RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/M/54
24 March 2000
(00-1224)
General Council
13 March 20001
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 13 March 20001
Chairman:  Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway)
Subjects discussed: Page
1. Appointment of the Chairperson of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights and of the Ch airpersons of the subsidiary bodies of
the Council for Trade in Goods ...............................................................................................2
2. Election of a Chairman, member and alternate to the Management Board of the
WTO Pension Plan .............................................................................................................. .....2
3. Accession of Georgia......................................................................................................... ........3
(a) Extension of time-limit for acceptanc e of the Protocol of Accession ........................................3
4. Participation of acceding countries as observers in the mandated negotiations on
agriculture, on services and on other elements of the built-in agenda.................................3
Prior to the adoption of the agenda, the Chairman proposed that since consultations regarding
item 1 "Appointment of Chairperson of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights and of the Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods" had not
yet been concluded, the General Council agree to postpone consideration of this item and to adjourn
the present meeting after consideration of the other items on the agenda, in order to take up item 1
later in the week.  In addition, given that the General Council on 7-8 February 2000 had decided tolink the appointment of the Chairperson for the Council for TRIPS and the slate of names of the
Chairpersons for the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods, and given the fact that the
Council for Trade in Goods would meet only later in April, he proposed that the General Council
exceptionally agree to the Chairmanship appointments proposed in the slate of names for subsidiary
bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods at the same time that it agreed to the proposed name for the
Chairmanship of the Council for TRIPS.  In the light  of this, he proposed that the wording of item 1
be amended to read:  "Appointment of the Chairperson of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights and of Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in
Goods".
The representative of Mexico asked for clarification regarding the Chairman's reference to the
subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods.  At the informal meeting of the General Council
on 9 March 2000, Mexico had stated that one of the existing bodies mentioned in the informal list –
the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products – was
                                                     
1 This meeting was adjourned and will be reconvened to complete its consideration of items 1 and 4.
Minutes of the reconvened meeting will be carried in an Addendum to the present document.WT/GC/M/54
Page 2
of a plurilateral nature, and therefore should not be part of the General Council's decision.  He asked
whether the Chairman was referring only to subsidiary bodies on WTO multilateral agreements or
also on plurilateral agreements.
The Chairman said that he understood that the proposed slate of names concerned only bodies
dealing with multilateral agreements, and that the body Mexico had referred to had been listed only
for information purposes.
The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation wondered why this
issue had to be discussed at the present meeting.  It was clear that Members had not reached
consensus either on the appointment of the Chairperson of the Council for TRIPS or on other
appointments which might or might not be linked with it, and that they had to continue working with a
view to reaching consensus on this issue.  He wondered why Members had to pursue the course of
action proposed by the Chairman, particularly in light of the fact that the Chairman was not intending
to take over responsibility for the selection of the Chairpersons, but was leaving that responsibility to
the outgoing Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods.  He asked whether it would not be
sufficient to leave this item on the agenda until Members had reached consensus on it.
The Chairman said that this was his intentio n.  However, when the General Council reverted
to this point, it was appropriate that the agenda item reflect what Members would do at a later stage.
The purpose of his proposal was merely to amend the text of the agenda item and to leave this point
for consideration later in the week.  As he had stated earlier, there were two reasons for this proposal:first, the fact that the General Council had linked the appointment of the Chairperson of the Council
for TRIPS to the slate of names of the Chairpersons for the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade
in Goods, and second, the fact that the Council for Trade in Goods would only meet later in the month
of April.  There were no other reasons for his proposal.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed
 to the Chairman's proposal.
1. Appointment of the Chairperson of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights and of the Chai rpersons of the subsidiary bodies of the
Council for Trade in Goods
1. The Chairman proposed that the General Council agree to defer consideration of this item
until the present meeting was resumed later in the week, pending the results of consultations being
carried out by the outgoing Chairman of the C ouncil for Trade in Goods and the consensus-building
on the proposed slate of names.
2. The General Council so agreed.
2. Election of a Chairman, member and alternate to the Management Board of the WTO
Pension Plan (WT/GC/W/399)
3. The Chairman recalled that Article 4 of the Regulations of the WTO Pension Plan provided
for a Management Board comprising, inter alia , a Chairman, four members and four alternates elected
by the General Council.  At a special meeting on 26 March 1999, the General Council had elected
nine individuals to the Management Board, each for a term of office of three years (WT/L/297).  He
had been informed that Mr. Morjane (Chairman), Mr. Hill (member) and Mr. Krappie (alternate) wereno longer available to serve on the Board.  Following consultations, he had circulated a proposal
(WT/GC/W/399) to elect the following individuals to hold office during the remainder of the three-
year term:  Chairman – Mr. Jae Gil Lee (Republic of Korea), member – Mr. Roberto Carvalho
Azevedo (Brazil) and alternate – Mr. Matthew Nwagwu (Nigeria).WT/GC/M/54
Page 3
4. The representative of France, speaking also on behalf of Germany,  expressed those
delegations' surprise that, contrary to what was contained in WT/GC/W/399, not all Members had
been consulted on the proposed list of names.  This was particularly surprising given that the
Chairman had asked Members to waive the ten-da y rule regarding the convening of the present
meeting.  As a result, Members had not had time either to send the proposal to capitals or to receiveinstructions.  While France and Germany would not oppose the proposal, they asked that in future,
more complete consultations be held on such matters.  As all were aware, France and Germany had
had great difficulties in accepting the proposal that had led to the establishment of an independent
WTO Secretariat with a separate pension fund.  Therefore, they expected transparency from the WTO
regarding consultations on any measure relating to this decision, particularly as this question had a
bearing on budget and personnel issues, which were of high importance to both capitals.
5. The General Council took note of the statements and agreed
 on the election of the individuals
proposed in WT/GC/W/399 to the Management Board of the WTO Pension Plan.
3. Accession of Georgia
(a) Extension of time-limit for acceptance of the Protocol of Accession (WT/L/345,
WT/GC/W/398)
6. The Chairman drew attention to the request from the Government of Georgia in WT/L/345
for an extension of the time-limit for the acceptance of its Protocol of Accession until 15 May 2000,
and to the draft decision to this effect contained in document WT/GC/W/398, and proposed that, in
accordance with the Decision-making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement
agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), the General Council adopt the draft decision in
WT/GC/W/398.2
7. The General Council so agreed.
4. Participation of acceding countries as observers in the mandated negotiations on
agriculture, on services and on other elements of the built-in agenda
8. The Chairman recalled that a number of acceding countries had expressed interest in
participating as observers in the informal process related to the mandated negotiations on agriculture,
on services and on other elements of the built-in-agenda, as well as in negotiations in these areas.  He
also recalled that in 1999 the General Council had agreed to the participation of acceding countries in
the informal General Council preparatory process for the 1999 Ministerial Conference, and that in the
final stage of the preparatory process for Seattle there had been a general understanding that future
negotiations should be opened to acceding countries.  Therefore, he proposed that the General Council
agree that States and separate customs territories that had already informed Members, at a regular
meeting of the General Council, of their intention to  negotiate the terms of their membership, and for
whom an accession working party had been established, be invited exceptionally to attend, as
observers, the informal process related to the mandated negotiations on agriculture, on services and on
other elements of the built-in-agenda, and to participate in the negotiations in these areas.  It was
understood that decisions on the outcome of the negotiations would be taken only by WTO Members.
9. The representative of Panama asked for clarification of the Chairman's proposal, which
seemed to be suggesting that States and separate customs territories for whom accession working
parties had been established could be invited to attend the informal process related to the mandated
negotiations as observers, and could also participate in the negotiations in those areas.  He wondered
whether there was a contradiction in the Chairman's proposal.
                                                     
2 The Decision was subsequently circulated in WT/L/346.WT/GC/M/54
Page 4
10. The Chairman said that his proposal was that States and separate customs territories for whom
accession working parties had been established might attend, as observers, the informal process
related to the mandated negotiations, and could participate in the negotiations in these areas.
However, only Members could take decisions during the negotiations.
11. The representative of the United States said that her delegation could go along with the
Chairman's proposal, but wanted clarification that the Chairman's proposal was consistent with the
rules established during the Uruguay Round on the participation of acceding countries.  In the United
States' view, acceding countries could participate as observers, but could neither make proposals nor
participate in decision-making.
12. The Chairman said that he understood that the proposal was consistent with the procedure
established during the Uruguay Round.
13. The representative of Mexico said that his delegation shared the United States' concern with
regard to the Chairman's proposal.  That text referr ed to decision-making with respect to the outcome
of the negotiations.  This could be interpreted in a restrictive way as applying to the outcome of the
entire negotiating process, whereas in the procedures applied during the Uruguay Round, decision-
making had also involved what had taken place during the negotiating process.  If, in fact, there was
no difference between the Chairman's proposal and the practice established during the UruguayRound, it would be appropriate to modify the wordin g of the Chairman's proposal so as to avoid any
misinterpretation and to reassure all Members.
14. The representative of Panama said that his delegation remained unsure about the exact
meaning of the Chairman's proposal, and therefore requested that the Chairman propose an amended
text which could be considered at a resumed meeting.
15. The Chairman said that the concerns expressed by the United States, Mexico and Panama
could be easily dealt with.  He proposed that the sentence pertaining to decision-making be amended
as follows: "It is understood that decisions shall be taken only by WTO Members", and that the
reference to the outcome of the negotiations be dropped.  This would make it clear that all decisions
related to the negotiations could be taken only by WTO Members.
16. The representative of the United States reiterated that the text of the proposal had to be
consistent with the rules established during the Uruguay Round on the participation of acceding
countries as observers in the negotiations.
17. The Chairman read out the amended text as follows:  "The General Council agrees that States
and separate customs territories that have already informed Members, at a regular meeting of the
General Council, of their intention to negotiate the terms of their Membership and for whom an
accession working party has been established, be invited exceptionally to attend, as observers, theinformal process related to the mandated negotiations on agriculture, on services and on other
elements of the built-in agenda and to participate in the negotiations in these areas.  It is understood
that decisions shall be taken only by WTO Members."  He proposed that a reference to the procedure
applied during the Uruguay Round could be inserted in this text, and that the General Council take up
this item, together with item 1, at a resumed meeting of the General Council later in the week.
18. The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation had no difficulty
with the Chairman's procedural suggestion.  Howeve r, the Community wished to see the language that
would be used in relation to the Uruguay Round prec edent.  He recalled that the Community had put
forward a proposal in this area a year earlier, a nd wanted the Chairman's proposal to be consistent
with that proposal.WT/GC/M/54
Page 5
19. The Chairman said that he would ensure that the amended proposal was consistent with the
proposal by the Community and that it would be circulated to all Members.
20. The General Council took note of the statements and adjourned .
__________