. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/W/454
2 November 2001
(01-5408)
General Council
PREPARATIONS FOR THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE
Nigeria's Comments/Views on the Revised Draft Ministerial Declaration Job(01)/140/Rev.1
Communication from Nigeria
The following communication, dated 29 October 2001, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Nigeria.
_______________
1. Nigeria finds the revised text released by the Chairman of the General Council unsatisfactory
because it is one-sided. The text generally accommodates in total the interests of developed countries
while disregarding the concerns of the developing and least-developed countries. It is empty of
contents on the issues of interest to developing countries including issues of Implementation, Specialand Differential Treatment (S&D), LDC Issues, Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and TRIPS
and Public Health.
2. For instance, while not giving much in Implementation that has been on the table since the
conclusion of the Uruguay Round Agreements, it pushed vigorously the New Issues in favour of
major delegations. The Singapore Ministerial Decision is that negotiations on the New Issues will take
effect if a consensus is agreed. We have not reached a consensus on them. The Draft went further toinclude new views on TRIPS as if it is an agreed text. In the area of Industrial Tariffs Nigeria had co-
sponsored a proposal by Kenya and several other countries that a study should be initiated on the
implications of previous negotiations in the area of Industrial Tariff on the economies of developing
countries before engaging in new negotiations in this area. Here again the Draft has failed to reflect
the concerns of a large section of the membership. The text shows not much regard for our countries.We request the Chairman to indicate alternative views from the developing and least-developed
countries in order to send a balanced document to Ministers.
3. It is rather unfortunate that the Chairman has decided to adopt this non-inclusive attitude by
side-tracking the views of the developing and least-developed countries. Nigeria considers it a seriousomission that the Draft has not projected the crucial differences in our views. This portends that there
is no level playground in the WTO if one side only is heard in arguments and on issues that affect all
our countries. It will be recalled that my delegation requested the Chairman to indicate the different
views of delegations in square brackets when producing the second Draft. Apparently due to pressure
of work this has not be done (not that the Chairman is insensitive to the request or feelings of theNigerian delegation). This revised text does not clearly identify our interests, it only gave negotiating
options, and we reject those options on the New Issues, TRIPS, Trade and Environment, S&D
Treatment and the establishment of a Trade Negotiation Committee. The Chairman is therefore
invited to please reflect in his revised text the alternative views so as to give the Ministers the other
side of the story to enable them reach an informed decision.WT/GC/W/454
Page 2
4. Our request is that our proposals be reflected in the Draft Declaration alongside other
proposals. Our request is consistent and supportive of a similar request made by the Delegation of
Hong Kong, China before the Seattle Ministerial in 1999. At one of the Preparatory Special General
Council meetings held on November 23, 1999 (Reference Doc. No.WT/GC/M/51) the following was
recorded at paragraph 11:
"The representative of Hong Kong, China said that the positions of delegations which had
made proposals before 19 October and which were not reflected in the text circulated on that
date should not be prejudiced in any way by the transmission of that text to the Ministerial
Conference. Furthermore, his delegation requested that, when circulating texts to the
Ministerial Conference, the Secretariat should clearly state the source of the document,
whether it concerned one or several delegations and whether it was being issued under theChair's authority."
Time changes everything and the distance between Seattle and Doha appears long. But the
problems remain the same.
5. Our demands are very modest but we insist on them being reflected in the Ministerial
Declaration. These are that:
• All implementation issues should be addressed and resolved at Doha, in accordance
with an earlier decision of the General Council.
• On the New Issues, the study process should continue pending such a time that there
will be consensus on them as mandated by the Singapore Declaration. This will
enable delegations to better understand them and ensure that outstanding issues are
clarified. Consequently, we reject the opt in/opt out proposal in paragraph 20 and 21in whatever form it is presented.
• The Members should initiate a study of the implications of previous negotiations in
the area of industrial tariff on the economies of developing countries to guide them on
how to proceed in the future.
• In the understanding of the developing countries, nothing in the TRIPS Agreement
shall restrict Members from taking necessary action to protect public health in their
countries.
• Environmental issues do not belong in the WTO and the Organisation should not be
over-burdened with issues that rightly be long to other international Organisations.
• Special and Differential Treatment for developing and least-developed countries
should be made mandatory and binding.
• If a new round of negotiations is agreed in Doha, it should be conducted within the
existing negotiating bodies under the direct supervision of the General Council, hence
there is no need for the establishment of a Trade Negotiating Committee.
__________