brief introduction, it begins by updating Members on the rate at which they have 
taken up the e-TRIPS  system.  
In 2021, Members4 increasingly opted to use th e e-TRIPS Submission System  to efficiently 
make transparency -related submissions to the Council online. 74% of submissions were made 
through the Submission System in 2021 , compared to 63% in 2019 and 2020. Moreover, all but two 
Members who submitted report s under Article 66.2 and Article 67 did so using the Submission 
System.  
The companion5 e-TRIPS  Gateway, in turn, also continued to grow as a popular resource for 
Members who seek to access and analyse the data contained in Members ' submissions. The number 
of unique visitors to the Gateway nearly doubled from 2020 to 2021.  
Having updated Members6 on the primary means by which TRIPS transparency information is 
now submitted and accessed, namely through the e-TRIPS  system, the report then addresses each 
TRIPS transparency mechanism in turn. Each sub -section begins with a brief overview of the nature 
of the commitment (which stems either from the TRIPS  Agreement  itself, or subsequent decisions 
of this Council), and then summarizes the submissions circulated since 1995, with an emphasis on 
those circulated in 2021 . We identify discernible trends and offe r supporting charts, graphs, and 
tables. I will highlight a few key points related to each transparency mechanism on the next few 
slides.  
First, with respect to notifications under Article 63.2 of the Agreement, it is evident that from 
1995 through 20027 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 legislat ion have been received 
than would be expected. 41% of Members subject to the Article 63.2 obligation have not notified a 
new or amended law or regulation in over 15 years.  
On the positive side8, however, 2021 was a banner year. Except for 2013, more noti fications 
were received in 2021 than in any other year since the annual rate of notifications stabilized 
somewhat in 2005. This was due in no small part to the continued efforts of the United  Kingdom9 to 
update the Council on its current and historical IP  laws and regulations. As you can see, among the 
233 laws and regulations notified in 2021 by the 16 Members identified on this slide, the 
United  Kingdom  alone notified 150, or 64%.  
Although10 notifications of IP laws and regulations reached an eight -year high in 2021, no 
notifications of the companion Checklist of Issues on Enforcement  were received in 2020 or 2021. 
The blue trend line on this slide, showing the cumulative number of Members wh o have submitted 
responses, is fairly flat from 2002, indicating that most Members submitted their initial responses 
over 20 years ago. In fact, over 75% of the responses are over 20 years old.  
 
2 The PowerPoint presentation is available in Room Document RD/IP/4 7. 
3 Animation . 
4 Slide 2.  
5 Slide 3.  
6 Slide 4.  
7 Slide 5.  
8 Animation.  
9 Slide 6.  
10 Slide 7.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 15 - 
 
  
The data11 show that some contact point submissions may also b e in need of updating. Most 
Members under the obligation to notify contact points under Article 69 and Article 67 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement have done so, but over 50% were submitted more than ten years ago – and some 
date back over 20 years. In 2021, three  Members  updated their Article 69 contact points for 
cooperation on IP enforcement, and one Member updated its contact point for technical cooperation 
under Article  67.  
The Special Compulsory Licensing System12 established by the 2003 General Council Decision 
on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration  on the TRIPS  Agreement  and Public 
Health, and formalized in the amendments of the TRIPS  Agreement  that took effect in 2017, obliges 
Members wishi ng to avail themselves of the derogations to Articles 31(f) and 31(h) to make 
notifications to the TRIPS  Council . In 2021, three such notifications were submitted to the Council. 
Two notifications of a general intention to use the Special Compulsory Licens ing System  as an 
importer were received – one from the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and another from 
Antigua  and Barbuda, reproduced on the left -hand side of the slide. The Plurinational State of Bolivia 
subsequently also notified its specific need to i mport 15 million doses of a COVID -19 vaccine, as 
excerpted on the right -hand side of the slide. These three notifications were the first of their kind 
submitted to the TRIPS  Council  since 2007.  
In addition to notifications13, the report also provides infor mation regarding developed country 
Members ' annual reports and information submitted pursuant to built -in reviews. Developed country 
Members  are to submit annual reports on actions taken or planned in pursuit of their commitment 
under Article  66.2 to provi de incentives to enterprises and institutions for the purpose of promoting 
and encouraging technology transfer to LDCs. Developed country Members  have also agreed to 
annually report on programmes and projects undertaken to provide technical and financial 
cooperation in favour of developing countries  and LDCs 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 submitted reports. The number of reports rec eived in 2021 varied only slightly from 
2020 and was consistent with figures from prior years.  
The final transparency mechanisms14 addressed in the report relate to the Council 's review 
under Article 24.2 of the application of the TRIPS Section on geograph ical indications, and the review 
under Article 27.3(b), relating to domestic frameworks for protecting biotechnology inventions and 
new plant varieties. The data show that in recent years, a handful of Members have submitted 
responses to checklists on thes e topics, breaking a decade of minimal to no activity. In 2021, no 
new or updated responses to the checklist of questions in the context of the review under Art icle 24.2 
were received. One Member, the Kingdom  of Saudi Arabia , submitted its initial responses 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 have submitted responses 
to the checklist established by the Counc il 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).  
Much more information15 on each of 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 by 
submission type and by individual Member. 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 report closely and to contact us with 
any questions regarding the d ata or the procedures for making a notification or other submission.  
2  REVIEW OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION  
No statements were made under this agenda item.  
 
11 Slide 8.  
12 Slide 9.  
13 Slide 10.  
14 Slide 11.  
15 Slide 12.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 16 - 
 
  3  IP MEASURES IN THE CONTEXT OF COVID -19 
WTO Secretariat  
Thank you for the opportunity to once again update the Council on trends in licensing and 
production.16 Just to recall that this stems from a request from the Council in 2021 , and what we 
have to offer is a simple update of the previous two reports along t hese lines. As a preliminary17, 
just to observe that there is no single authoritative depository of all data relevant to COVID -19, not 
even on the question of licensing that we are focusing on. At the same time there is very active work 
under way at the te chnical level in cooperation with other partners to improve availability and 
integration of data and we are hopeful that this picture will continue to improve progressively. 
Members are no doubt aware that on 28 February 2022, in the most recent trilateral  technical 
workshop involving our colleagues in the World Health Organization (WHO)  and WIPO, there was 
direct consideration of the challenges of accessing data and this included work on patent data and 
information on licensing practices . I would mention t hat one key aspect of that trilateral workshop 
was to engage at a technical level with Members, to learn from Members their needs and concerns 
in relation to improved access to and use of data, and there is plenty of scope to follow -up on the 
insights from  that workshop.  
Having said that, the data that we are working with does have shortcomings . It is not necessarily 
up-to-date or exhaustive , or altogether inclusive. And when we are reliant on second -hand data that 
is based on public announcements, there is  considerable diversity in actual practice as to when 
licence agreements, for example, are announced, considerable diversity between the announcement 
of the licensing arrangement  and actual production of vaccines  – so it is an inherently variable 
phenomeno n at this stage. Therefore, we have to say very clearly that we are only providing this 
information as general background. It is certainly not data that we can vouch for as a Secretariat 
for all the reasons I have mentioned. This is an area of active consi deration at the technical working 
level and we are aware that other partners, in particular WIPO and the Medicines Patent Pool, are 
putting considerable effort and resources into improving the knowledge about the patent landscape 
in particular  with respect  to COVID -19 vaccines.  There remains ample room for improvement of the  
precision and completeness of information, so any guidance, requirements or specific needs 
identified by Members either collectively or individually would be very helpful to us.  
To giv e some broad insights into overall trends18, we know that patent activity regarding mRNA  
vaccines dates back over two decades, but as you would expect, has increased considerably over 
recent years. I stress this is a very broad -brush picture, but nonetheless one representing two 
important points. Firstly, the progressive increase of activity globally on mRNA  vaccines, one of 
those critical platforms for vaccine production . Secondly the fact that there are many patent 
documents that pre -date the identification of the novel coronavirus in late 2019, early 2020. Equally , 
as you would expect when it comes to specific COVID -related inventions19, the general patent 
procedure is that patent documents are published 18 months after the first filing date . Given that 
we have only now entered the third year of the pandemic, it is clear that many of the pat ent 
documents we are looking at specifically referring to COVID -19 will still be pending , and will not yet 
have translated into final decisions on patents as such.  
One key source for patent information is this database20, established by the Medicines Pate nt 
Pool and VaxPal , and we have used this as a source for background analysis and information, bearing 
in mind also that Members will be aware that tomorrow the WIPO Director -General  is due to launch 
a WIPO report on patenting activity in relation to COVID -19 technologies generally. That, I might 
say, parenthetically, is completely coincidental . We understand from our WIPO colleagues that this 
is not timed in any way to coincide with this particular meeting, it is pure coincidence. Nonetheless 
it is clearly  noteworthy in terms of tracking emerging data. Based on our colleagues, and I recogniz e 
their excellent work, Alex Chiang and Xiaoping Wu, based on the VaxPal data , these are the trends 
that have been identified.21 When it comes to specific vaccine technologies22, as you would expect, 
 
16 The PowerPoint presentation is available in Room Document RD/IP/46  
17 Slide 1.  
18 Slide 2.  
19 Slide 3.  
20 Slide 4.  
21 Slide 5.  
22 Slide 6  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 17 - 
 
  the more novel platforms, notably mRNA  and viral vectors , are the subject of a larger number of 
patent families identified . This applies when these are broken down according to specifi c vaccines 
within each of th e four broad categories of technology .23 Equally, and this reinforces the point I 
made earlier that quite a number of these patent families do date back prior to the first identification 
of COVID -19 and the pathogen causing it . and this is a factor that clearly has to be born in mind in 
looking at the patent data in that we are looking at platform technologies that have broader scope  
– and specific patents that have broader scope – than simply COVID -19 vaccines as such.  
Importan t developments since the last report, and these are not , I suppose , representative of 
broader trends, but nonetheless are very significant in terms of licensing practices , concern two new 
developments which are quite emblematic I would say. First is the licence  announced by  the 
Medicines Patent Pool (MPP)  and Merck Sharp & Dohme for molnupiravir which is an investigational 
oral anti -viral. This is an open and transparent , fully published license that has been concluded to 
enable access to this COVID -19 treatment for 105 low and middle -income countries. No time to go 
into details now, but this information is freely available on the MPP website and does represent a 
significan t development in licensing practices. Equally, our colleagues in WHO, together with MPP 
have announced the first licence concluded under C -TAP, the WHO COVID -19 Technology Access 
Pool, which concerns a diagnostic tool which is the subject of, as the title says "transparent global 
non-exclusive licence for access " to this diagnostic tool.  
Looking at the broader trends and now drawing on the UNICEF COVID -19 Vaccine Market 
Dashboard24, in vaccines in particular, the trend25 here is very clear, based on their data. The green 
sectors represent production through technology transfer, the blue sectors represent in -house 
production, production under the direct control of the originator company . And so you will see a 
variation here. In North America and Europe, esse ntially production under the control of the 
originator company, in South America, Africa, in much lower levels of production and in South -East 
Asia and Oceania the pattern is more production through licensing arrangements, with the exception 
of North -East Asia. We also see a wide diversity, again based on UNICEF data26, of licensing practices 
between the originator firms, the green bar representing again full technology transfer to separate 
entities, the blue representing production agreements under the dir ect control of the originator 
company . The point here is a relatively simple, but important one, that there is great diversity in 
licensing practices, at least reported under this system. We now turn to an update of the data we 
provided earlier, provided by Airfinity27 and again I stress that this is not WTO data, and this is data 
based on public announcements of different deals, different agreements for vaccine production, and 
here the distinction is between in -house production on the left, and c ontracted technology transfer 
production on the right. Arrangements rang e from provision of inputs to source of materials, through 
to simple fill -and-finish or the provision of inputs such as adjuvants which increase the impact of 
vaccine doses, so the key  point here is that there is both, in terms of in -house arrangements 
announced and more arms -length technology transfer arrangements , there is a considerable 
diversity in forms of collaboration. When it comes to supply chains28, again , the left concerns 
contracted production which in these statistics means technology transfer . The bulk of these 
agreements reported concern production in Asia and Europe, to some extent North Asia, much less 
so in Latin America, Africa and Oceania, and , again , these cover a wi de range of different forms of 
collaboration.  
Looking at overall reported production29, again reported production publicly reported and 
gathered by Airfinity, the overall level of vaccine  production  is much higher for in -house production30, 
the reported n umber here is 9.5  billion doses in -house as against 3.3  billion doses for production 
under tech -transfer arrangements. Again , these are very diverse in character . You will see, for 
example, the great bulk of the tech transfer type production concerns the A stra Zeneca vaccine, but 
again there is great diversity in these figures. Similar point are made here31 that there is considerable 
diversity by region, and this really reinforces what I mentioned earlier, it ties in with the UNICEF 
 
23 Slide 7.  
24 Slide 8.  
25 Slide 9.  
26 Slide 10.  
27 Slide 11.  
28 Slide 12.  
29 Slide 13.  
30 Slide 14.  
31 Slide 15.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 18 - 
 
  data which is in that fo rm here .32 One important point concerns the delay between actual production 
agreements announced, and the start of production.33 These have varied enormously, I might say 
that there is some hesitation in using these data because, as I say, the date of anno uncement can 
vary considerably, and so cannot be relied on absolutely as a firm figure, but we do see a very 
considerable difference between announcement of an arms -length or technology transfer licence, 
much longer delays for production to commence compar ed to in -house production, and that trend 
seems to be across the different technology sectors as well as different regions. To reinforce that 
further point34, the majority of production agreements still involve s production in Asia and Europe, 
a point worth  bearing in mind in terms of the current conversations about diversification of 
production capacity, that this is the overall picture we see. The majority of the reported production 
agreements do concern the transfer of technology, as you can see in the ri ght-hand bar, rather than 
in-house production . But there is nonetheless a concentration, certainly in Asia, Europe and North 
America. Supply chain announcements also, we do see an increasing degree of collaboration, and 
this applies both to contracted prod uction, that is to say that the technology transfer arrangements 
and the production under the continuing control of the originator firms. Airfinity forecasts35 at least 
a tendency for inhouse production to remain predominant , to maintain it  is relatively high share, but 
both in -house and externally contracted production are both growing.  
Finally , this chart36 is perhaps the most interesting from the point of view of the specific question 
we were put. This shows the evolution over time, up unt il the current month of reported production 
of vaccines broken down according to in -house, production under the control of the originator 
company as against production by external firms through technology transfer. We do see a slow rise 
in the proportion o f the production under technology transfer arrangements, but as is clear from the 
blue sections of the bar chart, there is still predominant production under the control of the 
originating company. Once again , the figures mentioned earlier of a total nearl y 12.9  billion doses 
produced, 9.5  billion are in-house production, and the remainder through technology transfer. As I 
mentioned , the proportion of the technology transfer production has gradually increased, not 
dramatic ally, but the absolute numbers are also increasing in line with the overall trend of increased 
production.  
I would stress that this is very much work -in-progress in line with the trilateral cooperation we 
are working to improve the relevance, the granularity and the timeliness of the infor mation we make 
available for the benefit of Members, not only on these specific issues that we have been looking at 
this morning, but on the full range of factors bearing on access to vaccines.  
South Africa  
South Africa would  like to reiterate its support for this item to remain on the agenda of the 
TRIPS  Council  and thanks the Secretariat for its ongoing work to update the compilation. In our view 
the compilation of measures is a useful tool that not only informs Members rega rding measures by 
other Members but can also be the basis for useful mutual dialogue.  The overall theme that emerged 
from the experiences shared was the inadequacy of existing flexibilities to deal with the pandemic. 
The TRIPS Waiver Proposal  offers a work able solution.  We note with appreciation, the Secretariat 
working paper entitled "Innovation and the Patenting Activities of COVID -19 Vaccines in WTO 
Members – Analytical Review of Medicines Patent Pool COVID -19 Vaccines Landscape (VAXPAL) ". 
Our delegation is studying the report and we believe it would be appropriate for the Secretariat to 
provide Members with a presentation of the findings.  
We also note that tomorrow afternoon, WIPO will present a patent landsca pe Report on 
"COVID - 19 related vaccines and therapeutics - Preliminary insights on related patenting activity 
during the pandemic ". In our view, it would greatly benefit the discussions of this Council if WIPO 
could be invited to present its findings.  
 
32 Slide 16.  
33 Slide 17.  
34 Slide 18.  
35 Slide 19.  
36 Slide 20.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 19 - 
 
  
United States  of America  
The United  States  thanks the Secretariat for the informative report. The previous interventions 
of the U S on the agenda item  concerning IP Measures in the Context of COVID -19 stand.  As 
previously stated, intellectual property plays an incentivizing role in the development of new 
technologies to combat this deadly pandemic and in supporting economic recovery.  In past meetings, 
the U S highlighted the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office COVID -19 pilot programme  which 
prioritizes examination of certain patent applications claiming a product or process subject to an 
applicable FDA approval for COVID -19 use, and a companion Fast -Track Pilot Program for Appeals 
Related to COVID -19.  
As of 1 March 2022, 906 applications have been granted prioritized examination status in the 
USPTO 's COVID -19 Prioritized Examination Pilot Program, and 591 patents have issued from 
applications granted  priority status under this pilot programme . The pilot programme  was originally 
set to expire after the USPTO accepted 500 applications into the programme , but this application 
limit has been removed. The pilot will include all qualifying patent applicatio ns received by midnight 
Eastern Time on 31 March 2022.  Further information on the USPTO 's initiatives on life science 
technologies can be found on the COVID -19 Response Resource Center page of USPTO.gov.  
Also, as mentioned previously, in 2021 the USPTO lau nched a category of its Patents for 
Humanity Program for inventions that address the COVID -19 pandemic. This new category will 
provide business incentives for patent applicants, holders, and licensees whose inventions track, 
prevent, diagnose, or treat COVID-19. The application period for the new category ended on 
30 September 2021 and the USPTO is currently in the judging phase of this programme . We will 
announce winners for this programme  by fall 2022.  
China  
China would like to thank the Secretariat and M embers for their measures responding to the 
pandemic. Sharing relevant measures in an open and transparent manner will help Members  learn 
from each other and better respond to the pandemic. China has made two notifications in this regard 
and we are willing to continue our participation into the experience sharing exercises as appropriate.  
4  REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B)  
5  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERS ITY 
6  PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE  
India  
India recalls previous information provided  under these agenda items  and our position remains 
unchanged . We remain committed to engage and take forward these discussions.  
China  
The relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity 
(CBD)  is an important issue in the TRIPS  Council , to which China has attached great importance.  
For the past years, Members  have conducted fruitful discussions on this important topic. We look 
forward to the early reinvigoration of this topic at the TRIPS  Council . Regarding the procedure issue, 
we support the TRIPS  Council  inviting the CBD Secretari at to brief on the Nagoya Protocol and its 
progress. We hope the Secretariat could renew the three factual notes. In recent years, although 
WIPO  IGC37 has conducted a lot of discussions and negotiations on the protection of genetic 
resources and traditiona l knowledge, achieving certain results, China believes that WIPO  IGC 
discussions and negotiations on the above -mentioned  issues do not contradict with Members ' 
discussion in the WTO.  
 
37 WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions, and 
Genetic Resources (IGC) . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 20 - 
 
  
Bangladesh  
On agenda items 4, 5 and 6, the position of Bangladesh has not changed. In this regard, to 
avoid repetition, I refer to my delegation 's statements delivered during the previous TRIPS  Council  
meetings. Bangladesh supports discussions towards a progress on these issue s and stands ready to 
engage constructively with Members.  
Nigeria  
I wish to recall previous information provided  by Nigeria regarding agenda item 5 and 6 of 
which our positions remain unchanged.  We reiterate the importance for Members  to support 
discussions and past proposals that facilitate traceability and requirement of a prior informed consent 
as well as benefit sharing in respect of any product manufactured via the use of genetic components 
or traditional knowledge and folklore. The requirement of disclosure contained currently in the 
TRIPS  Agreement  remain grossly inadequate. We therefore urge Members  to consider collaborating 
with each other both regionally and internationally, in order to a chieve this mutually beneficial goal.  
Indonesia  
Indonesia would like to recall all its previous information provided  on this triplet issues.  
Indonesia reaffirms its position on the importance of the negotiation o n the relationship between the 
TRIPS  Agreement  and the Convention on Biological Diversity  (CBD) , as well as the need to protect 
the traditional knowledge and folklore. Indonesia stands firm in its view that it is paramount for the 
Council to give adequate attention to address this issue, including through the update of the long 
overdue Secretariat summary note and inviting the CBD Secretariat to brief the Council on the 
Nagoya Protocol and its update.  
Brazil  
Brazil 's positions regarding the three agenda items under consideration are well documented 
and remain unchanged to date. I therefore refer to my delegation 's past statements on all three 
issues, which continue to reflect our understanding and aspirations regarding agenda items 4, 5 and 
6. 
Tanzania on behalf of the African Group  
I would like also to reiterate the position of the African  Group  that remains unchanged. We 
support to continue the discussions in the Council regarding the three agenda items and we welcome 
the participation of other institutions that have experience on this matter to share their views.  
South Africa  
We would like to recall previous information provided  on these agenda item s. 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  Council  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 mandated issues which remain an integral part of the 
Doha Round single undertaking.  Biopiracy remains a pervasive problem and the absence of a 
multilateral solution, as applicable under the TRIPS  Agreement , national disclosure requirements will 
remain inadequate.  Discussions in this forum and those under the auspices of the IGC and the WIPO 
are complimentary and not mutually exclusive.  In line with our previous statements, it would be 
useful for the CBD Secretariat to brief the TRIPS  Council  on the CBD and other implementation issues 
under the Nagoya Protocol as well a s any new developments.  
Finally, we 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.  We would like to associate with the 
statement delivered by the African  Group . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 21 - 
 
  
Japan  
Japan 's position remains unchanged.  Regarding the proposal to introduce the disclosure 
requirement in the IP system, there is concern that the introduction of such a requirement would 
discourage industries from conducting research and development activities on biological materials.  
In addition, the delegation of Japan believes that WIPO IGC is the most appropriate forum for holding 
technical discussions on genetic resources , traditional knowledge and folklore from IP aspects. The 
delega tion of Japan remains willing to contribute to evidence -based discussions on these issues in a 
constructive and effective manner.  
United  States  of America  
The United  States'  position on this agenda item  remains unchanged.  Regarding genetic 
resources, traditional knowledge and folklore, we continue to believe that WIPO serves as the best 
forum to address these issues. With respect to the various requests made at the present me eting, 
the United  States  is not in a position to support these requests, but remains open to discussions, 
including bilaterally with delegations in between and at the margins of the TRIPS  Council  meetings.  
Canada  
Canada's position is well -known, and we would refer to our previous interventions on agenda 
items 4, 5, and 6. With respect to procedural matters, as previously noted and without prejudice to 
our position on substantive matters, Canada could support a procedural briefing from the 
CBD Secretariat to the TRIPS  Council . Canada could also support the compilation of the three factual 
notes on TRIPS and the CBD, and remains of the view that this would remain an information collating 
exercise.  
Chile  
Our country 's position is well-known  among Members. Nevertheless, we would like to reiterate 
the importance of the flexibilities contained in the TRIPS  Agreement  as tools for development. As 
regards the relationship between th e CBD and the TRIPS  Agreement , Chile, like other delegations, 
considers that they are complementary instruments. We therefore believe that there is no need to 
make any amendments to the Agreement to ensure that the instruments are consistent with each 
other. Lastly, we would like to express our support for the proposal that the CBD Secretariat provide 
a briefing to this Council.  
Australia  
Australia 's view remains that WIPO IGC is well placed, with appropriate tech nical expertise, to 
consider the complex and important issues relating to IP, genetic resources and associated 
traditional knowledge and cultural expressions. We hope Members will adopt a spirit of compromise 
to make meaningful progress in ongoing discussi ons in WIPO IGC, noting that last's IGC session 
revealed that there is still a lot of work to do in this space . Australia also believes the 
TRIPS  Agreement  and Convention on Biological Diversity are fully consistent.  Australia fully 
implements our obligations under both agreements, which we view as mutually supportive.  In regard 
to procedure matters , Australia would like to echo the comments of some other Members  and could 
also support a briefing by the CBD Secretariat on the Nagoya Protocol.  
7  NON-VIOLATION  AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS  
Brazil  
As stated in previous meetings and recent consultations, Brazil remains open to assess 
proposals on scope and modalities of non-violation  and situation complaints  (NVSCs)  applied to the 
TRIPS  Agreement . We are ready to assess any contributions Members might have that could lead to 
an agreed solution on this file.  As we have expressed before, we would also be open to consider a 
paper presented under the chair 's responsibility, as has been suggested by yourself and the previous 
chair of the TRIPS  Council . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 22 - 
 
  
India  
India's position on the issue of non-violation  and situation complaints under the 
TRIPS  Agreement  remains unchanged. We are happy to note that at the formal TRIPS  Council  
meeting held on 5 November  2021 the Council has adopted a recommendation contained in 
document IP/C/91  to the Ministerial Conference to extend the moratorium until MC13. We look 
forward for the adoption of this decision at the upcoming MC12 in June. In the meanwhile, India 
remains committed to work with like -minded Members in making non-violation  complaint s 
inapplicable to TRIPS.  
Tanzania o n behalf of the African Group  
I intervene on behalf of the African  Group . This is to reiterate our position that remains 
unchanged. We believe that the moratorium on non-violation  and situation complaints should be 
made permanent in the TRIPS  Agreement  in order to show Members that we fully join the flexibilities 
which are in the Agreement. We believe  that if  the moratori um expire s this would not mean the 
automatic application of non-violation  and situation complain ts in the dispute settlement . We also 
want to welcome contribution s from Members that will lead to the establishment of modalities  to 
apply in a non-violation  and situation co mplaints  in the future . Let me join my colleague from India 
to welcome the decision for an extension of the moratorium . 
Bangladesh  
Bangladesh is in favour  of establishing a permanent moratorium on this issue. As an interim 
arrangement, Bangladesh supports that the MC12 will endorse the TRIPS  Council 's recommendation 
(document IP/C/91)  for an extension of the moratoriu m until the 13th Ministerial Conference. 
Bangladesh is ready to constructively engage with Members on this issue further.  
Chile  
Chile once again commends the decision adopted by this Council to extend th e existing 
moratorium for complaints of this type until the 13th Ministerial Conference and we hope that it will 
be ratified at the Ministerial Conference in June. In our view, it is important to recognize that 
consensus has not been reached on this matter  in the past and it is therefore necessary to continue 
maintaining a space for the relevant dialogue. Our delegation is open to considering proposals that 
Members wish to put forward in this respect. Lastly, we would like to acknowledge the undeniable 
existence of linkages between this moratorium and others within the Organization, which is why we 
suggest approaching this matter in a responsible and cautious manner.  
Canada  
Canada 's longstanding position on this issue remains unchanged: the availability of NVNI 
claims under TRIPS would create legal uncertainty for Members. To this end, Canada continues to 
support the 5 November decision of the TRIPS  Council  to recommend that Ministe rs at MC12 extend 
the moratorium on the application of NVNI complaints under TRIPS to MC13. Canada is also pleased 
that this Council has constructively worked to make a consensus -based decision on this matter, and 
encourages the TRIPS  Council  to continue t o similarly engage constructively to identify 
consensus -based solutions to important issues facing the WTO membership. Finally, recognizing that 
the moratorium on the application of non-violation nullification and impairment (NVNI) complaints 
under the TRIPS Agreement  exists thanks to consensus, Canada wishes to note the historical link 
between the NVNI moratorium with the WTO moratorium on customs duties on electronic 
transmissions.  
Nigeria  
e wish to recall our previous statements under this agenda item  of which our 
position remains unchanged . We remain open to working with other Members  to consider modalities 
for the application of NVSCs . However, we believe that the current moratorium should be made 
permanent.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 23 - 
 
  
Indonesia  
Indonesia 's position calling for a permanent moratorium is very much well known  and remains 
unchanged. We reiterate our concerns on the negative impacts that non-violation  complaints in 
TRIPS can have on the regulatory policy space of Members and on TRIPS flexibilities. Having said 
that, Indonesia welcomes the adoption of the recommendation on 5 November 2021 to extend the 
moratorium at the upcoming MC12 in June 2022. Rest assured, Indonesia is committed to engage 
constructively in the discussion of this issue.  
United  States  of America  
The United  States  supports the consensus reached at the TRIPS  Council  to recommend 
extension of the TRIPS NVNI moratorium to the 13th Ministerial Conference. The United  States  
remains open to considering specific proposals from Members wishing to further examine the scope 
and modalities for complaints of these types.  
South Africa  
We 
 We would like to support the consensus of the 5 November 2021 meeting, and 
furthermore we recall our previous statements under this agenda item on substantive aspects.  
Switzerland  
Switzerland 's position under this agenda item is well  known. According to its Art icle 64 para. 
1 and 2, non-violation  and situation complaints are applicable under the TRIPS  Agreement , once the 
moratorium ends. Switzerland is of the view that no additional modalities are needed for the 
application of such complaints under the TRIPS  Agreement  next to those already contained in the 
Dispute Settlement Understanding  (DSU) . On 5 November 20 21, Switzerland joined the consensus 
in the TRIPS  Council  to recommend to MC12 to extend the moratorium in Article  64.2 once more till 
the next Ministerial Conference. In the meantime, my delegation is prepared to discuss 
constructively proposals from Memb ers on modalities, if they think such modalities are necessary in 
addition to those contained in the DSU.  
Australia  
Australia supports the extension of the TRIPS non-violation  complaint moratorium until MC13. 
We also recogniz e the need for a long -term solution to this issue.  
8  REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  UNDER ARTICLE 71.1  
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  
Switzerland  
Switzerland submitted its first set of responses in 1999 in Addendum 13 to d ocument 
IP/C/W/117 . We updated our r esponses in September 2017, in document IP/C/W/117/Add13/Rev.1  
and in February 2019 , in document IP/C/W/117/Add.13/Rev.1/Corr.1 . As informed under agenda 
item 1 "Notifications ", Switzerland adhered to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on 
Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications on 1 December 2021.  
Document IP/C/R/GI/CHE/1  reflects the amendments in the Swis s national legislation resulting 
from our accession to the Geneva Act now also in Switzerland 's answers to the checklist of questions 
of the review under this agenda item. Since the entry into force of the TRIPS  Agreement  in 1995, 
geographical indications as an intellectual property right have only gained in importance. We see a 
dynamic development in many WTO Members of all levels of development. Members want to take 
advantage of the benefits that geographical indications  (GIs) offer for the promotion of t heir specialty 
products in their national market and in international trade. My delegation therefore echoes your IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 24 - 
 
  call, Chair, and encourages Members who have not yet submitted their responses to the checklist, 
to do so now or bring their earlier responses up to date.  
The answers to the checklist of questions are a valuable resource and the basis for the Council 's 
discussion under this agenda item.  In the same vein, Switzerland calls on the Council to resume its 
review under Article 24.2 of the TRIPS  Agreeme nt to allow for substantive discussions, the sharing 
of Members experience and lessons learned for the mutual benefit of all delegations.  
European Union  
I would like to take the opportunity to share some information about GIs in the E uropean  Union 
and would first of all also like to echo Switzerland 's views on the ever-increasing importance of 
protected geographical indication in the European Union.  
We wanted to draw Members ' attention to a recent registra tion of a GI in the E uropean Union. 
In February  2022, the European Commission registered Ceylon Cinnamon as a protected 
geographical indication in the E uropean Union. The E uropean Union considered that the name 
'Ceylon cinnamon ' refers to a product which h as distinctive qualities and characteristics and that the 
name enjoys a consolidated reputation. This is an example of the European Union protecting the 
products and cultural heritage of Sri Lanka.  As from 23 February 2022, the name Ceylon Cinnamon 
will be  protected against use on any non -originating product and protected against uses that evoke, 
misuse or imitate the genuine Ceylon Cinnamon.  Importers of genuine Ceylon Cinnamon will now 
be able to distribute and sell the product using the valuable E uropean  Union protected geographical 
indication logo and face a level playing field in the market.  
Other cinnamon or blended cinnamon from different places outside of Sri Lanka can and will 
still be sold on the EU market, but it will not be able to use the name 'Ceylon Cinnamon '. Also, any 
use of the Sri Lankan flag, emblems, signs or other graphic representations on the labels that might 
mislead consumers in particular as regards the characteristics, origin or provenance of the product 
is and will be prohibited in the E uropean Union. 
Sri Lanka  
On this subject matter, we have requested the floor to first thank the European Union for its 
very intensive and friendly coordination with the Sri Lankan authorities, both in Brussels and with 
our capital . We submitted our application to the EU authorities for seeking protection within the 
European Union for this very valuable geographical indication , as Sri Lanka had been trying to 
promote Ceylon Cinnamon to distinguish it from other varietie s of cinnamon, or other similar 
varieties of spices.  
I think the exercise began some years ago, by particularly creating a specific classification for 
Ceylon cinnamon which actually differentiated it from other spices like cassia and the tamala leaves, 
because they belong to a similar botanical family . We managed to make this differentiation even in 
the World Custom Organization. And then, subsequently, we also protected certain processes that 
are quite unique in making this particular spice variet y. So it is not only the agricultural commodity 
product itself but all the production process, quite unique compared to the other production 
processes that are being used in the production of cassia.  
We know that this product fetches normally a high value i n the international market compared 
to other competitive products of cassia . With this geographical indication, particularly since this is 
the first country which has recognized and granted the adequate protection for us in the EU market , 
I would say that this is the way for our producers to obtain much higher prices in the world market. 
This is a challenging job. I know that we also plan to obtain similar protection in other markets , 
particularly in South America and in the United States which are the main  market.  
This is a  valuable opportunity for Sri Lanka, despite the many challenges we faced while 
obtaining this protection in the EU market . There was an objection, relating to the use of Ceylon 
cinnamon in other commodities,  such as in a tea variety.  This is because the  protection that we have 
got is actually not the high level of protection, which is normally accorded to the wines and spirits . 
Now, if you have the high -level protection, then such an attempt can also be restricted by the 
third- party user . I mean, we can restrict it and limit the use by third parties. So, we are very much IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 25 - 
 
  in favour of having Members ' direction and attention towards according the high level of protection 
for such cinnamon, and other product s coming from developing country M embers. They made lots 
of investment in creating an enabling environment for such products, and similarly, we are also now 
looking forward to launch other  application at the EU in seeking a similar protection for Ceylon tea, 
which is, again, a very well-known GI round the world.  
10  FOLLOW -UP TO THE NINETEENTH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 
DECISION ON THE  IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE  66.2 OF THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  
WTO Secretariat  
Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to report to the Council on the recent  workshop on the 
Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement , the fifteenth in this annual series of technical 
assistance activities. First, I would like to express our sincere thanks to you, Chair, and to HE 
Ambassador Ahmad Makaila of Chad, HE Ambassador Mustafizur Rahman of Bangladesh, and 
HE Ambassador Kirsti K auppi of Finland for the invaluable support and active engagement at the 
workshop. We would also like to thank HE Ambassador  Lansana  Gberie , for personally taking part in 
the workshop .  
Secondly, I want to express our deepest appreciation to WTO Members, i ncluding least 
developed count ry Members and developed country Members for your active engagement in the 
workshop. The workshop was attended by more than 75 capital and Geneva -based experts from 21 
LDCs and from seven developed country Members.  Most of the  participants had direct responsibility 
for technology transfer, and their expertise ensured that the workshop focussed ever more 
effectively on the specific needs and circumstances of LDCs.  Ten experts from developed country 
Members made presentations dur ing the workshop, providing updated and complementary 
information to the reports submitted by the developed country Members in 2021.  We were delighted 
by the number, diversity and range of those experts who took part in the workshop . 
Since we organised thi s workshop in 2008, the Secretariat has made continuous efforts to 
improve the value and impact of this annual dialogue between LDCs and developed country 
Members. These efforts have been guided by LDCs and in particular through the coordination with 
the LDC Group , and this has enabled this exercise to respond to the evolving current needs and 
priorities identified by LDCs. Hence, we want to record our warmest appreciation for this support 
and guidance from our Members .  
I would like to highlight three main  improvements the Secretariat has made for this year 's 
workshop.   
Firstly, while still focusing on the specifics of how Article  66.2 has been implemented, we 
improved the structure and format of the workshop  by providing an overview of the broader 
development and policy context of technology transfer to LDCs with a focus on three specific fields 
of technology transfer, namely the field s of health, agriculture, and the environment.  We invited our 
sister international organizations  to report from their specialized area of expertise their current works 
on national technology needs assessments and technology transfer programme s in LDCs, not ably 
the WHO, WIPO, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) , the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) , and UN Technology Bank for LDCs.  The active 
participation of these partners significantly enriched 2022's programme. We  are pleased to record 
our gratitude for their participation and look forward to furthering our collaboration in the future.  
Secondly, we developed a more sophisticated survey questionnaire on LDC needs and priorities 
for technology transfer with a view to  assisting Members in their better understanding of the critical 
need for a sound and viable technological base as a foundation for LDCs sustainable development.  
The survey questionnaire was circulated to all LDC Members  and observers, as an optional tool.  The 
detailed survey result was presented to Members during the workshop . We would like to highlight 
four key results of the survey : all of the thirteen LDCs responding to the survey identified agriculture 
and environment/climate change as a priority techn ology field for them to develop a sound and 
variable technological base, while eleven also considered public health/pharmaceuticals and 
Information and Communication Technology (ICT)  as a priority technology field.  All the respondents 
indicated government sponsored and funded joint research and development (R&D)  activities as the 
most relevant incentive to enterprises and institutions for technology transfer as presented in the IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 26 - 
 
  Article  66.2 annual reports. Six LDCs indicated that they had conducted national needs assessments 
for technology transfer in certain technology areas.  Also, six Members  had established national 
points of contact to monitor, coordinate, assess and communicate priority technology needs to the 
developed country reporting Members . However, it is noted that technology transfer as a 
cross-cutting issue may not be handled by a single department but rather requiring the involvement 
of several government agencies.  
 Thirdly, we prepared a summary on the technology transfer programmes reported by eight 
developed country Members in 2021 with a focus on these three  fields of technologies.  The summary 
was presented in the workshop, and my colleague will briefly introduce this summary.  
Before we present this summary, we would like to highlight that the summary does not 
substitute for nor seek to interpret the reports receive d, but aims only to build on the continuing 
efforts to enhance transparency, and thus to assist Members with the practical understanding of 
detailed and diverse information covered in the reports submitted.  
Presentation on the summary of Article  66.2 repor ts38 
We would also like to briefly explain the methodology39 used for categorizing the programmes.  
In particular, the programmes have been grouped according to the information provided under the 
"field of technology " or "category of technology " part of the optional reporting template available in 
the e-TRIPS Submission System . Indeed, we note that seven  developed country reporting Members  
submitted their 2021 reports using that optional template.  For the programmes reported not through 
the optio nal template, these have been grouped according to the information provided in the reports. 
This methodology is not cast in stone, and we will be grateful to receive Member 's suggestions for 
improvement, bearing in mind that this is only an optional facili tative tool. We would like to 
emphasize that, by its very nature, the summary cannot include a full reflection of all the 
programmes reported.  Anyone wishing to appreciate the full undertakings should consult the reports 
directly.  
A total of 449 examples o f technology transfer programmes40 were reported in the eight 
reports in 2021 benefitting all 43 LDC Members and observers. The top three technology transfer 
categories were environment and climate change, public health and pharmaceuticals, and agriculture  
and food.  We recognize that ICT – as a crosscutting enabling technology - plays a very important 
role in many of these technology transfer programmes, and that ICT programmes are oftentimes 
related to a particular category. Thus, we have, for the purpose of this summary, classified these 
ICT programmes in the respective category. For example, an ICT programmes related to agriculture 
has been included in the agriculture category.  
This slide41 demonstrates the number of programmes provided by each of the eig ht developed 
country reporting Members  in the different technology transfer categories. As you can see, the 
United  States  and the European Union and its member States, as the two top providing Members , 
have provided approximately 48% of the total number of  programmes. In the interest of time, we 
will only elaborate on the programmes reported in top three  categories areas for technology transfer, 
which are agriculture and food, environment and climate change, public health and pharmaceuticals.  
Starting42 with the environment and climate change category.  In this category, a total of 102 
technology transfer programmes have been reported which benefitted 41 LDC Members and 
observers . As you can see, the European Union and its member States together  with the 
United  States  and Norway are the top three  providers of such programmes.  Together they have 
provided 75% of the 102 technology transfer programmes reported.  
As you can see43, we have grouped the types of environmental technologies into four 
subca tegories, namely climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, biodiversity and 
 
38 The PowerPoint presentation is available in Room Document RD/IP/4 8. 
39 Slide 1 . 
40 Slide 2 . 
41 Slide 3 . 
42 Slide 4 . 
43 Slide 5 . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 27 - 
 
  ecosystem, and waste management . The vast majority of environmental technology transfer 
programmes reported are in the climate change mitigation subcategory.  
When looki ng at the LDC beneficiaries44, we note that Uganda benefitted from around 
28 programmes, at least two third of which were programmes related to climate change mitigation. 
Other LDC beneficiaries such as Tanzania, Bangladesh, Zambia, Cambodia, Nepal, Madaga scar and 
Mali benefitted from more than 15 programmes, the majority of which were also related to climate 
change mitigation.   
Moving45 on to the category of public health and pharmaceuticals.  A total of 92 programmes 
have been reported in 2021 which benefi tted 39 LDC Members and observers . As you can see, the 
United  States  provides for 41% of programmes in this category.  
Here46 we have grouped the types of health technologies into five subcategories, namely 
healthcare system, services and equipment, communicable diseases, reproductive, maternal and 
child health, regulatory standards, safety and security, and non -communicable diseases . As you can 
see, the majority of health programmes re ported fall under the healthcare system, services and 
equipment subcategory, as well as the communicable diseases subcategory. It may be interesting 
to note that there were eight programmes reported on COVID -19 surveillance, testing, data 
collection and fo recasting . 
When looking at the LDC beneficiaries47, we note that Tanzania benefited from the highest 
number of programmes in the healthcare system, services and equipment subcategory, whereas 
Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo each benefitted from seven  programmes in the 
communicable diseases subcategory.  
Moving48 on to the overview on the agricultural technology transfer programmes reported in 
2021, a total of 92 programmes have been reported which benefitted 39 WTO LDC Members and 
observers . As you can see, the European Union and its member States together with the 
United  States  have provided and reported on 43% of these programmes.  
For the purpose of the summary49, the agricultural technology transfer programmes have been 
divided into eight subcategories, which are crop productivity and food security, 
trade/export/marketing and value chain, rural development, agricultural infrastructure, livestock, 
fisheries, horticulture, and a general subcategory called agricultural. As you can see, the vast  
majority of agricultural technology transfer programmes reported are in the crop productivity/food 
security subcategory.  
When looking at the LDC beneficiaries50, we note that Cambodia and Mozambique each 
benefitted from 16 programmes, the majority of whic h are related to crop productivity and food 
security.  As advised to the Council at its previous  meeting, the workshop  comprises a workshop 
segment and a reporting and review segment within the formal meeting of the TRIPS  Council . 
Therefore, as you have mentioned, Chair, we have arranged the attendance of capital based LDC 
participants at  the present  TRIPS  Council  meeting  on their national delegations. We do hope that 
workshop participants will make full use of the opportunity to draw on the insights and information 
shared during this workshop and to engage fully in the TRIPS  Council 's discussion. In the meantime, 
we look forward to Members ' further guidance arising from the Council 's discussion. We conclude by 
thanking them for their continuing commitment to this area which we understand is a strong priority 
of LDCs, and for their indispensable role in guiding our work in this area.  
Sierra Leone  
My delegation thanks the Secretariat for organizing the annual Workshop on the 
implementation of  Article 66.2 of the TRIPS agreement from 2 -4 March 2022. We are particularly 
 
44 Slide 6 . 
45 Slide 7 . 
46 Slide 8 . 
47 Slide 9 . 
48 Slide 10 . 
49 Slide 11 . 
50 Slide 12 . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 28 - 
 
  grateful that despite CO VID-19 and the travel restrictions the Secretariat was able to organize the 
Workshop and continue the exchange of this important issue virtually.  We believe this platform 
provides paralleled opportunity for the participants both from the LDCs and reporting  Members to 
have a needs -based and focused discussion on technology transfer issues.  We trust that this dialogue 
will inform the Secretariat and developed country Members on technical assistance and technology 
transfer programmes.  In this context, Sierra Leone has tentatively prioritized the following 
sectors/areas for technology transfer to the country: 1) business, trade and finance, 2) 
manufacturing, 3) agriculture and food, 4) ICT and 5) environment and climate change.  We call on 
developed count ry Members to initiate targeted activities and projects to transfer specific 
technologies in those specific priority areas.  Sierra Leone thanks the developed country Members 
for their annual reports under TRIPS Article 66.2 and we encourage them to continu e assisting LDCs 
and increase their outreach and the level of assistance in the transfer of technology under Article 
66.2.  in the interest of promoting effective implementation and impact of Article 66.2, my delegation 
kindly suggests reporting Members to share with LDCs the final project evaluation reports, 
particularly with effect to technology transfer adoption in the LDCs concerned. We stand ready to 
continue constructive dialogue with Members.  
Chad on behalf of the LDC Group  
I would first like to greet you all – good morning, good afternoon or good evening, depending 
on where you are in the world. And herein also lies the charm and usefulness of the technology that 
enables us to communicate in spite o f distance and different time zones. This is why the transfer of 
technology to the least developed countries (LDCs) is vital and indispensable, especially when 
adapting it to areas that represent their priorities. Often I refer to the work of LDCs and othe r 
countries that highlight LDC concerns in terms of policy space and sovereignty regarding 
development issues and economic, social and cultural issues, saying: "Do not be the objects of 
others' perception; become the subjects of your own history". The tran sfer of appropriate 
technologies helps to enable and empower LDCs to take charge of their own development.  
As regards the Workshop, the LDC Group thanks the Secretariat, and in particular the 
Intellectual Property Division team, for organizing the annual W orkshop on the Implementation of 
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement  with respect to incentives for the transfer of technology to 
LDCs. The Workshop was held from 2 to 4 March. For three days we followed with great interest the 
rich, varied and constructiv e presentations on implementing Article 66.2. As the Secretariat just 
mentioned, there was significant and active participation by both LDC Members and developed 
Members in Geneva and in our capitals. Four main topics were addressed, in particular Article 66.2 
in a broader context of trade, technology transfer and development in LDCs, with technology transfer 
in various important areas for our group, particularly health, environment and agriculture.  
Although the Workshop was held in virtual format because o f the pandemic and certain 
restrictions, we hope that a face -to-face meeting will be possible next year.  
LDC colleagues based in the capitals have provided feedback through a voluntary survey 
questionnaire. We hope that the information shared by LDCs will be useful for the Secretariat in 
order to know LDC priorities and design the future technical assistance programme in this regard.  
The survey questions will also help to strengthen dialogue between LDCs and developed 
country Members on technology transfer issues. The LDC Group requests the Secretariat to compile 
a list of priority technologies identified by LDCs in the Workshop and report to the next TRIPS  Council 
meeting. It is essential that partners, particularly developed Members, pay special attention to the 
priorities presented by LDCs in key sectors and areas, particularly agriculture, environment, 
education, transport and livestock farming. This was seen during the Workshop, and also in sectors 
of real interest to MSMEs, with regard to technology tra nsfer to LDCs. We hope that developed 
country Members will initiate targeted activities and projects to transfer specific technologies to 
priority areas in our countries.  
The LDC Group therefore thanks the developed countries for the annual reports under 
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. We are pleased that most of the 2021 reports now follow the 
format suggested by the LDCs. We understand the efforts made to compile all relevant programmes 
of value that are being implemented as part of each country's de velopment assistance, and we also 
recognize the valuable benefits generated by each of these projects. We expect the annual reports IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 29 - 
 
  to specify the beneficiary LDCs and identify the specific technology that has been transferred, even 
though, as we see in th e 2021 reports, such identification is difficult for some projects. Furthermore, 
there is also a mixture of assistance initiatives under Article 67 of the TRIPS Agreement, which 
include the names of certain developing countries that are not LDCs as benefic iaries of technology 
transfer.  
As a result, some reports and even websites do not provide enough or sufficiently detailed 
information. It would therefore be interesting to know, as from the delegation of Sierra Leone 
mentioned, the real impact of technolog y absorption in the LDCs concerned. For this reason , we ask 
reporting countries to share the final project evaluation reports with the LDCs, since evaluation of 
all these public development assistance projects related to capacity building is a necessary tool. The 
LDC Group therefore requests the Secretariat  to organize a separate workshop to monitor progress 
under Article 67 of the TRIPS Agreement with regard to technical cooperation. This will also avoid 
any duplication of reports under Article 66.2 and Article 67 of the TRIPS Agreement.  
The LDC Group would  like to highlight some points where improvement is called for. In this 
new three years period, the LDCs are seeking specific new incentives introduced by developed 
countries to encourage their enterprises, institutions or other entities within their terri tories to 
promote technology transfer to LDCs in line with their obligation under Article 66.2. The LDCs are 
seeking to establish a viable technological base to develop resilient economies with adequate 
productive capacities to add value and to become part  of regional and global value chains. However, 
the LDCs have noted a minor change between the first reports on the three years period and those 
containing updates on the following two years.  
The reports for each year reflect exactly the same type of projec t as those for the previous 
year with some variations in Members' individual reports. The LDCs note that financial or other 
incentives granted to the private sector in developed Members, for example with regard to the flow 
of foreign direct investment, equ ity investments and other instruments such as commercial loans to 
LDCs, have only been reported by a few developed country Members. It was also noted that the 
provision of advice on public and private infrastructure and the Private Infrastructure Developme nt 
Group are jointly funded by many reporting Member governments. However, Switzerland is the only 
developed country Member to mention these projects in its annual reports. The LDCs therefore 
encourage all reporting countries to set up mechanisms to collec t project data and provide details 
of their entities that have been encouraged to invest in LDCs from next year.  
The LDCs believe that when a project refers to "capacity building" in the descriptions column 
of the table and an effort is being made to impro ve LDC skill levels and transfer technology to them, 
it would be useful to know the real impact on the absorption of technology in the LDCs concerned. 
The LDC Group encourages reporting Members to mention the links to the evaluation report for the 
project in question in order to share with the LDCs the impact in terms of technology transfer and 
absorption and skills enhancement. The LDC Group also notes that some reports are unclear, mixing 
the incentives provided under Article 66.2 and technical assistance  provided to certain developing 
countries, though it is aware of the importance and necessity of technical assistance for LDCs as 
well as the difficulties faced by reporting Members. The LDC Group encourages them to make an 
effort to produce separate repor ts, as this would avoid the duplication of programmes in the reports.  
Where applicable, the LDCs believe that the objective pursued for each reported project in 
relation to the beneficiary and the financial allocation needs to be mentioned. In this regard,  the 
LDCs appreciate the efforts of the European Union, which encourages other reporting Members to 
follow this path, and the LDCs call for more specific information to be made available together with 
the websites indicating the names and details of the co ntact points for each relevant project. This 
would facilitate the follow up between the authorities in our capitals and those of developed country 
Members. The LDC Group thanks all developed country Members for their annual reports and the 
efforts made to implement Article 66.2.  
In conclusion, the LDC Group remains available and open to dialogue in order to ensure that 
this provision of the TRIPS Agreement concerning technology transfer to LDCs is truly operational. 
We need strong responses to the huge chal lenges faced by the LDCs: it should not be forgotten that 
these challenges continue to get worse because of the consequences of both the current pandemic 
and the international geopolitical situation. For this reason, the LDC Group reiterates its call to 
developed country Members to genuinely engage in the effective implementation of Article 66.2 of 
the TRIPS  Agreement. LDCs need relevant support to adapt to the new trade landscape that will IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 30 - 
 
  inevitably be shaped by the main actors and their motives. This is another reason why we need 
technology transfer. We remain convinced that this tool contributes significantly to improving the 
standard of living of our peoples, creating wealth and maintaining the workforce in our own countries 
rather than having people pu rsue the hazardous course of exile or immigration.  
Lastly, we also look forward to receiving responses to the questions that the LDC Group  
submitted, addressed to developed country Members that submitted reports, in particular Australia, 
Canada, the European Union, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and 
the United States. So we look forward to receiving these responses, and a list of written questions 
will also be sent to each of these Members.  
Bangladesh  on behalf of the LDC Group 's focal point on TRIPS  
I think that the LDC coordinator has covered almost all in detail, so my intervention will be 
very brief. As the focal point of the LDC Group on TRIPS, it is my pleasure to thank the Secretariat 
for the detailed report and of course for organizing this Wor kshop. We are delighted that all 
participants and capital -based colleagues participated. Since the LDC coordinator has provided a 
detailed summary and the substance of the 2021 reports, I can only add that, the LDC Group  hopes 
to provide feedback of these reports to the individual developed country delegations very soon. We 
look forward to working with the developed country reporting Members  and seek their further 
cooperation to better understand some of the reported projects. We also hope that the priority  
technology sectors highlighted and identified by the LDCs in this Workshop will also be considered 
by the developed country Members while initiating the next targeted projects and programme s in 
this regard. Along with the LDC Group , Bangladesh stands read y to engage constructively with 
Members. So here at the national capacity, my colleagues from the capital will be participating.  
Bangladesh  
On behalf of Bangladesh delegation, I greet you all from our capital Dhaka. My deleg ation 
thanks the Secretariat, particularly the ITTC and the team of the IP Division, for organizing the 
annual W orkshop on the Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement  from 
2 to 4 March  2022. During this time of pandemic, with travel restricti ons and other sanitary 
measures in place, the Secretariat has organized this Workshop successfully through the virtual 
platform. The Workshop earlier provided opportunity for the participants, both from the LDCs and 
developed countries, to meet each other  virtually . We hope that next year an 'in person reunion ' will 
be possible  to exchange our views more interactively . 
The capital -based colleagues from the LDCs provided feedback through a voluntary survey 
questionnaire. The information shared by the L DCs will be helpful for the Secretariat to know the 
priorities of the LDCs and design future technical assistance programme s in this regard. The survey 
questions will also help informed dialogues among the LDCs and developed country Members on 
technology t ransfer issues. My delegation requests the Secretariat to compile a list of prioritised 
technologies identified by the LDCs in the Workshop and report to the next meeting of the 
TRIPS  Council . 
My delegation has tentatively prioritized the following sectors /areas for technology transfer to 
my country: Agriculture and Food; Environment and Climate Change; Public Health and 
Pharmaceuticals; Information and Communication Technology (ICT); Construction, Infrastructure 
and Transport; Manufacturing; Mining . Bangla desh hopes that developed country Members should 
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 the reports in 2021 are now following the format 
suggested by the LDC Group . My delegation fully understands the efforts involved in compiling all 
the relevant programme s out of the many valuable projects tha t are implemented under each 
country 's development assistance and also acknowledges the valuable benefits generated by each 
of the projects.  
We expect that the annual reports should specify the beneficiary LDCs and identify the specific 
technology that has  been transferred. Although, as we see the latest 2021 reports, in some of the 
projects it is difficult to identify what precise technology has been transferred.  There is also mixture 
of technical assistance (under TRIPS Article  67) initiatives including t he names of some non -LDC IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 31 - 
 
  developing countries as the beneficiary.  In some of the reports, the website does not provide 
information. It would also be worth knowing what actual impact was made with respect to technology 
absorption in the LDCs concerned. We r equest the developed country reporting Members  to kindly 
share with LDCs the final project evaluation report that is a necessary tool deployed for evaluating 
all such the Official Development Assistance (ODA) projects related to capacity -building . 
My delegation requests that the WTO Secretariat should organize a separate workshop to 
monitor progress under TRIPS Article  67. This will also help avoid any reporting duplication between 
Article  66.2 and Article  67 of the TRIPS  Agreemen t. My delegation once again thanks the Secretariat 
and delegates and speakers from other Members and IGOs who made the TRIPS Article 66.2 annual 
Workshop truly effective.  Bangladesh looks forward to attending the 2023 workshop in person in 
Geneva. We stand  ready to constructively engage with other Members.  
Togo  
I would like to congratulate the Secretariat and the TRIPS  Council  for having prepared the 
meeting so smoothly, of course, took place on a virtual platform, thanks to the In formation 
technology, communications, we can remain in touch even from capital. Thank you very much for 
all the technical arrangements that have been made to enable us to take part, even though we are 
not in Geneva. We also congratulate you, Chair, for the way that you are steering our meetings . We 
also thank the team who has presented the Report f or 2021, I think that shows the great efforts 
that have been made.  
Togo is extremely grateful to countries that have given their precious support to the projec ts 
mentioned in the reports : the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC);  the International Visitor 
Leadership Program (IVLP).  I would like to take this opportunity to indicate our willingness and 
interest in reviewing the priority areas of interest communi cated to the Secretariat since 9 October 
2015. It is being over  nine years now since those leads were identified and given the context in our 
country and our national development plans that has been drawn up and sectoral plans as well, we 
think it is very important to review our needs  so that they reflect the current situation . Our country 
is trying to ensure that there are good links with between the private sector and the work of 
researchers so that innovations that come out of that to collaboration can b e used by the private 
sector . We are benefiting from some support . In that regard we would like to continue with that 
effort. We work on the themes that have been chosen and underscored by the delegation of Chad, 
and we wish to support those comments and w e wish to continue to work with all of our partners to 
better use the intellectual property system.  
Nepal  
Thank you, Chair, for convening this meeting and giving me the floor. I associate with the 
statement delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDC Group . My delegation thanks the Secretariat, 
especially ITTC and the team of the Intellectual Property Division for organizing the annual workshop 
on the Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement . The capital -based colleagues from 
the LDCs, provided feedback through the questionnaire. The information shared by the LDCs will be 
helpful for the Secretariat to figure out priorities of the LDCs and also designed the future technical 
assistance programme in this regard. Additionally, it would also help effective dialogue and 
discussion among the LDCs and developed country Members  on technology transfer.  
My delegat ion requests the Secretariat to compile a list of prioritised technologies identified 
by the LDCs in the Workshop and report to the next meeting of the TRIPS  Council . My delegation 
thanks the developed country Members  for their annual reports under TRIPS  Article 66.2. It would 
be appreciated if the annual reports could specify the beneficiary LDCs and identify the specific 
technology that has been transferred, as and when possible. Similarly, sharing the final project 
evaluation report with the LDCs of such  support would be beneficial for us. Organizing a separate 
workshop to monitor progress under TRIPS Article  67 (technical cooperation) would help avoid any 
reporting duplication between Article  66.2 and Article  67 of the TRIPS  Agreement . 
Tanzania on behalf  of the African Group  
Thank you Chair for giving me the floor to intervene on behalf of the African  Group . At the 
outset, we would like to commend the Secretariat for organizing the Workshop on the IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 32 - 
 
  Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement  which brought participants from LDCs and 
developed country Members  to exchange views and share experience  on the subject matter. 
Similarly, the African  Group  would like to commend developed country Members  which have 
submitted their reports to the TRIPS Council demonstrating the efforts undertaken to implement 
Article  66.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement  as obligated, for  which also we would like to urge Members  
which have not submitted their reports  yet, to do so. Also, we have noted with appreciations the 
efforts of all Members  implementing numerous projects in LDC s and particularly in the African region 
geared to promot e technology transfer.  
While those efforts are commendable, still there is a room for further improvement on both 
the annual reports and the actual incentive programme s which will encourage their private sector to 
transfer technology. It should be recalled  that Article  66.2 is calling for public policies or programmes 
that developed country Members undertake to encourage their respective enterprises or institutions 
to engage in real technology transfer. On the annual reports, Members  should focus on program mes 
geared to LDCs as beneficiaries and need to specify the targeted technologies transfer. However, 
regarding the 2021 reports like previous years reports, one finds difficult to pinpoint the actual 
targets of projects or transferred technologies.  
The pas t two years of battling with COVID -19 challenges have exposed the vulnerability of 
LDCs due to their weak industrial capacities constraining their ability to produce basic products 
especially medical related products. Therefore, deliberate and genuine effo rts are still desired to 
support LDCs in their endeavour to this course.  
Norway  
Norway took part in the Workshop,  and I like to congratulate the Secretariat for a very 
successful Workshop. Participation in the Workshop  is an important part of our work on technology 
transfer . Transfer of technology to LDCs is important in order for them to strengthen their economies 
and their societies. Norway is fully committed to provide incentives in line with the obligations under 
Article  66.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement . Norway provides incentives primarily by supporting private 
sector development and commercially viable investments.  
European Union  
The European Union and its member States take their commitment under Article  66.2 of 
TRIPS  Agreement  very seriously. The EU and its member States provided proof year after year of 
having promptly and attentively reacted to natural, social, health, climate, food and economic 
changes by implementing projects specifically tailored to the current needs of LDCs and their regional 
organisations. The EU participated in the W orkshop  on the Implementation of Article 66.2 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement . This was the opportunity for all of us, LDCs and developed countries, to exchange 
in a positive atmosphere about the LCDs ' needs and the progresses made in the field and for the EU 
to reaffirm its commitments in the matte r. 
The EU would like to thank the Secretariat for the excellent organization of the W orkshop  and 
the excellent quality of the debates  held. The EU would like also to thank in particular 
Dr Ngozi  Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO - most warmly for her intervention in the 
Workshop  and her encouragement to continue the work on the subject.  
In October 2021, the EU submitted its annual report which provides a detailed update on the 
EU technology transfer programmes. This document was circulated in accor dance with the Decision 
of the Council for TRIPS of 19 February 2003, according to which developed country Members shall 
submit annual reports on actions taken or planned in pursuance of their commitments under 
TRIPS  Article  66.2. Our programme s cover the period from July 2020 to July 2021 and can be found 
in the e-TRIPS  Portal.  
Beyond the EU -financed programme s, this year Austria, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, 
Ireland, Spain and Sweden sent reports to the European Commission on technology transfer 
programmes provided to LDCs. The report submitted by the Commission is not an exhaustive list of 
all the programmes provided but gives a vast range of examples of the technology transfer 
programmes.  The Report has a total of 113 technology transfer programmes,  including 37 projects 
funded by the EU Institutions and 76 projects from the EU member States . The main incentive to IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 33 - 
 
  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. 
The main financial source is the Horizon 2020 framework programme with a total budget of 
EUR 960 billion spread over several financial years.  
Due to the fact we have a packed agenda for these two-days meeting, we would like to refer 
to our interventions on this topic in previous meetings and in the Workshop  which took place the 
previous  week; in particular, our views on the issue of conditions for successful technology transfer, 
including the impo rtance of absorptive capacity of LDCs. We would like to focus on some examples 
of the EU 's and its member States ' technology transfer programmes, mostly from the areas of the 
fight against climate change and agriculture and food.  
Climate change  
AfriAllian ce - Africa -EU Innovation Alliance for Water and Climate in Burkina Faso  
The aim of AfriAlliance is to increase African preparedness for climate change by addressing 
the question of the knowledge gap of African stakeholders and to improve knowledge sharing  and 
technology transfer in online and offline environments and events for African stakeholders acting in 
water and climate sectors. The programme contributes also to the improvement of water and climate 
monitoring and forecasting processes and tools in Af rica. This programme is expected to foster both 
profitable and equitable use of resources without exceeding environmental limits or creating societal 
and/or stakeholder conflicts. The project also supported the implementation of the UN Sustainable 
Developm ent Goals.  
Increased Access to Electricity and Renewable Energy Production (IAEREP) in Zambia  
This programme was subject to a presentation highly appreciated at the Workshop  on the 
Implementation of Article  66.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement . The project aims to : 
a. Promote enabling regulatory framework, renewable energy friendly policies and more 
effective and inclusive sector institutions;  
b. Enhance government and private sector capacities to develop gender inclusive renewable 
energy and energy efficiency projects; and 
c. Improve Energy Efficiency at household and industry level by awareness raising and 
support to economic activities.  
This programme is the perfect example of Improved policies and planning for investments in 
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (RE/EE) . IAEREP has increased the number of people 
getting access to energy services and strengthened the capacity -building  of national institutions for 
improved policy and deployment of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency.  The programme fosters 
know -how trans fer to public and private entities on technical and economic aspects relating to 
Renewable Energy solutions and business models and deepens awareness raising of the society on 
effective and productive use of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency solutions  and applications.  
Finally, IAREP develops incentives (grants) for private developers to stimulate investment in 
low-carbon technologies to contribute to country goals on energy access and climate change 
mitigation (investment component: EUR 25 million).  
Food & Agriculture  
AfriCultuReS - Enhancing Food Security in AFRIcan AgriCULTUral Systems with the Support of  
REmote Sensing in Mozambique, Niger and Rwanda  
AfriCultuReS aims to design, implement and demonstrate an integrated agricultural monito ring 
and early warning system that will support decision making in the field of food security. AfriCultuReS 
delivers a broad range of climatic, production, biophysical and economic information, for various 
regions in Africa.  The research strengthens user 's operational capability in agricultural areas 
management activities, reducing costs and increasing performance by:  
a. Accessing relevant online services and integrating innovative R&D products, previously 
tested by end user organizations, into their own deci sion making chain;  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 34 - 
 
  b. Acquiring more updated and accurate information which may improve their preparedness 
level and operational efficiency; and 
c. Obtaining information on crop & livestock status in a reliable, transparent and fast way, 
increasing trans -nation al cooperation between users who can share the same information.  
EU-African Union Research & Innovation Partnership on Food and Nutrition Security and Sustainable 
Agriculture (FNSSA) - first priority of the EU -AU High Level Policy Dialogue (HLPD) on Scienc e, 
Technology and Innovation  
Countries concerned: Angola; Benin; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Central African Republic; Chad; 
Democratic Republic of the Congo; Djibouti; The Gambia; Guinea; Guinea -Bissau; Lesotho; Liberia; 
Madagascar; Malawi; Mali; Mauritania; Mozambique; Nepal; Niger; Rwanda; Senegal; Sierra Leone; 
Tanzania; Togo; Uganda; Zambia (27 African countries and Nepal) . The objective of the EU -Africa 
Research and Innovation Partnership on FNSSA is to overcome fragmentation of efforts and mobilise 
knowl edge (new and traditional) in order to sustain innovation processes and establish a jointly 
funded long -term partnership.  
Impacts of research, innovation and capacity -building  are often only recognizable in the long 
term. In the short and medium term they can be measured through creation of new technologies, 
services and products. Most of the projects are still ongoing and have not yet produced records of 
specific outputs. Many of the projects are applying a multi -actor approach. They combine the 
knowledge systems of scientists, advisors, farmers and other food systems actors in creation, 
execution and implementation of results. They are addressing challenges within a regional, national 
or local context, if successfully implemented, they have potential to co ntribute towards increased 
knowledge, and to stimulate local and scaled -up innovation processes.  
Considering, in addition that the projects align with global developmental challenges such as 
addressing poverty, hunger and malnutrition, combating the effects of climate change and 
conserving biological resources. The projects have the potential for generating technologies and 
solutions with relevance and potential for uptake in LDCs in Africa and other partner countries.  Total 
funding mobilised so far f rom 2016 -2020 still ongoing : EUR 390 million . 
IRELAND: Africa Agri -Food Development Programme (Botswana; Côte d 'Ivoire; Ghana; Kenya; 
Liberia; Malawi; Mozambique; Namibia; Nigeria; Rwanda; Senegal; Sierra Leone; South Africa; 
Tanzania; Uganda; Zambia; Zimbabwe)  
The objective of the Africa Agri -Food Development Programme (AADP) is to develop 
partnerships between the Irish Agri -Food Sector and African companies to support sustainable 
growth of the local food industry, build markets for local produ ce and support mutual trade between 
Ireland and Africa. The partnership involves new and additional resources to the Agri -Food sector 
and includes a combination of finance and technical assistance. Initiatives are based around the key 
themes of:  Food Safet y; Animal Health/Veterinary ; Business  development ; Production systems ; 
Training/Mentoring ; Technology transfer ; R & D ; and  Project Management.  
Grant support for feasibility studies and/or full commercial projects is provided on a 50/50 
matched basis. Suppo rt for grant recipients to establish in -country private and public sector contacts 
through Irish Embassy networks. The grant must equal a maximum of 50% of the project 's total 
costs, up to a cap of EUR 250,000.  I just mentioned few of the programme s included in our report 
and we are available to reply to any question from LDCs partners.  
United  Kingdom  
The United  Kingdom  takes its commitment to supporting developing countries seriously, 
including by fulfilling our ob ligation contained in Article  66.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement  to incentivise 
transfer of technology to LDCs. The UK particularly recogniz es the importance of technology transfer 
for economic and industrial development of LDCs.  In particular, it is the UK 's amb ition to strengthen 
research capacity in developing countries and in LDCs in particular at an individual, institutional, and 
systemic level. Our programmes aim to ensure greater development impact through the strong 
involvement of skilled national and regi onal researchers. An increase in the relevance and 
applicability of research at a national level will only come if partnerships harness essential local 
knowledge.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 35 - 
 
  
The UK would like to extend our gratitude to delegations who attended and contributed to 
discussions in the Workshop held on 2 and 4 March looking at the implementation of Article  66.2. 
The sessions were highly useful for sharing experiences on transferring technology to LDCs. We 
would also like to thank the Secretariat for again facilitating such productive engagement between 
Members.  We look forward to contributing to additional sessions in the future to support LDCs make 
the most of TRIPS provisions designed to enable technology and knowledge transfer.  
South Africa  
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 technology transfer to LDCs in order to enable them to create a sound and viable 
technological base.  Fulfilment of the obligation contained in Article  66.2 would contribute to the 
objectives of the TRIPS  Agreement , in particular, Article 7 which posits that "the protection and 
enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological 
innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology.  
This issue is key not only in the context of the pandemic but also in relation to longer term 
and structural issues such as climate change and digitalization.  The Doha Decision on 
Implementation -Related Issues and Concerns reaffirms the mandatory nature of Article  66.2, as 
does the 2001 Declaration on the TRIPS  Agreement  and Public Health.  In our view , it is important 
that implementation of Article  66.2 should contribute to the objectives of the TRIPS  Agreement  and 
enable LDCs to develop a sound and viable technological base.  
Clarification of various issues could amplify the impact of technology transfer related initiatives 
that have been undertaken. These include inter alia : 
a. Definitional issues around what cons titutes technology transfer.  
b. To what extent incentives provided can  be considered additional to official development 
aide? and  
c. The robustness of evaluations undertaken to understand the impact of initiatives that have 
been taken.  
LDCs have raised some of these issues among others in document IP/C/W/562 . Our delegation 
sees great value in meaningfully engagi ng with these issues and stands ready to work with other 
Members toward full implementation of Article  66.2. 
Japan  
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  that was held previous  week. Japan also 
participated in the Workshop. The Workshop worked to advance cooperative activities and enhance 
mutual understanding between LDCs and developed country Members.  Japan believes that  activities 
in our report contribute to creating a sound and viable technological base in LDCs, which will bring 
about further technology transfer by enterprises and institutions in developed countries.  Japan will 
continue to make its utmost efforts to imp rove the business environment and make it even more 
conducive to transfer technology. We look forward to working further with LDCs in this context.  
Switzerland  
Switzerland was pleased to participate in th e 2022  Workshop on the Implementation of 
Article  66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement . We were asked to focus our presentation on a specific thematic 
area. We have chosen to focus on health technologies as Switzerland is a leader in this field and 
aims to improve access to proven and  newly developed, safe, effective, high -quality, affordable and 
financially sustainable medicines.  
The Workshop format was a good opportunity to present a brief update of the 2021 report  
which was circulated in September  2021 and in particular, to present three selected Geneva -based 
Product Development partnerships (PDPs) – FIND, MMV and DNDi - to foster local production and 
greater access to medical technologies.  We would like to thank the Secretariat for the organization IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 36 - 
 
  of the Workshop. The constructive discussions held throughout the Workshop will certainly contribute 
to the continued collaboration on technology transfer.  We greatly appreciated the summary provided 
by the Secretariat that lists all incentives and projects i mplemented by the reporting Members. 
Additionally, specific summaries for each field of technology transfer were presented just before 
each thematic session. This is very helpful to keep the overview of donors, projects, and beneficiaries 
in the specific f ield of technology and knowledge transfer. We suggest maintaining this good practice.  
Switzerland remains committed to engage in the TRIPS  Council 's discussion on the 
implementation of Article  66.2 and to promote and encourage technology transfer to LDCs.  
United  States  of America  
The United  States  attributes great importance to this review with respect to the obligations 
under TRIPS  Article  66.2. Our submission in 2021 details programme s aimed to encourage  the 
effective and voluntary transfer of technology to LDCs. The US submission for 2021 highlights 
programme s in areas ranging from intellectual property and trade capacity -building , training, 
development assistance, education, finance, entrepreneurship, labour , and the environment, in 
addition to infrastructure -related health programme s. Similar to previous years ' submissions, this 
report includes comments from host country represen tatives regarding the value they placed on 
several of the programme s listed in the report.  
The United  States  continues to believe that the effective functioning of Article  66.2 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement  requires a robust dialogue between developed countries a nd LDCs in order to 
target incentives in a way that is most responsive to the self -identified technology transfer interests 
and needs of LDCs. At the W orkshop on the Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement  
on 2, 3, and 4 March 2022, we were p roud to highlight many programme s that are in our report. I  
would  like to share a few with you in this forum as well . 
For the first theme of the Workshop focused on facilitating agriculture technology transfer.  Our 
report details numerous programme s in cou ntries such as Haiti, Lao People 's Democratic Republic , 
Mali, Mozambique, Rwanda, Senegal, Uganda, and Tanzania to name a few.  Our report also features 
several in -country Feed the Future (FTF) programme s and other US government agricultural 
programme s such as USAID 's Resilient Agriculture and Markets Activity (RAMA -BC). This 
programme 's overarching goal is to equitably increase agricultural productivity and climate resilience 
by increasing adoption of resilient agricultural technologies and p ractices.  The RAMA -BC project has 
assisted smallholder farmers to apply new and improved technologies to 13,037 hectares of land for 
15,684 farmers. This has led to increased sales by smallholder farmer that amount to 
USD 4.6 million. The project has also managed to establish 1,394 awareness events for several 
stakeholders, including smallholder farmers, private sector partners, partner government entities, 
and the local universities and agricultural colleges.  
For the second theme of the Workshop, environme nt, the United  States  has engaged in a wide 
range of activities with developing countries, with the goal of promoting the development and 
deployment of climate -friendly technologies and practices, and responsible management of the 
environment and environme ntal resources.  
One particular example I would like to highlight, is led by the U.S. Department of State Climate 
Fellows (CF) programme . For the past four years, a U.S. Climate Fellow (technical expert) has been 
embedded within the Government of the Democr atic Republic of the Congo 's Ministry of Forest 
Economy.  This American expert provides training and capacity -building  to technical staff of the 
National Centre for the Inventory and Management of Forest and Wildlife Resources (CNIAF) and 
the Directorate Ge neral of Sustainable Development in the Ministry of Tourism and Environment.  
Specific areas for capacity -building  and training include:  remote sensing, interpretation of satellite 
images, forest inventory and management, Geographic Information System (GIS) , Green House Gas 
Accounting and other relevant technical and policy processes/issues related to the sustainable 
management of forests, avoiding deforestation and forest degradation, and conservation and 
enhancement of forest carbon stocks (afforestation a nd reforestation).  
For the third focus area of the Workshop, health, our report highlights the multitude of 
technology  transfer programme s covering issues ranging from epidemic diseases to maternal health.  
For example, I  would like to discuss briefly our programme  known as the "International Centers for IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 37 - 
 
  Excellence in Research (ICER) " in Uganda.  The National Institute of Health, National Institute of 
Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Division of Intramural Research lead the ICER site in Uganda.  
It include s a state -of-the-art field laboratory in the Rakai District and facilities at Makerere University 
in Kampala and the Uganda Virus Research Institute in Entebbe.  Basic and clinical research on HIV 
and sexually transmitted infections, including studies on viral pathogenesis, transmission kinetics, 
treatment and prevention, is conducted.  A major focus is the impact of antiretroviral drugs on 
community -level incidence in the Rakai community cohort, which consists of over 17,000 individuals.  
This programme  is ongoing.  
We look forward to further discussing our technology transfer programming  with the LDC s 
throughout the year.  
Canada  
Canada would like to thank the Secretariat for organizing the thematic discussions during 
previous  week's annual Workshop on the Implementation of Article  66.2 of the TRIPS  Agreement . 
Canada welcomed the exchange of views and experiences on the implementation of this 
commitment, including the opportunity to hear directly from LDCs on their tech transfer interests 
and priorities in meeting their respective national development objectives.  In our view, this exchange 
is key to ensuring that LDCs have an opportunity to provide feedback on specific projects and on 
their priority needs, and to hel p provide that tech 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 a nd 
identifying best practices and commonalities, to better inform how future incentives in the area of 
technology transfer can respond to LDCs ' priorities over time.  
Canada was pleased to present on key updates from its September 2021 annual report (which  
can be found under document IP/C/R/TTI/CAN/2 ), and to participate in the previous  week's panel 
discussion on the theme of tech nology  transfer in the agricultural sector. In this spirit, Canada would 
be pleased to discuss any of the projects reported under this thematic area, a nd indeed any of the 
other thematic areas detailed in our 2021 report, which also include sectors such as environment, 
health, digital economy, and information and communications technology. We look forward to further 
dialogue through the annual Workshop a nd discussions here in the TRIPS  Council , and once again 
thank the Secretariat for convening the previous  week's Workshop, and all Members for their 
constructive engagement on this important commitment.  
Australia  
Australia would like to thank the Secretariat for hosting the 2022 Workshop on the 
Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement . We would also like to thank LDCs for their 
helpful interventions, including the explanations of key priority areas for  technology transfer 
programme s. 
Australia recogniz es the fundamental role of technology transfer in supporting LDCs, to 
continue to develop and achieve greater prosperity.  Australia also recogniz es the need for developed 
country Members  to continue to sup port technology transfers, including in response to COVID -19, 
not only to ensure that LDCs are able to respond to the impacts of the pandemic, but also so that 
LDCs can develop the capabilities necessary to achieve greater prosperity.  Australia was pleased  to 
submit its Article  66.2 report to the Secretariat on 15 September 2021.  We take our Article  66.2 
reporting very seriously and are careful to submit our reports using the template preferred by LDCs.  
Our own Article  66.2 report focused on Australia 's efforts to support LDCs create the conditions 
essential to allow the transfer of technology, including the technology necessary to assist WTO 
Members access and administer COVID -19 vaccines. We would be happy to discuss our report further 
with Members at  the next available opportunity.  
Chad on behalf of the LDC Group  
Following the statements made by the developed country Member s, I would like to pay tribute 
to all these statements  by responding briefly.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 38 - 
 
  
At the Workshop, I think it was the Director of the IP Division who indicated that when the 
provisions of the TRIPS Agreement were adopted, nobody could know how the technologies 
concerned would evolve, since that question lay beyond the scope of vision o f the TRIPS negotiators 
at the time. Today, we see the extremely important role occupied by technologies in our lives, in 
our societies, in the way we see the modern world, in the industrialization of our countries. And  the 
LDC Group recognizes the socioec onomic benefits generated by each of the projects reported by 
developed country Members. It is very interesting to see the examples that have been presented or 
developed by Japan, Switzerland, the United States and the European Union. All these are extremely 
important, whether in the area of water or in projects funded to build capacity for renewable energy 
and energy efficiency. And there are other aspects that also relate to water and water resources, 
and the issue of climate change raised by Switz erland. All of these areas are extremely important to 
us and we need technology transfer to effectively boost our economies.  
The importance of technology in agriculture is already known, but in recent years we have also 
seen the importance of technology in  mitigating climate change and combating diseases, in 
particular, the COVID -19 pandemic.  
Hence the LDCs attach great importance to the effective implementation of Article 66.2 of the 
TRIPS Agreement since technology not only helps to stimulate production b ut also to maintain 
standards. So we recognize the contribution of the developed country Members. Here we tell 
ourselves that what has been done so far regarding expectations in relation to Article 66.2 is far 
from adequate. We therefore encourage Members to continue their efforts and pursue the dialogue 
with the LDCs so that the spirit and letter of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement can be respected 
and effectively implemented for the benefit of the LDCs that are currently the most vulnerable and 
fragile  countries in terms of trade and also economic development. We rely heavily on the support 
of our developed partners to ensure that the provisions of Article 66.2 can be implemented effectively 
or at all events can be operational on the ground.  
11  TECHNICAL C OOPERATION AND CAPACITY -BUILDING  
Bangladesh  
The delegation of Bangladesh welcomes the reports under TRIPS Article  67 from the developed 
country Members  on capacity -building  support to the developing countries and particularly the LDCs. 
These reports provide information on a wide range of programme s and activities customized for the 
beneficiary Members. These programme s are critically important for the LDCs. My delegation also 
thanks the Secretariat for managing the e-TRIPS  Gateway regarding TRIPS related data and 
information.  Bangladesh sincerely thanks the developed country Members and IGOs for their help 
and would li ke to request them to continue their valuable supports for the developing countries and 
particularly the LDCs and the graduating LDCs.  
My delegation also takes this opportunity to request the WTO Secretariat to organize dedicated 
annual workshop to monito r progress on technical cooperation under Article  67 of the 
TRIPS  Agreement . This may take the similar type of format like the TRIPS 66.2 workshop we referred 
to under agenda item 10. We propose  that such a regular event on TRIPS Article 67 will help infor m 
dialogue among the Members.  
World Intellectual Property Organization  
Allow me to share some information on WIPO 's COVID -19 activities to address the 
pandemic -related issues.  In October 2021, Member States approved a package of COVID -19 support 
measures as part of WIPO 's Program of Work and Budget 2022/23.  The implementation of the 
package involves a 'whole of WIPO ' approach a cross all WIPO Sectors and is coordinated by a 
dedicated WIPO COVID -19 Focal Point. The Focal Point is responsible for ensuring timely and 
effective responses to requests from Member States.  WIPO is currently conducting briefing sessions 
with Permanent Mis sions and IP Offices to inform Member States about the package and how to 
access support, and to ensure the package meets needs and priorities.  
Let me mention some specific areas on which our COVID -19 related activities are focused. 
These include:  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 39 - 
 
  
Legislat ive and policy advice relating to patents, trade secrets and other relevant forms of IP, 
including advice on the use of available patent -related flexibilities.  
New services delivered by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center including new mediation 
services and WIPO Dispute Resolution Boards to facilitate the resolution of commercial disputes 
between private parties, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector.  
WIPO Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISCs) and other technology transfer 
structures will be strengthened, especially in developing countries, to support the identification of 
innovations and inventions in the area of pharmaceuticals, and the more specialized areas of 
therapeutics, bio -analytics, and bioinformatics.  
A patent landscape repo rt on COVID -19 related vaccines and therapeutics has been prepared 
and will be launched on 10 March in the presence of Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of 
the WTO, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director -General of the WHO, Daren Tang, 
Director  General of WIPO . The report provides information on early patenting activity during the 
pandemic, the use of the patent system and its response to the pandemic, and other related 
information. Further patent landscape reports on other relevant topi cs will be published in 2023.  
Tailored capacity -building  initiatives will be delivered via the WIPO Academy, including training 
on IP and public health, innovation and medical technology, and IP for entrepreneurs. The WIPO 
Academy will work with partners a t the national and regional levels, in particular with national IP 
offices and national IP Training Institutions to deliver relevant skills -based training programme s. An 
integral part of the COVID -19 response package is WIPO 's trilateral cooperation with t he WHO and 
WTO.  
In their meeting of 15 June 2021, the Directors General of WHO, WIPO and WTO agreed to 
enhance and focus support in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic. In particular, they agreed to 
implement a joint platform for tripartite technical assi stance and to organize a series of trilateral 
capacity -building workshops on Innovation in, and Access to, COVID -19 Technologies.  
The WHO -WIPO -WTO Technical Assistance Platform aims to help Members  of the three 
organizations, and WTO accession candidates , to address their capacity -building  needs to respond 
to the pandemic. The platform shall facilitate access to timely and tailored technical assistance upon 
request. It will be a gateway to the full range of expertise of the three organizations, and will be 
launched in the second quarter of 2022.  
Also, under the trilateral cooperation framework, two workshops focusing on pandemic -related 
issues have been held. Program mes, presentations and background materials of the two workshops 
are available from the respective meeting webpages. A third workshop is envisaged for the second 
half of 2022.  We remain available to provide Members  with any additional information on WIPO 's 
COVID -19 packages of services.  
12  PROPOSAL FOR A WAIVER FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT  
FOR THE PREVENTION, CONTAINMENT AND TREATMENT OF COVID -19 
13  DRAFT GENERAL COUNCIL DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS  AGREEMENT  AND PUBLIC 
HEALTH IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF A PANDEMIC  
South Africa  
We remain disappointed that the WTO is yet to provide a credible response to the pandemic 
and that we are still discussing the Waiver Proposal  18 months after it was tabled in October 2020. 
This reflects on the failure of the WTO to prioritize issues that are critical to save human lives.  Our 
delegation would like to thank Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  for facilitating 
Ministerial level discussions aimed at developing a framework that the broader membership can 
consider as the basis for a multilateral outcome. We believe that these meetings provide a platform 
to engage in solution -oriented discussions and have injected an im portant dynamic that can take us 
forward.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 40 - 
 
  
We are focused on achieving an outcome that leads to a workable solution capable of 
promoting diversification of production across the world. It must fundamentally enable local 
manufacturing and exports of COVID -19 related products in developing countries. We strongly 
believe that a TRIPS waiver  is doable if we all think creatively to find a balanced outcome that 
addresses all our concerns. It is critical in unlocking global production of COVID -19 products, 
includin g vaccines beyond fill and finish.  
This pandemic has taught us that Africa cannot continue to be confined to the lower end of the 
value chain. This pattern has driven vaccine inequality which has severely affected Africa where just 
over 12% of the adult po pulation is vaccinated. This is not surprising when one considers that Africa 
imports 99% of its vaccines. A model which relies on highly concentrated production in the hands of 
a few manufacturers and distributing these products cannot be sustainable.  
We welcome the recent announcement about five new spokes in Kenya, Tunisia, Nigeria, 
Senegal and Egypt and congratulate these nations for the tremendous progress being made there. 
Having said this, South Africa 's experience of hosting an mRNA  vaccine hub has revealed at a 
practical level, the impeding impact that intellectual property  barriers can have. It is imperative that 
we expeditiously pass a TRIPS waiver  to avoid replication of these inhibitors.  
As noted by President of South Africa, HE President Ramaph osa at the recent 
African  Union- European Union (AU-EU) Summit:  
"The TRIPS waiver , when approved, will ensure freedom to operate for entities with the 
requisite capacity and provide a platform to upgrade existing capabilities. In addition, 
it will facilitate the diversification of production to geographical regions that are 
currently cut out of manufacturing value chains ". 
We reiterate that our intention is not to dismantle the current system of innovation incentives 
and the TRIPS waiver  does not do  so. We have shared ideas with Members on a limited scope landing 
zone that aims to address all concerns and ensure that we can facilitate global production, 
diversification and access to COVID -19 related products. This is critical to ensuring resilience, as 
well as preparedness , for future pandemics.  
Donations and support to COVAX are helpful and must be applauded but they cannot  be a 
substitute for supporting the waiver in the WTO. President Ramaphosa also stated that 
"Governments that are serious about v accine access for all need to approve the TRIPS waiver ". We 
will continue engage in good faith with the view to find a landing zone that delivers on the common 
purpose of ensuring equitable access to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics. The TRIPS waiver  is 
critical to complement global efforts of diversification of production.  We reiterate that a targeted, 
time-limited TRIPS waiver  represents a n appropriate , necessary and proportionate response to the 
pandemic.  In concluding, we would like to reemphasise that the framework that emerges from the 
discussions among our delegation and three others will be subjected to consideration by the 
TRIPS  Council  and its full membership.  
European Union  
The European Union participated with a constructive approach and in a result -oriented manner 
in the discussions on which Ms Anabel González, Deputy Director -General of the WTO debriefed in 
the last session. These d iscussions continue. In parallel to these discussions, the European  Union 
has continued working on various fronts to address the identified bottlenecks that stand in the way 
of achieving our common goal of ensuring equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines and  medicines.  
In February 2022,  in the course of the E uropean Union-African Union (EU-AU) Summit , we 
committed to a substantial package supporting the development of mRNA  technology for the 
continent and the resilience of health systems in Africa. The President of the European Commission, 
Ursula von der Leyen, indicated that what we need is a multifaceted strategy to enhance production 
of mRNA  vaccines in Africa. We need government support to  kick-start production. We need to 
strengthen health systems to create conditions for private investment and voluntary transfer of 
technology. Finally, we need to protect intellectual property, as the element that is necessary for 
research and development.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 41 - 
 
  
It is in that context that the EU is supporting the development of the mRNA  hub and Team 
Europe has contributed with EUR 40 million to this objective. We also have an example of industry 
direct involvement as regards the transfer of mRNA  technology with B ioNTech cooperating with a 
number of African countries on mRNA  technology by delivering Bio NTainers and the blueprints for 
the production of vaccines.  This all just shows that the collaboration and transfer of technology are 
happening. We must continue to work together to create the conditions for what will be most needed 
for regions such as Africa going forward, that is  private investment and transfer of technology.  
The situation as regards supply of COVID -19 vaccines to Africa has also substantially impro ved. 
In total, by end of January 2022, 760 million doses of COVID -19 vaccines were supplied to Africa. 
40% of these doses were fully produced in the EU (292 million). These doses, while still insufficient 
to achieve international vaccination targets, are a lready enough to fully vaccinate almost 60% of 
Africa 's adult population. Very soon in 2022 (towards the end of March 2022 ) it is expected that 
Africa will have sufficient supplies to vaccinate 70% of its adult population.  
The number of COVID -19 vaccines p roduced (13  billion by end January 2022) has consistently 
outpaced the number of vaccines being administered (10.8  billion by end February 2022). This shows 
that vaccine production is no longer a bottleneck. The number of donations through COVAX has risen 
sharply. More vaccines have been shipped through COVAX in the last three  months than in the ten 
months prior.  However, reportedly around half of the supplied doses have not been used yet due to 
various logistical bottlenecks, such as the lack of syringes. Vaccine hesitancy is a problem 
everywhere , as well. More efforts are required in these areas if we want to progress fast in 
vaccination.  
The European Union remains committed to finding a solution on intellectual property that can 
contribute to the diversification of production of COVID -19 vaccines. We continue to believe that we 
can find a bridge between the positions of various Members, be tween those who advocate for a 
waiver and those of us who believe that the TRIPS  Agreement  provides enough flexibilities to ensure 
that the enabling qualities of intellectual property can be used to the maximum. This is why we have 
engaged in the quadrilat eral process facilitated by the WTO Secretariat,  and this is why we continue 
to engage in this process . 
The European Union has shown utmost flexibility and moved its position significantly 
throughout this process. We have moved from the declaration we prop osed in June 2021 towards a 
solution which would allow Members to authorise their manufacturers to produce and export vaccines 
in the fastest possible manner and without red tape, with maximum flexibility as to the legal 
instrument used to do so. But in or der to find a solution flexibility is needed on both sides.  We are 
looking for a pragmatic solution that could facilitate production of vaccines and other essential health 
products in regions like Africa, while preserving incentives for innovation and inve stment that are 
key for responding to new variants of COVID -19, such as Omicron or to new diseases.  
Finally, we would like to thank the WTO, WIPO and the WHO for their continuous collaboration 
on the organisation of practical capacity -building workshops to  enhance the flow of updated 
information on current developments in the pandemic and responses to achieve equitable access to 
COVID -19 vaccines and medicines. We would like to thank WIPO for the debrief of its activities in 
this area. We welcome the effort s carried out by WIPO to enhance our understanding as regards 
accessing databases on intellectual property in the context of our common goal of ensuring equitable 
access to COVID -19 vaccines and medicines.  
Maldives  
The pandemic continues to hamper global development. In light of this , we believe it is 
important to redouble our efforts to overcome the challenges of access, affordability and equity of 
vaccines and COVID -19 therapeutics faced by many  countries especially in the developing world . 
Maldives , as a co -sponsor of the proposed waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS  Agreement  
for the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19, encourages Members to work together 
in global solidarity and agree on moving forward with a view to achieving consensus on a workable 
solution. In this regard, we reiterate our call for moving expeditiously on the proposed time -bound 
TRIPS waiver  which would no doubt be an important contribution by WTO towards recovery efforts 
from pandemic and help to achieve greater vaccine equity.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 42 - 
 
  
Egypt  
Egypt welcomes the E uropean Union support to the transfer of mRNA  technol ogy to six African 
countries, which has been launched during the A frican Union –European Union (AU-EU) summit held 
in Brussels in February  2022. Nevertheless, we reckon that the full utilization of the manufacturing 
capacities available to produce vaccines in some developing countries would be hampered by the 
challenges imposed by IP barriers.  That said , and given that Africa 's COVID -19 vaccination rate 
remains one of the lowest compared to other regions, we stress the importance of finding a 
meaningful, practical and credible multilateral solution on the TRIPS Waiver Proposal , including 
vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics, to scale -up and diversify production, and ensure equitable 
access of key public health tools for controlling the pandemic and its expected mutations in 
developing countries and least developed countries.  In this regard, our delegation expresses its 
support to the on going high -level consultations among South  Africa, India, E uropean Union and the 
United States, which is being facilitated by Dr Ngozi  Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO . 
In the meantime, we remain committed to engage constructively with Members  in any configuration, 
while looking forward to reaching a workable and balanced outcome.  
Bangladesh  
My delegation thanks the TRIPS  Council  Chair for facilitating the discussion at the 
TRIPS  Counc il on this issue since long . The social and economic effects of COVID -19 have been and 
continue to be disastrous , especially for developing countries and LDCs. My delegation strongly 
appeals to Members to agree to get an outcome on the submission of document IP/C/W/669/Rev.1  
as soon as possible. The TRIPS  Council 's objective on this specific discussion, in my delegation 's 
view, should be to  overcome barriers to achieve equitable and timely access to vaccines, 
therapeutics and diagnostics , particularly for the developing countries and the LDCs.  In this context, 
Bangladesh truly appreciates the most recent initiatives by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala , Director -
General of the WTO  to continue intensive discussion among some delegations to find a solution. We 
also welcome the recent announcement regarding the E uropean Union and the African Union 's 
initiative to facilitate mRNA  hubs in some African countr ies with an aim to address at least the 
production constraints for vaccines. However, the challenges related to therapeutics and diagnostics 
are yet to be addressed in the broader context including the IP barriers. This may be noted that as 
of the end of F ebruary  2022, only 12.13 % people of Africa are fully vaccinated.   
The delegation of Bangladesh expects that WTO Members  will not fail to deliver a solution to 
address the most pressing need of the humanity today. My delegation stands ready for further wor k 
in this regard.  
Indonesia  
Indonesia aligns its position with what have been conveyed by our fellow cosponsors . After 
more than two years into the pandemic, 6 million people have died. While parts of the world are well 
on their way to recovery, many low - and middle -income countries are still struggling in their efforts 
to combat the pandemic.  This situation reflects bleakly how ill -equipped and ill -prepared we are in 
responding to the global pandemic.  Against this backdrop, Indonesia is of the view that the TRIPS 
waiver  is still very much relevant and needed to overcome the problems arising from the highly 
concentrated production and d istribution of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics.  Indonesia 
welcomes the efforts made by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  to find a 
solution in the quadrilateral process.  In this regard, Indonesia calls for the quadrilateral proces s to 
be accelerated and its results shared with the broader membership so that we can deliver on this 
very important issue expeditiously.  
Indonesia reiterates its support with Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO 's 
position that we need to d eliberate on this issue as soon as possible, even before the MC12. Not 
only is an outcome very much needed , but it would also provide the impetus needed to resolve other 
negotiating issues.  To that end, rest assured that Indonesia remains fully committed t o engage 
constructively on this issue with all Members . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 43 - 
 
  
Malaysia  
We call upon all Members to engage constructively to explore key improvements, particularly 
the inclusion of IP elements from the TRIPS Waiver Proposal . A balanced and inclusive outcome on 
WTO's response to the pandemic would help Members to effectively mitigate the pandemic. While 
we remain cognisant of the role of intellectual property rights in research and development, we 
believe that the urgency of addressing this life -threatening pandemic warrants more bold and 
decisive interventions to save lives, including through the waiving of some aspects of the intellectual 
property rights. We view that a TRIPS waiver  can act as an important demonstration of global 
solidarity and a huge contribution o n the part of the WTO in responding to the pandemic.  
Tanzania on behalf of the African Group  
On behalf of the African  Group , I would like to thank you Chair for the  introduction you have 
provided on this agenda item. As we have repeatedly voiced in the past, once again we would like 
to reiterate our position. The consultation process on the proposed waiver has taken too long than 
was expected, and COVID -19 continues to devastate the humankind . The African  Group  believes 
that the waiver could provide an enabling environment to ramp up and diversify production and 
distribution of COVID -19 related medical products , including vaccines. This could bridge the existing 
inequ itable access resulting from the current centralised production and distribution.  Africa remains 
concerned that it is one of the regions with the lowest rate of COVID -19 vaccination of its population 
compared to other regions. The main reason being inequit able supply of vaccines. Also, Africa 
remain s one of the continents that has received less technology transfer through contracts or full 
in-house production of vaccines , as has been confirmed in the presentation made by the Secretariat 
on agenda item  3. 
The proposed waiver ( document IP/C/W/669/Rev.1 ) is currently co -sponsored by 65 Members  
and many Members  have pronounced their support to-date who hold a similar view as the African 
Group that the waiver is the only solution to  go in order to scale up and diversify  production to 
ensure there will be equitable access. Beyond WTO, the proposal has been endorsed globally by 
international organizations such as WHO, UNITAID, UNAIDS, and many more,  also the civil society, 
trade unions, world leaders, academia, human rights experts and parliaments , including the 
European Parliament. However, with all the pouring support, a handful of Members  are not ready to 
allow the process of text-based negotiations to commence. The African Group had welcomed the 
consultative process initiated by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO which 
involves a few Ministers, with a view that the outcome of that process could lead to laying a  
framework  that may lead to consensus. However, we find that the process is taking longer and 
therefore would like to request a full briefing  to be provided to the membership  so we can know the 
progress that has been achieved since this process was established.   
We also want to urge Members that the time has come where this proposal should be given 
serious consideration , and perhaps adopt the waiver  so that it contributes to the process of 
combatting the pandemic that has been traveling the globe . It should be recall ed that there is not 
one Member that will remain safe until all other Members are safe. We also have witnessed the 
evolution of mutants of COVID -19 virus in the past, including the Omicron that led to the 
postponement of MC12 in December 2021.  We do not want to be in a similar situation in the near 
future . Therefore , we think that the full vaccination of all Members needs to be achieved within a 
short period so that the pandemic is eliminated . In closing, we would like to assure you Chair that 
the African  Group  stands ready for the commencement of a constructive text-based negotiation to 
finalise the long -overdue proposed waiver.  
Chile  
In recent weeks we have seen how many Members have begun to lift  their sanitary measures 
aimed at preventing and containing COVID -19, which, in principle, would appear to be a sign that 
the world is finally starting to win the battle against the pandemic. However, let us not deceive 
ourselves : a large percentage of the  population  is still battling the virus and it is thus important to 
continue efforts to improve the distribution of vaccines worldwide and to ensure that the WTO speaks 
up on the matter. There is still time for us to take action. For Chile, it is important that the WTO 
contributes to efforts to combat the pandemic in all its areas of work, including in intellectual 
property. We have therefore promoted a holistic approach that produces ambitious results on, inter IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 44 - 
 
  alia, export rest rictions, customs procedures and transparency, and, at the same time, recognizes 
the role of trade facilitation measures that will improve resilience for the future . 
The Trade and Health Initiative, which Chile cosponsors , seeks to contribute in an effecti ve 
manner  as a response to the pandemic and to prepare for those to come in the future, as it has been 
developed based on the problems that we have already faced and that have also been widely 
confirmed by the industry at the various workshops and activiti es organized by the WTO. Chile is 
aware that, for some delegations, an outcome on the pandemic response first requires an outcome 
from the process that is underway in this Council. However, we believe that both processes may 
advance in a parallel manner as  they will all contribute ultimately in some aspect to the common 
objective of improving the production and distribution of COVID -19 vaccines worldwide.  
We therefore welcome the discussions facilitated by Ms Anabel  González, 
Deputy  Director - General  of the WTO, taking place among the European Union, the United  States , 
India and South Africa, and encourage these delegations to deliver a multilaterally applicable 
package that creates a broad consensus among Members. We urge Members to inform us  of the 
progress and details of the process, as is the practice in other nego tiating groups within this 
Organization, which we believe certainly precipitates the consensus  we seek . 
Colombia  
Once again, we are meeting in this Council to discuss Members ' responses to the gl obal health 
crisis and the economic consequences of the measures taken to contain the COVID -19 pandemic. 
Once again, Colombia wishes to thank the authors and cosponsors  of the two documents that we 
have on the table, documents IP/C/W/669/Rev.1  and IP/C/W/681 , which set out alternative ways 
forward. Once again, we have sat and listened with  great interest in seeking results, but little 
progress has been made in achieving them. We would therefore like to reiterate the specific message 
that we have already deliv ered at past meetings.  
First, without prejudice to the enforcement of intellectual property rights protection and 
investments made and to be made in this area, Colombia expresses its support for the temporary 
lifting of patent s for the vaccines, medicines  and other inputs required to address the COVID -19 
emergency.  It is important to have a waiver on vaccine patents as part of a set of tools that also 
includes the scaling up and decentralising of manufacturing sites around the world , and a technology 
transf er system that will enable us to deal effectively with this pandemic and future crises. Colombia 
will actively participate in the discussion and agreement on the mechanisms to achieve  the 
temporary patent waiver. We will urge and endeavour to ensure that all Members can overcome 
their entrenched positions and advance constructive dialogue, with flexible positions, in search of a  
coordinated, satisfactory, timely and necessary response.  
Second, Colombia reiterates its well -known position against the impositi on of restrictions on 
exports of vaccines and their inputs. These elements together are key to an effective and coordinated 
response to the pandemic.  
India  on behalf of the co-sponsors  
India on behalf of the cosponsors  of this proposal  wishes to place on record our gratitude to 
Members who share the cause behind th is proposal and support the proposal. Time was never in our 
favour and our concern is that losi ng further time on taking a decision will render any outcome 
ineffective. India along with other cosponsors  of the proposal have been constructively engaging in 
discussions on the Waiver Proposal  that will both enable Members to tackle the ongoing crisis a s well 
as restore the credibility of this institution. It  is unimaginable that a prominent world organisation 
like ours does not deliver in the most extraordinary of circumstances.  To agree on a workable 
outcome on this proposal , discussions are ongoing un der the process led by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director -General of the WTO . However, the outcome of the process needs to be effective  and doable : 
one that ensures security of supply along with equitable and affordable access for vaccines, 
therapeutics and diagnostics. The global community has suffered for long . Saving lives must be 
prioritised and therefore, despite the divergences we must strive hard to achieve an effective 
outcome and deliver on this urgent and critical issue.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 45 - 
 
  
Bolivia, Plurinational State of  
We echo the views expressed by India, South Africa and other co-sponsors . It has now been 
more than two years since the pandemic began, and several countries have begun to lift their 
measures against COVID -19, while other countries are still struggling with the virus, and their 
post-pandemic economic recovery will be even more  complicated. It is truly unfair that Members 
have not been able to reach timely agreement on the waiver as the appropriate and necessary 
measure to address the pandemic, increase the production of vaccines and other medical products, 
and ensure effective and equitable access to vaccines and medicines. We have repeatedly heard 
about countries ' commitment to finding answers and solutions, yet we remain in the same situation. 
It is essential that our response be credible and effective, as we run the risk of a ll this effort becoming 
a reminder of what we were unable to achieve. Bolivia welcomes the efforts of Dr Ngozi 
Okonjo - Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  on this matter , and hopes that countries will be able 
to reach consensus on the points that we do not agree on . 
China  
It has been 18 months since the Waiver Proposal was tabled to the TRIPS Council. Members 
have conducted intensive consultations in various formats and configurations regarding t his 
important issue. We  would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to the Chair, all 
Members  and the Secretariat for the tremendous efforts made in this process. As far as we know, 
the high -level four -party consultation is still going on.  While calling upon the four -parties to enhance 
their efforts in identifying the possible landing zones, we would like to stress the critical importance 
of the principles of transparency and inclusiveness, not only for the specific topic we are discussing,  
but also for the system as a whole. Any potential outcome emerg ing from the small -group 
consultations shall be balanced, non -discriminatory which is subject to the multilateral scrutiny. More 
importantly, it should be truly conducive to improving the acce ssibility and affordability of vaccines 
for developing Members . 
China has expressed its firm support to an early decision on the waiver of certain IP provisions 
for vaccines. Although the discussion on the Waiver Proposal  has yet to make substantial progre ss, 
China 's efforts in participating in the international cooperation to fight against the pandemic has 
never stopped. To date, China has provided more than 2.1 billion doses of COVID -19 vaccines to 
more than 120 countries and international organizations. We have rolled out cooperation with African 
countries in vaccine production, which will contribute to the goal of reaching the vaccination rate to 
60% of its population by the year 2022. For the next step at the TRIPS  Council , China will continue 
its engag ement in any form of consultation with the aim of harvesting the outcome on this issue 
before the MC12.  
Brazil  
Brazil remains committed to a robust trade and health framework for the WTO, one that offers 
meaningful, timely and comprehensive solutions to the COVID -19 pandemic and beyond.  Brazil is 
also willing and eager to contribute to a solution that is effective and that can be agreed in  the 
shortest possible timeframe.  Substantive discussions have nonetheless ceased to take place in the 
TRIPS  Council  and are now confined to the talks within a restricted group of Members.  Brazil has 
expressed on several occasions its concerns with the lack of transparency and inclusiveness of this 
format.  We would like to reiterate our call for an open and transparent dialogue on the terms of the 
intellectual p roperty aspect of the WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic.  We remain r eady to 
engage and contribute to a solution to the waiver discussions.  
Pakistan  
Pakistan wishes to recall all its previous statements on this issue we also align ourselves with 
the statements mad e by South Africa and other co-sponsors  of the waiver on this item . Pakistan 
finds that it is lamentable that one and a half year s after it was  tabled, we continued to fail in 
advancing text -based negotiations on the proposal. Therefore , we have been unable to find a 
meaningful response to the pandemic from the WTO. We are reminded again of the stark disparity 
in access to vaccines and other COVID -19-related  products across the world due to th e confinement 
of production in a few hands and regions , pushing prices up and making the affordable access 
difficult. We continue to believe that the TRIPS waiver  remains necessary for expanding production IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 46 - 
 
  and supply of vaccines and other COVID -19-related  products to a scale that is required for a 
collective global fight against pandemic. We understand that a high level political engagement is 
taking place on the issue of the wa iver and we are hopeful that it would be able  to find a  way forward. 
It is about  time we place the valuable human lives ahead of the monopolistic  profits. We look forward 
to a meaningful solution.  
Hong Kong, China  
We need a tangible and effective WTO response to the  current pandemic and future ones.  We 
take note that a process facilitated by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO has 
been going on and progress reportedly made.  Hong Kong, China echoes Members ' call for 
transparency and urges the small group participants to provide timely updates to the TRIPS  Council . 
We look forward to considering any proposals that may emerge from the small group discussion in 
the near future.  
Sri Lanka  
I also would like to support the statement and the efforts made by the proponents of this 
Waiver Proposal and Sri Lanka has been always supportive of such efforts. As notified in the media, 
11 March 2022 will mark the  beginning of the third year of the COVID -19 pandemic. Global responses 
in addressing the most pertinent challenges, which the COVID -19 pandemic has posed and continue s 
to pose to the world community, have been mixed. While having a colossal  failure , as evidenced by 
the vast inequities prevailing in access to vaccines and COVID -related products , worsening the 
excess of COVID -19 in the developing world.  
Although t he other existing variants have proven to be not so severe , the virus is spreading 
at unim aginable rates, which we witnessed also during 2020. Meanwhile, the empirical data 
demonstrates that big pharma industry is enjoying colossal profits enabled by intellectual property 
monopolies. This is happening in all areas of medical items being used to  prevent the spread of the 
COVID -19 virus and also cure the patients affected by it. The TRIPS Waiver Proposal, co -sponsored 
by 65 countries and supported globally, including Sri Lanka, aims to scale up and diversify production 
to ensure equitable access. However, due to the continued stalemate, the WTO has yet to deliver a 
meaningful outcome on the proposal, despite the high-level discussions that are underway to find a 
way forward.  
In this regard, Sri Lanka is also praising the efforts being taken by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director -General of the WTO and her team and also commending the willingness of those key four 
players to continue their discussion further. It is claimed that no one side will be completely happy 
with the final outcome. This is what w e are hearing from these closed -door discussions, even arguing 
that vaccines should be dealt with before COVID -19 related products, which, to our mind, may not 
be a comprehensive solution being sought by the proponents. We also join others who call for an 
earlier solution of this long -standing issue by doubling their efforts, particularly of those leading 
Members engaged in the intensive negotiations. If not address ed expeditiously in a timely fashion, 
the solution may render inappropriate. Such an outcome will enable the scaling of the production, 
including horizontal and vertical diversification of production and enhance their distribution across 
the countries who need them desperately without any hinderance, particularly the perceived IPR 
barriers.  
Austra lia 
Australia remains committed to achieving a positive and meaningful outcome on the proposal  
for a TRIPS waiver . A positive outcome is crucial to not only supporting Members, but also to 
demonstrate that the WTO can effectively respond to a global pandemic.  As negotiations progress, 
we continue to urge Members  to step away from entrenched positions and help ensure that common 
ground can be found. It is clear that Members  agree that intelle ctual property should not pose a 
barrier to accessing COVID -19 health products, and this issue is now a test for the WTO 's public 
credibility and risks becoming a gateway issue that determines the WTO 's ability to make progress 
more broadly at MC12.  Austra lia urges all Members , particularly those in the small group, to engage 
actively and constructively to reach a consensus and deliver a positive, compromise outcome that 
effectively supports the global response to COVID -19. We look forward to continuing to work with 
WTO Members  to achieve this.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 47 - 
 
  
Nigeria  
We welcome the initiatives by the E uropean Union and A frican Union that facilitate the 
production of mRNA  vaccines in a few countries including Niger ia. However, we would like to 
underscore the need to ensure that intellectual property rights do not create barriers to the 
scaling -up of research, development, manufacturing and supply of materials essential to combat 
COVID -19 pandemic , while preserving the intellectual property rights of Members . That being said, 
we reiterate our support for the Waiver Proposal , as it will prove to be a very useful tool in ensuring 
equitable access to vaccines and in turn save lives.  In addressing the two agenda items  12 and 13 , 
we would like to highlight that the existing challenges of implementing the compulsory licensing 
system under the TRIPS  Agreement  include the cumbersome procedures of acquiring the licen ce at 
the national level among other thing s. Therefore, we believe that the  document  IP/C/W/ 681 proposal 
should complement the TRIPS Waiver Proposal , we are also open to exploring avenues to simplify 
procedures of the current TRIPS flexibilities under this proposal in response to the current and future 
pandemics.  
Finally, the solution to the current vaccine inequity remains the diversification and 
decentralization of manufacturing capacities through the ramping up of production of COVID -19 
vaccines and products in developing countries which will prove to be a useful tool in not only current 
pandemics , but also future pandemics.  
United  Kingdom  
As my delegation expressed its well -known position on this issue on numerous occasions, most 
recently in detail at the previous  session of this Council, I will not repeat it. Our participation in this 
debate has been to ensure the WTO 's intellectual proper ty response is both effective and reflects 
evidence -based decision making, by noting the role IP rights have played in the development and 
production of COVID -19 goods which are positively contributing to the global pandemic response. 
This has and will not  change. We also acknowledge recent announcements contributing to improved 
vaccine equity demonstrating why waiving IP rights is not needed.  
The rescheduling of MC12 makes clear the importance of working towards a meaningful and 
comprehensive pandemic resp onse package. Members all recogni ze and agree the importance of 
making progress towards achieving this shared objective. The United  Kingdom  has repeatedly stated 
its intention to work towards a pragmatic, evidence -based solution and we stand ready to conti nue 
our constructive engagement. However, the current process around waiver discussions is not 
transparent , and means this Council is not informed of the substance of discussions. At this point, I 
would like to support the delegation of Tanzania, speaking on behalf of African  Group , in the call for 
a fuller briefing to this Council. This is needed to fulfil the mandate placed upon Members to engage 
with each other constructively. Simply put, we cannot be expected to progress towards an outcome 
on discussion s which this Council does not know the details of.  
While we recogniz e the urgency of taking forward discussion on the wider pandemic response, 
the United  Kingdom  will not accept an outcome when we have not been consulted or given sufficient 
prior notice to  assess what is being proposed in writing. This is because getting it wrong could make 
both short and long -term pandemic preparedness worse.  Members of this Council are entitled to 
digest, scrutinise, and discuss any outcome of these negotiations before we  can reach consensus. 
As was made clear ahead of November 's expected MC12, this process needs to happen before 
Ministers can agree an outcome.  
Norway  
Norway has consistently encouraged Members to r evisit their positions with a view to 
narrowing differences, so that we can find a compromise that can achieve consensus, since progress 
on this issue is urgently needed. We need to strike the balance between on the one hand ensuring 
that IPRs do not const itute a barrier to solving the current or future health crises, and on the other 
hand preserving the incentives for innovation. Norway strongly believes that a clear time -limited 
waiver related to patents on vaccines against COVID -19 can be part of such a balanced approach.  
 We like to thank the E uropean Union for their proposal for a General Council  declaration on 
TRIPS and Public Health in the circumstances of a pandemic, contained in document IP/C/W /681. IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 48 - 
 
  As we have said in earlier discussions on this proposal, we understand it to be seen as part of a 
wider WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic. That is in Norway 's view an appropriate point of 
departure. Also, the proposal is closely linked to the 2001 Doha Declaration  on the TRIPS Agreement 
and Public Health, and the aim is to make the so -called TRIPS 'flexibilities ' better suited to the 
circumstances of a pandemic  for all Members . We consider this proposal to be a useful contribution 
that merits further discussion. Without prejudice to the discussion on other proposals, or to the 
timing or format of any decisions on trade and health, it can be one of several elements to strengthen 
the multilateral trading system 's ability to better respond in the event of  future health crises.  
Nepal  
My delegation associates with the statements delivered by South Africa on behalf of 
co- sponsors, and the statement to be delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDC Group . Nepal 
commends you, Chair, for your tireless efforts in this process.  I appreciate Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director -General of the WTO for her initiative of consultations with a view to finding a landing zone 
in this matter. My delegation has been continuously supporting this proposal from the beginning and 
reiterates its position of the necessity of adopting the TRIPS waiver  through a text -based negotiation 
at the earliest possible. I reiterate the urgency of scaling up produ ction globally to ensure access to 
vaccines for all, and my delegation believes that it can be addressed through adoption of the 
TRIPS  waiver . The TRIPS waiver  is not only necessary for saving lives of millions of people across 
the world , but also for rega ining trust in this institution.  
Switzerland  
My delegation has made an extensive statement under these two agenda items at the informal 
part of the Council meeting of 22 February. We request t hat this statement be included in the 
minutes of the present  formal meeting. We will make it available to the Secretariat for this purpose.  
I will only sum up a few key points: we pointed out that it is important to look at facts and 
figures and relevant d evelopments on the ground in order to be aware of where we actually stand 
today in our common fight against the COVID -19 pandemic  and what the real challenges are that 
still lie ahead of us . In our statement of 22 February, we presented such facts  and figures for an 
evidence -based discussion and hopefully a mutually agreeable decision by the Council.  
On that basis, we concluded that c oncerning the TRIPS Waiver Proposal , we need a reality 
check in the Council 's discussion. Proponents claim that the TRIPS waiver  is needed to broaden the 
global manufacturing capacity to allow all WTO Members sufficient access to COVID -19 vaccines. 
Data shows we have sufficient capacity today. The established and trusted TRIPS and international 
IP framework has helped - and enabled - us to get to this point . Access to and manufacturing capacity 
of COVID -19 vaccines and therapeutics are no longer the bottlenecks we face. WHO 's COVAX global 
vaccination campaign is now facing a lack of demand - not of supply. Today, this ap plies also to 
Africa. To reduce their stocks, some African countries have asked COVAX to pause vaccine deliveries 
and postpone them to the second half of 2022.  
The African Union Centre for Disease Control and Prevention confirms that their primary 
challeng e for vaccinating the continent is no longer supply shortage , but the logistical challenges to 
vaccinate at scale and vaccine hesitancy. These challenges are not connected to IP or the 
TRIPS  Agreement  - nor would waiving patent rights or the TRIPS  Agreemen t assist WTO Members 
in addressing these challenges. Having said this, while being an ambitious and long -term goal, 
sustained investment in geographically diversified manufacturing capacity and new technologies are 
key as part of future preparedness to ens ure early access in a next pandemic also for low and middle -
income countries (LMICs). This was stressed during the recent meeting of the Multilateral Leaders 
Task Force on COVID -19, on 1 March. To this effect, close collaboration between vaccines 
developer s, manufacturers, international organizations – including the WTO – and governments is 
essential. Th e goal of building up diversified global manufacturing  capacity can only be pursued and 
successfully achieved within the regulatory framework of the WTO and its TRIPS  Agreement . 
Switzerland is convinced that for countries wishing to develop their own manufacturing 
capacity in the vaccines sector, a TRIPS waiver  would w ork against their own interests. Vaccine 
developers would be dis -incentivized to invest or license their technology or know -how to 
manufacturers in countries without such a framework to build their partnership on. A core lesson for IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 49 - 
 
  the WTO and for its regu latory framework in future pandemics is that there is a need to ensure the 
smooth running of supply chains, avoiding their disruption through measures such as export 
restrictions or other trade barriers imposed by WTO Members. A well -functioning and truste d 
intellectual property rights system, as provided by the TRIPS  Agreement , will continue to be crucial 
to provide the necessary incentive for partnerships to come together to develop and manufacture at 
global scale new - and hopefully again effective - vaccines and therapeutics against a next pandemic 
virus.  
I refer here to the presentation of the WTO Secretariat this morning under agenda item 3, and 
more specifically to the statistical information given therein on the hundreds of manufacturing 
partnership s that have formed during 2021 to jointly achieve a global production of more than 
13 billion of COVID -19 vaccine doses  by early this year, and since then, growing every day.  
Finally, regarding the small group process initiated and led by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director -General of the WTO  and ongoing now for almost three  months , we flagged our concerns 
that this process does not meet WTO principles of inclusiveness and transparency. We also made 
clear that delegations excluded from these talks should not b e expected to simply wave through an 
outcome this small group process may come up with.  
Switzerland 's statement at the informal meeting held on 22 February 2022  
Draft report to  the General Council  
Thank you, Chair, for consulting Members on the status report to this week 's meeting of the 
General Council . My delegation fully supports your report.  
Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO 's small group process ( "QUAD -process ") 
We thank Ms Anabel  González, Deputy  Director -General  of the WTO and the 
HE Ambassador  João Aguiar Machado ( European Union), HE Ambassador Xolelwa Mlumbi -Peter 
(South Africa) and HE Ambassador Maria PAGAN  (United States)  for a first brief up -date on the small 
group process initiated by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO . While we 
appreciate Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  and her facilitators ' efforts to find 
an agreement among Members, we register our serious concern with the very restrictive format 
chosen for this process : a process that has been ongoing now for almost two months. This format 
does not correspond to the fundamental WTO princip les of inclusiveness, transparency or regular 
reporting to the membership. My delegation is also concerned about the imbalance of representation 
in this small group process of which we should  be part. My delegation believes that an inclusive and 
transparen t process is indispensable if we are to find a mutually agreeable outcome on this matter.  
Facts and developments on the ground  
To have a useful and objective discussion under these two agenda times, it is important to 
look at the facts and take into accoun t the developments on the ground since the Council last met.  
According to the scientific online publication "our world in data " (a project of the Global Change Data 
Lab), the rate of vaccination on all continents, except Africa, is now above 65%. South Ame rica 
being in the lead, with more than 80% and Asia coming second, with more than 70%, ahead of 
Europe or the U nited States. 
Global manufacturing capacity started at zero early in 2021  and has since massively increased 
to more than 1.5 billion  doses per mo nth by the end of 2021. Capacity has grown to an extent that 
some manufacturers have started to reduce output since demand is decreasing.  One player in this 
massive increase of manufacturing was COVAX, the global COVID -19 vaccine facility co -founded by 
the WHO. COVAX had entered into contractual arrangements with manufacturers in developing 
countries for the production of these vaccines for low - and middle -income countries (LMICs).  
Vaccine developers had licensed their innovative COVID -vaccines to these man ufacturers, 
based on the TRIPS  Agreement  and the IP system. It was export restrictions which stopped the 
delivery of these vaccines under the COVAX programme  to many LMICs for much of 2021. Today, 
however, supply of and access to vaccines is there, includi ng in Africa . 
According to the WHO regional office, there is now a steady supply of doses flowing in . 
According to the WHO office, African countries will have adequate access to COVID -19 vaccine IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 50 - 
 
  supplies in 2022.  In fact, many struggle with administering the number of doses delivered. According 
to recent data from Airfinity, a total stock of 780 million vaccine doses supplied to low -and middle -
income countries await their administration to the population.  
The numbe rs of the African Union Centre s for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) 
show that there is a wide gap in many African countries between the vaccines supplied and the 
vaccines administered. The low figures of vaccinations are thus not a problem of a ccess to vaccines 
anymore, but one of administering the vaccines at disposal.  
At the WTO Technical W orkshop  on COVID -19 Vaccines R&D, Manufacturing and Distribution, 
11 Feb ruary  2022, UNICEF informed that the COVAX programme was able to deliver over 600 mi llion 
vaccine doses in Q4 2021. However, many recipient countries were overwhelmed by this large 
volume which is why they asked to reduce deliveries in Q1 2022 to give them time to reduce their 
stockpiles.  The main challenge today is thus the effective dis tribution of available vaccines to the 
populations, thus making vaccination happen and bring the jabs in people 's arms, particularly in 
low-income countries.  
Link to pandemic preparedness process  
These facts and developments recall the intrinsic link of our discussion here to the broader 
agenda of WTO 's pandemic response. Any WTO outcome will need to be comprehensive and balanced 
in order to be meaningful.  IP has played a positive role in fighting this pandemic effectively. This 
positive role of IP and TR IPS must be reflected in any such outcome.  
As part of a holistic pandemic response, the WTO needs to undertake efforts to improve vaccine 
readiness, address challenges linked to transparency, burdensome customs procedures, but mainly, 
to export restriction s – which, as mentioned, have proved a significant barrier to access, including 
under the COVAX facility.  
Waiver Proposal  and pandemic preparedness in the future  
Finally, as part of improving pandemic preparedness in the future, building up local and 
regional manufacturing capacity in the vaccines and pharmaceutical sector is important, particularly 
in Africa. A number of initiatives in this regard are already underway, be it by the private sector or 
in public private partnerships, including under the umbre lla of relevant international organizations. 
Recent examples of such initiatives include the mRNA  tech transfer hub in South Africa, BioNTech 's 
delivery of turnkey manufacturing facilities to Rwanda, Senegal, and potentially South Africa by 
mid-2022. Johns on & Johnson 's licen ce agreement with Aspen Pharmacare in South Africa for the 
production of 500 million doses  in 2022 or the agreement between AstraZeneca  and Brazil's  Fiocruz 
Foundation for 120 million  doses and Insud Pharma in Argentina for the producti on of 200 million 
doses, to name just a few.  
More can and should be done. For these partnerships and long -term ventures to be successful, 
however, the WTO regulatory framework will remain instrumental, including IP and TRIPS, building 
necessary bridges bet ween these partners and allowing for trusted and effective collaboration. In 
other words, IP has been, is and will be part of the solution in the COVID -19 crisis. Preparedness for 
future pandemics must therefore build on the existing WTO IP framework and not undermine it.  
Chad on behalf of the LDC Group  
The LDC Group thanks the Chair for the tireless efforts to move the process forward on these 
topics.  We welcome the initiative of Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  and all 
initiatives to reach joint agreement on the role of the WTO in combating the current pa ndemic and 
in future crises that may arise . We thank the various co -sponsors. They have continue d and will 
continue  to provide clarification and information until we can find a shared landing zone together 
because the situation requires this . 
We understand  the viewpoint that certain Members disagree with certain elements of the 
proposal and we have listened with particular interest to the European Union's approach, though it 
should be recognized that there is good will and a willingness to find an appropria te solution. The 
approaches developed by some Members are insufficient , in our view; they are not at the level to  
address the current dangers and do not meet the expectations of a number of countries at the IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 51 - 
 
  international level . We stress the fact that inequality with regard to vaccines needs to be addressed 
from a n all-embracing way  and that we are not in a position to envisage individual options. On the 
contrary, it is essential that production is increased from now on in all developing and least devel oped 
countries. Global statistics show that as of June 2021 only 1.2% of COVID -19 vaccine doses had 
been administered in LDCs, even though these countries represent 14% of the world's population. 
Only about 3.1% of the population of LDCs have received at l east one dose of the COVID -19 vaccine. 
Some so far have not yet received the second dose, for which there is a waiting time of six months 
to one year. It is clear that the health consequences of this year -long wait for the second dose, this 
potentially har mful interval, need to be measured, bearing in mind that in many developed countries 
people have received three doses. There is this striking imbalance, which can only be rectified by a 
strong, decisive approach such as the adoption of the TRIPS waiver. Hence, we urge all Members to 
hear our appeal, to support the developing countries, the LDCs and the whole world by shaping the 
necessary compromise and consensus to arrive at the TRIPS waiver.  
Saving lives is a high priority. We must not miss the opportunit y to highlight the relevance of 
the WTO in a situation like this.  We also wish to underscore the importance of transparency and 
inclusiveness in terms of process. More than one year has elapsed since the TRIPS waiver proposal 
to deal with the pandemic was submitted. Last year we saw the emergence of new variants and, as 
we have often repeated – and repetition is always useful – "nobody will be safe until everyone is 
safe". We fear that as developed Members begin to emerge from the pandemic, countries like o urs 
must not be left behind or  forgotten because of the structural difficulties  encountered  in obtaining 
vaccines and treatments.  
We therefore require a sustainable solution with both rapid and adequate production and 
distribution of vaccines and therapeutics to ensure affordable, quick and effective access for all 
Members to fight the pandemic.  
Finally, the co -sponsor s remain ready to provide all necessary information and clarification, 
including with regard to the question of our colleague from t he United Kingdom . The co -sponsor s 
remain ready to provide any clarification and any useful, necessary and updated information so that 
together we can move towards consensus and truly emerge from this situation and find a landing 
zone with regard to the wa iver proposal.  
Japan  
We appreciate the efforts made by the Chair and the Secretariat, and Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director -General of the WTO  and other colleague to seek a landing zone for this important agenda  
item. Members have not yet reached a consensus , but share the common goal. Any ideas and 
proposals should be considered as long as they are effective in achieving the common goal. 
Pragmatic approaches  such as considering this issue such as limiting scope , as well as concentrating 
on common ground s, would be one of the effective ways to facilitate this discussion. We have no 
objection to proceed ing with this discussion. Japan remains ready  to discuss constructively with 
Members towards consensus.  
Singapore  
Now that the General Council has identified a window for MC12, it is imperative that Members 
intensify work and exercise greater flexibility in order to find a landing zone on the TRIPS Waiver 
Proposal  as soon as possible. Allow me to make th ree points.  
First, it is crucial that our discussions on the TRIPS Waiver Proposal  take into account the 
evolving reality of the situation on the ground. As Singapore highlighted at the previous  
General  Council meeting on 23 and 24 February, the IFPMA had  reported that 11 billion COVID -19 
vaccines were produced in 2021, an exponential increase from the 31 million produced in 2020. In 
addition, UNICEF 's data on supplies and the use of delivered vaccines indicate that more than 681 
million shipped doses are currently unused. In short, the challenge is no longer one of vaccine 
supply, but of vaccine distribution and administration.  
Second, against such a backdrop, we must be flexible, pragmatic and take a holistic approach 
in working towards our shared objecti ve of ensuring equitable access to vaccines. The figures I had 
cited earlier are telling of the other challenges that Members face in distributing and administering IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 52 - 
 
  vaccines. According to key stakeholders at the WTO technical workshop on COVID -19 vaccines,  other 
critical factors such as the lack of regulatory harmonisation, inadequate infrastructural capabilities, 
and vaccine hesitancy have emerged as key obstacles to achieving higher vaccination rates. The 
WTO-WIPO -WHO trilateral workshop the previous  week has also provided us with a range of 
information resources for pandemic response , including vaccine dashboards which could be helpful 
in identifying bottlenecks and providing guidance on discussions. In this regard, we welcome the 
presentation by WIPO earlier on the various initiatives to enhance access to COVID -19 vaccines and 
technol ogies. We should bear these factors in mind as we continue our discussions to find a 
pragmatic and realistic solution.  
Third, while it may be constructive for discussions on the TRIPS Waiver Proposal  to continue 
taking place in smaller configurations, it i s also important that transparency is maintained. It is 
important that the wider membership receives not only regular, but detailed updates on the state of 
discussions. This will facilitate the process of reaching a consensus when a middle ground solution 
is found. Singapore remains committed to continue to engag e constructively and working with 
Members to find a way forward on this issue at the TRIPS  Council . 
Russian  Federation  
The Russ ian Federation  encourage s further work of the TRIPS  Council  on a COVID -19 
response, which will be beneficial to all of the membership,  and which will increase the capability of 
Members  to respond to the pandemic. We believe that negotiations on such a comp rehensive 
response should be discussed in the most transparent way possible. Every member has its own 
experience during past two years and can add some valuable inputs. In parallel , any cooperation 
between Members  to facilitate transfer of technology, free  licensing, creation of local production of 
vaccines and therapeutics, and on facilitating logistics and distribution should be encouraged and 
expanded. Discussing the response , Members should focus the attention on such issues as clear time 
frames, accessibility of the measure s, fast implementation, practical outcomes and safety.  
Turkey  
Turkey very much values discussion s at the WTO on how to respond and contribute to the 
global fight against COVID -19 pandemic. In the TRIPS  Council , we observe that Members continue 
to be divided between two different approaches for delivering a swift response to possible IP -related 
issues . Divergent views among Members with respect to the advantages of the two different 
approaches and the concerns expressed about them are very clear to us. We think that constructive 
engagement and bridging the gap between Members was crucial since the very  beginning. In this 
regard, we see that since December 2021, quadrilateral meetings are conducted at Ministerial and 
technical level, under the good offices of Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  and 
Ms Anabel González, Deputy Director -General of the WTO . We hope that they can come up with a 
solution soon and the TRIPS  Council  can discuss it multilaterally.  
Namibia  
As we are taking the floor for the first time, I would like to thank you Chair for directing the 
proceeding s of this meeting and also to thank you for the introduction that you made on this agenda 
item. Namibia align s with the statement delivered by Tanzania on behalf of the African  Group , and 
we also  support the statement made by South Africa as well as on behalf of the cosponsors  and the 
statement by India. I think with the agenda item what seems to be coming out is whether we agree 
that the Marrakesh Agreement provides for  a waiver. A Waiver Proposa l was submitted under 
document IP/C/W/669 . I think if you all agree that the Marrakesh Agreement provides  for that, then 
it is fair and  just that we have to move to the next stage.  The next stage which is to move  to text-
negotiation s. Perhaps we can understand and negotiate the text and  the context in terms of the 
proposal, which has to be advanced . The issu e of delaying the discussion o f the subject matter  might 
cause a  problem in the future for which most of the issues concerned should be address ed, or will 
also be prolonged on the table. If we cannot  implement something which is  provided for according 
to the Marrakesh Agreement , then how are we going to proceed  with other issues that are not 
provided for that we are negotiating.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 53 - 
 
  
United  States  of America  
The United  States  is committed to continuing to lead in responding to the global COVID -19 
pandemic. We have committed to donate over 1.2 billion vaccine doses to date.  We have already 
provided over 486 million doses to over 110 countries.  The United  States  has also contributed more 
than USD 19 billion in health and humanitarian assistance to h elp combat COVID -19 issues and to 
help ensure communities around the world have the resources that they need.  The United  States  
has stated its support for a waiver of intellectual property protections for COVID -19 vaccines.  The 
United  States  continues to e ngage with Members to look for areas of convergence that can lead to 
a solution. This includes our participation in the WTO Director -General 's consultations.  
Peru  
Even though no country has been spar ed the devastation caused by this health crisis, which 
quickly became a multidimensional crisis, we still cannot agree on a collective response, based on 
solidarity, to this global challenge. As time passes, we run the risk that any decision taken by this 
Council will become irrelevant. Moreover, the credibility of this Organization will be affected at a 
time when the multilateral system is still being seriously called into question.  Peru, as one of the 
countries hardest hit by the COVID -19 pandemic, considers it a priority to accelerate discussions 
with view to an outcome that facilitates universal, timely and equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines, 
as well as global public goods. In this regard, we would like to recall the words of the Secr etary 
General of the United Nations when he characterized the inequity in the distribution of vaccines as 
the "biggest moral failure of our times ". As long as we do not ensure universal access to these goods, 
including through increased production and fair er distribution, we are jeopardizing implementation 
of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the livelihoods of our people.  
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of  
Our delegation echoes the remarks made by India, South Africa and other countries that are 
co-sponsoring the waiver. The effects of COVID -19 have already caused hundreds of thousands of 
deaths and disrupted the lives of billions of people. While some countri es have now lifted their 
restrictions, other regions are still dealing with and fighting against COVID -19 and its different 
variants. One of the lessons of the pandemic has been the urgent need to increase local vaccine 
production so as to ensure the vacci nation of the entire population in middle - and low -income 
countries. Our country continues to support the waiver. It regrets that we have not yet reached an 
agreement yet and requests that the discussions continue so as to achieve outcomes that will benefi t 
humanity as a whole.  
South Africa  
We would like to clarify a procedural matter. As indicated in various consultations under the 
Chair's  good offices, we have consistently requested that these agenda items be retained,  and we 
would repeat that call.  
Resumption of the Council for TRIPS on 6 May 2022 
China  
Thank you Chair for convening this meeting. Since this is the very first opportunity for me to 
speak in this Council, please allow me to extend my sincere congratulation on your appointment as 
the Chair of this important Council. This Council now bears the  expectation of all Members to deliver 
concrete outcomes before MC12. We believe under your leadership we can achieve this goal. I also 
thank you, Chair, and Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  for circulating the 
communication as well as t he document earlier this week. My capital is still studying the document. 
Here, I would like to make three points. And we may have technical comments in a later stage.  
First, China has always been a significant contributor to the global efforts in combatti ng the 
pandemic, and a staunch supporter of TRIPS waiver on COVID -19 vaccines. In May 2020, President 
Xi Jinping made a commitment that the COVID -19 vaccine under development and deployment in 
China will be made a global public good when it  is ready for us e. One year later, China announced 
its support for waiving intellectual property rights on COVID -19 vaccines, and called upon the WTO IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 54 - 
 
  to make an early decision on this matter. As one of the first countries hit by the pandemic, China 
fully understands and s ympathizes with the severe challenges encountered by other developing 
Members and LDCs. China has made its best efforts in providing vaccines to them which is a 
significant contribution to the global response to the pandemic. Up to now, China has provided more 
than 2.2 billion doses of vaccines to over 120 countries and international organizations, and realized 
joint production with African countries. In addition, together with other BRICS states, we made the 
public health and vaccines cooperation a key are a of BRICS ' work this year. We have been and will 
continue to actively participate in the discussions here with a view to pursuing an outcome that could 
enhance vaccines accessibility and affordability for developing Members and LDCs.  
Second, we always bel ieve that any negotiation in this organization, including the ongoing 
TRIPS waiver discussion, shall be guided by the principles of openness, transparency and 
inclusiveness. And outcomes of the negotiations shall be fair and non -discriminatory. Otherwise, it 
will be difficult to build consensus among Members, in particular for those who have not been 
involved in the process. The procedural fairness is even more relevant for the TRIPS waiver 
discussion which needs a proper and urgent solution as it relates to human life and livelihood. We 
should also avoid any hinderance to its successful outcome due to politically  motivated disturbances.  
Third, we appreciate the efforts made by Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the 
WTO, Ms Anabel González,  Deputy Director -General of the WTO  and the Quad in forming the 
document or text, whatever we call it. China, in general, supports to have this document as a basis 
for further discussions and hope it would lead to a long -awaited and urgently  needed outcome , 
bearing in mind that Members ' key concerns, including China 's, should be properly addressed in this 
process. For China, we can not accept the second brackets of footnote one which uses the criterion 
of export share to define eligible Members. Such an unre asonable and arbitrary criterion will send a 
wrong signal to the outside and also have systemic implication to the future negotiations. On one 
hand, this implies punishment to those who supplied a large amount of vaccines to others even when 
they themselve s were suffering from shortages. On the other hand, this constitutes a tolerance or 
even an incentive for Members to adopt inward -looking policies and apply export restrictions in 
difficult times when we should resist such temptations. So my question to ev eryone in this room is: 
is it a right signal that the WTO, a long -time advocate of free trade and multilateral cooperation, 
should be sending to the world? Should the contributions made by Members during the pandemic 
be encouraged or discarded?  
As Dr Ngozi  Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  repeatedly highlighted, multilateral 
cooperation on trade is deadly needed to address the mounting challenges we are encountering. 
However, if the second brackets remains as it is, I have a serious doubt on how t he long -held spirits 
of unity and cooperation could be preserved in this organization . Who will be willing to export critical 
materials to others if we are to face another pandemic in the future? And how the interest of the 
vulnerable economies, developing  Members and LDCs, could be protected? Compared with this 
second brackets language, the first brackets adopt a more positive approach, i.e. to encourage 
developing Members who have capability to opt out from this decision. This is the right direction we 
should work to. However, as to what I just said on export criterion, we believe a more general 
language to encourage developing Members who are in the position to opt out can be a solution. I 
know many of you are looking at China who is one of the leading pr oducers and exporters of COVID -
19 vaccines. In spite of the great difficult situation China is in, I can assure you that China 's 
determination to make further contribution to the global pandemic response remains unchanged. 
Based on our proposed footnote an d in line with assessment of our capability, we are willing to 
address the eligibility issue in a pragmatic and constructive manner, so that an outcome that benefits 
developing Members and LDCs in genuine needs could be reached at an earliest date. We look  
forward to the same level of pragmatism and constructiveness from other major stakeholders to 
meet us halfway . Let me conclude by reiterating our firm commitment to supporting your work, and 
our strong willingness to work tirelessly with all Members to go through the dark tunnel and find the 
light before Ministers land at Geneva.  
Indonesia  
As this is the first time that I take the floor since your election, let me first congratulate you 
on taking the position as Chair of the TRIPS Council. I am fully confident that under your able 
leadership and guidance, we  will be able to further advance the various works under the TRIPS 
Council, many of which are very much of concern to developing Members and the LDCs. Allow me 
also to convey our deepest appreciation to the D irector -General,  all Members of the Quad and als o IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 55 - 
 
  the Deputy Director -General for their hard work. It is our hope that with the official circulation of 
document IP/C/W/688 , we will be able to move forward with the text -based negotiation that is long 
overdue. I am sure that with good faith and full commitment of the Members, we will be abl e to 
achieve an outcome that is acceptable to all for the MC12. Meanwhile, in terms of substance, our 
delegation is still coordinating with our capital for our official response. This is not only because the 
text was circulated only several  days ago, but b ecause our capital is still on holiday, celebrating the 
Eid al -Fitr for the entire week. Nevertheless, I would like to share some preliminary views on 
document IP/C/W/688  as follows:  
First, we welcome the additional option suggested by the Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director - General of the WTO  regarding the eligibility of Members. Our delegation believes that the 
option to voluntarily opt out of this Decision is preferred as we have a precedent for such mechanism 
in the TRIPS Agreement.  In our view, the alternative, which is to exclude certain Member or Members 
in an arbitrary manner, would be problematic and create a bad precedent for the future.  
Second, the d ecision on the TRIPS waiver should not undermine or supersede the existing 
flexibilities already available in the TRIPS Agreement, let alone create additional burdens, or TRIPS 
plus in nature. In this regard, we have difficulty to retain paragraph 3.a., although we are still 
consulting with the capital whether to delete the entire pa ragraph or suggest some textual revisions.  
Third, Indonesia would like to highlight the importance and relevance of the inclusion of  the 
therapeutics and diagnostics in the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19. As some 
parts of the world are n earing the end of the pandemic, treatments for COVID -19 are becoming 
much more important than vaccines. If nothing else, the pandemic has also taught us that issues of 
accessibility and affordability are as important, if not more so, than availability. To date, most WHO -
recommended treatments for COVID -19 are either inaccessible or unaffordable for developing 
countries and LDCs.  It is inhumane to charge hundreds or thousands of dollars for medication and 
therapy, where the estimated generic price for the sa me treatment is only USD 2, which already 
include s a 10% profit margin and around a 26.6% tax on profit.  
Last but not least, it may also be necessary for us to address not only the current pandemic, 
but also to prepare for another such eventuality in the f uture. In this regard, Indonesia is of the 
view that we do not necessarily need to incorporate this issue in the current Decision, but it could 
more appropriately address this issue in the preparedness aspect of the WTO response to the 
pandemic. This would  make our pandemic response more holistic and meaningful. Before I close, let 
me also convey Indonesia 's support on your draft report to the General Council, as it is factual and 
reflects correctly the current situation. At last, let me once again reiterat e Indonesia 's readiness to 
engage constructively with all Members and in all formats so that we can deliver a meaningful and 
credible outcome on the TRIPS Waiver at the MC12.  
Ukraine  
Ukraine would  like to welcome you on your appointment as Chair of TRIPS Council. Our 
delegation is looking forward to working with you. We would also like to express our gratitude for 
your report delivered on Tuesday on consultations held and progress achieved on the w aiver 
impasse. Ukraine supports the draft language of the TRIPS Council 's status report for adoption by 
the General Council and we have no objections on the new dates for the next regular TRIPS meeting. 
Ukraine would also like to acknowledge tireless effor ts of the WTO Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director - General of the WTO  and Ms Anabel González , Deputy Director -General  of the WTO along 
with the WTO Members on finding solutions on an intellectual property response to COVID -19. 
In light of the document circulated, we hope that achieving consensus on the most efficient 
solutions to deal with the COVID -19 pandemic would be possible for the MC12 . Our capital is carefully 
reviewing the document circulated on 3 May 2022 (document IP/C/W/688 ) and we hope to provide 
our feedback as soon as reasonably possible given the current difficult circumstances inside of the 
country as a result of Russia  Federation' s ongoing military assault on Ukraine and its people. In spite 
of these challenges, we would like to reiterate that Ukraine continues to  support achieving the 
common goal of ensuring timely, universal and affordable access and supply of vaccines and other 
needed medical goods globally to fight the COVID -19 pandemic. We also need to prepare for 
probable future health cris es. Ukraine is ready to play its part in the process to the extent possible. 
During  previous discussions within this Council, we have informed the WTO Members that Ukraine IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 56 - 
 
  has manufacturing capacities in the pharmaceutical sector, which could be used for ex panding 
COVID -19 production. We noted that promotion of voluntary licensing and the establishment of the 
collaboration agreements between developers and manufactures were the matters of great 
importance and interest for Ukraine.  
In this regard, we would li ke to inform Members that one of the Ukrainian pharmaceutical 
companies has signed an agreement to obtain a license for the development and production of a 
generic version of Pfizer 's oral anti -COVID drug. This company was also identified by the 
World  Health Organization as a company that will receive technology for the mRNA -based vaccines 
production. A lot of hard work on the side of both government and private sector was done in the 
process before the beginning of the war to achieve such results and much work remains to be done. 
Unfortunately, Russia  Federation 's unjustified and illegal aggression against Ukraine has triggered a 
variety of negative catalytic effects. For more than 70 days the war continues to cause immense 
human suffering. The Russia n Fede ration' s war, among other things, has also triggered health 
emergency. The Russian  Federation  troops target and destroy infrastructure, health facilities, 
transport, personnel, patients, supplies and warehouses. We are witnessing all plausible 
repercussions of such actions with unprecedented new challenges in access to health care and 
essential me dical goods. Supply chains are being disrupted, pharmacies are closing due to 
insufficient supplies of needed medicines and raw materials. We observe negative effects on the 
pharmaceutical market. Ukraine 's ability to export pharmaceutical products is limi ted due to 
damages of infrastructure and blockade of Ukrainian seaports by the R ussian Federation . Despite 
the devastating implications of barbaric war launched by Russia n Federation  against an independent 
country in the middle of Europe in the 21st centur y, Ukrainian pharmaceutical companies are putting 
great efforts to continue operating to meet demands of the health care system and its patients.  
On the other hand, the Ukrainian government is taking necessary steps to support 
entrepreneurs, deliver on the  needs of its people and fulfil its international obligations, including 
taken in the framework of the WTO. Given this opportunity, we would also like to inform the Council 
and the WTO Members on recent adoption of the law dated 1 April 2022 (№ 2174 -IX) th at aims to 
protect intellectual property interests of stakeholders during the martial law regime, imposed due to 
the military aggression of R ussian Federation  against Ukraine. The law entered into force on 13 April 
2022 and includes the provisions relevant  to maintaining the validity, proper use and enforcement 
of intellectual property rights during and after the state of war. Ukraine remains convinced that a 
sound regulatory environment, encouraging collaboration in the IP  sphere , sharing of know -how and 
technology, ensuring availability of raw supply are matters of extreme importance for the 
development of manufacturing processes, promotion of innovations and further recovery of our 
economy. However, for the most of today 's economic challenges, the war has  become a key threat 
and there is only one solution – Russia n Federation  needs to withdraw its troops from Ukraine 's 
territory and stop the war. In this regard, we reiterate our support and solidarity of all our partners. 
We are ready to engage further to conclude the outstanding agenda items  within this Council . 
Nigeria  
We commend the Chair, Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  and the 
Secretariat for the preparation and circulation of the outcome document from the Quad process. We 
also wish to warmly thank the Members of the Quad for their invaluable work in attempting to reach 
a consensus on the proposal for the waiver from certain prov isions of the TRIPS Agreement. We 
welcome the outcome textual document from the Quad process. It is pertinent to ensure that any 
outcome on intellectual property rights do not create barriers to the scaling -up of research, 
development, manufacturing and su pply of materials essential to combat C OVID -19, while 
preserving the intellectual property rights of Members.  
In addressing the substance of the document, we would like to highlight a few elements that 
are of critical importance which we believe should be included in the document, such as a clear 
reference to be made in ensuring that the new arrangement shall apply without prejudice to existing 
flexibilities under the TRIP S Agreement. In our view an eligible Member should have a choice on the 
flexibility th e Member may be able to avail itself. We believe this point may be inserted in the first 
paragraph. Furthermore, this brings me to the issue of listing as contained in paragraph 3 .a, it will 
prove to be an additional burden on the officers charged with thi s function to comply with because 
we may not be well equipped in terms of many developmentally related barriers, to handle such an 
intense task of listing where needed. We wish to propose that the requirement for listing be deleted 
from the paragraph 3.a o f the document.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 57 - 
 
  
 Finally  Chair , the solution to the current vaccine inequity remains the diversification and 
decentralization of manufacturing capacities through the ramping up of production of COVID -19 
vaccines and products in developing countries which w ill prove to be useful in not only current 
pandemics but also future pandemics.  
Russian Federation  
First of all, let me join others and congratulate you as Chair of the TRIPS Council. The Russian 
Federation notes with regret that for individual Members of the WTO, this Organization has become 
a political platform for imposing their political agenda.  Particularly, it seems to us inappropriate to 
politicize the issue that is a topic of today meeting. COVID -19 pandemic, unfortunately, is still active 
in many countries.  The Russian Federation believes that Members of the Council should concentrate  
their efforts on this issue and not listen to unfounded accusations targeted at Russia n Federation  
from some participants. Bearing in mind that these same Members, on their own initiative and 
without legal grounds violate the principles and rules of the W orld Trade Organization.  
The Russian Federation welcome the communication of the Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -
General of the WTO  dated 3 May 2022 and the proposal elaborated by the group of Members under 
the leadership of Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Direct or-General of the WTO  and Ms Anabel González , 
Deputy Director -General  of the WTO. We think this proposal c ould be a base for a potential consensus 
in the Council. The document contains important decisions and ideas. They will be carefully 
considered in our  capital. We expect that at the next meeting of the Council we will be able to give 
more detailed and substantive comments on the draft.  At the same time, we would like to point out 
some of its elements already now.  
Unfortunately, we have to note that the presented document does not apply to medical 
equipment, therapeutics and diagnostic tools. They are important parts of a good functioning health 
protection system s. We also want to draw attention that experience of discussions in TRIPS Council 
during past two years has shown that in time of the pandemic , TRIPS flexibilities are relevant to all 
economies because the challenges are the same. This is why TRIPS flexibilities as well as the 
compulsory licensing and the Article 31bis mechanism are available to everyone. We believe that 
the future TRIPS COVID -19 solution should follow this logic. All developing M embers and LDC s should 
be eligible and be free to decide on their own to use or not any instrument of this kind.  
Russian  Federation hope s that future negotiations will be open and transparent and is ready to 
engage constructively in it. 
14  INTELLECTUAL PROPER TY, INNOVATION, AND MICROFINANCE  
Canada  
Canada would like to thank the Secretariat for circulating the discussion paper under 
document  IP/C/W/686 , as well as Australia, Cana da, Chile, the European Union, Japan, Singapore, 
Switzerland, the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, the 
United  Kingdom, and the United  States  of America  for co -sponsoring the paper. Canada is pleased 
to take this opportunity t o present the discussion paper on the topic of "Intellectual property, 
innovation and microfinance ". Following this, we will provide a few insights based on Canada 's 
national experiences in the area of microfinance for innovation and  look forward to an exc hange of 
views from any interested WTO Member on this topic.  
In recent discussions under this agenda item , the TRIPS  Council  has explored various topics 
related to IP -backed financing for innovative firms, including for micro, small and medium -sized 
enterp rises (MSMEs). However, while conventional forms of financing through banks and venture 
capital may be more readily accessible to larger businesses, financing can nonetheless prove 
challenging for those MSMEs seeking to attract funding for innovation, such  as in respect of financial 
literacy as well as the perception of risk by lenders. Access to microfinance, such as small -scale 
loans and microcredit may, however, provide an opportunity for smaller business to fund innovation, 
such as through IP -backed fin ancing, whereby IP and related assets may be used as collateral for 
funding, in addition to social collateral in the form of pooled lending and joint liability.  
The discussion paper for this agenda item , therefore , sets out to explore whether and how IP 
ownership or innovation might promote access to microfinance, as well as whether and how access IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 58 - 
 
  to microfinance might promote innovation or otherwise support innovative or IP -based MSMEs. While 
a lack of financing can itself serve as an obstacle to innovatio n, other important questions arise as 
to whether intangible assets, such as IP, may be undervalued by creditors. For instance, challenges 
associated with the valuation and awareness of IP may serve as a limiting factor for innovative or 
IP-based MSMEs ' access to "conventional " credit. As well, given the links between innovation and 
export performance, the issues of financial inclusion for innovative and/or IP -based MSMEs also has 
implications for international trade and trade finance, highlighting the impor tance of collaboration 
between the WTO and bodies such as the International Finance Corporation, particularly regarding 
the needs of innovation and/or IP -based MSMEs.  
We therefore invite Members to share their perspectives on or experiences of financing or  
microfinance for MSMEs and would particularly like to hear from or about LDCs. For example, and 
we note here some of the issues put forward in document IP/C/W/686:  
a. What are some best practices or options in terms of IP -backed financing for MSMEs and/or 
other financing for innovative or IP -based MSMEs?  
b. Which, and how can, innovations in finance, technological or otherwise, support innovative 
or IP-based MSMEs?  
c. At what stage in an enterprise 's development does IP -backed financing become an option?  
d. What is the level of awareness of IP -backed financing among innovation and/or IP -based 
MSMEs? What are some best practices or options in enhancing this awareness?  
e. How can IP rights be divided in wa ys that allow MSMEs to maintain some direct control 
and revenue generation from their IP while also leveraging IP for capital?  
Now, in terms of Canada 's experiences in this regard, we would like to highlight a few key 
projects through which Canada has supp orted microfinance for MSMEs in developing countries and 
LDCs, including with respect to innovation. For example, together with  Développement international 
Desjardins , the microfinance arm of the Desjardins Group, a banking and financial services 
cooperati ve, Canada has long been working on projects to support microfinance networks in Mali, 
including the establishment of the Nyèsigiso  network of savings and credit unions in the country. 
From 2008 to 2013, Canada 's Microfinance Support Programme supported Ma li's national 
microfinance strategy, which aims to improve access to diversified and innovative financial services 
for a large majority of poor and low -income populations. Through this project, Canada has supported 
the improvement of the performance of mic rofinance institutions, including through the development 
of automated computer systems and legacy assessments. In addition, our Agricultural and Rural 
Financing project in Mali, under way since 2014 and implemented by Développement international 
Desjardin s and Financière agricole du Québec , aims to improve agricultural productivity in five 
regions by supporting management practices and farming methods, particularly through 
microfinance initiatives. These projects have also promoted innovations in microfina nce, including 
the digitization of credit networks. For example, innovations such as inter -institutional systems and 
the introduction of service points have enabled credit union members to access loans across the 
country.  
Canada has also supported the Inte rnational Bank of Reconstruction and Development -World 
Bank's Women Entrepreneurship and Development Program, which was operational from 2013 until 
2019, and provided access to finance and entrepreneurial training for women -led MSME owners in 
Ethiopia, inc luding with respect to technology and product development. This project has notably 
contributed to the ability of microfinance institutions to appraise clients and reduce collateral 
requirements, including new forms of collateral such as business inventory  to secure loans. The 
project also introduced innovative credit technologies to lenders, such as predictive analytics, to 
enable borrowers to seek loans without the need for high collateral requirements.  
In presenting on these projects, Canada wishes to hi ghlight the potential for both innovation 
in microfinance, by way of new technologies to reach and facilitate lending to MSMEs, as well as the 
role of microfinance in supporting innovative MSMEs develop new technologies and engage in 
innovative activities.  While conventional IP -backed financing, such as bank or venture capital loans, 
may provide a more well -known vehicle for supporting innovation, innovative microfinance and 
innovation -supported microfinance may open new channels for fostering innovative ac tivity, 
particularly for those small businesses that may not otherwise have access to credit in the IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 59 - 
 
  knowledge -based economy. Canada looks forward to further exploration on this emerging topic, 
including any insights and national experiences from other Memb ers during the present  discussion.  
United  States  of America  
Thank you to Canada for suggesting this topic and continuing the conversation we began in 
June 2021 regarding IP and finance. This is an understudied area.  As noted in the discussion paper, 
the data is sparse on the relationship between access to microfina nce or microcredit and innovation 
or the development of intellectual property assets. However, an argument can be made that 
appropriate financing can support new and existing ventures in numerous ways, including by 
providing education and resources regardi ng intellectual property protection as part of a financial 
assistance package.  
According to the U .S. Federal Reserve: microenterprise development programme s in the 
United  States  are about much more than the extension of credit, though access to credit remains a 
central concern. Many programme s take a holistic approach, offering interconnected services that 
complement lending activities and are targeted at entrepreneurs at each st age of business 
development. Services being offered include up -front business training; specialized technical 
assistance; mentoring programme s; sector -specific advice and support; networking opportunities; 
coordinated sales and marketing programme s; and th e development of formal links with banks, local 
community colleges, and other institutions (Edgcomb and Klein, 2005).  
In the United  States , microcredit has generally been defined as loans of less than USD 50,000 
to people — mostly entrepreneurs — who canno t, for various reasons, borrow from a bank.  For 
example, organizations like Grameen America state that they offer small, less formal loans at a lower 
cost. Members are supposed to be below the federal poverty line when they join and use the money 
for entre preneurial purposes.  Other micro -lending organizations describe the use of technology like 
mobile credit, savings, payment and e -wallet solutions to make banking more accessible and 
affordable.  
One advantage of microfinance appears to be its reach of under served populations, like women 
and minorities. For example, organizations such as the Accion Opportunity Fund describe serving a 
client base that is nearly 90% women, people of colour , or immigrants.  On its website, Accion offers 
information on intellectua l property protection, including seeking patent, copyright, trademark 
protection, as well as trade secret protection.  It is certainly true that limited access to credit is a 
huge barrier to growth for small businesses, especially in developing countries bu t also in developed 
countries for communities that are not well -integrated into the financial system.  However, literature 
appears to indicate that this growth is generally focused on capital accumulation, expanding 
inventories, or increasing employee numbe rs, rather than the innovation channel.  Few 
microfinance -backed businesses or individuals are at the "knowledge frontier " and likely to generate 
a patentable invention.  Instead of innovation, they are more likely to focus on adopting the 
established best practices of their industry . 
However, since many organizations offering microfinance loans target entrepreneurs and 
provide entrepreneurial training and assistance, opportunities exist for providing entrepreneurs with 
IP information, resou rces, training, or mentoring as they establish their business.  Such actions could 
include referring small and emerging businesses to resources offered by the U nited States Patent 
and Trademark Office (USPTO).  
The USPTO offers multiple programme s that help small businesses and inventors with 
acquiring intellectual property protections, which can help protect creative works or ideas.  These 
programme s, such as the Inventors Assistance Center and the Trademark Assistance Center, are 
aimed at assisting the publi c, especially small businesses and inventors, with intellectual property 
protections. The USPTO also provides information about The Patent Pro Bono Program, a nationwide 
network of independently operated regional programme s that match volunteer patent prof essionals 
with financially under -resourced inventors and small businesses for the purpose of securing patent 
protection.  Inventors and small businesses that meet certain financial thresholds and other criteria 
may be eligible for free legal assistance in p reparing and filing a patent application.  
The USPTO and the US Copyright Office also offer a wealth of online information in the forms 
of videos, written guides, and other resources that cover both basic facts and more specific issues IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 60 - 
 
  in IP protection.  The Copyright Office 's Public Information Office provides virtual and in -person 
support to creators using the registration system.  Since microcredit loans appear to be geared to 
underserved populations, education on IP that could be provided alongside the loa ns could reach 
those who may not normally be familiar with or aware of the benefits of intellectual property 
protection.  
Further, a small business that may not have a patentable invention may have an asset or idea 
that is ripe for trademark, copyright, or trade secret protection. With respect to the discussion 
question in the document concerning revenue generation from IP, opportunities exist for MSMEs to 
maintain some direct control over their IP while also leveraging it for capital, such as in the case of  
trademark and copyright licensing.  This is a larger topic which we hope to explore in future 
discussions on IP and finance.  
European Union  
The E uropean Union delegation is pleased to co -sponsor this agenda item together with the 
delegation s of Australia, Canada, Chile, the European Union, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, the 
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, the United  Kingdom , and the 
United  States  of America . We thank in particular Canada for the active role in the drafting of the 
document submitted to the TRIPS  Council . We also thank the US for their full involvement in the 
coordination of the group.  
Intellectual property rights ( IPRs) play an increasingly important role in corporate strategy 
and the intangible assets created through innovation represent a major share of the value of today 's 
businesses. The IPRs associated with intangible assets are the legal guarantee for potentia l returns 
on investment in innovation and a means to get funding.  The utilisation of IPRs to gain finance is 
considered an important aspect given that SMEs and startup s encounter difficulties in raising funds 
from bank loans due to the risks involved, whil e Venture Capitals ask for a large equity interest.  
Actually, according to the EUIPO SME scoreboard 2019, only 13% of SMEs owning IP rights 
tried to use intangible assets to obtain finance: 9% successfully and 4% unsuccessfully. Additionally, 
only 25 % of medium -sized IPR owners have professionally valued their intangible assets, and this 
drops to 20 % for small and micro -sized IPR owners.  The European Union Intellectual Property Office 
(EUIPO ), through its European Observatory on Infringements of IPRs and the European Patent Office 
have carried out four EU-wide studies on the contribution of IPRs to the EU economy. These studies 
aim to provide evidence to support policymaking and form a basis for raising awareness among 
Europe 's citizens about the value of intellectual property.  
The Study on "Financing intangibles – Is there a market failure? " (Financing intangibles - 
Publications Office of the EU (europa.eu)) found that growth companies that invest mainly in 
intangible assets have difficulties in o btaining external funding to finance their growth because they 
lack sufficient tangible collateral that is accepted by banks, leading to higher interests rates and 
hampering access to credit.  In light of these results, the EU has developed programmes in fa vour of 
the financing of the SMEs. I am going to mention only three  : COSME, Innovfin and INNOSUP -10 
including LeadershIP4SMEs.  
COSME (Competitiveness of Enterprises and Small and Medium -sized Enterprises)  
COSME, the Europe 's programme for SMEs, aims to ma ke it easier for SMEs to access finance 
in all phases of their lifecycle – including the creation, expansion, or business transfer. Thanks to 
COSME, businesses have easier access to guarantees, loans and equity capital. EU 'financial 
instruments ' are chann elled through local financial institutions in EU member States.  COSME helps 
businesses to access markets in the EU and beyond. It funds the Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) 
that helps SMEs find business and technology partners and understand EU legislation.  The "Your 
Europe Business " portal provides practical information on doing business within Europe. It also 
finances a number of IP SME Helpdesks.  The COSME Loan Guarantee Facility is managed by the 
European Investment Fund and deployed by eligible local ba nks, leasing companies and guarantee 
institutions.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 61 - 
 
  INNOVFIN  
The Innovfin guarantee refers more directly to IP rights. This guarantee scheme financed by 
Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe supports innovative SMEs. One of the eligibility criteria for such 
comp anies to obtain a preferential credit based on this guarantee scheme is the ownership of an IP 
right related to technical inventions. The aim of the loan is to enable the direct or indirect use of this 
technology right. Specifically , this eligibility crite rion refers to the beneficiary who has registered at 
least one technology right such  as patent,  utility  model,  design  right,  topography of semiconductor  
products, supplementary protection  certificate  for medicinal  products  or other products, plant 
breeder 's certificate or  software  copyright,  in the last 24 months.  
INNOSUP -10 :LEADERSHIP4SMEs  
At this stage, I would like to briefly introduce  the European Innovation Council and SMEs 
Executive Agency (EISMEA). Established on 1 April 2021, EISMEA brings together in one Agency all 
the activities of the European Innovation Council (EIC) and all programmes related to small and 
medium -sized enterprises (SMEs). The Agency has a clear focus on innovation in the single market 
and contributes to create strong syn ergies to support the recovery of the European economy.  
The Agency implements the following programmes over a period of seven years:  
COSME  
Interregional Innovation Investments  
Horizon Europe, pillar III: the European Innovation Council (EIC) and European I nnovation 
Ecosystems, including LEADERSHIP4SMEs  
Part of INNUSOP actions related to innovative SMEs under Horizon 2020, LEADERSHIP4SMEs, 
aimed at particularly focusing on IP towards deep -tech innovative SMEs and Start-ups. It was 
launched in September 2020,  for a two-years duration with the objectives of supporting SMEs and 
start-ups developing disruptive technologies, enhancing their IPR portfolio and exploiting it to 
stimulate their growth with funding. It comprises eight consortium partners, covering ten 
EU member States for the moment.  
In fact, SMEs ' reluctance to use IPRs is largely due to a lack of knowledge about IP as a whole 
and finance access but also a lack of interest on intangible in general. In parallel, there is a need to 
turn the outcomes of Europe 's excellent research into innovation and step up the EU efforts towards 
achieving breakthrough market -driven innovations that will contribute to a more competitive 
European industry.  
LEADERSHIP4SMES aims at responding to the existing financial gap existing particularly for 
deep technology compani es when dealing with their intangible assets. The action purposes are to 
encourage innovative SMEs and start-ups to better exploit and promote their innovative assets, as 
well as building a strategic vision based on their first results that should be easil y assessable by the 
funders. The various services propose complementary expertise in IP, funding and business 
development, and a leverage proven tool – the Venture Development Platform – so that IPR are 
included in a holistic business development approach.  
LEADERSHIP4SMEs has built up a 360° offer through partnership with external experts 
(consulting companies, venture capitalist s and banks, corporations, innovation intermediaries). The 
chosen methodology is to put in place an online platform in which best practices, training, business 
opportunities combined with IP assessment and integration within the business plan are proposed 
to innovative SMEs.  
Today,  the online Community encompasses 591 SMEs and Start-ups, which have access to a 
resource repository and  matchmaking tool, provide support to Individual roadmaps, action plan and 
a service guide is available, as well as an IPR -centric business growth best practices guide.  
Furthermore, public funding is sought as a reinforcement in the process, having an addi tional 
leverage effect on both technology development and validation, facilitating the collaborations , and 
increasing the valuation. LEADERSHIP4 SMES is successful to define a holistic IPR business 
development approach and also to create a community around  this matter. The beneficiaries, start-
ups and SMEs can more easily access to finance.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 62 - 
 
  
Japan  
The delegation of Japan would like to thank the delegation of Canada, 
United  States  of America , and all Members for preparing our concept paper. As stated in the concept 
paper, document IP/C/W/686 , for innovation -based businesses on the smaller end of the MSME 
spectrum, and likely for IP and /or innovation -based MSMEs in least -developed country Members  in 
particular, "conventional " financing might present challenges. As also indicated, lack of financing 
appears to be an obstacle to innovation by MSMEs. IP valuation issues might represent a cha llenge 
in innovative or IP - based MSMEs ' access to "conventional " credit. Taking this opportunity, the 
delegation of Japan would like to briefly introduce  our national experiences regarding this agenda 
item, "IP, Innovation and Microfinancing ". 
With the globalization of the world 's economy and the rapid advancement of computer 
networks, the source of corporate value, no matter how large or small, has shifted from tangible 
assets such as factories and machinery to intangible assets such as technologies, de signs, and 
brands. In order for financial institutions to understand intangible assets, especially intellectual 
property, it is essential that they be able to properly evaluate the business potential of their clients 
based on the potential of IP. If techno logies are properly evaluated and the potential of new IP leads 
to greater financing, it can lower the high bar for MSMEs in terms of raising funds needed to develop 
new products and launch new businesses.  
Against this background, the Japan Patent Office ( JPO) formed the IP finance promotion 
project, which offers support to financial institutions by helping them focus on the potential of their 
clients ' IP and enable them to provide business and management support. In this project, two kinds 
of reports are p rovided to financial institutions. "IP business valuation reports " and "IP business 
proposal reports ". The former evaluates the IP -based businesses of SMEs. The latter includes 
strategies on and solutions for management issues. Under this programme , IP exp erts are sent to 
financial institutions so that they can understand SMEs ' businesses and create growth support 
scheme within financial institution based on an IP -based perspective.  
The accelerated -examination system can lead to obtain financial support as soon as possible 
also in the context of microfinance. The JPO offers accelerated examination under certain conditions, 
and start-ups and SMEs are also eligible for this system. Furthermore, as a means to support 
start- up companies ' applications during pat ent examination, the JPO has implemented two 
programme s namely "Accelerated Examination Using Interviews for start-ups" and "Super 
Accelerated Examination ". The first programme  includes interview examinations that are conducted 
prior to the first actions o f examination results. The second programme , super accelerated 
examination, provides first actions within one month from the request in principle. These two 
programme s meet the needs of start-ups in terms of their obtaining patent rights much sooner.  
Japan  would like to continue to support the activities of financial institutions and companies 
through implementing various initiatives and programme s. The delegation of Japan also looks 
forward to sharing experiences with other Members . 
Singapore  
Singapore is pleased to be a co -sponsor of this paper and we thank Canada and the 
United  States  for leading the efforts on this paper. This paper is timely and useful in allowing 
Members including Singapore, t o share our experiences on the links between IP, innovation , and 
micro -financing.  Singapore recogniz es the need for enterprises to proactively protect, manage and 
commercialise IP to derive maximum benefits for enterprises and the economy. In 2014, the IP 
Office of Singapore (IPOS) piloted an IP Financing Scheme to allow IP -rich companies to access loan 
financing by pledging their IPs as collaterals. Under this scheme, the Singapore Government shared 
the risk of the IP loan with the participating financing institutions to encourage financial institutions 
to accept IP assets as collaterals in support of the loan.  
Through this scheme, we also learnt of four key challenges for IP -based financing:  
First, a reluctance for intangible assets and IP (IA/IP) to be accepted as collateral.  
Second, information asymmetry and the lack of a clear financial reporting framework.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 63 - 
 
  
Third, the lack of secondary markets for intangible assets and IP liquidation.  
Fourth, gaps in IP management practices.  
Singapore believes that a ccess to IP financing is a continuous process which requires MSMEs 
to innovate, be aware of the intangible assets and IP that they have, and to protect them well. In 
our view, a key challenge which we can and should overcome is the lack of IP awareness. To  this 
end, IPOS has launched programmes to help MSMEs better appreciate the value and importance of 
IP, as well as to leverage their IP for sustainable growth. For example, the IP Office of Singapore 
(IPOS) rolled out a Workforce for IP -Savvy Enterprises initiative in collaboration with the Singapore 
Business Federation to support companies in improving IP literacy and management. MSMEs are 
also eligible to sign up for IP clinics organised by IPOS to better understand how to protect their IP 
portfolio through the development of an IP strategy.  
In addition, more can also be done to address the challenges faced by MSMEs on information 
asymmetry and financial reporting. For example, measures can be put in place  to encourage 
adequate disclosure of intangible assets or IP by enterprises. In Singapore 's context, IPOS and other 
partner agencies are working on an IA/IP disclosure framework to help enterprises better disclose 
their IA/IP. Internationally, there exists  a range of IA/IP reporting methodologies promulgated by 
academics and international organizations , but no jurisdiction has developed a standardised IA/IP 
reporting framework which will help enterprises better communication the value of their IA/IP.  
To imp rove assurances over the value of IA/IP, Singapore is also developing a standardized 
set of IA/IP valuation guidelines which is interoperable globally with professional valuation 
organizations and industry partners. Development of these guidelines will be driven by an 
international IA/IP valuation panel which will comprise representatives from various national 
Valuation Professional Organisations (VPOs). Through these efforts to nurture the IP financing 
ecosystem, Singapore hopes to be able to help MSMEs to  effectively leverage their IP and to gain 
access to financing in order to support continued innovation. I look forward to hearing other Members 
sharing their efforts on how we can tackle the other challenges in IP and micro -financing.  
United  Kingdom  
The United  Kingdom  is pleased to co -sponsor this agenda item and would like to thank 
co-sponsors  and in particular to Canada for bringing forward this paper on a topic important to so 
many entrepreneurs ar ound the globe.  In particular, the UK would like to respond to the paper 's 
question asking, "What specific financing needs or considerations pertain to innovative and/or 
IP-based MSMEs? " There were 5.3 million micro -businesses (those with fewer than ten employees) 
in the UK in 2021. Micro -businesses account for 95% of all UK businesses. Even though most 
businesses in the UK employ fewer than ten people, micro -businesses account for only 21 % of 
employment and 14% of turnover.  
Bank lending is often the most viable route to finance for more established businesses. Smaller 
early-stage businesses may, however, be overlooked by investors, and IP -intensive businesses with 
substantial intangible a ssets can often find it difficult to access debt finance. The UK Intellectual 
Property Office (IPO) and British Business Bank (BBB) conducted several roundtables, the results of 
which were published in 2018. These roundtables concluded that the main obstac les to using IP as 
collateral for loans were banking regulations, legal enforceability, valuation, and liquidity. I will now 
briefly set out these four issues:  
Banking regulations  
Banks are required to hold a minimum ratio of capital in relation to the risk-weighted assets 
(loans) that they hold. This is called the capital adequacy ratio, the standards for the calculation of 
the capital adequacy ratio are based on the international rules set out in Basel III. These standards 
define the eligibility criter ia for inclusion as capital. Intangible assets are specifically excluded from 
eligibility as capital for capital adequacy. This results in IP -intensive firms finding it more challenging 
to obtain bank loans than firms with tangible assets such as buildings . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 64 - 
 
  Legal enforceability  
IP and other intangible assets are often difficult to separate from the firm that developed them. 
This might make it difficult for lenders to exercise claims on those assets or take possession of the 
IP in the event of a default. The  lender would not then be able to sell the IP to recover its losses.  
Valuation  
IP and other intangible assets may be difficult to value, particularly if they are innovative and 
therefore unique. There is no single agreed methodology for valuing IP. Without  a consensus 
approach, it is difficult to verify independently the value attributed to a piece of IP.  
Liquidity  
Transactions involving intangible assets are infrequent and not publicly recorded. The limited 
frequency of intangible asset transactions may in  part be due to a lack of mature supporting 
infrastructure such as valuers, agents and value logs.  The UK Government is working towards 
future -proofing the UK finance market so that intangible assets such as IP are considered fully as 
part of lending decis ions. Several UK actions are outlined in the response to the next question below.  
The UK would also like to respond to the question "What are some best practices or options in 
terms of IP -backed financing for MSMEs and/or otherwise for the financing innova tive or IP -based 
MSMEs? " The UK Government published its Innovation Strategy in July 2021 that included several 
key actions related to finance and a commitment to "ensure innovators can access the right private 
finance at the right stage and provide target ed public support where there are gaps in private 
markets ". 
The UK Government is committed to making private markets function as effectively as 
possible. The UK benefits from a diverse finance ecosystem for innovative start-ups, including angel 
investors, equity crowdfunding platforms, and venture capital funds. Where private capital alone is 
insufficient to enable innovative companies to start, grow and scale up the UK Government 
co-invests alongside private investors.  The British Business Bank is an impor tant delivery partner in 
UK Government efforts to make finance markets work more effectively for smaller businesses. Up 
to the end of 2020, the Bank had supported the provision of GBP 42 billion worth of finance to 
170,000 small and medium -sized businesses across the UK, excluding COVID -19 debt and equity 
finance schemes.  
The steps on the innovation finance journey typically involve progressing from the founder 's 
own resources through g rant funding, seed finance and later venture/institutional capital and 
ultimately, once a business has demonstrated it is able to generate sufficient cashflows, debt finance.  
The U nited Kingdom  has an array of public interventions which, alongside private capital markets 
are designed to enhance the funding ecosystem, UK Government has continued to strengthen its 
support offer for innovative businesses. with Innovate UK and the British Business Bank playing a 
key role. This means that the U nited Kingdom  is a good place for businesses of all sizes to access 
the funding they need for innovation.  
Chinese Taipei  
We are happy to co -sponsor the paper.  Our industrial structure is composed mainly of SMEs, 
accou nting for nearly 98% of the total number of enterprises, thus highlighting the importance of 
providing assistance to innovative R&D SMEs to obtain funds – one of our policy objectives. However, 
innovation -based MSMEs often have difficulty accessing capital  through traditional means due to the 
relatively low level of financial inclusion worldwide.  
SMEs tend to have relatively fragile financial structures due to their sizes and difficulties 
obtaining capital. In order to assist SMEs in obtaining funds, the go vernment has established the 
Small and Medium Enterprise Credit Guarantee Fund (SMEG) to provide credit guarantees for 
enterprises with potential, stable business operation, and good credit scores – resolving the 
challenges SMEs face in obtaining financing  from financial institutions such as insufficiency in 
collateral.  
In addition, for SMEs that research and develop innovative products or provide innovative 
services, we offer the Directions for SME Innovation Development Project Loan, which provides loans IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 65 - 
 
  to enterprises with innovation potential, recipients of innovation awards from either home or abroad, 
or R&D subsidy grantees, so as to encourage innovation and assist their continuous growth and 
development. This programme  offers up to TWD 100 million, and the aforementioned SMEG provides 
a minimum credit guarantee of 80% of the loan limits; as for start-ups that have been established 
for less than five years, the minimum guarantee percentage is 90%.  
The Statute for Industrial Innovation wa s amended in 2017 to introduce a legal framework for 
the valuation of intangible assets. Since 2020, SMEG has been able to provide an over 80% 
guarantee for the loan of SMEs or start-ups that meet the qualifications upon the board of experts ' 
approval.  We strive to effectively assist innovative MSMEs and start-ups in obtaining sustainable 
funding and ensure enterprises ' stable developments. In pursuit of this goal, the means , and 
measures to achieve it require our further thought and deliberation. We welcom e all Members to 
kindly share related measures and experiences regarding this topic with us.  
Australia  
Australia welcomes communication IP/C/W/686  and we are  pleased to co -sponsor.  We also 
thanks Canada and the United  States  for their work in leading the development of this paper. As an 
innovative economy with a large number of MSMEs, Australia  recogniz es the important contribution 
small businesses make to driving growth and p rosperity in the global economy.  Communication 
IP/C/W/686  notes that MSMEs tend to have large unmet financial needs, with 40 % of MSMEs in 
developing countries having unmet needs of up to USD 5.2 trillion each year  
In 2021 , we discussed communication IP/C/W/679  on IP for Investment, Financing and 
Funding, which explained that innovative businesses can find it difficult to use their IP assets to 
access funding because of issues around awareness and valuation of intangible assets .  This has 
been exacerbated by the ongoing challenges posed by the COVID -19 pandemic, which continue to 
have a significant impact on small businesses . With these challenges in mind, we should all continue 
to explore the potential for alternative financing options, including microfinance, to fill this gap and 
enable MSMEs to acces s the financing they need to develop their ideas and participate in the global 
economy.  
Document  IP/C/W/686  also highlights that while microfinance offers an alternative avenue to 
conventional financing, MSMEs still face the same – and in some cases additional – challenges in 
accessing credi t. Noting in particular that microfinance 's use of pooled lending and shared liability 
may lead borrowing groups to exclude MSMEs and, in some cases, may even lead to innovation and 
IP MSMEs to self -select out of participating in group loans.  
Australia 's Government IP agency – IP Australia – works to help MSMEs understand how they 
can use the IP system to accessing financing and to raise awareness of key considerations and 
challenges in the process . Including through an online portal which provides a single  consolidated 
location for information on products, programme s, and services available to help SMEs 
commercialise their ideas.  We look forward to further exchanges with Members , including informally,  
on how to best support innovative and IP -based micro, sm all and medium enterprises to access 
financing.  We would also be pleased to discuss IP Australia 's online portal in further detail.  
Switzerland  
Introduction  
The Swiss delegation would like to thank Canada for introducing submission IP/C/W/686  for 
the TRIPS  Council 's discussion. Switzerland is pleased to co -sponsor the agenda item, as well as the 
submission addressing the topic of microfinance as well as the access to the modalities and 
implicati ons of IP -backed financing for micro, small & medium enterprises (MSMEs). This document 
highlights the challenges especially for MSMEs regarding access to conventional financing. This in 
turn can have an impact on innovation, business growth and the econom y. The International Finance 
Corporation noted in a recent report that "access to finance is frequently identified as a critical barrier 
to growth for MSMEs ".51 These interconnections and concerns lead to the increased attention 
regarding the financing opportunities for these types of enterprises, such as microcredits or 
 
51 International Finance Corporation. (2017). MSME Finance Gap: Assessment of the Shortfalls and 
Opportunities in Financing Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises in Emerging Markets. Washington, DC.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 66 - 
 
  IP-backed financing. We welcome the chance to exchange national experiences and hear about 
different approaches in the relevant topic of access to financial resources, innovation , and IP.  
Role of Microcredits as a financing opportunity for MSMEs]  
First, let us imagine for a moment that we want to start a new business. Among other aspects, 
finances are probably one of the most important issues that we need to address. In Switzerland, 
every year thousands52 of people take the chance to start their own business. If their business 
remains small, there is a large chance that they will be part of  the 40 % of microenterprises, which 
are exclusively self -funded. Before the COVID -19 pandemic, this number was even higher, with 58 % 
of micro -enterprises relying solely on their own funds.53 
This high degree of self -funding should not detract from the fact  that there is an uncovered 
need for debt capital. In one survey, 14 % of microenterprises reported needing outside capital. 
However, many of them do not apply for a bank loan, stating that they know they cannot provide 
the required collateral, the applicat ion procedure is too complicated or that they have access to 
cheaper and easier alternatives than bank loans.54 Such alternatives might include loans from family 
members or Crowdfunding.  
In Switzerland, bank loans are the most common form of financing. Not  surprisingly, the 
amount required and the probability of obtaining the loan decrease the smaller the company.55 
Financial institutions often require collateral in order to grant loans. This reflects one of the main 
problems for the access of MSMEs in this  form of financing. In an increasingly knowledge -based 
economy, MSMEs often lack tangible assets that can be used as collateral, as their enterprise value 
consists primarily of intangible assets such as IP rights (IPRs).56  
For companies unable to provide the required collateral, microcredits might be a solution. In 
Switzerland, the term microcredit does not have a unified definition. Usually,  microcredits contain 
an amount of about  CHF 30'000 and provide support in cases where the conventional financing pa th 
does not work.57 
In Switzerland the non -profit association, "GO! Mikrokredite !" offers microloans to 
entrepreneurs with a viable business project. They support the founder mainly in the early stages 
with financial and consulting services. As it is often  the case with microcredits, the focus is on viable 
business projects. Although, GO! actively promotes innovative projects within the scope of the 
currently still tight financial possibilities. Many niche projects are based on an innovative idea and 
in this case the association even takes higher credit risks to support the further development. The 
association has a credit default rate of 3% since they started their business in 2009, whereby they 
have supported 392 projects from areas such as handicrafts, fo od, or personal services with a total 
amount of  CHF 8.9 million.58  
Crowdfunding is an alternative source of funding for start-ups that do not have access to 
traditional financing. Inventors present their projects and companies on so -called crowdfunding 
platforms, where a large number of investors can contribute to their funding. Such platforms are 
active in the Swiss market, whereb y the credit volumes can vary depending on the project. This 
financing mechanism can also help start-ups with already existing IPRs to bring their invention to 
innovation and thus achieve market entry. As with microcredits, the simple application procedure  
and the lower requirements are an advantage for small companies.59  
Another way to provide financial support for innovative projects is to raise awareness and 
opportunities for IP -based financing. This includes improving the process for measuring the valu e of 
patents, designs, trademarks, geographical indications , and copyright or emphasizing the 
 
52 BFS. (retrived from Bundesamt für Statistik , 23.02.2022).  
53 Hochschule Luzern. (2021). Studie zur Finanzierung der KMU in der Schweiz . p.25   
54 Hochschule Luzern. (2021). Studie zur Finanzierung der KMU in der Schweiz . p.35/41/42  
55 Hochschule Luzern. (2021). Studie zur Finanzierung der KMU in der Schweiz . p.39  
56 OECD. (2021). Bridging the gap in the financing of intangibles to support productivity: Background 
paper, OECD Publishing, Paris.  
57 Europlace. (2019) European Microcredit Whitepaper: Unlocking the potential of microcredit for a more 
inclusive and dynamic Europe . p.10  
58 GO! Mikrokredit! (2020).  Geschäftsbericht 2020 . 
59 Hochschule Luzern. (2020). Crowdfunding Monitor Switzerland 2021 . IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 67 - 
 
  importance of these IPRs as a signal of enterprises ' value, attractiveness and prospects for success. 
In this context, IPRs also represent a great competitive adv antage for young companies. However, 
not only the right management of the IP portfolio is important, but also the legal framework in which 
a company operates. A broader knowledge of IP -backed finance can benefit both public and private 
participants in the financing process.  
Switzerland is currently finalizing a study, under the auspices of WIPO, to explore the 
possibilities for SMEs to use IP assets to access funding, including the opportunities and challenges 
that arise from the use of IP rights in the dif ferent financing channels.  
Conclusion  
Access to capital is key for companies and their business growth, which in turn can have a 
widespread impact on the economy as a whole. The still existing challenges, especially the access 
to debt capital to implement innovative projects requires action. Thus, the increased awareness and 
use of IP as collateral or the granting of microloans, which do not rely on traditional securities, could 
help to close a gap in the provision of capital. However, more research and ana lysis on the above 
topics is needed and could be undertaken with the support of international organizations such as the 
World Trade Organization ( WTO) or World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO.  
Chile  
We would like to begin by thanking the proponents for raising the topic "Intellectual Property, 
Innovation and Microfinance " at the Council, thereby enabling us to address the challenges facing 
SMEs in accessing financing in their early stages of developme nt. It also allows us to share with 
Members a perspective of how innovation in microfinance can improve access to financing for SMEs. 
Our country has placed SMEs at the heart of its economic policy. Likewise, trade policy has been 
geared towards increasing  their participation in international trade as a way of guaranteeing that 
the benefits of trade have a positive impact on economic growth and the reduction of inequality. 
This is particularly relevant in the case of Chile since SMEs account for over half o f the jobs created 
in the country.  
The incorporation of new actors requires access to sources of financing. In this regard, creative 
industries and entrepreneurs that protect their intellectual property assets may use their intangible 
assets as a means of accessing financing. In our experience, we have found that using intellectual 
property assets as collateral is not common practice. There are significant difficulties in the valuation 
and acceptance of these assets as such by traditional banks. Nevertheles s, the intellectual property 
assets of SMEs do tend to be key factors in scaling up these projects. Moreover, there has been 
sustained growth in the fintech ecosystem since 2016, with the most recent figures available, 
prepared by Finnovista in conjunction  with the Inter-American  Development Bank and the Pacific 
Alliance, showing growth of 38% from June 2019 to December 2021. Of the 179 start-ups created 
in 2021, innovators in digital payments and remittances make up the largest segment of fintech 
companies  in Chile, followed by companies engaged in enterprise financial management. Innovations 
by national fintech companies can increase the relevance of intellectual property assets. The 
incorporation of the intellectual property rights aspect in enterprise fi nancial management therefore 
contributes to the creation of a culture that promotes the protection of these assets. Innovation in 
this area has the potential to increase the opportunities for SMEs to access credit and to open up 
other sources of financing such as crowdfunding and angel capital.  
The Chilean Economic Development Agency (CORFO), a domestic public service, has offered 
lines of financing targeted specifically at innovative SMEs as a way of contributing to the creation of 
conditions that promote the emergence of new innovative actors. There are thus special lines of 
financing such as "InnovaChile ", which is geared towards research, development and innovation 
projects; "Escala Innovación ", which is aimed at supporting the development, from a functi onal 
prototype to validation on an industrial and/or commercial scale, of new or improved technology 
based products, processes and services; "Consolida  y Expande Innovación ", which focuses on 
supporting national and international scaling up; and "Innova Al ta Tecnología ", which is geared 
towards supporting research, development and innovation projects with a high technological and 
commercial risk in scaling up to the global level. Lastly, we would like to reiterate our thanks to the 
proponents for enabling u s to hear about other Members ' experiences in this area.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 68 - 
 
  
Chad on behalf of the LDC Group  
On behalf of the LDC Group, I would like to thank Canada and all the co -sponsor s of the 
document. It is true that intellectual property law plays an important role in innovation. We know 
that, in view of competitiveness issues, especially against the current backdrop of crisis, wealth and 
job creation is, in some countries, increasin gly dependent on the ability of the business ecosystem 
to renew itself. In the case of LDCs, it is not only a question of renewal, but rather of the need to 
set up more innovative MSMEs and make them work, and of how to support MSMEs in LDCs and 
strengthen  their development capabilities, knowing that MSMEs have very limited room for 
manoeuvre in terms of price competitiveness. If we consider this matter holistically, in view of the 
financial and market power of large enterprises, the development potential o f MSMEs lies mainly in 
their capacity for innovation.  
However, in the case of LDCs, there are geniuses, young people at the cutting edge of business 
start-ups and innovation but who lack certain tools, notably in terms of meeting funding needs. In 
that re gard, I share the view expressed by a number of delegations, in particular that of the 
European Union, in relation to bank loans. You can imagine the difficulties LDCs have in obtaining 
funding. If, in developed countries, such problems exist, in LDCs the challenges are multiplied 
tenfold. There is reluctance on the part of banks; that is the reality. We need guarantees to help 
MSMEs in LDCs to obtain preferential credit. I believe that the examples cited by Canada are very 
interesting, whether microfinanci ng projects in Mali or support for women in Ethiopia.  
I think that there are elements of great interest to us and perhaps the question I would like to 
ask to the  Canadian colleague is whether there are projects that could also be extended to other 
countrie s and how relevant information can be obtained in that regard. I think that this is extremely 
important for us as an LDC. We have also seen, in the light of or as a result of the global pandemic, 
that there were stabilization mechanisms in some countries. We have seen that the European Central 
Bank supported micro and small enterprises in Europe. We have also seen national banks and States 
mobilize to help MSMEs to cope with the crisis, and some MSMEs have managed to weather the 
crisis.  
However, LDCs have n either the mechanisms nor the budget needed to help MSMEs to cope 
with this situation; some MSMEs have already been lost to the crisis. I therefore believe that we 
must continue our discussions in order to come up with new alternatives to ensure adequate 
financing to help MSMEs, in particular, and to play a real role and contribute to sustainable 
development in our countries. Business competitiveness data reveals that 95% of companies 
worldwide are MSMEs and 10% of people work in that sector.  
Paradoxically,  MSMEs generate only 30% of revenue and therefore, if the aim is for more 
robust and sustainable growth, it is imperative for MSMEs to play a key role compared to large 
enterprises. How can we help SMEs to understand how to improve their management, their 
competitiveness , and their efficiency, in accordance with the required standards? We think that we 
must consider measuring, identifying , and boosting the competitiveness of MSMEs, which represent, 
on the African continent alone, almost 90% of the economic sector in Africa and the majority of the 
informal sector. In that connection, we may also need help to be able to better organize the informal 
sector. How can we boost the competitiveness of our MSMEs and receive help with the organization 
of the informal sector?  
Despite the numerous opportunities available, MSMEs in LDCs are often faced with specific 
challenges. This underdevelopment can be partially attributed to a lack of information, suitable skills , 
and resources. Closing that gap would lead to both i ncreased productivity and significant benefits 
for the general public. This is why we think it is useful to expand the scope of private sector 
approaches, including through dialogue and exchanges between MSMEs and governments, on the 
one hand, and between MSMEs and multilateral trade institutions, on the other, as well as with all 
relevant partners. It is also important to put particular emphasis on transformation, behavioural 
changes, increased productivity , and the continued involvement of young people in  starting up and 
growing MSMEs, especially innovative ones.  
That was what I wished to say on behalf of the LDC Group in relation to these documents and 
to the comments and submissions of my colleagues. Once again, thank you to Canada, the 
United  States and  all the other co -sponsor s for this rather interesting presentation. We are IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 69 - 
 
  particularly interested in ideas involving our micro and small enterprises and the ability of our young 
people to set up innovative enterprises. There is enormous potential in LDCs  but, unfortunately, this 
potential is not being harnessed owing to financial constraints and a lack of certain competencies.  
Brazil  
We would like to thank the proponents of the discussions for reintroducing issues related to IP 
and financing, now with a focus on microfinance.  Brazil supports the continuity of the debates on 
those issues and is eager to listen to Members experiences in that regard.  The Brazilian Government 
is convinced of the imp ortance of these discussions and is working to promote a favourable  
environment for the use of IP as a collateral for credit purposes in Brazil.  At this point, we are 
investing our efforts in mapping the situation on the ground so that we can have a better  
understanding of the scenario of IP financing in Brazil and its related challenges.  To that end, we 
are cooperating with WIPO to elaborate a study on the IP financing landscape in Brazil.  We believe 
this study will give us important insights for public po licy in this realm.  We reiterate our interest in 
and support for this discussion and look forward to future debates on these issues.  
Hong Kong, China  
I would just like to thank the proponents for th e paper and for contributing to the discussion 
of the less studied issue of IP, innovation , and microfinance.  The sharing of experiences has been 
very interesting and certainly helpful as Members consider their relevant policies and initiatives 
against the  backdrop of post -pandemic recovery.  If the proponents could just share their written 
statement, that would be great.  
China  
At the outset, China would like to thank cosponsors  for their ongoing  attention attached to 
intellectual property and innovation, in particular, from the perspective of small and medium -sized 
enterprises (MSMES). We fully recognize the important role of MSMEs in economic development and 
people 's livelihood. On the other han d, we have also noticed the great challenges confronted by 
MSMEs in obtaining any form of finance due to their limitations in scale and assets. The information 
sharing on this topic among Members  will enlighten our understanding in this regard.  
As we know,  MSMEs are like the "capillaries " in economic development. They play an important 
role in stabilizing economic growth, increasing employment, and ensuring living standard. In 
particular, for those technology -oriented start-up MSMEs, despite their small sca le, they possess 
strong innovation capability and great growth potential. To better tackle the challenges posed by 
the pandemic, MSMEs are keen to receive financial support including with the help of "light assets ", 
such as patents and trademarks. China ha s carried out some positive attempts in this regard.  
First of all, regarding supporting policies, we have enhanced financial support to M SMEs. One 
of the most important ways is the IP -related financing. Since the outbreak of COVID -19 pandemic, 
Chinese Government has issued a series of policies, aiming to increase the financial and credit 
support through enhanced role of IP collateral information platform. We have launched a MSMEs 
targeted service programme  called "Service at Your Door ", which brings IP collateral related service, 
such as information enquiring, document filing, directly into industrial parks. Policies mentioned 
above share a common goal of enhancing the ability of MSMEs in obtaining financing with intangible 
asset.  
Secondly, we have optimized services for MSMEs in various ways. One of the examples is 
revision on Measures for Registration by Patent Collateral. The new version further simplifies the 
registration procedures, relaxing filing requirements and allowing more b anking institutions as pilot 
points to perform "Online Registration of IP Collaterals ", so as to promote more convenient and 
efficient registration services. Besides, competent authorities have issued guidance on developing 
special products for IP Collater al and promoting the connection between banks and MSMEs.  
Here is an example of financial service customized specifically for small and micro enterprises. 
The Bank of China has tailored a service plan for small and micro enterprises named "Loan of IP to 
Welfare". Benefiting from big data technology, with a new evaluation method called "matrix ", Bank IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 70 - 
 
  of China has offered online services on single IP pledge and combined IP+ guarantee, with a 
maximum credit of JPY 30 million and a maximum period of three  years .  
Thanks to the joint efforts of all stakeholders, the year 2021 has seen further expanded scale 
of IP collateral financing, further optimized structure and quality, and further highlighted 
inclusiveness. The total amount of national patent and trademark collateral financing registration 
has reached JPY 309.8 billion, a year -on-year increase of 42%, benefiting more than 15,000 
enterprises. It is worth noting that, among the 15,000 enterprises, MSMEs account for 71.8%.  
There are large numbers of MSMEs in Ch ina. Like other developing countries , the MSMES in 
China face similar challenges and difficulties in getting needed financing. The guiding questions 
raised in the proposal will facilitate our thinking and discussion in the future. And we are looking 
forwar d to further exchange of views and sharing of experiences by cosponsors  and other Members . 
World Intellectual Property Organization  
We have read with interest the document IP/C/W/686  on the topic of "Intellectual Property, 
Innovation and Microfinance ". As the paper highlights, access to finance is critical for the economic 
growth of MSMEs. Economies are increasingly driven and built upon intangible assets, which occupy 
a growing portion of businesses ' resources and can be leveraged for growth. Clearly, in such 
economies, it is crucial that MSMEs are able to use their IP to access finance. WIPO is elaborating a 
comprehensive programme  of activities on this issue of IP -Backed Finance, in order to facilitate the 
use of intangible assets as a source of financing. The activities will include, among others, the 
following:  
First, r eports on the country situation – these reports - already in preparation - take stock of 
different c ountries ' initiatives and approaches regarding the use of IP assets as a source of financing. 
Their goal is to collect and share knowledge and experience on prospects, challenges, actions 
pursued, best practices and future initiatives, from the perspective s of governments, financial 
institutions and other stakeholders.  
Second, f acilitation of international discussions – In order to raise the profile of the potential 
of IP-Backed financing, WIPO is planning to hold an annual High -level conversation – the first one 
in fall 2022 - that will bring together leaders in the fields of finance, business, and IP, from the 
private and public sectors.  
Third, f ocused work with businesses and lenders, about the economic value of intangible 
assets. Th rough a series of guides and related activities, we will work with both businesses and 
lenders to better equip them with skills on how to identify and convey the value of intangible assets 
and use those as instruments in the course of raising finance.  
Four, work on IP Valuation – common accepted standards for IP valuation are critical for 
widespread use of intangible assets as a source of financing. We are currently working on developing 
several initiatives in this area as well and will have more informatio n to share soon.  We are available 
to provide any additional information Members may desire.  
Canada  
Canada would like to thank the Members that have taken the floor and that have read our 
Group's paper for their interest and would like to express particular thanks to Chad as coordinator 
of the LDC Group.  
In choosing the topic of the paper and its positions during this exercise, we made considerable 
efforts to think about considerations specific to MSMEs in L DCs and have tried hard to listen, 
including today when we were involved in discussions to gather the views of LDCs and to trace or 
identify the connections between the most dynamic countries and the development of a broad range 
of innovative MSMEs in LDCs , as defined in the paper. We would therefore like to thank Chad and 
other Members once again for their interest and their views.  
We have truly aimed to address this subject and write this paper without preconceived notions 
and without really knowing what we would find; we eventually emerged from the exercise with more IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 71 - 
 
  questions than answers, as reflected to some extent in our paper. However, this is no bad thing as 
it clearly shows us some avenues that deserve or need more discussion and attention here at the 
WTO or elsewhere.  
Regarding Chad's question on the projects mentioned by Canada in our intervention, the 
details of these projects, and indeed of all Canadian development projects, are available online in a 
public database on Canada's international dev elopment projects called Project Browser. I can share 
this information with Chad, at the very least, and I could also see if it would be possible to provide 
further information and views, in addition to those available online, for those that are interested . I 
can provide Chad with information laterally, but the project database can also be found through 
search engines by looking up " banque de projets -développements Canada " in French or "Project 
Browser" in English.  
15  INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEW HERE IN THE WTO  
TRIPS Amendment  
15.1.1   Ecuador  
Thank you, Chair. As this is the first time that I have taken the floor, allow me to congratulate 
you on the excellent manner in which you have conducted this meeting. We also extend our thanks 
to our colleagues from the Secretariat for the great work that  they do.  
I would like to inform you that on 8 March, at a ceremony with Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, 
Director -General of the WTO , our Permanent Representative, H.E. Ambassador José Valencia, 
deposited, on behalf of Ecuador, the instrument of acceptance of the  Protocol Amending the 
TRIPS  Agreement . Chair, as you mentioned, this brings the number of WTO Members that have 
agreed to secure a legal pathway to make it easier for developing countries to access affordable 
medicines to 134. For Ecuador , this ratificati on is not an end in itself, rather it is one more tool for 
our efforts at the national level, and strengthens our participation in the broader global response 
with multiple stakeholders that seeks to address the public health challenges that afflict develo ping 
and least developed countries in particular, especially those which are net importers of medicines, 
challenges which at the local level impact different population groups differently.  Chair, we echo 
your words to encourage more Members to ratify this instrument which is of great importance for 
public health and trade.  
IPR-Related Issues in Trade Policy Reviews and the Director -General 's Monitoring 
Reports  
15.2.1   WTO Secretariat   
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 most recent 
Trade Policy Reviews. Since our previous  report during the TRIPS  Council  Meeting in October 2021, 
the following ten Trade Policy Reviews have taken place: Republic of Korea, China, the 
Russian  Federation , Mauritius, Oman, the Kingdom of  Bahrain, Tajikistan, Georgia, Panama, and 
Guyana. During these reviews, delegations engaged in the discussions and sought further details 
on: 
a. The domestic implementation of the TRIPS  Agreement ; 
b. Institutional arrangements for the administration and enforcement of intellectual property;  
c. Copyright and related -rights regimes;  
d. Trademark regime;  
e. Protection of geographical indications;  
f. Patent regime;  
g. Protection of new plant varieties;  
h. Enforcement, online and at the border; and  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 72 - 
 
  i. Measures taken in response to the COVID -19 pandemic.  
The Secretariat is already working on the Chapter on Intellectual Property for the upcoming 
G20 and WTO wide Director -General 's Monitoring Reports.  
On 7 March  2022, Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala, Director -General of the WTO  sent a fax inviting 
delegations to prov ide information, on all trade and trade -related measures; as well as on measures 
taken specifically in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic between mid -October 2021 to 
mid-May 2022 including any updates to and/or elimination of existing measures.  Since she  took 
office, the Director -General  of the WTO  has emphasised the importance of transparency for the WTO 
as it is fundamental to any well -functioning global governing body. Inputs by delegations are 
essential in assisting the Secretariat to prepare the Reports in the most accurate and comprehensive 
manner. The Secretariat looks forward to receiving your inputs by 25 April.  
16  OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS  
No statements were made under this agenda item.  
17  OTHER BUSINESS  
No statements were made under this agenda item.  
18  ELECT ION OF THE CHAIRPERSON  
Sierra Leone  
I just want to say a very few words on this agenda item. I would like to start by thanking you, 
HE Ambassador  Dagfinn Sørli, for so ably steering the work of this Council over the past year, during 
a very difficult period in the life of the WTO. I thank you very much for your steady leadership and 
for being so very open and transparent during this process. I would also like to thank particularly 
Members for entrusting me wi th this role. I look forward to building on the work that you have done 
and that others have done before me. I look forward to working with all parties concerned. I listened 
through most of the presentations over the past day and a half and I understand th at this is a 
particularly challenging moment, going forward to the MC12, but I hope that we will be able to make 
progress on some fronts, and we do not get bogged down to a particular issue. I thank you all and 
I thank you for entrusting me with this respo nsibility.  
Chad on behalf of the LDC Group  
Under this agenda item, on behalf of the LDC Group, I would like to thanks 
HE Ambassador  Dagfinn Sørli for his important contributions, the effectiveness of his leadership and 
the wisdom with which he has led the work of the TRIPS Council, in particular his advocacy on behalf 
of LDCs in the multilateral trading system. Under your leadership, Ambassador Sørli, we have 
obtaine d conclusive results. There are a number of noteworthy examples, but I see only one here of 
relevance to LDCs: it concerns the extension of the transition period provided for in Article 66.1 of 
the TRIPS Agreement. The transition period for LDCs will be ex tended by 13 years to 1 July 2034. 
LDCs will thereby continue to have sufficient room for manoeuvre. The transition period provided for 
in Article 66.1 of the TRIPS Agreement is an essential element of the special and differential 
treatment for LDCs. This specific feature is provided for in recognition of the particular situation of 
LDCs, especially in terms of their capacity constraints and their need to create a sound and viable 
technological base. The compromise, which was reached through the adoption by  the WTO of a 
formal decision on 29 June 2021, is the culmination of many months of intense discussions under 
the leadership of Ambassador Sørli, who went above and beyond until we were able to reach a 
consensus with our partners.  
The constructive and frui tful deliberations we have had at the TRIPS Council have enabled 
Members to better understand our challenges in terms of increasing our share of global trade. The 
LDC Group is therefore infinitely grateful to Ambassador Sørli for his considerable efforts o n behalf 
of the LDC Group, as well as for his excellent work as Chair of the TRIPS Council. We wish him every 
success in his future activities, including within the WTO, and we know we can rely on him to support 
and help us whenever we ask.  IP/C/M/104/Add.1  
 
- 73 - 
 
  
On behalf of th e LDC Group, I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate the new 
Chair. Our Group remains convinced that you will show able leadership in guiding the work of the 
TRIPS Council, especially in these extraordinary and extremely challenging time s. You can count on 
the support of the entire LDC Group in the performance of your duties.  
Bangladesh  
My delegation commends you, Chair, for your guidance and leadership at the TRIPS  Council  
particularly during this difficult time of the pandemic. As the LDC Coordinator has already pointed 
out, we are grateful for your facilitating role during the hard negotiation in 2021 for the extension 
of the TRIPS Article 66.1 transition period for the LDCs. Bangladesh hopes that you can stay with us 
with your wisdom and active spirit in the works of the TRIPS  Council . Also, t he delegation of 
Bangladesh welcomes HE Ambassador  Lansana  Gberie  as the new C hair of the TRIPS  Council . My 
delegation assures its the fullest support and wishes all the best and every success for 
Ambassador  Gberie  in the works of the TRIPS  Council and the approaching MC12 . 
Switzerland  
Let me join preceding speakers in congratulating HE Ambassador  Lansana  Gberie  to his 
election and welcome him as the new Chair of the TRIPS  Council . I would like to take this opportunity 
to also thank the outgoing Chair, HE Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli  from Norway, and expressed our 
sincere appreciation for his able guidance, his objective, member -driven and solution -oriented 
conduct of the Council 's work through 2021. In sometimes difficult waters, Ambassador  Sørli steered 
to TRIPS  Council  with a calm hand a nd mind, in a fair and impartial manner, for this we are grateful. 
We trust that you Ambassador  Gberie  will continue to guide the Council in this way. We are looking 
forward to working with you.  
European Union  
The E uropean Union would also like to echo previous speakers and thank you, 
HE Ambassador  Dagfinn  Sørli, for your relentless efforts in making the TRIPS  Council  meetings as 
fruitful and efficient as possible, this was without a doubt, a very challengi ng period, and the 
European  Union really appreciates the way in which you conducted the deliberations in this Council 
and in other smaller configurations. In our view, your leadership was truly exemplary. The 
European  Union would also like to congratulate HE Ambassador  Lansana  Gberie  and look forward to 
cooperate with him so that the TRIPS  Council  is a place where decisions are taken in the end, and 
we wish Ambassador  Gberie  best luck in his new role.  
Tanzania on behalf of t he African Group  
On behalf of the African  Group  we also would like to express our  gratitude to you the outgoing 
Chair, HE Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli  for having led the Council  well, transparently and very 
harmoniously. U nder your leadership we managed to achieve some key decisions , including the  
extension of the TRIPS waiver for the LDCs, but also the drafting of the decision on  non-violation  
and situation complaints which has be en awaiting adoption by the ministers. So we are appreciative 
for the good guidance  you have provided during  those processes of negotiations.  We wish you all 
the be st in your future endeavours. O n the same note, we want to briefly welcome our incoming 
Council Chair , HE Ambassador Lansana Gberie  of Sierra Leone . We want to ensure  him o ur 
commitment to working together with him. 
__________  