 RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/M/179  
 
25 September 2019  
(19-6195) Page: 1/169 
General Council  
23-24 July 2019    
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN THE CENTRE W ILLIAM RAPPARD ON 23-24 JULY 2019  
Chairperson: H.E. Ms. Sunanta Kangvalkulkij  (Thailand ) 
The Chairman and the Director -General bade farewell to  Ambassador Juan Carlos González 
(Colombia), Ambassador Mark Vanheukelen (European Union), Ambassador Walter Werner 
(Germany), Mrs. Dalia Kadišienė (Lithuania), Ambassador Roberto Zapata (Mexico), Ambassador 
François Xavier Ngarambe (Rwanda), Dr. Cyrus Chu (Chinese Taipei)  and Ambassador Walid 
Doudech (Tunisia) , and expressed appreciation for their valuable contribution during their time as 
Permanent Representatives.  
 
Subjects discussed1:  
 
1   REPORT BY  THE CHAIRMAN OF THE  TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND 
REPORT BY THE DIRECT OR-GENERAL  ................................ ................................ .............  2 
2   IMPLEMENTATION O F THE BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRES OUTCOME S – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHA IR ................................ ................................ .............................  3 
3   AID FOR TRADE – REPORT BY THE DIRECT OR-GENERAL ON THE  GLOBAL  
REVIEW 2019  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  5 
4   WORK PROGRAMME O N SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRM AN OF 
THE DEDICATED SESSIO N OF THE COMMITTEE O N TRADE AND DEVELOPM ENT ..............  9 
5   INFORMAL PROCESS  ON MATTERS RELATED TO THE FUNCTIONING O F THE 
APPELLATE BODY  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  10 
5.1   Appellate Body Impasse – Communication from the African Group  ................................ . 10 
5.2   Report by the Facilitator  ................................ ................................ ............................  11 
6   WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE – REVIEW OF PROGRESS  .............  30 
7   PROCEDURAL GUIDE LINES FOR WTO COUNCI LS AND COMMITTEES AD DRESSING  
TRADE CONCERNS – COMMUNICATION FROM AUST RALIA; EUROPEAN UNIO N; 
HONG KONG, CHINA; RE PUBLIC OF KOREA; NEW  ZEALAND; NORWAY; PA NAMA; 
SINGAPORE; SWITZERLA ND; THE SEPARATE CUS TOMS TERRITORY OF TA IWAN, 
PENGHU, KINMEN AND M ATSU; TURKEY AND UKR AINE  ................................ ................  38 
8   STRENGTHENING TH E WTO TO PROMOTE DEV ELOPMENT AND INCLUSI VITY – 
COMMUNICATION FROM P LURINATIONAL STATE O F BOLIVIA; CUBA; ECU ADOR; 
INDIA; MALAWI; SOUTH  AFRICA; TUNISIA; UG ANDA AND ZIMBABWE  .........................  55 
9   AN INCLUSIVE APP ROACH TO TRANSPARENC Y AND NOTIFICATION 
REQUIREMENTS IN THE WTO – COMMUNI CATION FROM THE AFRI CAN GROUP; 
CUBA AND INDIA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  69 
10   PROCEDURES TO S TRENGTHEN THE NEGOTI ATING FUNCTION OF TH E WT O –
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES  ................................ ............................  81 
                                                
1 The proposed agenda was ci rculated in document WT/GC/W/779.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 2 - 
 
11   EXPORT RESTRICT IVE MEASURES BY JAPA N – STATEMENT BY THE  REPUBLIC 
OF KOREA  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  87 
12   STATEMENT BY TH E UNITED STATES ON T RANSPARENCY IN WTO D ISPUTE 
SETTLEMENT  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  91 
13   WAIVERS UNDER A RTICLE IX OF THE WTO  AGREEMENT  ................................ ........  97 
13.1   Review of Waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement  ...............................  97 
13.1.1    Least -Developed Country Members – Obligations under Article 70.8 and Article 70.9 
of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to Pharmaceutical Products, granted on 30 November 
2015 until 1 January 2033   ................................ ................................ ...............................  97 
13.1.2    Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 28 July 2015 until 31 December 2023  .....................  97 
13.1.3    United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 5 May 2015 
until 31 December 2019  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 97 
14   WTO PENSION PLA N ................................ ................................ ............................  104  
14.1   Annual Report and Finan cial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2018  ...........  104 
14.2   Report of the Independent External Auditor on the Audit of the Financial Statements of 
the World Trade Organization Pension Plan (WTOPP) for the year ended 31 December 2018  .. 104 
14.3   Election of a Member  ................................ ................................ .............................  105 
15   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 105  
15.1   G20 Osaka Summit and the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital Economy – 
Statement by Japan  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 105 
15.2   Waiver concerning the Preferential Tariff Treatment for Least Developed Countries – 
Statement by the LDC Group  ................................ ................................ ...........................  106 
15.3   US Trade Restrictive Measures on the ICT industry – Statement by China  ....................  107 
15.4   Chairmanships of the Negotiating Group on Rules and on the Committee on Trade and 
Development in Special Session – Statement by the Chair  ................................ ..................  107 
15.5   Administrative matters for MC12 – Statement by the Chair  ................................ ........  108 
15.6   Statement by the Chair in connection with Administrative Measures for Members in 
arrears  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........................  108 
ANNEX 1 – THE REPORT S BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL AND  THE CHAIRS OF THE 
NEGOTIATING GROUPS A T THE INFORMAL TNC A ND INFORMAL HODS MEE TINGS 
HELD ON 19 JULY 2019  ................................ ................................ ...............................  110 
ANNEX 2 – STATEMENTS B Y MEMBERS AT THE INF ORMAL TNC AND INFORM AL 
HODS MEETINGS HELD O N 19 JULY 2019  ................................ ................................ .... 117  
 
1  REPORT BY THE CHAIRM AN OF THE TRADE NEGO TIATIONS COMMITTEE  AND REPORT 
BY THE DIRECTOR -GENE RAL 
1.1.  The Chair recalled that the Director -General had convened Informal TNC and Informal Heads 
of Delegation meetings on 19 July where he had provided a report on his recent activities and 
consultations. Chairs of Negotiating Bodies had also provided their reports on the  negotiating work 
where updates were available, and some fifty  delegations had taken the floor.  
1.2.  As had been announced at that meeting, the Director -General's report and the reports of the 
Chairs of Negotiating Bodies would be included in the minutes of the  General Council meeting.2 
                                                
2 The Director -General's report (also circulated in JOB/TNC/ 75) and the reports of the Chairs of Negotiating 
Bodies at the 19 July Informal  TNC and Informal HODs Meetings  are incorporated in the  minutes of this meet ing 
and are  reproduced in Annex 1  of this document.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 3 - 
 
Statements delivered by delegations would also be included in the minutes unless indicated 
otherwise.3  
1.3.  The General Council took note  of the report of the Chairman of the TNC and of the Director -
General's report on 19 July and of  the statements delivered at the 19 July  Informal TNC and Informal 
HODs meetings.  
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF TH E BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRES OUTCOME S – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHA IR 
2.1.  The Chair4 said that the  item remain ed on the agenda so that the General Council c ould 
continue to follow up on the decisions adopted in Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires – and to do so in a 
horizontal and transparent manner.  
2.2.  On 17 July, in preparation for th e General Council meeting, she had  held a meeting with the 
Chairs of Regular Bodies and they had  had a useful discussion on a range of horizontal issues. Their 
reports and updates on the implementation of the Ministerial mandates were the basis of her 
statement under th e item .  
2.3.  She also point ed out that matters related to the Work Programmes on Small Economies and 
on Electronic Commerce as well as the Aid for Trade Global Review 2019 w ould be taken up 
separately in the following  agenda  items . 
2.4.  Regarding TRIPS Non -Violation and Situation Complain ts, under the Buenos Aires Ministerial 
Decision, the TRIPS Council was directed to continue its examination of scope and modalities for 
such complaints, and to make recommendations by December 2019, when the moratorium on 
bringing such complaints w ould expire. Members' discussions at the TRIPS Council meetings in 
February and June ha d shown signs of increased activity but little change in Members' principled 
positions on th e matter. The TRIPS Council Chair w ould resume focused discussions on th e issue 
after the summer break.  
2.5.  Concerning  some of the Ministerial outcomes on Agriculture, the fourth annual dedicated 
discussion pursuant to the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition had taken  place at the June 
meeting of the Committee on Agriculture. With respect to the implementation of the Decision by 
Members with scheduled export subsidies commitments, ten Members ha d their revised schedules 
certified5; three Members ha d circulated draft re vised schedules6; and three other Members7 had 
updated the Committee on the steps taken to implement the Decision.  
2.6.  Regarding the review of the Bali Decision on TRQ Administration, the General Council was 
expected to take decision on the recommendations ari sing from the Review, normally no later than 
31 December 2019 – unless Members agree d otherwise. The objective of the Review was to promote 
improvement in the utilization of TRQs and to specifically consider the issue of the future operation 
of Paragraph 4  of the Underfill Mechanism. The discussions ha d been ongoing in the Committee on 
Agriculture towards the finalization of report of the Review and draft recommendations for the 
General Council. The Review 's report could not be finali sed at the June meeting  as initially foreseen, 
and the Committee had agreed to extend the timeline to October 2019. The Chairperson w ould 
organi se additional informal meetings and consultations to enable Members to reach an agreement 
on the report of the Review by October 2019.  
                                                
3 The statements at the 19 July Informal TNC and Informal HODs Meeting s by the following delegations 
are incorporated in the minutes of this meeting and can be found in Annex 2 of thi s document:  Paraguay; 
Singapore; Chad (LDCs); Republic of Korea; Chile; Benin (African Group); Panama (Article XII Members); 
European Union; Nepal; Australia; India; Thailand (ASEAN); China; Kazakhstan; Mexico; Sri Lanka; Colombia; 
Switzerland; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Japan; New Zealand; United States; South Africa; Brazil; Jamaica; 
Canada; Uruguay; Turkey; Indonesia; Trinidad and Tobago; Egypt; Montenegro; Russian Federation; Malaysia; 
Norway; Uganda; Ecuador; Afghanistan; Hong Kong, China; Argentina; Nig eria; Chinese Taipei; Pakistan; 
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Haiti; Viet Nam; Peru (Lima Group) and Philippines.  
4 The Chair's statement was circulated in JOB/GC/21 9. 
5 Australia;  Colombia;  Iceland;  Israel;  Mexico;  Norway;  South Africa;  Switzerland;  United States and 
Uruguay.  
6 Canada;  European Union and Turkey.  
7 Brazil;  Indonesia and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 4 - 
 
2.7.  Concerning  the LDC Services Waiver, the Council for Trade in Services had continued its 
discussions on the  matter  at its meeting in June  – which had been  preceded by various rounds of 
informal consultations to discuss the organization of the dedicated sess ion to review the operation 
of the preferences notified under the Waiver.  
2.8.  During those consultations, broad convergence had been  found to organi se the dedicated 
session in two parts : a workshop and a dedicated formal meeting of the Services Council to be held 
on 29 and 30 October, respectively. The Secretariat had been  asked to prepare a draft programme 
outline for the workshop, and the Chairman had issued a note that outline d the suggested agenda 
items for the dedicated meeting and also provide d some cont ext and guidance for Members to assist 
them with their preparations. At its June meeting, the Services Council had formally agreed to the 
suggested approach, and to the draft programme for the workshop and the proposed agenda for the 
formal dedicated meeti ng. 
2.9.  With respect to Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs, in the first half of 2019, the Committee 
on Rules of Origin had furthered understanding of origin requirements applied in the context of non -
reciprocal trade preferences for LDCs. Members had taken  note of progress in the implementation 
of self -certification for registered exporters under some specific trade preferences.  Members had 
also continued to discuss rules of origin based on the tariff classification criterion  and they had 
examined preferenc e utilization rates to identify specific rules of origin or origin requirements which 
could  be operating as trade barriers in specific markets or sectors. A full report w ould be forwarded 
to the General Council at the end of 2019.  
2.10.   The situation concerning the Bali Decision on the Monitoring Mechanism as well as the Bali 
Decision on Duty -Free Quota -Free market access for LDCs ha d not changed since her previous 
report. The CTD C hair intend ed to continue reaching out informally to Members on th ose issues.  
2.11.   And lastly, a very quick update on the Trade Facilitation Agreement, where 145 Members ha d 
currently  domestically ratified the Agreement which was more than 86% of the total. Ad ditionally, 
the overall implementation rate, which was measured as the sum of implementation commitments, 
currently st ood at 62.5%.  
2.12.   The representative of Benin , on behalf of the African Group , took note of the achievements 
made by Members in implementing  the outcomes of the Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires Ministerial 
Conferences.  Several objectives and implementation measures remain ed unfulfilled from the 
perspective of developing and LDC Members  including African countries.   
2.13.   The issues concerned had been  relative to the improvement of trade rules in important areas 
such as cotton, agriculture, services, preferential rules of origin, DFQF  market access, intellectual 
property, TBT and the provision of technical assistance and the enhancement  of productive capa cities 
and of exports.  The African Group urge d Members to continue their efforts and initiatives to ensure 
the effective implementation of the adopted Decisions and their WTO commitments . 
2.14.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , reminded Members of the importance of 
the full implementation  of Ministerial Decisions taken in the past in favo ur of LDCs to help their 
economies better integrat e into the international trading system.  These decisions included DFQF 
market access for LDCs, the  Waiver concerning the Preferential Treatment to Services and Service 
Suppliers  of LDCs and the Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs.  
2.15.   Since the adoption of those decisions, t he LDC Group had put forward  several communications 
to enhance the decisions' implement ation and  operationalization through recommendation s and 
detailed explanation s of the LDCs'  needs and priorities.  
2.16.   The LDC Group  renew ed its thanks to the M embers who ha d notified their preferences granted 
to LDCs in relation to the relevant decisions. A lot however remained to be done. The LDCs therefore 
commended the dialogue at the end of the year that had  been mentioned in the Chair's report 
concerning  the operationalization of the Services Waiver.  
2.17.   Although th e regulatory implementation of decisions ta ken in favour of  the economies of LDCs 
was a good measure,  it was also equally important to ensure and support the LDCs so that they 
could fully use the preferences that were granted to them. What the LDCs looked for  was a good WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 5 - 
 
combination of those factors  to ensure greater growth and momentum for the integration of LDCs 
in world trade . 
2.18.   The General Council took note  of the Chair's statement and of the other statements.  
3  AID FOR TRADE – REPO RT BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL ON THE GLOBAL  REVIEW 2019  
3.1.  The Chair noted  that the Aid for Trade Global Review 2019 had taken place on 3 to 5 July with 
the theme "Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment for Inclusive, Sustainable 
Development through Aid for Trade".  She invited the Director -General to  provide hi s report on the 
Global Review .  
3.2.  The Director -General  noted that t he 2019 Global Review on Aid for Trade held at the beginning 
of July had been  the largest since the launch of the Initiative. It had been  more than twelve  months 
in the planning. The theme of  the biennial Review had been  "Supporting Economic Diversification 
and Empowerment".  
3.3.  There had been  a high -level attendance including H is Excellency  the Prime Minister of 
Cambodia, Her Excellency the Vice -President of The Gambia and over thirty  Ministers and Heads of 
International Organizations. In total, more than 1,500 people had taken part in the event.  
3.4.  The Global Review had also generated significant interest online. Aid for Trade posts on social 
media platforms had received over 2.5 million views. Th e "Development Hubs" sessions that had 
launched publications in the library had gathered around 1.6 million views in total.  
3.5.  Eleven  publications had been  launched or presented at the Review  which  included the flagship 
"At a Glance " publication authored joi ntly with the OECD. With over 500 pages of analytical work, 
including the country profiling of 88 Members, it provided a rich contribution to the discussions on 
diversification and empowerment.  
3.6.  He had  also launched two joint reports at the Review : one with  Philippe le Houérou, the CEO 
of the International Finance Corporation, entitled "Trade Finance and the Compliance Challenge"  and 
the other one with  Ángel Gurría , the Secretary -General of the OECD, entitled "Facilitating Trade 
through Regulatory Cooperation". All publications c ould be found on the WTO  website together with 
videos and podcasts of each session.  
3.7.  Concerning the content , the core theme of "Supporting Economic Diversification and 
Empowerment" had been  addressed quite comprehensively in the various sessions. Other topics had 
also been addressed such as LDC graduation, trade and peace, standards, sustainability, tourism, 
e-commerce and many others . Many of the sessions had taken  a regional or group perspective on 
those issues.  
3.8.  One theme that had run  through many sessions was that of women's economic empowerment. 
There had been  a clear message that trade and the Aid for Trade i nitiative ha d a role to play in 
promoting women's economic empowerment. However, more remained to  be done to dismantle 
barriers faced by women in order to facilitate their full participation in global trade.  
3.9.  The Session on Diversification and the Blue Eco nomy had also been substantive. He hoped that 
the strong messages emerging from that discussion w ould spur negotiators to redouble their efforts 
to tackle harmful fisheries subsidies. Overfishing and illegal fishing were putting many livelihoods at 
risk an d jeopardi sing the future of many coastal economies – and Members  had a mandate to 
address th at in a time bound manner.   
3.10.   Remarks at the Closing Plenary had also been positive and constructive. There had been  a lot 
of appreciation of the organization of th e Global Review and there had been constructive suggestions 
for elements of possible focus at future reviews  which included sustainability, digital connectivity 
and empowerment especially women's empowerment.  
3.11.   His evaluation of the Aid -for-Trade Work Progra mme was that the WTO was delivering a 
substantive and robust body of work. Given that Members  could always improve  in that regard,  he WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 6 - 
 
welcome d their  thoughts on th e matter . The CTD Chair  would be convening discussions on the next 
stages of th e work in the Dedicated Sessions of the CTD on Aid for Trade.  
3.12.   He looked forward to hearing Members' ideas on how they could use the unique Aid for Trade 
platform to continue to address their evolving development needs and priorities. Members  should 
be prou d of what ha d already been achieved  and he encouraged them to  plan for an even brighter 
future for their Aid for Trade work.  
3.13.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , thanked the Director -General for his report 
and the successful conclusion of th e Seventh Aid for Trade Global Review.  The LDC Group 
congratulated the Director -General and the Secretariat, in particular the Development Division, for 
the outstanding organization of th e Global Review which focused on  supporting economic 
diversification and empowerment . Essential topics had been  addressed among Members , their 
delegat es, Aid for Trade organizations, civil society, private sector and donors.  
3.14.   Trade was a key driver towards economic development and a sustainable society. The Aid for 
Trade I nitiative was therefore a cornerstone programme for the LDCs especially given that their  
participation in world trade remained  largely small. As the  major beneficiaries of Aid for Trade 
program mes, the LDCs would like to  see its benefits  manifest ed through  more economic 
empowerment and more economic diversification  to ensure that the LDCs would  become less 
dependent on Aid for Trade and that their national systems be in a position to better finance their 
own production and development projects.  
3.15.   Achieving autonomy and greater diversification of the LDCs'  production  and supply w ould 
clearly  require greater involvement o f their population in terms of business and entrepreneurship. 
In that regard , key topics had been  addressed at the Global Review such a s inclusion of women and  
youth  which had been  relevant and should  form part of the solution. Connectivity , infrastructure and 
proper management of information and technology tools and communication were also part of the 
building blocks to empower LDC  econo mies and make them more diverse .  
3.16.   Those were challenges that their societies should  meet and that necessitated  major 
investments whether in the  financial  sense  or in terms of human resources and training.  The LDC s 
therefore called upon their Aid for Trade  partners to continue their efforts to support them. That wa s 
a long -term project  and consequently, it should translate into valuable long -term benefits and 
prosperity for all.  
3.17.   The representative of China  thanked  the Secretariat for its excellent work  in preparing and 
organi zing the Seventh A id for Trade Global Review.  The dynamic initiative ha d been responsive to 
the needs of Members since its initiation at the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in 2005. At such 
a critical juncture for the multilateral trading system, th e broad participation and constructive 
debates at the Seventh  Global Review br ought strong attention to the WTO 's role of helping Members 
to address challenges  – both old and new.  
3.18.   To reinforce the coherence between aid and trade and to en sure that th e initiative remain ed 
relevant and responsive, the initiative necessitated  more active contributors and sustained attention  
– devoting to make Members'  needs heard, discussed and finally accomplished.  
3.19.   The representative of Morocco  noted  that th e African continent ha d witnessed historic and 
fundamental change with the implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area  – with the  
goal of develop ing trade among all African States. Given that Africa had just taken that major step, 
the WTO  should closely follow more of what was happening in that  continent particularly because  
the implementation of the AfCFTA  was a key step towards Africa's economic integration.  
3.20.   Such a development should  be followed up and encouraged  particularly at a time when 
multilateralism was encountering increasing difficulties in expressing itself. Although t he 
implementation process could take time, it remained important and promising nonetheless . Attention 
to the AfCFTA and Africa's regional integration in general t herefore  remained essential.  
3.21.   Morocco recalled that it  had organi zed, together with other partners  including the  
International Monetary Fund , a special event  during the Review  entitled  the "Economic Integration 
in the Maghreb: An untapped source of Aid for Trade and growth ". The event had given Members WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 7 - 
 
from the Maghreb an opportunity to analy se the backlog and  delay s they had experienced in their 
region which ha d been critical  for their economies . In that regard, Morocco  thank ed the Permanent 
Representative of Singapore who had come to the event to share the experiences of Southeast Asia 
in that area which ha d also experienced economic integration and ha d had its story of trade 
development with neighbo uring countries.  
3.22.   The representati ve of Canada  thank ed the Secretariat for delivering a successful Global 
Review  and had been  happy  to contribute to the review by organi sing sessions and actively 
participating in other events and on its margins.  
3.23.   The topic of economic diversification and e mpowerment had allowed for an in -depth discussion 
and exchanges on current trends and issues  with regard to trade and development. The joint WTO 
and OECD publication "Aid for Trade at a Glance" was useful in looking at those trends as Members  
started thinking about future Aid for Trade discussions , particular ly when looking at what were the 
top priorities  such as export diversification, trade facilitation and transport infrastructure and how 
they c ould vary depending on the region.  
3.24.   The Global R eview had also highlighted the importance of advancing gender equality and 
women's economic empowerment  – the key interest for Canada under its feminist international 
assistance policy and in the context of its free trade agreements. As Members  went through the last 
stretch of the current Aid for Trade Work Programme , Canada  stood ready to initiate discussions for 
future work.  
3.25.   The representative of the European Union  underlined the EU and its Member states' strong  
and unwavering commitment,  as the world 's largest provider of Aid for Trade  - contributing no less 
than a third of all Aid for Trade funds  - to continuing to provide Aid for Trade.  
3.26.   Based on the  EU Aid for Trade 2019 Report that had been  published on the first day of the 
review, in quantitative terms , the European Union's  contribution ha d been strengthening every year.  
But as the report also stresse d, the EU  wanted to deliver more , but also better , aid for trade. That  
was why the EU's  new Aid for Trade strategy agreed in 2017 focuse d its efforts on LDCs and 
especially on disadvantaged groups including women, young people and the extremely poor.  
3.27.   The EU's  new approach was to relate its aid ever closer to the market , to ensure that the 
considerable market access that it provide d, especially to LDCs , was leveraged by aid for trade into 
real impact. Supporting implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  was a prime example.  
3.28.   In that context , the European Union  highlight ed three points where Members  had to double 
down with aid for trade efforts . First, m aking trade inclusive mean t keeping the challenges and 
interest of the LDCs, women and youth at the forefront of Members'  efforts.  Second,  the future was 
digital . Connectivity and skills would matter more than ever and Members should  retain that high 
on the agenda. Third,  the future ha d to be greener . Climate change was a threat to humanity  – 
again it was the most vulnerable among them who suffer ed the most.  Those three pillars were 
essent ial if Members  were to achieve their 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.  
3.29.   The representative of Ecuador  commended  the Secretariat for its important contributions and 
hard work in organising the Seventh Aid for Trade Global Review . In line with what other Members 
who had supported the report had emphasised, o ne of the most important aspects taken up at the  
Global Review  was economic diversification .  
3.30.   One of the greatest problems in diversifying one's economy  was the limited industrial 
manufacturing ca pacity and access to financing for international trade. Th ose were the main 
obstacles that  hindered Members from integrating themselves into the world economy.   
3.31.   In those two cases, it was evident that Members in that situation  would need more space for 
their domestic public polic ies to enable them to overcome th ose challenges . By providing  them with 
more policy space, such Members could  have active industrial and financial polic ies for development 
to achieve diversification whic h was the objective of the current Aid -for-Trade Work Programme.  
3.32.   The representative of Cambodia  congratulate d the WTO  Secretariat  under the able leadership 
of the Director -General for the successful organization of the Seventh Aid for Trade  Global Review WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 8 - 
 
with the theme "Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment for Inclusive, Sustainable 
Development through Aid for Trade ". The Aid for Trade Initiative had  supported program mes for 
economic diversification in developing and LDC Members  and had  effectively promoted international 
trade, had created jobs and had alleviated pover ty. 
3.33.   Cambodia expressed its gratitude  to the Director -General for inviting H.E. Samdech Akka 
Moha Sena Pa dei Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia,  to give a keynote 
speech  at the opening plenary session of the Global Review held on 3 July. The high -level attendance 
had shown a good image of the WTO and the strong  commitment of its Members.   
3.34.   Cambodia commended  all stakeholders, including the EIF and the WTO Secretariat , especially  
the Development Division  and the Aid for Trade team , for their active support and cooperation to 
make the hono urable attendance of the Prime Minister of the Kingdo m of Cambodia a fruitful one.  
3.35.   Cambodia thanked  all Members for their participation in its events including the launch of  the 
Cambodia Trade Integration Strategy 2019 -2023 and the social event. The success  of such events  
would not have happened without their participation and contribu tions. 
3.36.   The representative of Benin , on behalf of the African Group , welcome d the report presented 
by the Director -General on the work of the Seventh  Aid for Trade  Global Review held on 3-5 July 
and thank ed him and  the Secret ariat for the good organization of that session.  
3.37.   The important theme of th e Seventh  Aid for Trade Global Review and the constructive 
discussions and experience sharing that had been  held had also been enriched  by the participation 
of Ministers , representat ives of international organizations  both in the  regional and sub -regional 
levels  and officials  from capitals.  
3.38.   The discussions had allowed Members  to examine various  areas  including  value chains in the 
production and export of goods and services ; questions concerning financing ; the development of 
digital skills ; the role of women and youth in e -commerce ; digital infrastructure  and connectivity  
and energy, sustainable development and the green economy , among others,  with particular 
emphasis on aspects such as  extreme poverty,  MSMEs and  standards.  
3.39.   Furthermore, stressing the importance of research in the field of international trade applied 
to production and exploitation activities of developing and  LDC Members  in particular, the African 
Group recommend ed that the WTO Chairs Programme continue d to benefit from adequate financial 
resources for their smooth conduct.  
3.40.   The African Group urge d all Members and other institutional actors to cooperate with a view 
to the smooth and consistent implementation of the recommendations arising from the ir work.  
3.41.   The representative of Côte d'Ivoire  said that the Seventh Aid for Trade Global Review had 
allowed Members  to appreciate the importance of Aid for Trade for inclusion and emp owerment in 
both a specific and a general way.  
3.42.   Aid for Trade was more oriented and adapted to current commercial realities  such as  the 
digital divide.  The digital economy including  electronic commerce was permeating and transforming 
all sectors of the economy and commercial transactions more and more by further structuring global 
value chains. Such evolution had resulted in  various opportunities but also major challenges  
including the  digital divide characteri sed by  the inadequacy of the ICT infrastructure and 
connectivity, among others . 
3.43.   In th at regard, Côte d'Ivoire suggested that a special fund be set up to facilitate the 
participation of developing and LDC Members  in the rel evant  WTO work and to contribute to the 
reduction of the digital divide through the strengthening of digital infrastructure, internet 
connectivity and access to information technology.  
3.44.   The representative of Nigeria  thank ed the Director -General for his report on the Seventh A id 
for Trade Global Review and congratulate d the WTO for the success recorded in organi zing it. Nigeria  
express ed its  appreciation for the opportunity given to it to  host a side event at the margin s of the 
Global R eview on women emp owerment. The side event had recorded a positive development . Many WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 9 - 
 
women from Nigeria had participated  and had acknowledged that their participation had enhanced 
their understanding on the process by exchanging views and experiences and had expressed more 
interest for future opportunities to participate in more  events in that area.  
3.45.   The General Council took note  of the report by the Director -General and of the statements.  
4  WORK PROGRAMME ON SM ALL ECONOMIES – REPO RT BY THE CHAIRMAN O F THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF  THE COMMITTEE ON TRA DE AND DEVELOPMENT  
4.1.  The Chair recalled that in line with the agreement in the General Council in 2002, the Work 
Programme on Small Economies was a standing item on the agenda and the Committee on Trade 
and Development reported regularly to the Council on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions. 
In Buenos Aires, Ministers had adopted a Decision reaffirming their commitment to the Work 
Programme and instructing the CTD to continue its work in Dedicated Sessions under the overall 
responsibility of the General Council.  
4.2.  Ambassador Chad Blackman (Barbados) , Chair of the Dedicated Session of the CTD , recalled 
that, in his last report to the General Council , he had  presented a detailed account of the 
38th Dedicated Session on Small Economies. In th at session, the SVE Group had presented an 
outcome document of the work undertaken since 2017 in the Dedicated Session on the challenges 
and opportunities experienced by small economies in their efforts to reduce trade costs particularly 
in the area of trade facilitation.  
4.3.  Presentations had also been made at the April meeting on trade and natural disasters and on 
commodities trade. Although the Dedicated Session ha d not met since April, he underst ood that the 
SVE Group was working on possible  topics for future debate. Th ose would be proposed in a meeting 
of the Dedicated Session after the summer break with a view to presenting them for consideration 
by Ministers at MC12.  
4.4.  The representative of Guatemala , on behalf of the SVEs , noted that the SV Es Group had 
produced an outcome document that had been presented and discussed in the CTD Dedicated 
Session for Small Economies a fter successful substantive meetings on challenges and opportunities 
experienced by small economies in their efforts to reduce  trade costs particularly in the area of trade 
facilitation.   
4.5.  The SVEs Group was currently  reflecting on the new issues and priorities that they would like 
to place on the agenda for the future work of the Work Programme on Small Economies with the 
view t o hav ing a Ministerial Decision for the next Ministerial Conference.  Once the SVEs had decided 
on the topics, they would  share and discuss  them with the Membership to obtain support for the 
next Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Small Economies .  
4.6.  The representative of Trinidad and Tobago , on behalf of CARICOM , recalled the statement at 
the May  General Council meeting  where it had s aid that it had a ttached great importance to the 
continuation of work to address the challenges faced by small economies such as those of the 
CARICOM States .  
4.7.  Given CARICOM's  unique circumstances and vulnerabilities, the advancement of the Work 
Programme on Small Economies remain ed instrumental towards ensuring the realization of solutions 
which len t themselves to CARICOM's  meaningful participation in global trade and by extension, the 
achievement of sustainable growth and development.  
4.8.  CARICOM was  pleased to have had the spotlight placed on the Caribbean through the case 
studies focusing on Dominica and Saint Lucia during t he Third Symposium on Natural Disasters and 
Trade held on 10 May, wherein the nexus between trade and disaster resilience and the impact on 
development had been  highlighted. CARICOM  took note of th e outcome  of the symposium  and w ould 
continue to reflect on  the policy options and solutions arising from all the deliberations carried out 
in 2019  with a view to determining how best they dovetail ed with its member s' needs and priorities.   
4.9.  CARICOM would  remain engaged in discussions seeking to identify areas for  future work under 
the Work Programme for consideration at the upcoming Ministerial Conference.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 10 - 
 
4.10.   The General Council took note  of the report of the CTD Chair and of the statements.  
5  INFORMAL PROCESS ON MATTERS RELATED TO T HE FUNCTIONING OF TH E APPELLATE 
BODY  
5.1  Appellate Body Impasse – Communication from the African Group (WT/GC/W/776)  
5.1.  The Chair referred to the communication circulated by the African Group in WT/GC/W/776 and 
invited the proponents to introduce it.  
5.2.  The representative of Benin , on behalf of the Af rican Group , said that the Group was concerned 
about the deadlock facing the Appellate Body and stressed the urgent and pressing need to relaunch 
the process for selecting Appellate Body members to avoid total blockage in the operations of that 
central pil lar of the multilateral  trading system.  
5.3.  Taking stock of the gravity of the situation, the African Group had formulated the proposals 
contained in its communication in WT/GC/W/776.  In Paragraph 1.5 of the communication, the Group 
recalled that the African U nion Ministers of Trade had urged that "priority attention is given to 
resolving the impasse and undertook to work with all WTO Members to find mutually acceptable 
solutions, while preserving the essential features and integrity of the system".  
5.4.  In terms of  transitional rules for outgoing Appellate Body members, the Group proposed that 
the Appellate Body selection process should be launched automatically no later than three months 
before expiry of the term of office.  
5.5.  Rule 15 should moreover be maintained , to allow outgoing Appellate Body members to finish 
a case already in process until the vacant position was filled, but at the latest two years after the 
expiry of their terms. That was how the provision currently read in the Dispute Settlement 
Understanding . 
5.6.  With respect to composition, the number of Appellate Body members should be increased from 
seven to nine to facilitate settlement of the numerous disputes brought over time. Factors such as 
regional balance, gender representativity and multilingualism co uld be considered. The provision 
would amend Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the DSU. The maximum term of an Appellate Body member 
should be seven years without possibility of renewal.  
5.7.  Compliance with the 90 -day time limit under the DSU for distribution of th e Appellate Body's 
reports was the ideal. In exceptional circumstances, the Appellate Body should , however , be allowed 
to take longer than 90 days , but not more than 120 days, for the examination of cases referred to 
it and the submission of its reports. D ays not worked – weekends and public holidays  – should not 
be counted. The provision would amend Paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the DSU.  
5.8.  While the WTO was an organization directed by its Members, the independence of the Appellate 
Body should be maintained to  preserve a certain degree of predictability in the dispute settlement 
system.  
5.9.  The Appellate Body should confine its consideration to questions raised by parties to a dispute 
making observations only as necessary to resolve the dispute as submitted.  
5.10.   The representative of Nigeria  supported the  statement made by the African Group. Nigeria 
underscore d the importance of ensuring the effective functioning of the Appellate Body to uphold 
the integrity of the rule s-based multilateral  trading  system.  
5.11.   The WTO  dispute settlement system remain ed a core  pillar of the multilateral trading system. 
A unique feature of the WTO was its ability to enforce its own rule s thereby ensuring stability and 
predictability of the international trading system. Th at unique featur e risk ed being eroded if the 
dispute settlement system collapse d.  
5.12.   The clock was ticking . Members  could  stand the risk of facing an Appellate Body that fail ed to 
fulfil the prescribed quorum by the end of th e year. Their priority should  therefore  be to res olve th e WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 11 - 
 
impasse. Nigeria consequently urged all Members to continue to work constructively towards finding 
harmonious solutions in order to urgently fill the Appellate Body member vacancies.  
5.13.   The representative of South Africa  associated with the statement  made by the Africa n Group  
which  aimed to provide constructive solutions to the issues raised. The African Group's paper  brought  
the number of proposals put on the table to twelve , which  provide d a reasonable basis for a solution.  
5.14.   The dispute settlement system was one of the core pillars of the multilateral trading system . 
It was a key element in providing security and predictability in trade  – proving to be more effective 
and reliable as compare d to its GATT predecessor.  
5.15.   South Africa  noted that Members ha d failed to arrive at a consensus in the selection process 
to fill vacancies in the Appellate Body. Th e ongoing impasse was threatening to considerably weaken 
the dispute settlement system and t o completely paraly se it soon. Such paralysis  would  undermine 
the balance of rights and obligations of the  Members and render the rules -based multilateral trading 
system ineffective and the development of new rules futile.  
5.16.   South Africa  therefore urge d all Members to engage constructively to address the impasse 
without further delay in filling the vacancies in the Appellate Body. Such discussions should be 
balanced, address the issues of concern of developing Members  such as accessibility , ensure the 
indepe ndence and impartiality of the Appellate Body  and maintain a two -tier dispute settlement 
mechanism  and a multilateral mechanism of resolving disputes which were critical in addressing the 
power dynamics between Members.  
5.2  Report by the Facilitator  
5.17.   The Chair  recalled that at the meeting in May, Members had  had a second stock -taking of the 
work carried out in the Informal Process on matters related to the functioning of the Appellate Body, 
and had heard the report by Ambassador David Walker of New Zealand  who was leading th e process 
as Facilitator.  
5.18.   Since then, the Facilitator ha d continued his process of consultations and discussions in 
different configurations in the solution -oriented spirit that ha d guided th e process since the start. 
She had  convened an additional Informal Open -ended Meeting on th e matter on 18 July where 
Ambas sador Walker had provided a report of the work in the informal process since the start of th e 
year and where delegations had had an opportunity to intervene, make comments or ask questions. 
She then invite d Ambassador Walker to provide the General Council with his report.  
5.19.   Ambassador David Walker, Facilitator of the Informal Process on matters  related to the 
Functioning of the Appellate Body , said8 that he was  pleased to have th e opportunity to report t o 
Members  for the third time and in so doing take stock of where they stood in th e informal process 
at that point in time.  Members  were then six months into th e process. His report therefore provide d: 
(i) updates on recent developments in th e process since they had last met; and (ii) an overview of 
the work und ertaken in th e informal process since the beginning of the year as  had been  requested 
by Members and the Chair at the meeting of the General Council in May.  It should be read in 
conjunction with his reports to the 28 February and 7 May meetings of the General Council which 
had been  issued as JOB/GC/215 and JOB/GC/217 , respectively.  
5.20.   The objective of the informal process ha d been to address concerns raised by delegations with 
regard to the functioning of the Appellate Body and adherence with DSU provisions.  For th at purpose, 
and as had been mentioned by the Chair, meetings ha d been: (i) convened in a range of formats, 
keeping in mind the solution -oriented spirit of the exercise; and (ii) designed to ena ble an informal, 
active and constructive exchange among delegations.  
5.21.   To th at end, they had held: two formal stock -taking sessions, in February and May 
respectively, at which he had  delivered progress reports to the General Council. As  had been  noted 
above,  those ha d been issued respectively in JOB/GC/215 and JOB/GC/217;  four open -ended 
informal meetings to ensure transparency and inclusiveness – on 17 January, 18 February, 9 April 
                                                
8 The Facilitator's report was circulated in JOB/GC/220 . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 12 - 
 
and 18 July; and  nine informal small group meetings – on 6 and 14 February; 2 1 and 28 March; 16 
and 23 April; 1 May; and 1 and 15 July.  
5.22.   The informal small group meetings had comprised delegations and coordinators that had: 
(i) tabled written proposals; (ii) raised concerns about the functioning of, and the adherence to WTO 
rules b y, the Appellate Body; and (iii) made alternative proposals and/or raised follow -up questions 
or concerns on the proposals or issues.  
5.23.   In total, twelve proposals ha d been submitted, reviewed and discussed in th e informal 
process. As had been mentioned by B enin, the most recent proposal was contained in WT/GC/W/776 
by the African Group. Th e proposal had first been presented at the eighth small group meeting on 
1 July, during which delegations  had posed a number of initial questions and had commented 
positive ly on various elements of the proposal including its emphasis on ensuring diversity in the 
selection process of new Appellate Body members.  
5.24.   All in all, and as had been requested by the General Council Chair, they had  conducted – in 
the first half of the year – an issue -by-issue review of all the concerns raised and had discussed a 
range of potential solutions that ha d been put forward in the proposals or orally at the meetings.  
From their deliberations, it ha d become clear that, althoug h some concerns raised were shared by 
Members, there were also differences of view on the specifics of how to address those concerns.  
5.25.   Acknowledging th ose differences of view, and as  had been  tasked by the General Council 
Chair and Members, he had identifie d, on his own responsibility, the following areas or issues where 
he detect ed a certain degree of convergence during the discussion to date. He wou ld be going 
through th ose issues per force one -by-one, but the convergence he detect ed was across all th ose 
issues in  a holistic sense.  
5.26.   With regard to c onvergence elements , concerning the t ransitional rules for outgoing Appellate 
Body members , the DSB ha d the explicit authority and responsibility to determine membership of 
the Appellate Body.  To assist Members i n discharging th at responsibility, the selection process to 
replace outgoing Appellate Body members sh ould be automatically launched 180 days before the 
expiry of their term in office. Such selection process sh ould follow past practice.  If a vacancy ar ose 
before the regular expiry of an Appellate Body member's mandate, or as a result of any other 
situation, the Chair of the DSB sh ould immediately launch the selection process with a view to filling 
that vacancy as soon as possible.  Appellate Body members nearing the end of their terms could  be 
assigned to a new division up until 60 days before the expiry of their term.  An Appellate Body 
member so assigned could complete an appeal process in which the oral hearing ha d been held prior 
to the normal expiry of their term.  
5.27.   Concerning 90 Days , consistent with Article 17.5 of the DSU, an Appellate Body report need ed 
to be issued no later than 90 days from the date a party to the dispute notifie d its intention to 
appeal.  In cases of unusual c omplexity or periods of numerous appeals, the parties could  agree with 
the Appellate Body to extend the timeframe for issuance of the Appellate Body report beyond 
90 days. Any such agreement w ould be notified to the DSB by the parties and the Chair of the 
Appellate Body.  
5.28.   Concerning Municipal Law , the 'meaning of municipal law' was to be treated as a matter of 
fact and therefore was not subject to appeal.  The DSU d id not permit the Appellate Body to engage 
in a 'de novo' review or to 'complete the analysis' of the facts of a dispute.  Consistent with 
Article  17.6 of the DSU, it was incumbent upon Members engaged in appellate proceedings to refrain 
from advancing extensive and unnecessary arguments in an attempt to have factual findings 
overturned on appeal, un der DSU Article 11, in a de facto 'de novo review'.  
5.29.   Concerning Advisory Opinions , issues that ha d not been raised by either party should not be 
ruled or decided upon by the Appellate Body.  Consistent with Article 3.4 of the DSU, the Appellate 
Body sh ould address issues raised by parties in accordance with DSU Article 17.6 only to the extent 
necessary to resolve the dispute.  
5.30.   Concerning Precedent , precedent was not created through WTO dispute settlement 
proceedings . Consistency and predictability in the inter pretation of rights and obligations under the 
covered agreements was of significant value to Members.  Panels and the Appellate Body should take WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 13 - 
 
previous panel or Appellate Body reports into account to the extent they f ound them relevant in the 
dispute they  had before them.  
5.31.   Concerning 'Overreach' , as provided in Articles 3.2 and 19.2 of the DSU, findings and 
recommendations of panels and the Appellate Body and recommendations and rulings of the DSB 
could not add to or diminish the rights and obligations provided in the covered agreements.  Panels 
and the Appellate Body sh ould interpret provisions of the Agreement on Implementation of Article  VI 
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 in accordance with Article 17.6(ii) of that 
Agreem ent. 
5.32.   Concerning the r egular dialogue between the DSB and the Appellate Body , the DSB, in 
consultation with the Appellate Body, w ould establish a mechanism for regular dialogue between  
Members and the Appellate Body where Members c ould express their views o n issues in a manner 
unrelated to the adoption of particular reports.  Such mechanism w ould be in the form of an informal 
meeting, at least once a year, hosted by the Chair of the DSB.  To safeguard the independence and 
impartiality of the Appellate Bo dy, clear ground rules w ould be provided to ensure that at no point 
should there be any discussion of ongoing disputes or any member of the Appellate Body.  
5.33.   He reiterate d that although the discussion had covered a broad spectrum of areas and issues, 
the report, u nder his own responsibility, focuse d exclusively on the areas or issues where a degree 
of convergence c ould be detected – at that point.   
5.34.   Going forward, if there were other potential points of convergence that he could  have missed, 
he was happy to receive  them from delegations.  Finding common ground vis-à-vis the Appellate 
Body's effective functioning remain ed their shared responsibility and, as they had already heard th at 
morning, one which was of increasing urgency.  
5.35.   He thank ed once again all proponents and delegations that ha d intervened and had provided 
comments, for their continued efforts and inputs into th e informal process since the start of the year.  
He also thank ed the Chair of the General Council and all delegations for  placing trust in him as 
Facilitator.  
5.36.   Looking ahead, he would  rely on the feedback from the General Council Chair and Members 
to see how th at work c ould be best carried forward to the next phase in the second half of the year.  
5.37.   In that context, as he had mentioned before, Members ha d suggested different vehicles for 
delivering the different approaches that ha d been discussed, for example through a Decision of the 
General Council. Any such vehicle would obviously need to be developed with delegations before i t 
could be considered for action by the Body concerned.  
5.38.   He continue d to stand ready to assist the Chair of the General Council and Members in any 
way necessary. As always, his door remain ed open.  
5.39.   The Chair thank ed Ambassador Walker on behalf of all Member s for his report and for his 
efforts and dedication in th e informal process. She also thank ed all delegations that ha d put forward 
concrete proposals, suggestions and ideas to advance th e discussion during the course of th ose 
months – and including at the recent Informal Meeting on 18 July which had been particularly  
constructive.  
5.40.   In the first phase of the Informal Process, Members had  discussed possible solutions with 
regard to the concerns raised, and Ambassador Walker's report highlight ed some areas of 
convergence that c ould be detected as a result of th e work. She believe d that th at was a positive 
and encouraging sign.  
5.41.   In moving to the next phase in th e informal process, it was up to the Members to indicate 
how best to carry th at work forward after the summer break. As had been mentioned by Ambassador 
Walker, Members would need to  decide on the adequate vehicle(s) to deliver on the different 
approaches. They would therefore need to decide on the mode and format for their work in t he 
second half of the year and she invite d all Members to reflect on th at aspect as they took a break 
during  the summer recess.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 14 - 
 
5.42.   The representative of Chile welcomed the proposal from the African Group on reforming the 
DSB which look ed at the interests and the African Group's commitment in the  reform process of the 
organization . Chile similarly value d the importance of the DSB proposal which call ed for the prompt 
appointment of new members to the Appellate Body. That proposal was currently supported by 114 
Members.  
5.43.   The representative of Pakistan  welcomed the  various proposals on the resolution of the 
Appellate Body impasse including the latest submission by the African Group in document 
WT/GC/W/776  and Benin's presentation of the proposal on the Group's behalf.  
5.44.   Pakistan ha d consistently called for an urgent resolution to the deadlock over the appointment 
of Appellate Body members  and appreciate d the efforts of Ambassador Walker and of the M embers 
that were striving for the same. Whil e urging  for the Walker Process to remain open and transparent,  
Pakistan called on Members to maintain the independence, integrity and impartiality of the Appellate 
Body in trying to make it functional again. Pakistan ha d always maintained that the resolution of the 
deadlock was an independent and  urgent issue which should  not be linked to any other reform 
processes and negotiations. The proposal of the African Group ma de the same point and Pakistan 
support ed it.  
5.45.   The submission of the African Group also ma de proposals on the duration of the examination 
of cases, length of reports, Rule 15, composition of the A ppellate Body and its term of office and 
obiter dicta . Pakistan  consider ed all of those suggestions to be const ructive and in line with similar 
proposals presented before on th ose issues. Considered in earnest, th ose proposals contribute d 
positively in the search for a resolution to the Appellate Body impasse . 
5.46.   The representative of Norway  said that  to safeguard the  fundamental elements of the dispute 
settlement system was of crucial importance to Norway.  Norway  therefore appreciate d the 
constructive and solution -oriented engagement by many Members, including the recent contribution 
from the African Group. It was time for the Member with particular concerns to engage actively in 
the discussions.  
5.47.   Norway  was looking forward to engage in the next phase of th e process, focusing on vehicles 
for the identified points of convergence  and called on the Member concerned to agree to initiate the 
appointment process to fill vacancies on the Appellate Body without further delay.  
5.48.   The representative of Turkey  noted that t he process ha d revealed  that there was room for  
improvement of the system in certain areas and Members  could bring more clarity on their 
understanding of the DSU. The  current  proposals had so  far put forward various reform elements  
and had  generated ideas for a set of explicit guidelines to navigate through the undefined or "not-
so-clear" areas.    
5.49.   Ambassador Walker 's summary ha d pointed to the main areas of convergence and ha d 
brought together main ingredients for potential solutions to the current stalema te. His report  clearly 
reflected their  discussions and provided a good path to follow.  
5.50.   Turkey was ready to move forward. In doing so, Turkey suggested that Members could  act 
on the issues where there was most convergence  and leave more difficult elements t o further  
negotiations. To that end, Turkey  was open to any solution either to amend certain provisions of the 
DSU or endorse guideline s through a decision of the General Council.  
5.51.   Responsibility rest ed with all Members. For securing a solution, all Members, without 
exception, were required to demonstrate  a strong sign of commitment to safeguard the two-tier 
dispute settlement system.  
5.52.   The representative of South Africa  said that, as had been  indicated in the previ ous 
intervention, many of the concerns that ha d been raised by one Member ha d been addressed in 
those proposals and c ould provide a reasonable basis for a solution.  
5.53.   Convergence seem ed to be emerging on seminal issues such as Rule 15 where expectations 
were that selection processes for outgoing A ppellate Body  members should be launched 
automatically six months before the expiry of their term in office. On the "90-day rule " there also WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 15 - 
 
seem ed to be a clear understanding of what it mean t while many proposals m ade suggestions as to 
how the A ppellate Body  could be helped to meet that deadline. Whether the period could be extended 
beyond the 90 -day deadline was also still under discussion where parties to a dispute could agree 
to such an extension.  
5.54.   Proposals also  recogni zed that the meaning of municipal law should be treated as a matter of 
fact and therefore not be subject to appeal. Advisory opinions in respect of matters not raised by 
any party to a case should not be ruled or decided by the A ppellate Body  as ma ny Members ha d 
reiterated. In addition, there seem ed to be no disagreement that binding precedent was not created 
through WTO dispute settlement proceedings. Th ose areas constitute d a landing zone for a G eneral 
Council  resolution to address issues that ha d been raised.  
5.55.   In view of the limited time remaining, the only way forward would be for the Member that 
had raised concerns to either respond in a concrete manner to the proposals or table a proposal that 
would unlock the impasse for discussion by Members after the summer break. It was important to 
emphasise that the proposals ha d been put forward as a basis to unlock the impasse. South Africa  
therefore urge d the concerned Member to approach the proposals with a sense o f urgency as they 
had been put forward by the proponents in good faith with a view to find ing a solution.  
5.56.   The representative of Thailand  noted that t he Facilitator and numerous Members ha d made 
utmost efforts in trying to bring about mutually agreeable sol utions by submitting  proposal s and 
providing  suggestions  – bringing the total number of  submissions during the process  to twelve which 
included the latest proposal by the African Group.  
5.57.   The convergent elements indicated by Ambassador Walker show ed that so me progress ha d 
been made. The process was however  not yet complete and further steps could be taken to attain 
the goal of finding an agreed outcome.  
5.58.   Thailand remain ed committed to enhancing the dispute settlement system and, more 
importantly, unblocking t he Appellate Body  selection process . Thailand  therefore urge d all Members 
to fully engage and give positive consideration to th at critical issue in order to unblock the A ppellate 
Body selection process.  
5.59.   The representative of Colombia  welcomed the document submitted by the African Group and 
thanked the entire Group for co -sponsoring the DSB proposal to launch  the selection process o f 
Appellate Body members.   
5.60.   Colombia reiterate d the importance its country place d on the rule of law in th e organization. 
The rules in th e organization should  be respected by all. It was  fundamental for Members to  
overcome the Appellate Body impasse to send a clear message on th e matter. Colombia  highly 
value d the report of the facilitator in which he outline d convergences that exist ed around various 
points under the reform of the dispute settlement system including  compliance with the 90 -day 
period for appeals, the valuing of municipal law as a matter of fact, the inexistence of precedence, 
and the inclusion of  rules to avoid obiter dicta.  
5.61.   Notwithstanding the aforementioned, the process could go deeper into other aspects. It was 
critical, for example, that Members  held a proper discussion on the checks and balances in the WTO 
with a view to strengthening the rul e of law of th e organization. The decisions of the DSB should  be 
able to be reviewed and corrected by Members through the Ministerial Conference, the General 
Council and the  relevant  regular bodies. Given that n o adjudicat ory body was infallible , the political 
bodies should be able to review and correct, if necessary, their decisions such as on issues which 
were not relevant to the organization.   
5.62.   Similarly, Members should give some though t to the rules that regulate d the dispute 
settlement system. Colombia  was struck by the absence of regulation when it c ame to evidence in 
the role of external advisers in cases before the DSB. It wa s therefore necessary to have a 
conversation about conflicts of interest that could  occur among the various stakeholder s in the 
dispute settlement system.  
5.63.   On a personal note , as th at was his last statement in the General Council, he took the 
opportunity to tha nk the Chair  and his colleagues, the Director -General, the Deputy  Director s-WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 16 - 
 
General and the Secretariat which he had the pleasure of working with over the last three years. He 
thanked them  for the ir friendshi p, professional support and personal assistance. He would  leave 
convinced of the importance of continuing to strengthen multilateralism and that the organization 
as a global good should  be preserved.  
5.64.   The WTO was  facing challenges that undermine d the functioning  of the multilateral trading 
system as Members knew it. Consequently, p art of the current ongoing discussions concerned  
emphasi sing the need to improve an d strengthen th e same system.  His hope was that the 
constructive period currently being undergone  by Members would lead to the strength ening of  the 
organization as a tool for inclusive trade that w ould meet the current challenges faced in the  areas 
of technology, economy  and environment and which w ould be in accordance  with th e objective of 
sustaining peace through cooperation, integration and interdependence.  He also hoped  that, as some 
of his colleagues  had previously  mentioned , the current turbulent period w ould not undermine the 
safety of the p assengers .  
5.65.   He thank ed all Members for the trust they had given him . He had  had the great hono ur of 
chairing the Trade Policy Review Body  which  had allowed him to directly experience the relevance 
of the institution  in foster ing transparency and dialogue between Members in order to address 
concerns and identify recommendations in a constructive  manner . Each Member  had the opportunity 
and the responsibility to pl ay their respective role s to strengthen th e organization based on their 
commitment s and active participation in the regular bodies.  
5.66.   He likewise thanked Members who he had worked with on Investment Facilitation where he  
had the privilege of coordinating the structured discussion s in that area. He noted that it was possible 
in an open -ended, transparent and gradual manner to find the forum for Members to di scuss topics 
of interest and to make progress with mutual understa nding and to build step -by-step the basis to 
make possible specific outcomes that would ultimately benefit  their economic actors and that would 
result in economic  growth.  
5.67.   Upon arriving at the WTO, he had already worked with foreign and international compa nies 
in Colombia  by supporting them in promot ing specific opportunities in relation to  trade and 
investment. Three years later, he would  leave the WTO with the certainty of the importance  of the 
role played  by the organization  in facilitating and assisting economic actors .  
5.68.   And as he would return back home as a regular citizen,  he trusted that th e organization w ould 
continue to  maintain peace and stability  in the conduct of trade that the business sector require d 
regardless of the size of the compa nies – be it micro, small, medium or large.  Just like passengers 
in a plane, it did not matter whether they were flying  first class, business  or economy  in the sense 
that they all put their trust on the same  pilot and crew to bring them safely to their point of 
destination , regardless of the size and the strength of the storm  they needed to go through.  
5.69.   The representative of India welcomed  the communication from the African Group contained  
in WT/GC/W/776 on the  Appellate Body impasse. India share d the Africa n Group's  concern that, 
unless prompt steps were taken to unblock the launch of the vacancies to the Appellate Body, come 
10 December 2019 there w ould be no credible mechanism to enforce the rules of the rules -based 
multilateral trading system  – diminish ing the appetite for negotiating new rules.  
5.70.   India also fully support ed the stand taken by the African Group that the resolution of the crisis 
in the A ppellate Body  should not be used as a leverage to extract concessions in other areas of the 
WTO's functioning especially by linking th at to the broader WTO reform agenda.  
5.71.   India noted the concerns raised by the African Group regarding the difficulties faced by 
developing Members in accessing the complex and technical  dispute settlement system. India had  
faced the challenges of financial and technical capacity constraints when bringing or defending a 
dispute at the WTO. The difference in the levels of development of  Members and their consequent 
ability to access the multilateral trading system was the ver y reason that an independent Appellate 
Body was indispensable for ensuring that the rules were enforced in a fair and even -handed manner.  
5.72.   In terms of their substantive proposals, India found the communication from the African 
Group to be complementary to t he concrete proposals put forth by the E uropean Union , India and 
other Members in documents WT/GC/ W/752 and WT/GC/W/ 753. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 17 - 
 
5.73.   Concerning the r eport by the Facilitator , India thanked  Ambassador Walker for providing 
Members  a report on the state of play in the in formal process on the Appellate Body matters and  for 
his assessment of the areas in which there was a convergence of Members ' views. As always, India 
remained  open to discuss  it. The important thing to see was however  whether the Member blocking 
the appoin tments to the Appellate Body ha d any new comments or reactions to the report.  
5.74.   Members currently  had twelve  proposals on the table to address the concerns raised by the 
Member blocking the appointments. In the last six months, they had had four open-ended a nd nine 
small group meetings under the informal process on Appellate Body matters with an issue by issue 
discussion of all the proposals on the table. And yet they were no t getting  any closer to a solution 
than they had been  at the beginning of the year. Th at was a very dire situation.  
5.75.   All Members ha d a treaty obligation under Articles 17.1 and 17.2 of the DSU to ensure the 
maintenance of a standing Appellate Body. India therefore call ed on all Members and in particular 
the M ember who ha d raised the concerns in the first place to engage  – and engagement mean t 
moving beyond general critiques of the Appellate Body 's past behaviour.  
5.76.   The focus should remain on solution -oriented approaches that explore d ways in which the 
concerns w ith the functioning of the Appellate Body c ould be addressed in a manner that 
accommodate d the interests of the entire Membership and preserve d the essential features of the 
system.  
5.77.   Most Members d id not want international trade without rules  – to be more p recise international 
trade where the rules were whatever the strongest party to a dispute sa id the rules were. Most 
Members ha d a strong interest in an effective rules -based dispute settlement system evidenced in 
the serious efforts by several Members to a ddress the concerns raised. Such an overwhelming show 
of good faith and willingness to engage should not be squandered away. With less than five months 
to go before the impending paralysis of the Appellate Body, India hoped to see real engagement 
from the United States.  
5.78.   The representative of Japan  said that, a s Ambassador Walker identifie d in his third report, 
there were a number of areas of convergence , at least at a conceptual level , which had  so far been 
an encouraging achievement in th e informal process , even though there remain ed certain areas of 
divergence that present ed difficult systemic questions.  
5.79.   On the transitional rule, Members agree d on the core issues  which  would allow them to draft 
the transitional rule in an appropriate forma t.  
5.80.   On 90 days, while agreeing on certain basic principles, Members' view differ ed as to the form 
of the rule and the legal nature of Agreements between parties. Members also ha d diverging views 
on the consequences of exceeding the 90 -day period. Certainly , those issues pose d difficult systemic 
questions. In their view, the so -called "deeming approach" would be a possible way forward. In any 
event, Members  needed to address th ose aspects further.  
5.81.   On municipal law and review of panels' factual findings, whi le there was a common 
understanding on the basic principles, Members' view differ ed as to the proper standard of review 
of panels' factual findings under Article 11 of the DSU. Th at was  a key issue which would warrant 
Members' further discussions.  
5.82.   On advi sory opinions, Members share d a common understanding that the Appellate Body 
should address issues raised only to the extent necessary to resolve the dispute. It appear ed that 
drafting guidance in an appropriate format would be the next logical step.  
5.83.   On precedent, there was an important clarification made when Members had agree d that prior 
reports d id not create binding precedent. In that regard, Japan  noted the guidance Ambassador 
Walker propose d in his report which appear ed to be simple and workable.  
5.84.   On 'Overreach ', Japan  welcome d Ambassador Walker's reference as an area of convergence  
to the basic requirements of not adding to or diminishing the rights and obligations of Members 
which Japan, Australia and Chile ha d proposed in their proposal . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 18 - 
 
5.85.   On the idea  of holding a regular dialogue, Japan  continue d to believe that Members should 
also consider a possible follow -up mechanism to ensure the implementation of the outcomes of such 
dialogues.  
5.86.   Given all of those points, Japan asked how Members could move their work forward. The key 
question was whether they had enough ingredients to complete their work to the satisfaction of all 
Members. As Japan  had already noted, a number of areas of convergence ha d emerged which they 
could build on in their future further wor k.  
5.87.   For example , Members could  engage in a drafting exercise in respect to the issues that ha d 
achieved a sufficient level of convergence. They should  also discuss what specific type of instrument 
or vehicle would be most appropriate to materiali se possibl e solutions. They could  be interested in 
a possible incremental approach whereby they produce d a concrete outcome issue by issue 
depending on the level of convergence  – not to mention the need to wrestle with the remaining 
difficult issues. Members  therefo re had unfinished business which they could and should complete 
with their active engagement.  
5.88.   All Members share d a common responsibility to preserve and restore the proper functioning 
of the dispute settlement system by addressing the issues which ha d been raised for years. Japan  
did not want to sound naïve nor too optimistic but the reality was, at th at point, th e informal process 
was the only tool at Members'  disposal to fulfil th eir common responsibility. Under the leadership of 
Ambassador Walker, Members  should continue the work they had  started six months ago. They had 
indeed plenty of work to do.  
5.89.   The representa tive of Ecuador  expressed f ull support for the Facilitator's efforts in steering 
the informal process , and welcomed the communication from the African Group.  Ecuador stress ed 
its growing concern on continuously prolong ing the  informal  process without makin g any concrete 
progress  in finding  a solution on an issue which was of critical importance to the organization. 
Ecuador could not stress  enough  the risk that the multilateral trading system  could face if the issue 
surrounding the dispute settlement system remain ed unresolved . In that regard, t he proposals put 
forward  by Members  had raised viable solutions to a ddress  the concerns raised  by other Members  
which ha d asked for the reform of the dispute settlement system.  
5.90.   As Ambassador Walker h ad mentioned in his report, important areas of convergence existed. 
Reform c ould not however take place in the current situation  because  any reform of the dispute 
settlement system should  be done only upon the resolution of the impasse on the appointment o f 
Appellate Body members based on  the principles that we re established  in that regard . Reform would 
not be possible  while the dispute settlement system was running the risk of be coming  paraly sed.  
5.91.   The position of Ecuador ha d been and w ould continue to be that the composition of the 
Appellate Body should  be an automatic process. The vacancies should  be filled as they appear ed as 
had been  established in the rules of the organization.  
5.92.   The representative of China  welcome d the proposal submitted by the African Group on the  
issue of Appellate Body reform. While preserving and further strengthening the independence and 
impartiality of the Appellate Body, the new proposal contribute d a number of constructive reform 
options wit h the view to breaking the selection deadlock. It reflect ed the great importance and firm 
commitment attached to the efficient functioning of the Appellate Body by African Members whose 
voices and concerns should be heard and taken into account in th e organization.  
5.93.   It was encouraging to note that the African Group 's proposal share d the same reform 
objectives with the joint proposal co -sponsored by China, the E uropean Union  and other Members 
and a lot of similar reform elements c ould be detected between the m as well. China ha d interests 
and st ood ready to further discuss th e new proposal with Members in the future.  
5.94.   China also thank ed Ambassador Walker  for his continuous efforts in furthering th e informal 
process  and took note of the specific reform suggestio ns made by the Facilitator based on his own 
judgment aiming to seek co nvergence among M embers. China w ould carefully analy se them and 
actively participate in the upcoming  discussions.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 19 - 
 
5.95.   The representative of Australia  welcome d the Facilitator 's third report on the progress of th e 
discussions in the informal process and the areas of convergence. Australia remained  committed to 
continuing th ose solution -oriented discussions to build on th ose areas of convergence.  
5.96.   September and October would be  a critical time for Members to reach consensus on a way 
forward , as that would provide necessary time to commence and complete a selection process to 
appoint Appellate Body members before mid -December . Australia was  committed to moving th at 
process forward a fter the summer break.   
5.97.   Australia ha d been active and flexible in pursing solutions to the Appellate Body appointments 
impasse. In th at spirit, Australia had  sponsored three proposal s and had indicated its openness to 
considering supporting other workable  proposals. Australia  urged others to also engage 
constructively with a view to building on Ambassador Walker's valuable work and developing a 
solution in the interest of all Member s. 
5.98.   The representative of Singapore  commend ed the African Group for its rece nt efforts with 
respect to the dispute settlement system. A significant milestone had been  reached at the 22 July 
DSB meeting when the number of co -sponsors for the joint proposal to launch the A ppellate Body  
selection process ha d reached 114 thanks  to the support of all African Group members. Coupled with 
the African Group's WT/GC/W/ 776 proposal which was being formally tabled t hat day, that reflect ed 
the African Group's interest in the continued functioning of the dispute settlement system.  
5.99.   On the Facilitator's progress report, first, Singapore thanked Ambassador  Walker for his hard 
work in relation to the informal process  despite the herculean task that had been  entrusted to him. 
He had handled it extremely well  by keeping  the Members focused while  trying to find areas of 
convergence that w ould serve as the basis for Members to continue progress. His report ha d given 
Members much food for thought as they prepare d for the road ahead after the summer break.  
5.100.   Second, speaking of food, there was a well -known story of two persons fighting over an 
orange. After taking the time to understand each other's interest, they had learned that one of them 
was actually interested in the orange for its peel  while the other person had wanted the orange for 
its juice. That enabled them to find a solution to the problem. It only appear ed however in such a 
happy situation. In the present case, Members were left with the question of what w ould happen 
when one party w ould be interest ed in more than just the peel and the juice and could be  using the 
orange as a leverage to get its hands on other fruits. Unfortunately, Singapore  had no answer  to 
that question but look ed forward to a more fruitful conversation  after the summer break.  
5.101.   Third, even as Members  continue d to search for answers in the face of the imminent paralysis 
of the Appellate Body i n case  vacancies remain ed unfilled, Singapore  noted that new disputes 
continue d to be filed. In the last two weeks alone, two new disputes ha d been filed  – one by the 
United States  in DS585 and the second by the Russia n Federation  in DS586. Furthermore, at the 22 
July DSB meeting, there had been  four new requests made for the establishment of dispute panels. 
That could only mean that Members contin ued to see value in the  dispute settlement system. 
Singapore  therefore urge d all Members to continue investing in th e system by strengthening it rather 
than crippling it.  
5.102.   The representative of Canada  welcome d the proposal of the African Group and note d that 
Members from all regions of the world ha d co-sponsored constructive proposals addressing the 
issues identified with respect to safeguarding the current dispute settlement system.  
5.103.   Canada welcome d Ambassador Walker 's good faith and sustained efforts to move forward 
the discussion to resolving the A ppellate Body  impasse. His report was a useful step in th e informal 
process. Canada  consider ed that th e process should continue but note d that it w ould be difficult to 
move forward unless all  Members that ha d expressed concerns with the current dispute settlement 
system contribute d to the process in a meaningful manner.  
5.104.   The representative of the European Union  said that the Facilitator had  given Members  a fair 
descrip tion of where things st ood. The European Union  noted  though that the elements put forward 
by the European Union  and co -sponsors in WT/GC/W/ 753 were not part of the convergences that 
the Facilitator had  identified even though they ha d significant support from the African Group in the 
proposal outlined th at day. Members should  therefore keep those issues under review.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 20 - 
 
5.105.   Regarding the areas of convergence that the Facilitator had  identified, the European Union  
looked forward to seeing the m in writing and reserve d its final position with respect to the details.  
5.106.   The E uropean Union  reiterate d its support for th e solution -focused process as the crisis was 
urgent. Th at was why the E uropean Union  and many other Members ha d made serious efforts to 
address the concerns raised by the Member blocking the appointments  and th at was why the 
European Union  would continue to support the Facilitator  in his work. The European Union  therefore 
agree d with the idea to develop text that would be the basis for the unblocking of the appointments.  
Unblocking the appointments  was the rationale for the current process . Members should not lose 
sight of th at. In that regard, the European Union  reiterate d its call on all delegations to engage 
substantively in th e proce ss so that the appointments c ould be made as soon as possible.  
5.107.   On content, the best way forward was the one contained in the concrete proposals that the 
European Union  had submitted together with other Members to the General Council. But the 
European Union remained  ready to show flexibility if that would lead  to the unblocking of the 
appointments. At the same time, it should  be clear that any attempts at addressing the cris is should  
preserve the essential features of the dispute settlement  system – notably an independent and two 
step system and the principle of negative consensus.  
5.108.   The representative of Brazil  welcome d the African Group's proposal and the fact that more 
Membe rs were becoming active in th ose discussions . Brazil also extended its gratitude to  
Ambassador Walker for his efforts in conducting the informal process  on Appellate Body matters  for 
the past six months. Brazil support ed that process and believe d that  it should continue.  
5.109.   Members should  find a compromise on all outstanding issues. In that regard, a  solution c ould 
be found within the text of the DSU itself. Brazil was therefore  convinced that guidelines would be  
the best way to tackle the issue  because they would  reinforce the DSU instead of changing it and 
they seem ed to be a more manageable and simple solution given  the time that they  had. 
5.110.   In the next few months, Members should  think of the endgame. The solution seem ed to be 
on the table as the conversations drawn t hat day show ed. Members  should also  work constructively 
toward a successful conclusion of th e process by December.  
5.111.   The representative of the Russian Federation  appreciate d Ambassador Walker's hard work 
and de dication in facilitating Members' search for a solution to the current Appellate Body  selection  
process  impasse through the informal process on Appellate Body matters conducted under the 
auspices of the General Council.  
5.112.   The Russian Federation  also welcome d all the constructive submissions  and assured 
Members that in case the final text w ould help solve the problem surrounding  the A ppellate Body 
selection process blockage while preserving the balance of rights and obligations under the covered 
agreement s as well as the independence of the Appellate Body, it stood  ready to support such text . 
5.113.   Engagement of all Members in a constructive dialogue on A ppellate Body  reform was crucial. 
The core question t hat day  was whether a Member who had caused the blockage of the selection 
process of the A ppellate Body  members  could be pleased with text proposed.  
5.114.   In addition to the need to agree on the substance, Members  should likewise  pay proper 
attention to the form of the solution . Given the circumstances and n ational requirements in certain 
countries, the amendment of the DSU seem ed less feasible and more controversial than guidance 
or authoritative interpretations.   
5.115.   The Russian Federation  remain ed committed to efforts aimed at unblocking the selection 
process  and expresse d its readiness to work towards creating a well -balanced option aimed at 
preserving the rule s-based multilateral trading system , including the dispute settlement mechanism.  
5.116.   The representative of the Philippines  extend ed its appreciation to Ambassador Walker for his 
stewardship of the Informal Process and for his focus and patience in helping Members  navigate the 
complex issues surrounding the functioning of the Appellate Body.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 21 - 
 
5.117.   The Philippines also commend ed the proponent s of all twelve  proposals for their hard work 
and their sincere commitment to finding solutions to fundamental challenges facing the  dispute 
settlement system. In particular , the Philippines  thank ed the African Group and Benin for their 
presentation t hat day. 
5.118.   By identifying areas of convergence among the twelve  diverse submissions, Ambassador 
Walker ha d led Members  on a path towards one single set of solutions that would help enhance and 
strengthen the Appellate Body a nd the  panel system.  
5.119.   During Members'  Informal Meeting the previous week  and in the ir discussions on the matter 
that day , Japan had made suggestions for the next steps to be taken which the Philippines  found to 
be sensible and pragmatic.  
5.120.   Concerning the next steps, i n the "zones of convergence " identified by Ambassador Walker, 
the Philippines  agree d that the process of crafting the legal text should begin as soon as practicable. 
A good place to start would be the latest Walker report itself. At th at point, Members'  work product 
shoul d be the result of an organic, collaborative effort and not solely based on any one or several of 
the twelve  proposals.  
5.121.   In parallel, Members  should continue their discussions on the areas of divergence in a more 
focused, issue -based and solutions -oriented manner  ensur ing that any final set of solutions Members  
would agree on would be completely responsive to and dispositive of the specific issues that ha d 
been raised regarding the functioning of the Appellate Body.  
5.122.   Finally, at the Informal Meeting  the previ ous week, Members had  heard loud and clear their 
friends from the LDC, African and CARICOM Groups. Th at was why, in addition to being pragmatic 
and solutions -oriented, Members should  also be principled and disciplined in how they mapped out 
the future of their dispute settlement system.  
5.123.   Members  had an important task ahead. The Philippines urged all Members to  work together 
with an open mind, a keen eye and a constructive mindset.  
5.124.   The representative of Switzerland  thank ed Ambassador Walker for the consultati ons he ha d 
conducted and for the excellent situation report he ha d just pre sented . Ambassador Walker  had 
judiciously identified the elements on which most of the positions converge d. Tangible progress ha d 
therefore  been made  which was  a positive development that Switzerland  welcome d. 
5.125.   The universe of possible solutions on most of the issues  raised had already been well -
defined. Members were left with the task of  moving to the next step which involved  the drafting of 
compromise texts based on the available material.  There were, however , issues  which still needed 
further discussion despite having already been taken up  in a constructive way. In that regard, 
Switzerland was  hopeful that pragmatic solutions c ould be developed in those areas in a timely 
manner.  
5.126.   The work involved in drafting the compromise texts for the points on which opinions 
converge d and the search for solutions on more difficult issues was clearly a priority. Members should 
tackle them as soon as possible . It would also be necessary to agree on the form that the envisaged 
solutions could take. A decision of the General Council or the Dispute Settlement Body seem ed to 
be the most promising avenue  in that regard.  
5.127.   Switzerland remained ready to participate actively in th e process  with the ultimate goal of 
ensuring that the dispute settlement system and its Appellate Body functioned in  its full potential.  If 
Members  wished to make real progress, it would  be essential for all of them to  engage constructively 
in the process.  
5.128.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the ACP , welcome d the African Group 's proposal 
in WT/GC/W/776 aimed at addressing the impasse on the selection process of Appellate Body 
members.  Developing Members , including  those from  the ACP Group , had long r eflected concerns 
relating to the gaps in the functioning of the dispute settlement system. Some of th ose concerns 
relate d to the lack or absence of effective enforcement for developing Members  and in particular 
those for whom the withdrawal of concessions  could not be an effective remedy.  Other concerns WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 22 - 
 
raised include d the high cost of participating in disputes and the rights accorded to third parties. 
While those long -standing concerns ha d not been satisfactorily resolved by the responsible 
adjudicative b odies, the membership of the ACP Group ha d remained resolute and undimmed in its 
support for the dispute settlement system.  
5.129.   The support for the system was validated by clear constitutional features such as the 
independence and impartiality of rulings, the lack of control by any one Member  and the notion that 
rules t ook precedence over narrow political interests.  
5.130.   Imperfect as the system could  be, there was no shortage of evidence of its proven success.  
For that reason , the ACP Group join ed the African Group in calling for the immediate unblocking of 
the appointment process for Appellate Body members. The ACP Group further call ed for the urgent 
resolution of i ssues that continue d to impede the effective functioning of the Appellate Body as the 
legitimate forum for the resolution and enforcement of disputes.  
5.131.   In pursuit of a solution, the ACP Group ha d taken note of the proposed approaches that were 
well articul ated in the submission with a view to their examination in its own deliberations.  The ACP 
Group again thanked the African Group for its submission which contribute d to the solution -finding 
approach advocated by Members.  
5.132.   The ACP Group also thank ed Ambassado r Walker for his efforts and his concise report on 
areas of perceived convergence. The ACP Group  hoped Members w ould be able to reflect on his 
report over the summer break with a view to arriving at a mutually acceptable solution that would 
allow for the u nblocking of appointments.  
5.133.   The representative of the United States  said that for the sake of clarity, the United States 
would repeat what it had  said at recent meetings of the General Council , that if Members sa id that 
they support ed a rules -based trading system, then the Appellate Body should  follow the rules they 
had all agreed to.  
5.134.   The United States ha d expressed in clear terms the US understanding of th ose rules through 
detailed interventions at the Dispute Settlement Body and in regular and ongoing discussions with 
Members.  In each instance, the United States ha d identified specific instances in which the Appellate 
Body ha d departed from the clear rules in the Dispute Settlement Understanding.   
5.135.   Through the US statements and by direct engage ment, the United States ha d endeavo ured 
to foster a dialogue so that Members c ould seek to understand if  they had a shared understanding 
of the rules including where those rules place d clear limits on the role of the Appellate Body.     
5.136.   The United States  recogni zed the work of the Facilitator to provide another forum to continue 
that important dialogue. The United States, along with other Members, ha d been actively engaged 
in the process. The United States ha d met with the Facilitator on an ongoing and regu lar basis in a 
variety of configurations.    
5.137.   The current report from the Facilitator reflect ed a simple fact also evident from numerous 
informal discussions.  Many Members , and not only the United States,  recogni zed that the Appellate 
Body ha d breached and  continue d to breach the clear rules of the DSU. While it would have been 
desirable to acknowledge th ose breaches and consider how to arrest them, some years ago, 
nonetheless, the United States  welcome d the growing acknowledgment by Members of the 
legitima cy of long -standing US concerns.   
5.138.   The United States  likewise recogni zed that proposals circulated by some Members appear ed 
to make genuine attempts to begin to grapple with some of the difficulties the Appellate Body ha d 
created for a rules -based dispute settlement system.   
5.139.   At the same time, the United States  question ed the proposals by other Members, some of 
which not only fail ed to acknowledge any breach of clear rules by the Appellate Body , but would 
even change the rules to further empower the Appella te Body and diminish its accountability.     
5.140.   Given that some Members appear ed prepared to condone continued rule -breaking by the 
Appellate Body, it was not surprising that the Facilitator 's Report reflect ed only limited progress.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 23 - 
 
The Report highlight ed certain areas of limited agreement on Members ' understanding of the rules 
while also raising significant questions on the appropriate action to ensure future compliance with 
those rules.   
5.141.   On transitional rules for Appellate Body members, the Facilitator 's Report suggest ed 
convergence on the understanding that the DSB ha d the explicit authority to appoint Appellate Body 
members.  The United States agree d, as it simply reflect ed the text of DSU Article 17.2. The question 
however was whether Members , through the DSB , had the exclusive authority to appoint Appellate 
Body members. Th at also follow ed from the text of the DSU which g ave the power to appoint to no 
other actor. In other words, the question related to whether Members agree d that the Appellate 
Body d id not have the authority to deem a person who was no longer an Appellate Body member to 
nonetheless continue to be a member and decide appeals , and whether  Members agree d that Rule  15 
was incons istent  with the text of the DSU .  
5.142.   Furthermore, there was also the  question on whether there was convergence on the 
suggestion to establish automatic procedures for the replacement of Appellate Body members whose 
terms ha d expired. Such a process could serve to reduce the DSB 's authority unde r the rules and 
limit the DSB 's capacity to exercise judgement about appropriate selection procedures.   
5.143.   On the deadline to submit reports, the Facilitator 's Report indicate d convergence on the 
understanding that the Appellate Body "needed" to issue reports within 90 days. The United States 
welcome d the acknowledgment from many Members that the DSU place d the Appellate Body under 
an obligation to issue its report within 90 day s through the use of the mandatory term "shall".  
Therefore, rather than "needed to", the report should rather reflect that the Appellate Body was 
"obligated to ". 
5.144.   As Members agree d that the 90 -day deadline was an obligation, Members should  understand 
what had led the Appellate Body to depart from th at unambiguous rule and what were the 
consequences where the Appellate Body breache d that rule. For example, the United States asked 
whether  the deadline  could  be exceeded by agreement of the parties or rather wo uld deviation from 
the rule be an issue for the DSB to decide .  
5.145.   On municipal law and questions of fact, the Facilitator 's Report indicate d convergence on the 
understanding that the meaning of municipal law was an issue of fact and the DSU d id not permit 
the Appellate Body to engage in de novo review of facts. The United States agree d. But the report 
did not address the means by which the Appellate Body evade d that limitation on its review by 
asserting that it c ould review whether a panel fulfil led its suppo sed obligation to make an objective 
assessment of the facts.   
5.146.   As the United States  had explained, the Appellate Body ignore d that to make an objective 
assessment under DSU Article 11 was a function of a panel  and not an obligation and the DSU use d 
the ver b "should " make an objective assessment not "shall" make. Apparently, further discussion 
was needed to understand th ose words to which Members had agreed and to understand why time 
and again the Appellate Body ha d felt free to review the facts including through de novo review of 
the meaning of municipal law.   
5.147.   The Facilitator 's Report d id not suggest any convergence on how to address th at repeated 
breach of the rules by the Appellate Body.    
5.148.   The same was the case with advisory opinions. According to the Facilitator 's Report, 
Members were in general agreement that issues not raised by either party to a dispute "should not " 
be decided by the Appellate Body.  The United States welcome d that acknowledgment that the 
Appellate Body was not to make out a case for a party or opine on an issue that d id not form part 
of the matter that the DSB had established a panel to consider. But th at was not a matter of 
discretion. Rather than "should not ", the Appellate Body "may not " render advisory opinions.   
5.149.   As the United States  had explained, the Appellate Body report exist ed to consider issues of 
law and legal interpretation in the panel report.   WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 24 - 
 
5.150.   The panel was charged by the DSB under DSU Article 7.1 to examine the matter set out i n 
the panel request and to make such findings as w ould assist the DSB in making the recommendation 
to bring a WTO -inconsistent measure into conformity with the relevant WTO agreement.  
5.151.   Therefore, a panel was not to make findings that w ould not assist the DS B in making the 
recommendation under DSU Article 19.1.  And the Appellate Body report therefore review ed such 
panel findings in order to assist the DSB in making that recommendation.  
5.152.   Again, the Facilitator 's Report d id not however  identify convergence on th at understanding 
and the appropriate means to ensure compliance with th at rule.   
5.153.   With regard to precedent, the Facilitator 's Report highligh ted the widely divergent views 
among Members on the value of prior Appellate Body report s. The Report suggest ed agreement 
among Members that precedent was not created through WTO dispute settlement. Yet, time and 
again, some Members insist ed that a panel should  adhere to the interpretation in past Appellate 
Body reports. And, time and again, the Appellate Body insist ed that panels should  adhere to past 
reports absent undefined "cogent reasons " – a term that appear ed nowhere in the DSU. Th ose 
assertions on the value of interpretations in prior reports were, as the United States  had explained, 
directly contrary to the DSU and the WTO Agreement. The United States therefore ha d not reached 
a common understanding among Members on the plain text of their agreed rules.  
5.154.   All of th ose issues were manifestations of the final issue in the Facilitator 's Rep ort – that of 
overreaching or disregard of clear rules such as to add to or diminish Members ' rights or obligations.   
5.155.   It was inaccurate to say that Members had a consensus that the DSU limitation in Articles 
3.2 and 19.2 should  be observed if Members c ould not agree that the clear procedural and systemic 
rules the United States ha d outlined were being broken. Rather, some Members appear ed to support 
diminishing other Members ' rights to have the DSU rules applied and respected as written.  
5.156.   In sum, the Facili tator's Report recogni zed that several Members agree d that the DSU 
impose d clear limitations on the Appellate Body and that the Appellate Body ha d felt free to disregard 
those rules. On the other hand, it was striking that a few Members appear ed to be taking the view 
that th ose same rules d id not impose such limitations. The United States  wished  to understand how 
it was that Members c ould supposedly understand the same, clear words in such disparate ways.  
5.157.   For those rules where Members share d a common understanding, as the United States  had 
previously explained, to find an appropriate and effective solution to prevent the Appellate Body 's 
repeated disregard of the rules from happening again in the future, it was imperative that Members 
underst ood how it was that they had come to th at point.  
5.158.   To do so w ould require Members to engage in a deeper discussion of why the Appellate Body 
had felt free to depart from what Members had agreed to.  
5.159.   Without th at understanding, there was no reason to believe that simply adopting new or 
additional language in whatever form w ould be effective in addressing the concerns shared by 
several Members.  
5.160.   The representative of Costa Rica  said that the dispute settlement system was a fundamental 
pillar of th e organization , guar antee d legal certainty, preserve d the rights and obligations of its 
Members and g ave predictability to global trade flows. Preserving its fundamental characteristics 
while taking care of and correcting some elements was a priority particularly for economies such as 
Costa Rica's  which were highly integrat ed in international trade.  
5.161.   As Costa  Rica had indicated on other occasions, it was necessary to find pragmatic solutions 
to the concerns that ha d been expressed about the  functioning  of the dispute settlement mechanism 
and to address all issues under a solution -seeking approach.  
5.162.   In that regard, Costa Rica thank ed Ambassador Walker for the report he ha d presented  – in 
particular the identification of the issues in which he ha d detected convergence. Th ose constitute d 
an important step towards an exit to the process of selecting the members of t he Appellate Body. 
Costa Rica remain ed committed to th e process and w as ready to continue working constructively WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 25 - 
 
and under an incremental approach particularly in the identification of the instrument or vehicle to 
materiali se those and other solutions.   
5.163.   The representative of Indonesia  appreciate d the initiative from the African Group to break 
the impasse on the selection of process of Appellate Body members and commend ed the leadership 
of Ambassador Walker in the informal process concerning the  functioning of the Appellate Body.  
5.164.   Indonesia  continue d to raise concern over the continued impasse of the selection process of 
Appellate Body members.  Without repeat ing its previous statement on the issue made on many 
occasions, Indonesia stress ed that Members  had already  sufficient ideas and proposals on the table 
at their disposal to move forward with th e issue. They however did not have much time given that 
the Appellate Body  dysfunction would happen  in December. Indonesia therefore  urged Members to 
immediately p roceed with the appointment of new Appellate Body members as a reflection of good 
political will to resolve th e matter.  
5.165.   The representative of Uruguay , on behalf of Argentina , Brazil , Colombia , Chile, Mexico , 
Paraguay , Peru and Uruguay , reiterate d their deep concern about the lack of consensus for the 
launch of the selection process for the  Appellate Body  members. Once the summer break was over, 
they urged Members  to begin the procedures for appointing vacancies to restore the full operational 
capacity of  the Appellate Body.  
5.166.   Members of all regional groups ha d participated constructively in the informal process led by 
Ambassador Walker and had presented concrete proposals to improve the functioning of the 
Appellate Body including  co-sponsor ing a proposal fo r the launch of vacancies that  had already 
reached the support of 114 Members. They reaffirm ed their commitment to a dispute settlement 
system that work ed fully for the promotion of international trade based on rules  that were  open, 
transparent, inclusive,  non-discriminatory and equitable.  
5.167.   Given the prospect of finding  themselves  in an unprecedented situation that mean t a 
substantial impairment of Membership rights, they urgently call ed on all Members to act with 
maximum responsibility to avoid the paralysi s of the Appellate Body while continuing to  improv e 
those aspects that would make  it possible to further strengthen the multilateral trading system.  
5.168.   On behalf Uruguay , Uruguay  appreciated the report presented by Ambassador Walker 
regarding the informal process on  matters relating to the functioning of the  Appellate Body under 
the auspices of the General Council. The result of the same and the consultations conducted  by 
Ambassador Walker ha d allowed Members  to reach important conclusions both in substanti ve and 
technical terms.  
5.169.   In the informal process, numerous proposals ha d been presented that explain ed ways of 
solving specific questions which ha d allowed the deepening of various aspects of the operation of  
the dispute settlement system.  In that regard, Uruguay also welcomed the proposal presented by 
the African Group that day.  
5.170.   Uruguay underst ood that the informal process ha d allowed Members  to find at least two 
important areas of convergence:  first, the fun damental importance of the full functioning of the 
Appellate Body for the multilateral trading system and the promotion of international trade based 
on rules ; and second, the existence of areas of convergence identified by Ambassador Walker's 
report regard ing aspects that c ould and should be improved concerning  the implementation of the 
Dispute Settlement Understanding.  
5.171.   In that regard, taking into account the importance t o launch the selection process for the 
Appellate Body vacancies, Uruguay r eiterate d its support for the informal process led by Ambassador 
Walker  which was being conducted  in a transparent and inclusive way and which  had acquire d even 
more relevance to guide Members  in relation to finding  solutions in a concrete and pragmatic 
manner . 
5.172.   The rep resentative of Guyana  welcome d the most recent proposal presented by Benin on 
behalf of the African Group which  was another constructive step to help Members  move forward.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 26 - 
 
5.173.   Guyana  thank ed Ambassador Walker for his report and appreciate d the work he was doing 
in that delicate and urgent matter to find a solution to the A ppellate Body  crisis and to the overall 
functioning of the  dispute settlement  system.  
5.174.   Members had  heard  much about the  many areas of convergence. Guyana would , however , 
like to hear more on areas of divergence especially if th ose areas were preventing them from taking 
the steps necessary to unblock the appointments.  
5.175.   That said,  Guyana  joined several others in holding the considered view that in light of what 
the system und erstood were the concerns and problems and to the exten t that the system was so 
far able to develop responses, there were already sufficient ideas and proposals on the table to allow 
Members  to achieve an acceptable conclusion and move forward on th e matte r. The time to resolve 
the issue was almost up  – if it had  not yet already passed. Members should  therefore  act with the 
greatest dispatch and diligence.  
5.176.   The representative of Qatar  welcome d all the twelve  proposals made by many Members  
including the  most recent  one tabled  by the African Group concerning the  launch of the Appellate 
Body selection process. Qatar reiterate d its commitment to the WTO and express ed its support for 
the multilateral trading system  as it had always held great i mportance to the benefits of being a  
Member of the system.  
5.177.   Like most Members, Qatar consider ed the dispute settlement system to be one of the major 
results of the Uruguay Round. After the entry into force of the WTO Agreement in 1995, the Appellate 
Body ha d an obvious advantage as it already had experience in solving trade dispute s and greatly 
contribute d to the stability and predictability of the multilateral trading system.  
5.178.   Pursuant to Articles 17.1 and 17.2 of the DSU, all Members ha d a collective oblig ation to 
ensure the maintenance of the standing Appellate Body comprising of seven members. To th at end, 
Qatar  called on all Members to fill the vacancies on the Appellate Body in order to remain a dynamic 
institution.  
5.179.   At the same time, Qatar  acknowledge d that concern s had been raised about the functioning 
of the dispute settlement mechanism. Qatar was ready to work on solutions with all Members whil e 
preserving the essential features of the system and of the Appellate Body. 
5.180.   The representative  of Zambia  thanked the Director -General in his capacity as TNC Chair for 
his report to the General Council  at the 19 July Informal TNC and Informal HODs meetings . Zambia  
welcome d the efforts he ha d made to facilitate consultations among the Membership and his 
engagement with other development partners and commend ed his tireless effort and leadership in 
the process.  
5.181.   As it was still her first statement to the General Council following her assumption of duties 
in Geneva a few months ago, she was  still in a pr ocess of learning and understanding the different 
issues currently under discussion. In the few months  that she had been  at the WTO , she had closely 
followed discussions on the current topical issues particularly those relating to strengthening the 
work of the WTO's regular bodies , addressing issues in the dispute settlement system including the 
impasse in appointments to the Appellate Body and improvi ng the WTO's negotiating work to reform 
agricultural trade and fisheries subsidies in order to have an effective rule s-based multilateral trading 
system that c ould contribute to sustainable development in trade.  
5.182.   As Members  headed  for the ir summer break and  prepare d for the stocktaking exercise in the 
months ahead in the lead up  to the Twelfth  Ministerial Conference scheduled to take place in 
Kazakhstan in June 2020, Zambia  appreciate d the efforts being made by the Chairs of the 
Negotiating Groups towards ad vancing negotiations and for their attempts to move into a solution -
finding phase once negotiations resume d in September.  
5.183.   The current state of negotiations should  be accelerated based on their mandate with a view 
to obtaining results -oriented outcomes. Decisions made between then and the Twelfth  Ministerial 
Conference c ould hopefully  be actuali sed. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 27 - 
 
5.184.   Agriculture remain ed a critical sector for the development of most least-developed countries 
including  Zambia. The Government of the Republic of Zambia was focused on attaining a diversified 
and resilient economy for sustained growth and socioeconomic transformation driven by priority 
sectors such as agriculture as  had been  outlined in its Seventh National Development Plan.  
5.185.   Reforms in agricultural trade negotiations essentially remain ed the unfinished business of 
the WTO. Zambia  called for a level playing field to correct the existing imbalances in the Agreement 
on Agriculture and to deliver concrete outcom es by the Twelfth  Ministerial Conference.  
5.186.   Domestic support remain ed the central issue for Members such as Zambia in the negotiations 
with regard to cotton. In that regard, Zambia  commend ed the data compilation work carried out so 
far in the cotton technica l Quad Plus meetings.  
5.187.   Zambia also  underscore d the importance of having an Appellate Body. Members should  move 
towards reinvigorating the Appellate Body by means of unblocking the impasse in order to preserve 
the system . Otherwise , with a paralysed Appellat e Body, the multilateral trading system w ould lose 
one of its fundamental pillars.  
5.188.   Zambia further reaffirm ed the importance of the S&DT principle as had been set out in the 
Marrakesh Agreement. S&DT  placed the needs of developing  and LDC  Members  at the he art of the 
WTO. The on-going negotiations on flexibility in development issues should  therefore  be at the centre 
of Members'  attention.  
5.189.   Strengthening the framework s on transparency and inclusiveness were also important issues 
to consider as Members  advanc ed negotiations.  
5.190.   Zambia remained  hopeful that the divergences in th ose discussions c ould help Members  find 
ways of achieving meaningful outcomes as they prepare d for the Twelfth  Ministerial Conference.  
5.191.   Zambia associate d with the statements made by the LDC, the ACP and the African Groups.   
5.192.   The representative of Mexico  welcomed  the African Group's proposal which contain ed 
important elements that Members  needed to take into account in their future discussions. Mexico 
likewise thanked  the African Group for co-sponsoring the proposal to launch the Appellate Body 
selection process presented for the twenty -fifth time at the DSB on  22 July .  
5.193.   Mexico recogni zed Ambassador Walker's leadership and commitment in helping Members  
engage constructively in seeking a solution to th e crisis. His report reflect ed in an appropriate way 
Members'  discussion s during the previous  months. With Members' political will, the infor mal process 
should put them in a promising path for an eventual result. Mexico  reiterate d its commitment and 
disposition to continu e working toward s avoiding the inoperability of the Appellate Body.  
5.194.   On a personal note, since th at was his last G eneral Council  meeting, he shared  a few 
thoughts pertinent to th at particular discussion. Members  were getting used to hearing that the WTO 
was in crisis whil e acknowledging that there were serious issues to overcome. It was therefore high 
time for  them to demonstrate their true regard for the multilateral trading system.  
5.195.   As larger geopolitical considerations w ould likely shape the future of the organization, it was 
clear more than ever that the status quo was not sustainable.  
5.196.   The WTO ha d an extremely val uable asset in its Director -General  and his extraordinary team 
of professionals who had done  an exceptional job in assisting Members  in the ir quest to achieve their 
common goals. But the WTO being a  Member -driven organization, as Members  always like d to 
reaffirm, the onus rested upon the Members themselves to set their sights high to renew and 
strengthen the system. Whil e that was mostly a shared responsibility, each Member should not hide 
behind the Membership as a whole. They should instead ask  themselves how each one of them could 
embrace and show leadership to overcome the crisis.  
5.197.   There were nuances to th at line of thinking.  Leadership from the two largest economies who 
undoubtedly ha d reaped benefit s from the system was both desired and expected. However, o ne of 
them ha d serious doubts with the current rulebook  and the other consider ed that it ha d already gone WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 28 - 
 
too far in its commitments since its accession  to the organization. He therefore asked whether those 
two Members were  still willing to assum e such leadership roles and in doing so ensur e the 
strengthening and the preservation of the system for the benefit of all.  
5.198.   Few things were as harmful to prosperity as prolonged uncertainty. A robust multilateral 
trading system ha d to be predictable  which mean t that the rights of Members w ould be respected  
and that obligations w ould be met  – and w hen th at was not the case, the balance  would  be re -
established on the basis of fully operational processes. Bearing th at in mind, he asked whether 
Members were wi lling to entertain the idea of a dispute s ettlement  mechanism being reduced to a 
glorious experiment of the rule of law in international relations as ha d been said . Based on previous 
experience comprising about a quarter of a century, he did not think that was the case.  
5.199.   Judging by the reaction of a great number  of Members, there was high interest to solve the  
Appellate Body impasse  – which was particularly evident in the constant call  of 114 Members to 
launch the A ppellate Body  selection process  and the  dozen proposals tabled to address concerns of 
the functioning  of the dispute settlement system . That had been an unprecedented display of 
leadership and strong reaction of a large number of Members to address the concerns originally 
expressed by one Membe r. It was therefore up to that Member to  show readiness to engage in 
finding solutions to the impasse.  
5.200.   The monitoring and transparency function was a fundamental part of the balance of rights 
and obligations of the Membership and a premise for the system's  efficient functioning. Major actors 
in the House, both developed and developing, ha d the shared responsibility to lead by example in 
fulfilling their transparency commitments and instilling a constructive process to help others do the 
same. Th at would be a robust indication of leadership even if it was only to deliver on what Members 
had agreed to more than two decades ago.  
5.201.   On the rulemaking processes before Members , the status quo was not an option. The WTO 
needed to respond to the most pressing issues co nfronting it. Identifying what was minimally 
necessary and possible in the short -term as well as what c ould be articulated as part of the work for 
the medium -term. It was not his role to single out or priorit ise those issues but he should  point out 
the contrasting appetite most Members display ed at regional negotiations in comparison to the 
multilateral level to lock in ambitious rules around the same issues but arguing in th e House the 
need for policy space on one hand and the lack of pol itical conditions for results in areas of high 
interest for developing Members  on the other. He asked whether M embers were still willing to show 
leadership and invest the political capital needed to move forward in the WTO as they had all done 
in their RTA  negotiations . 
5.202.   On development, an issue at the heart of the WTO, the question was how to maximi se the 
opportunities for trade to continue to be  a powerful tool for development. Blanket carveouts from 
commitments w ould not bring about th at opportunity. S&DT  should  be properly designed according 
to the commitment in question , each Member's capabilit y and the recognition of unique  realities 
across developing and LDC M embers.  
5.203.   In addition, Members should not forget that  an effective connection with strong domes tic 
institutions and policies  was necessary to attain larger development objectives.  The leadership on 
that could not fall only on a handful of Members with hard opposing views  but rather on a larger set 
of diverse Members that w ould need to engage in find ing the right balance .  
5.204.   Political speeches would  not suffice to preserve the health of the system  and to strengthen 
it. Members would rather need  the drive  to truly want outcomes  and the assertiveness to make them 
happen. That was the only way to set the WTO process in motion.  
5.205.   Going  back to his original question, he asked again how each Member could  embrace and 
show leadership to make those outcomes happen  and whether Members were  prepared to invest 
the necessary resources at all levels to  produce results and to reassert the WTO's role as a 
centrepiece of global governance . He would leave Members  with those thoughts .  
5.206.   He also noted that  the WTO was a small, understaffed organization  compared to others with 
less reach. Having had the privilege to directly work with the Secretariat on an almost daily basis, 
he could  attest that they truly embod ied the public good es sence  of the WTO. They excel led at their WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 29 - 
 
work and they deserve d not onl y words of praise for th at but also t he Membership's reflection on 
how to make the most of th at sophisticated pool of talent going forward.  
5.207.   He thanked  the Mexican G overnment , particularly the Ministry  of Economy , for giving him 
the opportunity to represent his country. He also paid  tribute to his colleagues at the Mexican 
mission . Their  support and outstanding work in favo ur of Mexico's interest ha d been truly invaluable. 
Lastly, he mentioned his wife  and his family who ha d uncon ditionally followed and supported him 
throughout his exceptional journey. Without them next to him, he would not be where he was  that 
day. 
5.208.   He extended his  appreciation to  all his colleagues  for having been part of his past two  and a 
half years in Geneva. He was certain that they would en sure that they would  be able to tackle the 
critical challenges that lie d ahead of them as there was enough brain power and statesmanship in 
the House. He wished everyone all the best.  
5.209.   The representative of Egypt  intervened u nder the two sub -items  and echoed the statement 
made by  the African Group . It was important to give value to the African Group's submission in 
document WT/GC/W/776  considering the limited time and capacity constrain ts that Members  faced. 
It was  indeed  a clear sign of the African Group's  commitment towards the effective functioning  of 
the WTO, the dispute settlement system  and the multilateral trading system . 
5.210.   Egypt s upport ed the informal process led by Ambassador Walker under the auspices of the 
General Council and thank ed him for the sincere efforts in th at regard.  
5.211.   In addition to the possible elements of conver gence  that ha d been mentioned by Ambassador 
Walker, there  were currently  more than 114 Members forming a critical mass that sought  to launch 
the selection process  of Appellate Body members . The initiative , which  dated back to November 
2017, was a test ament  to the importance that the Membership accord ed to the di spute settlement 
system  which included a fully functioning Appellate Body.  
5.212.   It was important to avoid making any linkages between resolving the urgent crisis in the 
Appellate Body and the broader reform agenda. From a developing Member's perspective , it was for 
the benefit of the whole Membership to continue their discussions about the  reform of the dispute 
settlement mechanism  while the dispute settlement system including the Appellate Body  was still 
working and its predictability still secured instead of discussing potential reforms while it was 
completely paraly sed. 
5.213.   In that regard, Egypt recall ed the Declaration of African Ministers of Trade in Cairo in 
document WT/GC/199  where the Ministers had  urged for priority attention to be given to resolving 
the Appellate Body impasse and had commit ted to work with all  Members to find mutually agreeable 
solutions while preserving the essential features and the integrity of the system.  
5.214.   The representative of Uganda  intervened under the two sub -items and took note of the 
communication from the African Group in WT/GC/W/776 and the report of the Faci litator.   
5.215.   Uganda  thank ed Ambassador Walker for his report and all his efforts made so far toward s 
finding an acceptable solution to the situation in the dispute settlement system  and all the  members 
of the African Group for their excellent contribution to the discussion regarding the crisis in the 
Appellate Body. 
5.216.   In the absence of a satisfactory solution to the current Appellate Body crisis, Uganda believed 
that 10 December 2019 would most likely mark an unfortunate, undesirable and unprecedented yet 
avoidable turn of events in the WTO and the multilateral trading system. What would happen 
between then and 10 December would  largely be in the hands of the Member that refuse d to bring 
forward concrete proposals to address the concerns it ha d raised. Sadly, until such time it  did not 
seem feasible to hope for a solution of the crisis.  
5.217.   Members should not allow the fate of th e organization to be the very thing on which it ha d 
thrived and had served the interests of many since its creation. The principle of consensus was a 
cardinal point in an org anization like th e one where sovereign nations ha d agreed to lend their WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 30 - 
 
sovereign rights by virtue of their Membership and it was important that th e principle was not 
misused for selfish interests.  
5.218.   Uganda therefore called  on all Members to join  the consensus to resolve the impasse and 
launch the selection process of the appointment of Appellate Body members without any further 
delay. If need be, Uganda  also suggested that a core Committee could be needed to  look into th e 
matter and fast -track it so that Members could  come to a solution before 10  Decembe r. 
5.219.   The representative of China  stressed that the b locking of the selection process of the 
Appellate Body by the United States c ould not be justified by any reason. In order to break the 
selection deadlock, in the past six months , Members  had brought their utmost patience and sincerity 
to the informal process  – but they still had  not gotten a  positive response from the United States.  
5.220.   During the meeting, Members had  heard some substantive comments by the United States 
on specific issues. China  viewed it as a kind of improvement  which wa s, however , not enough. 
Specific suggestions and counterpropos als were what Members needed the most.   
5.221.   The informal process was not a one -way traffic where  one Member would raise questions 
while others would compete  to answer. Members should  rather work together to deal with the 
challenges they were facing. In that se nse, the specific reform suggestions made by the Facilitator 
was a semi -public product which deserve d further discussions. China strongly urge d the United 
States to real ly engage in the solution s-oriented  discussions in a reasonable manner.  
5.222.   The Chair reiterated that Members would  need to decide on the format and the vehicle for 
the process in the second half of the year. She certainly did not need to stress the time constraints 
under which they we re operat ing.   
5.223.   As the D irector -General had  noted at the 19 July Informal TNC and Informal HODs meetings , 
Members  only ha d three working months for a solution to be found. The matter need ed Members'  
engagement and pragmatic spirit  and should be urgently dealt with . She therefore ask ed 
Ambassador Walker as Facilitator to continue consulting with delegations on th at very important 
matter immediately after the summer break.  
5.224.   The General Council took note  of the Chair's statement, of the report of the Facilitator and 
of the other statements.  
6  WORK PROGRAMME ON EL ECTRONIC COMMERCE – REVIEW OF PROGRESS ( S/C/57, 
G/C/65)  
6.1.  The Chair9 recalled that, a t MC11, Ministers had adopted a Decision on the Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce. In th e Decision, Ministers had decided to continue the work under the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce and had instructed the General Council to hold periodic reviews 
in its sessions of July and December 2018 and July 2019 based on the reports that could  be 
submitted by the WTO bodies entrusted with the implementation of the Work Programme namely 
the Councils for Services, Goods and TRIPS and the Committee on Trade and Development.  
6.2.  The Chairs of the Council for Trade in Services and of the Council for Trade in Goods had 
submitted written reports to the General Council under their own responsibility. Th ose reports were 
contained in S/C/57 and G/C/65, respectively, and g ave an overview of the discussions that had 
taken  place in the two Councils since the last review of progress in December 2018.  
6.3.  Deputy Director -General Yi Xiaozhun, on behalf of the Chair of the Services Council , said that 
a fuller account of the updates in that regard was contained in the written report circulated to all 
Members on 11 July in do cument S/C/57 and noted that the CTS had discussed the Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce at both of its formal meetings on 21 March and 27 June.  
6.4.  At the March meeting, China had presented information on the provisions on consumer 
protection and the liab ility of e -commerce platforms in its new Electronic Commerce Law. The United 
States had provided information about a year -long cooperation initiative between the Governments 
                                                
9 The Chair's report  was circulated in WT/GC/W/780 . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 31 - 
 
of the United States and of Lao PDR and their respective private sectors on digita l economy issues. 
Australia had shared information about its "Tech Future" digital economy strategy.  
6.5.  One delegation had suggested that a 'needs assessment', similar to the one that had been 
undertaken for the TFA, be carried out for e -commerce. Many Membe rs had called for work under 
the Work Programme to continue and be intensified and had stressed the importance of examining 
the challenges faced by developing and LDC Members in the digital sphere. Several Members were 
of the view that it was premature to consider negotiating rules on e -commerce while one delegation 
had reiterated its serious concerns with the parallel discussions on e -commerce aimed at rulemaking 
under the Joint Statement Initiative.  
6.6.  At the June meeting, the United States had introduced i ts submission on "The Economic 
Benefits of Cross -Border Data Flows". Several Members said that the communication had usefully 
illustrated the importance of data flows for digital trade and for commercial activities in nearly all 
economic sectors. A number of Members had underscored the point made in the submission about 
the importance of finding a balance between the free cross -border flow of data and the pursuit of 
public policy objectives. Certain delegations had expressed the view that the paper did not 
adequately discuss the complex and diverse risks associated with cross -border data flows. The LDC 
Group called for discussions to focus on the benefits and costs of e -commerce for LDCs.  
6.7.  Some delegations had been  supportive of the suggestion in the US subm ission that 
international groups having carried out work on data flows  like the OECD or APEC be invited to share 
information with the Council. Other delegations had called for UNCTAD to be invited to contribute as 
well. One delegation had cautioned against  the WTO discussing privacy regimes underscoring that 
privacy had not been a trade issue but a fundamental right.  China, Canada, Egypt and New Zealand 
had also shared experiences and information on matters relevant to the Work Programme.  
6.8.  Ambassador José Lu ís Cancela (Uruguay), Chair of the Goods Council , referred Members to the 
full report of the meetings of the  CTG to the General Council circulated  in document  G/C/65 . To 
comply with what had been  agreed by the Ministers to continue the work carried out within the 
framework of the Work Program me on Electronic Commerce and the mandate given to the General 
Council to conduct periodic examinations at its meetings in July and December 2018 and July 2019 
on the basis of the reports submitted by the relevant WT O bodies and to report at the next session 
of the Ministerial Conference  in that regard , the CTG  had included at its previous  meetings the item 
on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce  in its agenda . 
6.9.  During the April CTG meeting, the CTG had taken note  of the statement of the LDC  Group  
inviting the relevant WTO bodies to intensify their work before the current Ministerial Dec ision 
expired  and to  consider the benefits and costs of electronic commerce for LDCs  in that regard . In its 
statement, the LDC Group had also referred to several challenges and difficulties that th eir countries 
faced in order to benefit and enjoy the advantages of electronic commerce. With a view to addressing 
those challenges, t he LDC Group had announced that  it had intended to cond uct an internal workshop 
to analy se those issues.  
6.10.   During the July meeting of the CTG , he had taken note of the differen t presentations by 
Members concerning various topics on electronic commerce which would  help to promote industrial 
development and international trade in goods. One Member had stated that it recogni zed the 
potential advantages and benefits of electronic commerce but that the particular conditions of 
developing and LDC Members  should also be considered when addressing th e issue and that it had 
been pertinent to complete other work for the benefit of those Members before undertak ing 
negotiations on electronic commerce. Another  Member  had stressed the importance of the current 
negotiations on el ectronic commerce as they had demonstrated that the WTO respond ed to the 
current realities of international trade.  
6.11.   Since the next Ministerial Conference w ould take place i n June 2020 but not in 
December  2019, the Goods Council had agreed t o maintain the item on the Work Programme on 
Electronic Commerce in its agenda and w ould inform the General Council about it at its December 
meeting . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 32 - 
 
6.12.   Ambassador Chad Blackman (Barbados), Chair of the CTD , reported that since the Buenos 
Aires Ministerial Conference, five me etings of the regular session of the CTD had been held. The 
item concerning the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce had been listed on the agenda of all 
those meetings. During the course of discussions under that agenda item, some ideas had been 
shared a bout possible work in the CTD in the e -commerce area. However, there were still no concrete 
proposals on the table.  
6.13.   A number of delegations had nevertheless indicated their interest in that area. At recent 
meetings, the LDC Group had called for a reinvigor ation of the Work Programme in order to address 
the needs of LDCs. The Committee would revert to the agenda item concerning the Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce at its next meeting which would be held in November.  
6.14.   The Chair noted that w ith respect to the TRIPS Council, she underst ood from the TRIPS Council 
Chair that there ha d been no appetite among delegations to discuss the Work Programme in the 
TRIPS Council since 2018. The Chair remind ed Members of the Ministerial mandate for th at work 
and w ould report again should there be any activity in the context of the TRIPS Council's  meetings.  
6.15.   Concerning  the Work Programme  in general,  she extended her gratitude to the Chairs for the 
work carried out on e -commerce in their respective bodies and for their reports that day. She 
welcomed the discussions held under the Work Programme in th e regular bodies, the papers 
submitted and the information shared. As Members had however heard from the reports of the 
Chairs, the level of engagement differed among the bodies. In line with the Member -driven nature 
of WTO work, she encouraged delegations  to contribute to discussions in all the mandated bodies 
by putting forward views and concrete ideas on how Members could move their e -commerce 
discussions forward.  
6.16.   Concerning the moratorium on the imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions 
and the  informal open -ended meeting that she had convened on 17 June  to discuss  that matter, she 
recall ed that the discussion had intensified in 2018  following the submission from India and South 
Africa on the need to rethink the moratorium. Th at had been  followed by consultations by her 
predecessor and an informal open -ended meeting in late November 2018.  
6.17.   To better inform the discussion, a workshop focusing on the moratorium had been  held earlier 
that year and she had  reported on that workshop at the May General Council meeting. On 17 June, 
she had  convened an informal open -ended meeting to discuss the Work Programme in general and 
to consider the recent submission from India and South Africa on the moratorium circulat ed in 
document WT/GC/W/774.  
6.18.   The proponents had called for more discussion given the importance Members had attached 
to the moratorium and the December deadline. In their view, such discussions could help identify 
areas of common interest to Members and pro vide a platform for experience sharing without 
prejudging the extension of the moratorium.  
6.19.   As General Council Chair, she intend ed to consult broadly with Members following the summer 
break and she was ready to facilitate any further meeting as necessary b ased on Members ' 
proposals. As  Members were all aware, t he General Council w ould need to take a decision on the 
moratorium by the end of th e year. 
6.20.   The representative of India said that e -commerce ha d created new and exciting opportunities  
in global trade. However, at the same time, it also pose d significant infrastructure and regulatory 
challenges for developing Members  who were at a disadvantage and would lose out due to the large 
digital divide. As the digital revolution was still unfolding,  India had on a number of occasions 
reiterated that it was important to first understand the complex and multi -faceted dimensions of 
issues related to e -commerce.  
6.21.   India still d id not comprehend the full implications of effects of e -commerce on competition 
and marke t structures, issues related to transfer of technology, automation and robotization and its 
impact on traditional jobs and the gaps in policy and regulating frameworks experienced by  
developing Member s. India had  therefore  been proponents of strengthening the multilateral work 
under the non -negotiating and exploratory Work Programme on Electronic C ommerce.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 33 - 
 
6.22.   It was with the intention to understand the implications of the moratorium on customs duties 
on electronic transmissions  that India along with South Afri ca ha d introduced two submissions in 
July 2018 and in June 2019. Th ose submissions aim ed to examine the implications of the moratorium 
not just from the revenue perspective but also as to how it was impacting the digital industrialization 
of developing and  LDC Members . In that regard, India had engaged in the informal G eneral Council  
meeting on 19 June to address issues raised by some Members .  
6.23.   To highlight  key issues and address the doubts raised by some Members , India noted that, 
with the advent of indust ry 4.0 and the advance of 3D printing technologies, the moratorium w ould 
erode the existing GATT bound rates which were typically higher for developing  Members . The 
existing literature and research also unequivocally point ed out that developing Members  would be 
bearing the brunt of losses of revenue due to the moratorium. Members therefore  needed to deepen 
their debate to understand th ose implications.  
6.24.   Some Members ha d expressed doubts regarding the methodology and findings of the UNCTAD 
2019 study. What was important was the key message of th e study which highlight ed the negative 
consequences of the moratorium and loss of policy space for developing Members . It also point ed to 
the fact that if developing Members  did not regulate their trade in data and software , then the rapidly 
progressing digital technologies ha d the potential to significantly decrease their ability to control 
their manufacturing and services trade.  
6.25.   Regarding the issues related to the methodology of the study , India pointed out that the 
UNCTAD study ha d realistic estimates of electronic transmission or online trade in digitizable 
products and not just physical trade in digitizable products as in earlier such studies. The study was 
also conservative  in the estimation of revenue loss as it ha d only taken a growth rate of 8% for 
import of digitizable products against the average growth rate of global revenue of around 30% for 
services like Netflix and video games during the reference period from 2011  to 2017. 
6.26.   Questions had also been raised regarding the technical feasibility of imposing customs duties 
on electronic transmissions. In th at regard, India noted that many Members ha d started successfully 
levying GST on intangible imports. Feasibility of impo sing customs duties was therefore  not an issue. 
It was also important that the decision on desirability of imposing customs duties should rest with 
sovereign governments as a policy tool for their own development.  
6.27.   India would continue with its efforts to d eepen the discussion and engage with Members to 
understand comprehensively and examine the various dimensions of issues surrounding the 
moratorium so that Members c ould take a well -informed decision on the moratorium in December.  
6.28.   India welcome d the submiss ion by the United States on the economic benefits of cross border 
data flows under the Work Programme on Electronic C ommerce which w as the right forum for 
strengthening the multilateral work on e -commerce in the WTO. The US submission ha d flagged the 
critical issue of data which was at the heart of the e-commerce negotiations. India agree d that data 
which was the new oil was the lifeblood of economic activity and trade in  the current  digital world. 
The digital economy generate d trillions of megabytes of dat a every day which ha d significant 
commercial and economic value and big data analytics were playing an increasingly important role 
in trade and commerce.  
6.29.   All countries should be able to own and control their data for economic purposes and welfare 
of their people.  It was likewise essential that the economic benefits from e -commerce in general and 
data flows in particular should be shared in an equitable manner among all stakeholders instead of 
being monopoli sed by the global e -commerce giants. In th at regard, India' s draft e -commerce policy 
laid down possible strategies to treat data as a national asset and create a supporting legal and 
regulatory framework to ensure the same. India would engage to further deepen Members'  
discussions and understanding o n that matter . 
6.30.   India likewise reiterate d its concerns on the parallel discussions on e -commerce under the 
Joint Statement Initiative with the objective of rulemaking which was clearly contrary to the mandate 
reaffirmed at MC11 to strengthen the multilatera l work under the Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce . Rules and disciplines on e -commerce at th at stage were highly premature given the 
asymmetric nature of the existing global e -commerce sector. India therefore urged all Members to 
engage to strengthen their multilateral work under the work programme . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 34 - 
 
6.31.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , thanked the various Chairs for their reports 
particularly the Chairs of the CTG and CTD which had touched upon issues including those raised by 
the LDCs in  their respective bodies. The LDC Group support ed a tangible revival of the Work 
Program me on Electronic C ommerce  which enabled Members  to look at all issues related to that 
area including privacy, data flow  protection , localization, the e-commerce moratorium  and Members'  
effective participation in e-commerce while taking into account  their impact on LDCs.  
6.32.   The LDC  Group  had reiterated  at the meeting s of the Goods Council and the Services Council 
the issue of capacity building in relation to LDCs' eng agement in  e-commerce activities and the 
difficulties that they faced  in reducing the digital divide. The LDC Group  would be submitting its 
views on those  in a communication that would be circulated during the second half of the year . 
6.33.   The representative of  the European Union  noted that o ver the last months, Members ha d 
engaged into in -depth and substantial discussions of all aspects of the WTO moratorium on custom 
duties on electronic transmission and its implications. The discussion ha d allowed Members to 
address and discuss many of the questions raised so far.  On that basis, the European Union 
continue d to believe that the WTO moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions ha d 
made a significant contribution to the global growth of digital trade . 
6.34.   The moratorium  had provided certainty to both consumers and business es including MSMEs 
and had encouraged their engagement in global e -commerce.  It had also ensured predictability and 
facilitated the decisions of businesses in terms of strategic planning a nd structuring of enterprises.  
The European Union  therefore invite d Members to extend the WTO rule prohibiting custom duties on 
electronic transmissions permanently, if possible or at least by a regular two-year period which ha d 
been its consistent practic e for over twenty  years.  
6.35.   The representative of  the Russian Federation  encourage d Members to strengthen the 
discussion on the issues covered by the Work Programme under the Joint Statement Initiative on 
Electronic C ommerce  to help avoid duplications and facilitate comprehensive discussions with the 
participation of technical experts.  
6.36.   The Russian Federation  welcome d Kenya and Côte d'Ivoire to the Joint Statement I nitiative 
and encourage d other Members to follow suit. By staying  out of the discussions, some Members  
were missing a unique opportunity to influence the rules on e -commerce that business es urgently  
needed. By joining the debate, those who previously stayed away could enrich the process by 
articulating their needs, conc erns and priorities.  
6.37.   As Members  pursue d a transparent, inclusive and open multilateral agreement on e -
commerce, they should  ensure that there was a balanced approach that adequately t ook into account 
the considerations of all Membe rs. 
6.38.   The representative of  South Africa  recall ed the Declaration on Global Electronic Commerce 
adopted by Ministers at the second session of the Ministerial Conference  which urged the General 
Council to establish a comprehensive work programme to examine all trade -related issues re lating 
to global electronic commerce taking into account the economic, financial and development needs 
of developing Members  and to report on the progress of the work programme with any 
recommendations for action. In addition, all aspects of the work progr amme concerning the 
imposition of customs duties on electronic transmission sh ould be examined in the General Council.  
6.39.   At MC11 , Ministers  had agreed to continue the work under the Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce based on the existing mandate as set out in WT/L/274 and to endeavour to reinvigorate 
the work and had instructed the General Council to hold periodic reviews. Th e decision at MC11  built 
on previous decisions wherein Members had  agreed that the Work Programme could  explore 
appropriate mechanisms to address the relationship between electronic commerce and development 
in a focused and comprehensive manner.  
6.40.   The Work Programme provide d a useful platform to achieve the objectives for which it had 
been set and to promote sharing of views and experiences , among others . The sharing of experiences 
on taxation, competition and how Members deal t with concentration w ould also add value.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 35 - 
 
6.41.   E-commerce and digital trade evolv ed at enormous speed. As Members  consider ed ways of 
reinvi gorating the Work Programme, it was important to focus their discussions on the development 
needs of developing Members  to ensure equitable participation and distribution of benefits arising 
from e -commerce. There should  be comprehensive analysis of the ec onomic and financial 
implications to ensure informed policy decisions on issues related to e-commerce. Reinvigorating 
those discussions  should  be done within the framework of the implementation of the Work 
Program me on Electronic Commerce and based on the existing mandate.  
6.42.   Data was undoubtedly at the heart of the digital economy. It was important to have a balanced 
discussion on the value of data, the costs and implications of the free flow of data and how Members 
could leverage data to promote digital industrial policy and inclusive growth. Future discussions 
should focus on issues such as concentration and anti -competitive practices occurring in the context 
of the digital economy.  
6.43.   As data bec ame the new factor of produ ction – as an i nput that le d to economic profit  – in 
the digital economy , there was the potential for those with data processing capacity to also make 
new markets out of data flows. The free flow of data w ould have implications for the flow of goods 
and se rvices and would require a thorough assessment of its implications on data regulation policies 
if Members want ed to maintain the same or similar level of market opening as compared to their 
existing GATT or GATS schedules. In addition, data regulation poli cies were also vital for privacy, 
cyber security and national security considerations.  
6.44.   Furthermore, more discussion was required on the implications of the moratorium on 
electronic transmissions as the deadline was fast approaching. Discussions should  include challenges 
related to e -commerce such as the business practices of digital firms, market concentration, taxation 
and competition in the digital economy.  
6.45.   The representative of Uganda  said that the  Minister ial Conference  had mandated Members  to 
continue the ir work under the Work Program me on Electronic C ommerce  – which had been done for 
a good reason. Unfortunately, s ome Members  continued to exert efforts that were  contrary to that 
mandate .  
6.46.   The impressive expansion of e -commerce over the yea rs and enormous expected growth in 
the years to come that ha d been documented in various places to date ha d occurred in the absence 
of rules at the global level. Members should therefore be cognisant  of the danger that those  rules 
present ed to such further  anticipated growth.  
6.47.   A lot remain ed to be discussed under the work program me. The Marrake sh Agreement 
recogni zed the need for positive efforts designed to ensure that developing and LDC Members 
secure d a share in the growth in international trade commensur ate with the needs of their economic 
development. Th at could  prove to be difficult to achieve with the current status of the digital 
economy where  benefits were concentrated among a few  begging the question of the role of the 
existing GATS rules.  
6.48.   GATS Article 8.5 concerning monopolies and exclusive service suppliers stated  that a 
Member 's monopoly supplier c ould not act in a manner inconsistent with its obligations. Uganda 
referred to the document S/L/34 and said that i n the past  discussions on the Work Pr ogramme on 
Electronic Commerce in the Services Council , Members had stated that monopolies and restrictive 
business practices could  pose obstacles to electronic commerce and that th e issue need ed further 
examination.  
6.49.   In the TRIPS Council Chair's progress report to the General Council in relation to the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce circulated in IP/C/18 , it had been noted that a Secretariat 
background note had referred to "the role that the TRIPS Agreement and a functioning intellectual 
property regime should play in promoting technological development, including in connection with 
electronic communications networks, facilitating access to technology, requiring disclosure of new 
technology, requiring under Article  66.2 incentives for promoting and encouraging technology 
transfer to least -developed country Members and providing for measures and international 
cooperation to deal with anti -competitive practices relating to the transfer of technology.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 36 - 
 
6.50.   As such, given th e role of technology in the digital economy, the importance of the work 
programme's revival  and further discussion s on the critical issues under the Work Program me on 
Electronic Commerce could not be over -emphasi sed. 
6.51.   The representative of the United States  support ed reinvigorating the Work  Programme on 
Electronic Commerce. The United States  had been actively participating in the discussions and had 
been sharing information on certain capacity building projects that support ed the digital economy.  
6.52.   The United States  had also used the Work Programme to advance Members ' understanding 
on the importance of cross -border data flows to the expansion of international trade. The US  
submission in the CTS on  June 2019 had been  designed to be a complement to the ongoing 
negotiations to reach an ambitious outcome on digital trade and e -commerce.  
6.53.   The United States looked forward to continued work under the Work Programme to advance 
e-commerce and digital trade.  
6.54.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  thanked the Chair for convening the informal open -
ended meeting in June to discuss, among others, the  moratorium on customs duties on electronic 
transmission which  had provided Members an opportunity to reflect further on its implications on 
global trade and development and on the way forward.     
6.55.   Hong Kong, China  reiterate d its support for making the moratorium permanent to pr ovide 
certainty and predictability to the global business community.  
6.56.   Meanwhile, renewals of the moratorium by Ministers since the launch of the Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce in 1998 ha d provided a stable and predictable environment for global 
electronic commerce to thrive in the past twenty  years. Since the current moratorium w ould expire 
in December 2019, there was mounting urgency for Members to kickstart the process for its renewal. 
Any delay would be a big step backward for the WTO and would und ermine its credibility and role in 
promoting free trade.  
6.57.   Hong Kong, China  support ed the Chair's  proposed way forward to consult with Members after 
the summer break  and stood ready to join the discussions.  
6.58.   The representative of Benin  noted that electronic c ommerce wa s an important and relevant 
subject . As such, Members should all make their contribution in order to move forward with their 
mandate under the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce . At present, in talking about e -
commerce, Members knew that there  was a functional link between the application of e -commerce 
and the digital divide  necessitating the identification of the potential of e -commerce for Members 
while identifying the obstacles that existed in that regard particularly those faced by developi ng and 
LDC Members.  
6.59.   Concerning the potential of electronic commerce , Benin understood that  e-commerce allow ed 
Members  to ensure that information was disseminated instantaneously  which  applie d to both trade 
in goods and services and which  allowed for a grea ter scale. At the same time,  there were also 
constraints in relation to  both connection and connectivity  which particularly applied to developing 
and LDC Members . There were also issues regarding the  digital infrastructure and the development 
of expertise. Whether it be in Africa or in certain areas of Asia, the Caribbean or the Pacific, those 
constraints persisted and Members should try to address them by  revers ing those constraints.  
6.60.   Concerning cons umer protectio n, Benin noted that each of them was a consumer to some 
extent that needed  to protect its privacy  – a part of the d ay-to-day realities. Accessibility of 
payments was not something available to every one particularly for those who lived outside  urban 
centres and those in rural areas. Given the circumstances, Members should  ensure that they had an 
e-payment system that was available to all so that they would  not leave large sectors of the ir 
population digitally illiterate. Members needed to striv e for innovation  and further discuss  data flows  
and localization issues  as had been mentioned by delegations who had previously taken the floor.  
Data was a resource  that Members  should  be able to manag e. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 37 - 
 
6.61.   Concerning the moratorium on customs duties on elect ronic transmissions, Benin said that 
the Chair ha d played a crucial role in facilitating the work in the General Council in facilitating 
Members'  exchanges on th e matter and look ed forward to  her continuing to do so in order to look 
at all aspects of th e issue and to come up with appropriate responses to the concerns  raised  before 
the end of the year.  
6.62.   The representative of Singapore  thank ed India and South Africa for raising the important 
issue of  the customs moratorium on electronic transmissions  and said that it was  timely  for Members 
to consider th at important issue as they approach ed December. Singapore a lso emphasi sed its 
support  for the reinvigoration of the 1998 Work Program me on Electronic Commerce.  
6.63.   Singapore  had listened carefully to India and South Africa and highlight ed three points 
concerning the revenue aspect of the moratorium. First, the customs moratorium should not be 
viewed narrowly as a customs duties revenue issue. Th at was ultim ately a broader trade policy 
matter. Imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions was not merely a simple matter of 
generating additional revenue. Members should  consider the adverse impacts that imposing customs 
duties on electronic transmissions w ould have on the growth of the digital economy. On the other 
hand, extending the moratorium w ould help to create predictability and security for private sector 
business that w ould deliver concrete economic benefits.  
6.64.   Second, Members  should make a clear dis tinction between internal taxes and the customs 
moratorium. India and South Africa ha d raised concerns about revenue implications of the 
moratorium and Singapore  also unders tood the need for Members to retain policy space in response 
to the digital transfo rmation. In th at context, Singapore emphasised that the moratorium did  not 
infringe on Members' rights to impose domestic taxes and collect revenue.  
6.65.   Third, Singapore recommend ed maintaining the customs moratorium as Members  had done 
so for the past twenty years. The moratorium ha d served them well and they should not dismantle 
it hastily. As they worked toward a decision at the end of the year, they should  bear in mind that 
the digital economy was transforming at a rapid and rel entless pace. There were indeed unknowns 
but that was not an excuse for them to just sit around and deepen their discussions . Members should 
rather  immediately act as the digital revolution w ould wait for no man or woman.  
6.66.   The representative of Costa Rica  was pleased  for having various opportunities to address 
issues relevant to electronic commerce under the work program me. The seminar o n 28 April 
concerning  the moratorium had been  enriching for all . Costa Rica had also share d information and  
its national ex perience on e-commerce related matters in the relevant WTO bodies.  
6.67.   Concerning the moratorium , any discussion should take into account all its dimensions 
including  in terms of job creation, development of new sectors and diversification of economies 
particu larly th ose of developing Members . 
6.68.   Costa Rica ha d always supported a permanent  commitment  in the WTO not to impose customs 
duties  on electronic transmissions with the aim of giving greater predictability to all actors in 
particular to  the small and medium -sized enter prises  that participate d in e-commerce.  
6.69.   Costa Rica, like other Members, ha d made comm itments similar to the e-commerce 
moratorium  in its bilateral trade agreements  since what wa s at stake was the non -discriminatory 
treatment between domestic and foreign suppliers and between the Members themselves – a right 
that was  currently guaranteed by the moratorium. If the  e-commerce moratorium was not extend ed, 
suppliers from other countries particularly from developing ones could be excluded and discriminated 
against resulting in the widening of the digital divide.  
6.70.   The representative of Switzerland  attache d importance to the work of the organization on e -
commerce under  the work program me and the Joint Statement Initiative launched in Buenos Aires.  
6.71.   Concerning  the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, Switzerland was 
certainly willing to continue the disc ussion on the implications of th e moratorium if deemed 
necessary. Such a reflection should however  take into account the different implications – not just 
one of them.  In that context , the seminar held at the end of April  was enlighten ing. Many speakers WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 38 - 
 
had demonstrated how the moratorium ha d avoided fragmentation of markets and had contributed 
to the growth of electronic commerce.   
6.72.   If further analysis c ould refine Members'  understanding, th at should not result in the repeal 
of the moratorium which was a fa ctor in facilitating  stability and predictability in international trade.  
The moratorium had already been an integral  condition for international trade and Switzerland was 
keen to make it permanent.  
6.73.   The representative of Norway  believe d it was important to acknowledge that Members  had 
had some interesting exchanges under the work programme  as had been evidenced by the reports 
of the Chairs of relevant WTO bodies . It was important to continue Members'  dialogue on the 
relationship between develo pment and e -commerce both under the work programme and in the 
follow up of the Joint Statement  Initiative  launched in Buenos Aires. Those dialogues were mutually 
reinforcing.  
6.74.   The moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions was an integral part  of the 
Ministerial decision that had established the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and Norway 
continue d to support making the moratorium permanent.  Norway look ed forward to continued 
discussions under the work programme in the second half of the y ear with a view to at least 
extending the moratorium.  
6.75.   The Chair reiterated that she would conduct a process of consultations on the moratorium 
after the summer break.  
6.76.   The General Council took note  of the statements of the Chair and of the Chairs of the CT S, 
CTG and CTD, of the reports in S/C/57 and G/C/65 and of the other statements.  
7  PROCEDURAL GUIDELINE S FOR WTO COUNCILS A ND COMMITTEES ADDRES SING TRADE 
CONCERNS – COMMUNICA TION FROM AUSTRALIA;  EUROPEAN UNION; HON G KONG, 
CHINA; REPUBLIC OF K OREA; NEW ZEALAN D; NORWAY; PANAMA; S INGAPORE; 
SWITZERLAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TER RITORY OF TAIWAN, PE NGHU, KINMEN AND 
MATSU; TURKEY AND UK RAINE (WT/GC/W/777/R EV.1)  
7.1.  The Chair said that the delegation of the European Union had requested the Secretariat  to 
include th e item in the agenda of the current  meeting together with the communication circulated 
in document WT/GC/W/777. A revision had been  issued on 19 July  to include two additional co -
sponsors and she underst ood that an additional revision10 to add  another co -sponsor w ould be issued 
shortly. She then invite d the European Union to take the floor.  
7.2.  The representative of the European Union  introduce d the proposal for a General Council 
decision on Procedural Guidelines for WTO Councils and Committees add ressing trade concerns. The 
European Union thanked all eleven co-sponsors and those who would  join t hat day as well as all 
Members who had provided valuable comments during the preparation process.  
7.3.  As had been set out at earlier discussions about WTO refor m, the E uropean Union  saw the need 
for modernising all three core WTO functions namely rulemaking, dispute settlement and regular 
work. Even though s afeguarding the dispute settlement and reinvigorating the rule -making functions 
were the European Union's  priorities , strengthening WTO regular work was also necessary especially 
at a time when the other two functions were under severe stress.  
7.4.  The proposal was part of the European Union's  efforts to preserve the WTO as the basis of their 
trade relationships by making its regular work respond better to the expectations of Members but 
also their stakeholders. Addressing concerns over trade measures of other Members was the daily 
bread of mos t regular WTO Councils and Committees.  
                                                
10 The revisi on was subsequently circulated in document WT/GC/W/777/Rev.2 which stated that the 
following Members were co -sponsoring the communication: Albania; Australia; European Union; Hong Kong, 
China; Republic of Korea; Republic of Moldova; New Zealand; Norway; Pa nama; Singapore; Switzerland; Chinese 
Taipei ; Thailand; Turkey and Ukraine.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 39 - 
 
7.5.  The underlying objective was to avoid that concerns escalate d to dispute settlement stage. 
Unfortunately, the European Union  saw too many repetitive, time -consuming exchanges which fail ed 
to generate genuine dialogue  and collaborative solutions.  
7.6.  In some instances, unresolved trade concerns linger ed on the agendas for several years. The 
recent CTG experience was a case in point. The last meeting on 8 -9 July had a record number of 
36 agenda items  – most of them trade c oncerns  and some of them had been on the agenda for 
years.  
7.7.  The E uropean Union  and co -sponsors consider ed that horizontal guidance could help the 
Councils and Committees address trade concerns more effectively. At present, practices differ ed 
widely across Committees even though the concerns raised in different bodies were about the same 
or related measures.  
7.8.  The suggestions in th e proposal were based on their experience in the regular bodies from both 
an offensive and defensive point of view. They had develo ped them over months in informal 
conversations with numerous Members, big and small. They had  compared practices across the WTO 
and had taken  inspiration from good practices identified in some Committees with a lot of experience 
with trade concerns such as  the TBT Committee and the Committee on Agriculture. The objective 
was not to interfere with what work ed well – that should be preserved and encouraged.  
7.9.  Without going into details , the European Union outline d the main ideas of the proposal and said 
that i t had three parts: ( 1) improved meeting arrangements – those were mostly tasks for the 
Secretariat , (2) guidelines for Members' work on trade concerns in Council/ Committee meetings and 
(3) additional informal means for resolving trade concerns.  
7.10.   Regarding improved meeting arrangements, the set of rules in Paragraphs 1  to 4 aim ed to 
facilitate the preparation of meetings. Th at would not only improve the consideration of trade 
concerns but also all other substantive discussions which need ed preparation. The proponents simply 
proposed to have a little more time than what was  currently the practice in many bodies for Members 
to digest items proposed for the agenda and relevant documents. They also propose d for Members 
to receive  reports of past meetings earlier than what was  currently the case. As Paragraph 5 
specifie d, they propose d that set of improvements to be mandatory.  
7.11.   For Members' work in Council and Committee meetings, the Guidelines i n Paragraphs 6  to 11 
aimed to make the discussions on trade concerns more effective.  
7.12.   The Secretariat should help Members by managing and making available relevant information 
in a database as had been stated in P aragraph 8 and assisting the Chair in givin g an overview of 
relevant discussions when a trade concern was taken up as had been stated in P aragraph 9.  
7.13.   The European Union stressed that what they had proposed  were principles of good conduct  
and were  not intended to create new legal obligations.  
7.14.   As add itional means for resolving persistent trade concerns, Paragraphs 12  to 14 encourage d 
the use of an informal avenue for resolving trade concerns with the help of Chairpersons and the 
Secretariat or other experts as appropriate. Although the  possibility alr eady exist ed, the proponents  
still included it as they would like to put it more firmly on the radar screen of Members so that they 
exploit ed it better.  
7.15.   The European Union also stressed that t he proposal was far from revolutionary , nor was it the 
solution to the WTO's most fundamental problems. But it c ould be a useful piece in the WTO reform 
puzzle  as it very much f ell into the category of doable proposals.  
7.16.   Importantly, the proponents  did not intend to change one iota in the balance of Members' 
rights and obligations. They merely want ed Members to recogni ze the need to improve working 
practices and procedures and that , by doing so , they could collectively facilitate better outcomes for 
their operators and citizens.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 40 - 
 
7.17.   When preparing th e proposal, the proponents had done  their best to take into account 
Members' comments. They remained  committed to make th e proposal work for all and were 
therefore open to additional suggestions for improvement.  
7.18.   The representative of Ukraine  noted that Ukraine was a co -sponsor of the document discussed 
under the item and thanked the European Union for its insightful presentation a nd the  other co -
sponsors for their viable contributions during the preparation of th e proposal.  Along with other 
initiatives aimed toward s reforming the WTO, the proposed P rocedural Guideline  was relevant and 
would hopefully  lay ground for future work in th at direction.  
7.19.   The need to update the rulebook was indisputable if Members  wanted to ensure the coherence 
between the ir right to raise their concerns in the WTO regular bodies and to get an adequate 
response on one hand , and the ability of the multilateral trading system to serve as an efficient 
forum to meet such demands  on the other .  
7.20.   From Ukraine's perspective, one of the main challenges of the WTO was to find a way to 
ensure efficient and needs -based mechanisms of resolving trade concerns. In th at context, the 
communication from the proponents  invite d all Members to asses s how best to proceed to strengthen 
the functioning of the WTO regular bodies . 
7.21.   Ukraine welcome d the important objectives outlined in the document among which included 
the use of the trade concern s and practices dispute prevention mechanism and the improvement of 
efficiency and effectiveness of procedures that w ould allow t o streamline the review of the concerns 
within the WTO bodies. The mechanism which  had enabled Members to  express their  trade  concerns 
present ed a viable alternative to the currently overburdened dispute settlement system.  
7.22.   Finding potential opt ions and possible doable solutions to improve the mechanism  to deal with  
specific trade concerns and  to strengthen  the work of regular bodies would have a positive impact 
on the Membership and its stakeholders. Ukraine hoped that  the discussion would shed further light 
on how the WTO c ould seize the opportunity to become more responsive to Members' needs.  
7.23.   Ukraine look ed forward to the substantive cooperation of Members on all matters related to 
the initiative.  
7.24.   The representative of Australia  affirm ed its support as a co -sponsor to th e proposal introduced 
by the E uropean Union . One of the important functions of  WTO Councils and Committees was to 
provide Members the opportunity to discuss and resolve trade concerns at an early stage. Australia  
share d the concern of many Members that numerous trade concerns were long standing agenda 
items and that many remain ed unresolved.  
7.25.   The aim of th e proposal was to equ ip Councils and Committees with procedural guidelines to 
assist Members to better utilise existing measures of resolving trade concerns. Over time, the  
proposal ha d the potential to address the issue of unresolved trade concerns and in the long -term 
help r esolve the burden on the dispute settlement system.  
7.26.   The proposal and its enhancement to the operational efficiency of Councils and Committees 
would benefit all Members. Th at was  particularly the case for Members with resource constraints 
who would benefit  from the additional clarity provided by the proposal. Australia  highlight ed in 
particular the propos ed improvements to transparency and to better practice  which included  having 
common procedures for raising trade concerns across WTO bodies and the establi shment of a 
database of trade concerns.  
7.27.   The proposal was a work  in progress . Australia  and other co -sponsors remained  open to 
suggestions on ways to improve the text  and encourage d all Members to support the proposal.  
7.28.   The representative of Turkey  noted th at the European Union had  already introduced the key 
elements of the proposal . As one of the co -sponsors, Turkey  believe d that th e proposal w ould help 
WTO Councils and Committees  perform the organization's deliberative function more effective ly. By 
bringing a cross -cutting approach, th e proposal update d certain procedures in the WTO bodies and 
ensure d better use of the tools available in the system. The proposal  would streamline the 
functioning of the Committees and Council s, coordinat e duplications and br ing efficiency.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 41 - 
 
7.29.    The proposal would  benefit Members who lack ed necessary staff to participate in  each 
Committee meeting. Th rough the proposed guidelines, Members especially  developing Members and 
small delegations w ould have a better chance to follow  discussions around the same trade concern 
in different WTO bodies. The proposal would also help in the process of finding solution s to issues 
before they end ed up in litigation which was not desirable especially for developing Members.  
7.30.    Through the guide lines, Members w ould be more prepared to participate in  meetings . All the 
formal and informal processes w ould be more transparent through enhanced coordination and 
dialogue. In addition, the proposal would  not impose  any additional burden on Members.  
7.31.   The proponents remained open to engage in discussions with other M embers for any concerns 
or suggestions they could  have regarding th e proposal.  
7.32.   The representative of New Zealand  joined the broad range of Members co -sponsoring th e 
proposal  which  set out tangible, practical and pragmatic improvements to Council and Committee 
functioning. The proposed improvements in the meeting arrangements would make a practical 
difference to Members both in Geneva and to colleagues in capital.  
7.33.   To illustrate,  many Councils and Committee s currently circulated convening notices with 
proposed agenda items ten calendar days in advance. If the meeting was scheduled on a Monday, 
as had been  the case with the recent  regular session of the C ouncil on Trade in Goods, week ends 
took out four of the ten days  leaving only five full working days to prepare. By requiring the 
convening notice to be circulated fifteen days in advance, the proposal would allow more time to 
engage with capitals and for capitals to provide instructio ns. All Members would benefit  collectively  
and Members individually would be  better prepared for meetings.  
7.34.   Receiving minutes earlier, having an indicative schedule of meetings for a year and the ability 
to access a searchable database on trade concerns wo uld likewise  be of considerable assistance. 
Those were likely to be particularly helpful for smaller delegations.  New Zealand also echoed what 
the European Union  had already mentioned regarding the non -mandatory nature of the guidelines 
and the potential v alue addition for the informal mechanisms.  
7.35.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that Chinese Taipei wa s one of the co -sponsors of 
the proposal  because developing a horizontal procedural guideline for WTO Councils and Committees 
in addressing trade concerns  which  provided guidance  in that regard  was vital for the healthy 
functioning of the WTO.  
7.36.   The whole purpose of th e proposal was to make WTO regular work better respond to Members'  
stakeholders . With the proposed guidelines, t he WTO c ould better help Members and their 
stakeholders to resolve trade concerns without further escalating them into dispute settlement.  The 
proposal was therefore a cautious but an important step to modernise th e organi zation.  
7.37.   Based on the 85% principle that it had  mentioned in the 19 July Informal TNC and Informal 
HODs meetings , Chinese Taipei  urged Members to lend their support to th e proposal as a way 
forward on th at important issue.  
7.38.   The representative of Switzerland  thank ed the E uropean Union  for its introductory r emarks 
and for presenting the proposal  which it had co -sponsored. The proposal  provide d simple and 
effective guidelines for improving the functioning of Committees particularly in discussions of specific 
trade concerns .  
7.39.   The proposal also had many advantages that ha d already been highlighted by other co -
sponsors . Switzerland noted in particular  the possibility of involving the Chair of a Committee and 
the Secretariat to help Members resolve their differences.  
7.40.   In the same spirit and in addition  to the proposal discussed t hat day, Switzerland ha d launched 
discussions on the  possibility  of establishing a mediation framework in the WTO. Th e proposed 
framework aimed to support Members in finding mutually acceptable solutions to their commercial 
disputes. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 42 - 
 
7.41.   The proposed  mediation framework would provide  voluntary, structured but flexible 
procedures and would be  an additional tool that would be  particularly useful for delegations with 
limited means.  Informal discussions were ongoing in that regard and Switzerland  invite d all 
interested Members to participate.   
7.42.   The representative of Norway  co-sponsor ed the proposal  because  it was a modest but useful 
step in order to make the WTO a better tool for all Members. Streamlining procedural gu idelines for 
meetings w ould make the organization more transparent and eas ier to understand for Members.  
7.43.   Members w ould also benefit from a more uniform consideration of trade concerns with a view 
to solving issues before they escalate d into disputes. Th at was the objective of the second part of 
the proposal dealing with consideration and resolution of trade concerns.  
7.44.   Norway  underline d the voluntary character of th at part of the proposal and stressed that  no 
new obligations were put on Members  in that regard . Norway look ed forward to engage with other 
Members on possible improvements of the proposal.  
7.45.   The representative of Singapore  noted that  Singapore co -sponsor ed the proposal  as it showed 
that Members c ould and should galvanise around increme ntal approaches that work ed. It was not 
necessary that all ideas need ed to be revolutionary. The recommendations in th e proposal  provided  
common sense proposals that w ould help to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the WTO as 
well as enhance Membe rs' ability to participate meaningfully in meetings.  
7.46.   Some of the suggestions t ook reference from what was already being done in some 
Committees  which  include d the timeline for the circulation of the meeting agenda, the preparation 
of an indicative schedul e of meetings for the coming year, and the establishment of a database of 
information on trade concerns. Singapore regard ed those proposals as practical measures that c ould 
be implemented in other WTO bodies.  Such incremental approaches ultimately serve d their objective 
of improving the functioning of all WTO bodies.  
7.47.   The suggestions in the proposal d id not impose additional burden. On the contrary, they w ould 
help all delegations particularly small ones like Singapore  to better prepare for WTO meetings. 
Members  would have more time to consult wit h their capitals and to prepare responses. A database 
of trade concerns w ould also make it easier for Members  and their capitals to do the necessary 
research. Furthermore, t he proposal d id not change Members' fundamental rights and obligations 
under the WTO Agreements.  
7.48.   The WTO was an important institution for deliberation and dialogue among Members . Those 
operational changes w ould better equip Members  to engage in meaningful and substantive 
exchanges. Singapore remained  open to discuss and hear other Members' views on how the proposal 
could be fine -tuned.  
7.49.   The proposal join ed the many other proposals aimed at strengthening the WTO that ha d been 
tabled in recent months. Th at was a positive and unequivocal  signal that Members continue d to be 
interested in th e organi zation. Whil e Members ha d yet to converge on a single proposal, Singapore 
noted  the presence of  commonalities across the proposals whether on transparency or other areas 
of WTO reform. Members  should therefore focus on th ose commonalities and on the merit of each 
proposal rather than on who was tabling it. 
7.50.   All Members ultimately  share d a common interest in strengthening the WTO system . They 
should therefore tread a common path to get there.  
7.51.   The re presentative of Panama  thank ed the European Union and the other co -sponsors 
represent ing a very broad range of Members for presentin g their proposal  which endeavour ed to 
address  trade concerns and emphasis ed best practi ces in the Committees that took them up.  
7.52.   Panama was slightly concerned by the increase in the number of trade concerns which ha d 
been submitted in the various WTO Committees  and Councils . In that regard, the proposal  provided  
opportunities to underscore and promote mechanisms and practic es that were currently available  to 
promote dialogue and improve the general functioning of the WTO regular bodies .  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 43 - 
 
7.53.   The proposal emphasise d transparency  through  better exchange of information . The 
measures proposed would facilitat e the resolution of conce rns and would avoid such to  be repeated ly 
placed on the agenda of WTO Committees or Councils for many years or  to be elevated into dispute 
settlement. The proposal  further provide d for the Secretariat to produce more detailed reports in a 
faster timeframe and assist Members to prepare for meetings.  
7.54.   Those incremental steps  would  undoubtedly improve  regular  work at the WTO. Panama  was 
willing to listen to the comments and suggestions of other Members about how to improve the 
functioning of the  WTO Committees  and Councils,  how to best resolve trade concerns and how to 
improve the proposal that was currently  on the table. Panama  looked forward to putting th ose ideas 
into practice.  
7.55.   The representative of  the Republic of Korea  appreciate d the European Uni on's comprehensive 
introduction of the proposal. As a co -sponsor, Korea highlight ed key points in the procedural 
guideline  including the  necessity to horizontal guidance, the benefits to small economies and 
delegations and the prompt and substantive contri bution to WTO reform.  
7.56.   There was an urgent need for the WTO to effectively tackle trade concerns. For example, at 
the previous meeting  of the Council for Trade in Goods , more than two -thirds of the agenda items 
had been  trade concerns raised by both develo ped and developing Members. If such trade concerns 
were not addressed more effectively and remain ed unresolved, Members  would  not only confront 
high tension s among themselves  but it would also weaken the WTO's relevance to the multilateral 
trading system.  
7.57.   At present, there was no set of general rules to fully address such trade concerns raised by 
Members. Th at called for establishing comprehensive procedural guidelines to facilitate discussions 
and effectively resolve trade concerns. In th at regard, th e draft decision was timely proposed . 
7.58.   The guidelines w ould especially help small economies to handle trade concerns. The draft 
decision was aimed at maximising the Secretariat's assistance to Members including by making 
relevant information available in a database. As the E uropean Union  had already pointed out, the 
proposal d id not create any new obligation for small economies.  
7.59.   Among numerous proposals and options offered so far to upgrade and modernise the current 
WTO system, th e draft decision w ould contribute to an immediate operational improvement of the 
WTO's functioning. Furthermore, the advantage of the proposal was that it c ould be adopted without 
prejudice to Members' obligations , without further mandate and importantly without delay. Korea  
looked forward to wider support for the draft guidelines.  
7.60.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  joined the E uropean Union  in co-sponsoring the 
proposal  concerning the procedural guidelines for WTO Councils and Committees that address ed 
trade concerns.  
7.61.   Hong Kong, China  had been a staunch supporter of the multilateral trading system and the 
WTO. Not only d id it want the organi zation to continue to work, it also  wanted it to work well for 
every Member. In that regard, t he proposal on the table t hat day was a modest b ut useful step 
towards achieving th at objective.  
7.62.   Enhancing the meeting arrangements, putting in place some guidelines for Members ' work on 
trade concerns and making available additional informal means for resolving trade concerns were all 
pragmatic ways to  strengthen the deliberative function of the WTO for all Members.  
7.63.   Due to resource constraint s, smaller delegations were facing increasing challenges in 
preparing for and following up on discussions relating to trade concerns in different forums.  To 
respond  to such realities, t he proposal contain ed several elements that would facilitate delegations, 
in particular smaller delegations such as Hong Kong, China  to better prepare and plan for the 
discussions on trade concerns as well as on other matters. Early circulation of convening notices was 
one such example and early circulation of indicative annual meeting schedules was another. Hong 
Kong, China  hoped that, with better preparation , Members would be able to engage in substantive 
discussions more effectively.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 44 - 
 
7.64.   The proposed guidelines were a constructive contribution to the reform process because they 
provide d a pathway for the various Councils and Committees t o work better in their day  to day 
operation. Hong Kong, China echoed what the European Union had previously mentioned that  while 
the proposal was not revolutionary,  it was both useful  and doable.  
7.65.   The representative of Thailand  inform ed Members that Thailan d recently became  a new co -
sponsor of th e proposal.  The proposal provided  a positive and pragmatic approach to enhance the 
efficiency of WTO bodies including in tackling trade concerns while maintaining the existing balance 
of rights and obligations of Mem bers. The proposed guidelines could directly improve the efficiency 
of meetings by enabling Members to better prepare for them through  highlighting the tools and the 
process that would allow Members to effectively resolve trade concerns prior to litigation . 
7.66.   Along with other co -sponsors, Thailand remain ed ready to discuss with interested Members 
with a view to achieving a clear understanding a nd a practical outcome on th e issue.  Thailand  also 
urged other  Members to join the effort to enhance the effectiveness of WTO Councils and 
Committees.  
7.67.   The representative of Mexico  thank ed the European Union and other  co-sponsors for 
presenting th e proposal. It was of paramount importance for Members to  make the organization 
work more efficient ly particularly  in the way in which specific trade concerns were discussed and 
resolved. By doing so, it  would not only benefit those involved in the specific trade concerns but also 
the system as a whole.  
7.68.   It was for th at reason that Mexico  welcome d a number of points in the proposal  particularly  
making  all documents to be dealt with in a regular  body's meeting available at least fifteen  days 
prior to the meeting and circulating  the minutes of the meeting within th ree weeks after the meeting 
and not later than thirty  calendar days before the next regularly scheduled meeting ensur ing that 
delegations would be better prepared for discussions.  
7.69.   Mexico  also welcome d the suggestion in the proposal  of establishing  a perio d of time prior to 
the Committee meeting to enable  stakeholders involved in a specific  trade concern to be informed 
so that they would have  the opportunity to  respond to questions put in writing  – paving the way for 
a better manner  of addressing the concern.  
7.70.   Mexico further suggested that  both the Secretariat and the Committee be given a different 
way of addressing trade concerns that ha d already been presented  in a Committee or Council several 
times. It would  be in the interest of all Members to have more effective tools in order to have a way 
of resolving trade concerns in a more expedit ed manner. In this way, Members could  avoid 
overburdening the dispute settlement system which was already weakened. Mexico remained  ready 
and willi ng to continue to work in order to further discuss the matter . 
7.71.   The representative of  the Republic of Moldova  joined others in commending the European 
Union and co -sponsors for the tabled proposal  which was an important contribution to the discussions 
on strengthening the  functioning  of the WTO . The content of the document seem ed well-balanced 
aiming to improve transparency and the procedural ability of the WTO bodies to deal with trade 
concerns.  
7.72.   Moldova  appreciate d that the draft document also took into ac count the reduced capacity of 
smaller WTO missions to participate actively and reactively in th ose discussions. Moldova  hoped to 
see Members constructive ly engaging on discussions concerning the  proposal as improved horizontal 
procedural rules w ould benefit all  of them . The Republic of Moldova therefore  announce d its intention 
to co-sponsor the proposal.  
7.73.   The representative of  the Russian Federation  thanked co -sponsors of the item for putting it 
on the agenda. The draft decision was still under consid eration by Russia's capital -based experts. 
Russia however noted that it saw certain merits in discussing the problem at the General Council.  
7.74.   Russia shared the goals and objectives of the document and acknowledged its focus on 
streamlining the work of WTO b odies. Certain elements of the draft decision, if adopted, could 
discipline the work of the WTO bodies with a potential of making it more results -oriented and more WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 45 - 
 
effective.  Russia however still had many questions on the document which it would like the c o-
sponsors to address in an appropriate time and manner.  
7.75.   The representative of  the United States  thank ed the European  Union and the co-sponsors for 
the draft decision which ha d sparked some interesting conversations among Members  about how 
WTO Councils and  Committees function ed. 
7.76.   As one of the most active Members in the WTO 's Committee system, the United States  saw 
room for improvement  particularly in notifications which it was addressing through a separate 
proposal but also in terms of participation in some  Councils and Committees.  
7.77.   It was frustrating for the United States,  as it should  be for others , for specific trade concerns 
to be raised in Councils and Committees and then never addressed by the respondent Member.   
7.78.   For example, it  was frustrating that the United States  had raised concerns in the TBT 
Committee for almost four years with the European Union's  practice of granting GI protections to 
products w ith common cheese names that also ha d long-established international Codex standards. 
And instead of working to resolve th e concern, the United States  had learned that the European 
Union had  just granted GI protection to Havarti  – over objections of tradin g partners.  
7.79.   It was frustrating that the United States had  been raising concerns in the TBT Committee 
about the European Union's  policies regarding traditional terms for wine for more than twenty  years. 
More recently, the United States  had also raised conc erns with th ose policies in the CTG and still ha d 
not been able to find resolution or even receive information about the status of the US  industry 's 
applications submitted a decade ago.  
7.80.   And it  was deeply disappointing that the United States had  raised con cerns in the TBT 
Committee with the European Union's  regulatory regime for chemicals for almost fourteen  years.  
7.81.   At the most recent meeting of the TBT Committee, Members had raised 63 specific trade 
concerns . Of the 63 STCs, eighteen  had involved conduct b y the E uropean Union . Many of th ose 
STCs ha d been on the TBT Committee agenda for years including one for twenty  years as the United 
States had just noted. A few of th ose STCs ha d gone unresolved with over a dozen Members 
complaining over a period of sever al years.  
7.82.   In reading through th e draft decision, the United States  was not however  sure that it would 
make a meaningful difference in forcing Members to respond and engage on specific trade concerns.  
In fact, it could be that th e decision went some distance to limit or at least make more cumbersome 
the ability of Members to raise issues in WTO Councils and Committees. The United States  felt that 
it could be particularly true for small delegations.  A turn in th at direction would be troubling.  
7.83.   The United States  was also concerned about what it perceive d to be an increased role for 
Chairpersons and the Secretariat neither of whom ha d authority to resolve specific trade concerns.  
The ability to resolve STCs remain ed with the Members and in the case  of TBT and SPS with 
regulatory bodies . 
7.84.   In particular, both the SPS and TBT Agreements ha d built-in mechanisms to review the 
operation and implementation of the Agreements. Th ose periodic reviews by the Committees were 
excellent opportunities to propose im provements to Committee procedures.  
7.85.   The TBT Committee had recently  concluded its eighth  review and the SPS Committee was in 
the midst of its fifth review. A number of suggestions in th e proposal appear ed to be drawn from 
other Members ' contributions in th ose processes – some of those ideas ha d already been adopted, 
others had not reach ed consensus among Members – demonstrating that a bottom up approach to 
improvements in the context of each Committee work ed better and would be more appropriate than 
a horiz ontal, one size fits all approach.   
7.86.   In contrast to th e draft decision, the United States  further noted the exemplary efforts of 
Brazil to lead an open, inclusive process over the last year to develop consensus proposals to improve 
the functioning of the S PS Committee.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 46 - 
 
7.87.   As had been noted in the EU draft decision, regular WTO Council and Committee meetings 
offered Members the possibility to discuss and resolve concerns with trade -related measures. But 
resolution require d willingness of Members to address conc erns raised.  
7.88.   What was needed  the most was not more process but more political will. Th at would be the 
most effective way to resolve th ose longstanding concerns.  
7.89.   Rather than seeking to silence concerns through  Committee reform, the United States  instead 
urged the proponents to take th ose concerns into account and to bring their measures into greater 
alignment with scientific evidence and international norms.  That alone would make a significant 
difference in the operation of the WTO Committee syste m to which years ha d been dedicated on 
those STCs and others like them.  
7.90.   The representative of Uruguay  thank ed the E uropean Union  and the co -sponsors for 
presenting th e draft General Council Decision on Procedural Guidelines for WTO Committees and 
Councils that address ed trade concerns.  
7.91.   In a constructive and preliminary way, Uruguay  share d the objective of making the system 
more effective and efficient in order to further resolve specific trade  concerns at the Committee and 
Council level.  
7.92.   Uruguay  had seen some positive progress with respect to the previous version of the 
document such as th e elimination of the i tem that had recommended that Members that support ed 
a specific trade concern would limit their statements a nd the last point on how to deal with ongoing  
trade  concerns originally raised on regulato ry issues which were subsequently ad opted and 
executed . 
7.93.   Even if the proposal only spoke of guidelines, the proponents  should still be  careful not to 
suggest that Members should  refrain from presenting their arguments to the extent possible  when 
a trade concern was repeatedly raised at a WTO body  "to make the best use of time" as had been 
referred to in Paragraph 11 of the proposal . As Uruguay  had previously stated , it was still the right 
of any Member  to do so because  there could still  be political value in repetition  in certain instances . 
7.94.   Uruguay  share d the view that it would be a positive step  to have the annotated agenda and 
other documents circulated in advance to allow Membe rs to be well prepare d for the next meetings. 
The proponents should however consider the  possibility of Members rec eiving  instructions from their 
capital at the last minute  and that a c ertain degree of flexibility could still  be needed to  enable 
Members to  continue exercising their  right to raise any trade concern regardless of whether or not 
it would be the first time for such STC to be taken up in a Council or Committee.  
7.95.   Concerning the minutes of meetings, although Uruguay fully agree d with the need for the 
minutes to be circulated much earlier to provide Members more time to prepare for the next meeting, 
a horizontal rule could be difficult to apply given that different Committees and Councils had different 
practices when it came to circulating the minute s as some of them seemed to take longer time to 
prepare them than others.  
7.96.   In any case, Uruguay would not oppose the idea of having written questions and answers 
related to trade  concerns provided  that they complement ed the discussions  of Members in regular 
meetings and would not constitute as its  substitut e. 
7.97.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , welcome d the proposal  and thanked the 
European Union and the co -sponsors for presenting it at that meeting and for keeping in tou ch with 
the LDC Coordinator while preparing such document.  
7.98.   The LDC Group t ook note of th e proposal which constituted as a  welcome contribution to 
Members' collective  reflection on WTO Reform in order to improve the deliberative function of the 
organization . The LDCs  subscribe d to the principles according to which the deliberati ve function  
should be effective in order to resolve specific trade concerns that were put on the agenda of different 
Councils and Committees.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 47 - 
 
7.99.   The LDC  Group welcome d various provision s that  would  ensure that Members be in a position 
to better follow meetings such as having all the relevant information made available well ahead of 
time including by circulating the relevant documents much earlier.  
7.100.   The LDC Group  also welcome d the idea of improving deliberations in the WTO so that all 
Members would  be able to express their views and make their contributions bearing in mind that the  
Secretariat remained  always open to listen to Members in order to facilitate their work and ensure 
that it was as productive as possible.  
7.101.   The representative of Argentina  appreciate d the propo sal by the E uropean Union  and other 
co-sponsors on the important matter of monitoring trade concerns.  The draft decision contained 
interesting and useful elements including advance circulation of the documents to be considered at 
a meeting, swifter availability of meeting reports and the preparation of a tentative annual calendar 
of meetings. Such adjustments c ould have a positive impact beyond trade concerns per se.  
7.102.   On the specific provisions that relate d to trade concerns, as Argentina  had stated before, it 
could not accept an ap proach that limit ed or condition ed the right of Members to express their 
concerns and  to safeguard their interests. In that regard, t he changes made to the initial draft went 
in the right direction.  
7.103.   Argentina  agree d with the proponents  that one of the key  elements  to addressing trade 
concerns more efficiently was to  allow the Members consulted to provide substantive responses 
avoiding repeated brief interventions that impede d constructive progress with the concerns raised.  
7.104.   A database on specific trade conce rns similar to  the one already available on TBT c ould also  
be a useful tool to facilitate follow up and improve transparency.  
7.105.   Argentina found merit in the draft decision.  Among other things, it was an effort to establish 
mechanisms to simplify procedures. It also however  sought  to avoid the repetition of statements 
about trade concerns which some d id not consider useful. In any case,  during the presentation of 
the proposal at that meeting,  Members had  heard multiple co -sponsors and other delegations  
express ing their support for the draft language clearly demonstrating the power of repetition which 
Argentina  consider ed of great v alue. 
7.106.   The representative of  the Dominican Republic  believe d that the  proposal  would contribute to 
stronger and more effective WTO Councils and Committees  especially those that address ed specific 
trade concerns.  
7.107.   The Dominican Republic  recogni zed the importance of improving how th ose bodies  conduct ed 
their meetings – strengthening the capacity of Councils and Committees through clear rul es of 
procedure that permit ted transparency for the benefit of Member s such as precise indication of the 
timeframes for circulation of agendas, the trade concerns presented, the circulation of minutes and 
the establishment of a tentative schedule for meeti ngs each year.  
7.108.   In the same way,  trade concerns should  be effectively considered in the various WTO bodies . 
In that regard, the Dominican Republic  viewed the establishment of an informal mechanism for 
resolving them  as a positive step . The Dominican Republi c also  welcome d the assistance from the 
Secretariat given to  developing Members  encountering difficulties in responding to a trade concern 
or in implementing the procedures established in th e proposal.  
7.109.   Given all of those reasons, t he Dominican Republic sup ported the initiative as a means to 
achieve tangible results for th e organization.  
7.110.   The representative of Canada  thanked  the European Union and the co -sponsors for  the 
proposal on improving the day  to day business of the WTO. The ideas on the first section of the 
proposal to spread some good administrative practices across all WTO Councils and Committees 
were fully supported by Canada. Each Council and Committee was unique but the suggested 
horizontal i mprovements to meeting arrangements w ould contribute to improvements in the 
deliberative function overall.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 48 - 
 
7.111.   The encouragements in the second section of the proposal also point ed to good practices 
that all Members  should support. Canada note d that not all C ouncils or Committees ha d formal 
procedures to raise trade concerns and it did not read th e proposal as suggesting that such 
procedures be set up in those Councils or Committees.  
7.112.   The informal framework proposed in the third section was an interesting sugge sted addition 
to the tools available to Members to resolve trade concerns. Canada  noted its voluntary nature and 
appreciate d the flexibility built into the process set out. I t would also  be important to ensure that 
any assistance provided by the Secretaria t remain ed neutral and factual.  
7.113.   Canada look ed forward to engaging with the co -sponsors and other Members on the 
proposal.  
7.114.   The representative of Bangladesh  thank ed the proponents for the proposed procedural 
guidelines that aim ed to bring positive changes i n the work of the Committees and Councils in 
general. Bangladesh  welcome d the constructive ideas in the proposal  which contained a draft 
decision  and which still had  room for improvement.  
7.115.   For example , the use of the modal verb -forms "shall", "should " and "will" should  be 
consistent and rationali sed. In addition, on P aragraph 13 of the draft , the proposal suggested that 
Members should ensure participation of capital -based experts in person or through v ideo 
conferencing. In that regard, Members should  re-think whet her all of them we re in a position to 
implement th at suggestion  for all informal meetings.  
7.116.   Bangladesh made additional recommendations on the matter at hand. It suggest ed that the 
existing convening notice templates should includ e inter alia information such as  the date of the last 
meeting of the same Committee  or Council, the document reference of the minutes of the previous 
meeting  and the name of the Chair. Members  could also review the suggested time -limit for serving 
a convening notice before the actual date of the meeting and the time -limit for circulating the  
minutes after the meeting . A brief or a summary note should moreover go to the  newsfeed of the 
WTO website immediately after the meeting  which  would immensely help smaller delegations that 
were unable to attend all meetings  by assist ing them  in regularly updating their information 
repository.  
7.117.   The aim of the present submission, as the proponents had pointed out, was to strengthen 
the capacity of the Secretariat to support the Members more efficiently. In th at respect, Bangladesh 
encourage d all Members to reflect on the wider scope of the proposed guidelines so that their 
decisions would  not create future obstacles. Bangladesh look ed forward to engaging constructively 
with the proponents and other Members.  
7.118.   The representative of Sri Lanka  thank ed the proponents for their proposal on trade concerns 
which was being  studied in capital. Sri Lanka's  comments w ould therefore  be preliminary.  The 
proponents br ought  interesting aspects on the table such as having annotated agendas and 
circulati ng relevant  documents well in advance. In principle, the proposal entail ed good objectives 
and desires. Sri Lanka was however of the  view that the proposal  aimed at introduc ing new issues 
without exhausting and completing the issues already embedded in the WTO agenda , which aim ed 
at addressing most of the implementation issues related to the WTO Agreements.  
7.119.   Sri Lanka  noted the re-emergence of some aspects of the horizontal mechanism through th e 
proposal  and asked whether there was legal basis to develop horizontal rul es to resolve trade 
concerns. The mechanism also appeared to be  pushed as an alternative solution to the Appellate 
Body crisis  which  had been  apparent from the intervention of the European Union. The existing 
procedures available in the Committees were moreover already sufficient and adequate. It was 
therefore not clear why there was a need to tighten or mak e those procedures horizontal.  
7.120.   The scope of th e proposal was very broad and not entirely clea r where it w ould be heading. 
It went much further than what ha d been agreed to by the Membership with respect to the resolution 
of specific SPS issues . In that regard, Sri Lanka referred to the decision adopted by the SPS 
Committees concerning the "Procedu re to Encourage and Facilitate the Resolution of Specific 
Sanitary or Phytosanitary Issues among Members in accordance with Article 12.2" circulated in 
document G/SPS/61.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 49 - 
 
7.121.   The proposal , moreover , called for an increased role of the  Secretariat , which could  
overburden the work of the Secretariat and could place its officials in compromising situations , 
particularly in preparing documents.  
7.122.   The proposal would be tantamount to modifying the rules of procedures of all Committees 
and Council s covered by th e proposal. It would also modify the procedures for the circulation and 
derestriction of the WTO documents.  
7.123.   Some provisions in the proposed guideline contained in the draft decision  could actually 
weaken the ability of Committees and Councils to deal with trade  concerns. The proposal  had even 
made attempts to ignore the existence of various procedures to resolve trade concerns by calling 
for the adoption of certain rules applied on a trial basis whose impact ha d not yet been evaluated 
such as at the TBT Committe e.  
7.124.   Paragraph 4 of the proposal call ed for an indicative schedule of meetings , which could  not 
help ease resource constraints o f missions  of developing and LDC Members . It call ed for harsh 
treatment of repeatedly raised trade concerns  and could affect the negotiations on the rules of 
procedures of the Committee on Trade Facilitation. The proposed process could therefore  go against 
the developing and LDC Members  that lacked human r esources and capacity in monitoring and 
analysing the trade concerns , thereby leading the process to systematic outcomes.  
7.125.   The proposed mechanism ha d failed to recogni ze and consider the resource constraints of 
developing and LDC Members . The current propo sal and other similar ones would un doubt edly 
impose  a huge burden on developing Members.  For example, P aragraph 7 of the proposal called for 
the submission of responses in writing within a defined period of time and to circulate them as 
unrestricted docume nts.  
7.126.   In a similar vein, the United States had alluded to that point in a good way. T he imbalances 
between the number of trade concerns would be  brought by developed  Members  as those of small 
developing Members  had been  flagged . Even though t he proposal's objective was to bring trade 
concerns that were important to each Member , such imbalance already existed due to the differences 
in the capacity of each Member to bring a specific trade concern to the Council's or to the 
Committee's attention.  Through th e proposal, the imbalance would be further aggravated.  
7.127.   The proposal also aim ed to place some Members'  capital -based officials on the spot and in 
compromis e situations , due to their  lack of capacity to provide the information sought as those 
Members  did not have such organi zed institutional mechanisms generally found in developed 
countries . Sri Lanka  presume d that the proponents w ould take into account the above concerns and  
would  further evaluate their proposal.  
7.128.   The representative of China  appreciate d the efforts made by the European Union  and co-
sponsors  in preparing  the proposal. China agreed that there was a desire to strengthen the ability 
of regular WTO Councils and Committees to effecti vely resolve trade concerns a s the proposal state d. 
China therefore share d similar views on the objective and suggestions reflected in the proposal.  
7.129.   To illustrate , the elements in the proposal such as optimising meeting arrangements, 
strengthening bilater al consultations, better util ising the Secretariat resources were also included in 
China' s proposal on WTO Refor m11. Although the proposal presented that day was not a magic bullet, 
China  share d the view that good procedure s could facilitate adequate exchan ges of views and 
increase the potential for resolving trade concerns through conversations instead of resorting to the 
dispute settlement system.  
7.130.   At the same time, China  also recogni zed the capacity constraints of developing Members on 
both raising t rade concerns to Members  and responding to the concerns they receive d. China  hoped 
effective capacity building could be carried out for developing Members including LDCs  and looked 
forward to further technical discussions with the European Union  and other co-sponsors . 
                                                
11 The document could be found in WT/GC/W/773.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 50 - 
 
7.131.   The representative of South Africa  said that her delegation  wished to raise  a number of 
issues.  It was  not clear to South Africa  how the proposed procedure w ould result in the efficient 
resolution of specific trade concerns.  
7.132.   The proposal dr ew from  the experience of the TBT and SPS Committees which ha d enabling 
provisions in terms of Articles 15 and 12 , respectively. In the case of th ose Committees , there was 
a specific context under which the improvements on the functioning of th ose Committees ha d been 
implemented. South Africa  was concerned that the proposal introduce d horizontal procedural 
guidelines without taking due account of implications for the mandate and the rules of procedure of 
Councils and other Committees.  
7.133.   The Councils and Committees carried out the functions assigned to them by their respective 
agreements and by the General Council. The wholesale modification of the rules of procedures in 
various Committees w ould therefore  be indiscrimina te and w ould fundamentally affect the operation  
and the purpose for which they had been  established.  
7.134.   South Africa  was concerned with the enhanced role that the draft decision afford ed to the 
Chairpersons of the Councils and Committees  as well as the Secretariat. For reasons that were 
pertinent to the issues discussed in some Agreements , such as  the SPS Agreement, there was 
specific language relating to that Committee and its role in facilitating consultations and discussion 
among Members on specific issues while other Committees d id not. 
7.135.   South Africa  was also concerned that the proposed report of the Chairperson could  divert 
Member s' attention away from resolving an STC to a discussion of the Chair's report. The enhanced 
role of the Chairperson and the Secretariat as had been envisaged altered how the Committees were 
currently structured.  
7.136.   The manner in which consideration of trade concerns was handled should not impose 
additional obligations which would result  in onerous burdens to Members , especially developing 
Members  and LDCs , with ca pacity constraints. Encouraging submission of written questions and 
replies on STCs within a specified period prior to the meeting w ould overstretch the limited human 
resource and institutional capacity of such Members.  
7.137.   For South Africa, the WTO should not  be introducing more layers of bureaucracy for 
governments including more obligations , thus putting already strained capacity under pressure. 
Members  should spend more of their energies on addressing the core aspects of the existing mandate 
which aim ed to curb the growing development divide to ensure effective integration especially of 
developing Members  in global trade.  
7.138.   Members should  be cogni sant that the functioning of the WTO syste m, including the 
multilateral character of the system , had been  carefull y negotiated. They should not purport to give 
new mandates that would upset the delicate balance that had been  struck. All fundamentals of the 
Marrakesh Agreement should  be respected with regard to functions of the WTO, decision -making by 
consensus and amendments to WTO rules.   
7.139.   The representative of Brazil  thank ed the U nited States  for its reference to Brazil' s initiative 
on SPS. Brazil ha d already held consultations with many Members and it was its intention to listen 
to as many Members as possible in the attempt to build a proposal that could  benefit from a wide 
support.  
7.140.   Brazil share d with the proponents the objective of enhancing transpar ency and strengthening 
notifications. Timely and complete notifications were an obligation for all Members , and not an 
option.  
7.141.   In any event, Brazil ha d some questions that w ould be later discussed with the proponents 
relating to STCs within the SPS Committ ee and Q&A within the Committee on Agriculture , as well as 
the possibility of restricting access to written questions and replies if so requested by the Member 
raising or responding to a trade concern.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 51 - 
 
7.142.   The representative of Japan  thank ed the proponents for  their efforts. It was beneficial to 
establish a crosscutting procedural guideline with the view to resolving trade concerns in an effective 
manner. Japan  therefore support ed the proposal.  
7.143.   The proposal ha d value in terms of achieving a tangible outcome for  WTO Reform at an early 
stage. Japan would continue to look into the proposal and make additional comments if it had any. 
Japan w ould further actively engage in discussions to improve the regular bodies' activities.  
7.144.   The representative of Paraguay  thank ed the European Union and the co -sponsors  for the 
proposal presented. Paraguay  agree d on the need to strengthen the mechanisms available to the 
WTO to strengthen the fulfilment of the commitments made in the Agreements and to promote 
transparency and greater participation in the Committees. The proposal had improved  substantially 
and Paraguay  appreciate d that several of its comments made in their consultations had been taken 
into account.  
7.145.   However, Paraguay continue d to maintain some reservations regard ing the proposed 
deadlines and their implications for developing Members . Many of th ose deadlines represent ed a 
reduction in the time currently available to Members to raise concerns and the proposed changes 
could negatively affect the right of Members to present trade  concerns as well as their ability to put 
items on the agenda.  
7.146.   In that regard, both issues should be taken into account if Members would  want the proposal 
to meet its proposed objectives. Even if Members'  rights would  not be modified per se a s the 
European Union had  indicated, they w ould be considered principles of "good conduct"  conditioning 
or at least generating expectations about Members'  behaviour  in that area . 
7.147.   Paraguay was not also sure  that the proposed practice of referring to previous  interventions 
would help the d iscussions  in the Committees . On the contrary, such type of practice  could rather 
discourage the debate among the Members and would even be more harmful if the intervention had 
not been reflected in the minutes of the meeting . 
7.148.   Paraguay  asked the proponents to clarify whether the proposed mediation which would be 
carried out by the Chai r of the Committee would be done by mutual consent , since it was not clear 
from the current wording that both parties should  agree with the use of such measure.  They should 
also explain how they plan ned to address possible conflicts of interest in cases where  the Chair of 
the Committee belong ed to one of the delegatio ns that was part of the  trade  concern  at issue . 
7.149.   The representative of Chile placed high value and thank ed the proponents for th e proposal , 
which was  a sign of their interest in improving the functioning of the WTO particularly in the areas 
in which Members  could adopt decisions which d id not imply any modification to the legal texts, 
which could create greater efficiency in the regular work of the WTO and which provide d options to 
resolve trade concerns in a non -contentious framework.  
7.150.   The representative of Ecuador  thank ed the European Union and the co -sponsors for their 
proposal related to the management of addressing trade concerns  in relevant WTO Councils and 
Committees , which  would undoubtedly contribute to the resolution of such matters . 
7.151.   As a developing Member which continued to experience resource constraints , Ecuador did 
not, however , think that it was appropriate to lose sight of the fact that there continued to be pending 
matters with a mandate and which were more important for developing Members  such as equity in 
agriculture, S&DT and other issues under the  Doha mandate.  
7.152.   Ecuador  moreover emphasise d that there was already  the possibility of addressing trade 
concerns , without the necessity of introducing new provisi ons. Furthermore, th e proposal  could 
result in the weakening of the  important right  of developing Members  to raise trade concerns due to 
their limited resources and to the fact that some of their concerns had not yet been addressed 
despite being repeatedly  taken up for years in relevant Councils and Committees.  
7.153.   The proponents saw the issue surrounding the unresolved trade concerns as  a procedural 
matter that could be solved by  simply managing the volume of the concerns raised . The problem 
was not, however , related to the increasing number of the specific trade concerns  tackled in the WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 52 - 
 
relevant regular bodies . It was merely a symptom and as such it was important to  instead focus on 
identifying  the root cause of the problem  and subsequently resolving it . 
7.154.   Ecuado r was also concerned that  the proposal suggested a practice of setting up an approach 
where Members  could lose sight of the Appellate Body crisis. Such matter had further been indirectly 
alluded to in  some of the statements made by the proponents . Given th e imperative nature of finding 
a resolution to the current Appellate Body  crisis, it was therefore not appropriate at the current stage 
to formalise or make any progress in other bilateral  or additional processes  such as the one proposed  
which would put more pressure on developing Members . 
7.155.   The representative of Nigeria  thank ed the proponent s. Nigeria had  carefully reviewed th e 
draft GC decision and had found that the horizontal procedural guideline being proposed in the paper 
could  pose more challenges in strengthening the ability of regular WTO Councils and Committees to 
effectively resolve specific t rade concerns due to some of the technicalities  it had  introduced.  
7.156.   The scope of the horizontal procedural guideline , Paragraph 17 in particular, wa s unclear. 
Although the proposal had  made reference to Article IV of the Marrakesh Agreement with the explicit  
exception of the General Council and the Ministerial Conference, there was need for clarity with 
regard to the  respective Committees that w ould be covered  by the Guidelines .  
7.157.   It was unclear whether the Guideline s would apply to WTO Councils or  Committees that were 
not subsidiary bodies to the C TG, CTS and CTD . For example,  the Working Party on State Trading 
Enterprises set up pursuant to the unders tanding on Article XVII of the GATT had been  subsidiary 
to the General Council and ha d a separate legal basis. The proponents should also clarify on the 
likely nature of trade con cerns  that could potentially be raised in the CBFA which was one of the 
bodies referred to in Article IV of the Marrakesh Agreement.  
7.158.   In light of such observations , Nigeria was of the view that the horizontal procedural guideline 
would  unlikely achieve its set objective s. Nigeria  therefore urge d the  General Council  to reflect on 
the implication of the proposal and allow WTO Committees and Councils  to continue to deal with 
specific trade concerns  in line with their respective Rules of Procedure.  
7.159.   The represent ative of India thank ed the European Union  and the other co-sponsors  for 
putting forward the draft General Council decision on "Procedural Guidelines for WTO Councils and 
Committees addressing trade concerns ". While it  was in the interest of all Members to make full use 
of the Council and Committee procedures within the WTO to seek satisfactory outcomes of their 
trade concerns, it was important to ensure that any proposals in th at regard would  not in effect end 
up adding to or diminishing Members ' rights and  obligations under the covered agreements.  
7.160.   In that context, while India  support ed the strengthening of the existing processes in the 
various WTO Councils and Committees and addressing the issues and concerns , especially of 
developing and LDC  Members , with alacrity, India wished to provide some preliminary remarks on 
the proposal.  
7.161.   Individual Councils and Committees should continue to apply their own specific Rules for the 
resolution of a trade concern that ha d been raised within the context of that specific Committee.  The 
Marrakesh Agreement la id emphasis on the neutrality and need for the Secretariat not to align itself 
or take positions of particular Members or Groups. Any attempt to confer an enhanced role fo r the 
Secretariat in the resolution of trade concerns between Members would impinge on the Secretariat 's 
neutrality and diminish the Member -driven nature of th e organization.  
7.162.   The limited technical and financial capacity of developing Members should be born e in mind. 
Any proposal that s ought  to, in practice, add to the existing obligations of developing Members vis-
à-vis consultation requirements, provision of inputs or other burdensome rules such as requiring the 
participation of capital -based experts c ould not be accepted.  
7.163.   Any attempts of using the good offices of the Chair of a Committee to set up an informal 
meeting to address a trade concern should  be completely voluntary and subject to the agreement 
of both parties concerned. Further, any such proceedin gs should be confidential. In particular, 
positions taken by the parties during th ose proceedings should remain confidential and  should  be 
without prejudice to the rights of either party in any further proceedings under the DSU.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 53 - 
 
7.164.   India would also like to ge t greater clarity on the legal value of the report submitted by the 
Chairperson about the outcome of the informal meeting of the Members. Any outcome should be 
based on the explicit agreement of both parties concerned. In addition, the report should not 
prejudice in any way the process or outcome of the work of WTO bodies.  
7.165.   The appropriate forum for discussing procedural guidelines for trade concerns was the 
relevant Committee dealing with the specific trade concern as per the scope of the relevant WTO 
Agreement. While India was  open to discussing all possible suggestions aimed at improving the 
existing processes, it did not however  find merit in any approach that would  take away the role of 
the relevant bodies.  
7.166.   The representative of Egypt  thank ed the European Union  and the other  co-sponsors for the ir 
proposal  and for the ir efforts in preparing their communication , including the consultations they had 
conducted with Members in that regard.  While the proposal was still being analy sed by its capital, 
Egypt  underst ood that it focused  only on Article IV.2 of the Marrakesh Agreement. Egypt also  recall ed 
that the African Group and the other co -sponsors of the communication in document JOB/GC/158  – 
JOB/TNC/64 had raised concerns related to Ministerial Conferences and of the  communication in 
document  JOB/DEV/48  – JOB/TNC/60 on S&DT  issues and concerns.  
7.167.   In that context, Egypt  shared  the co -sponsors ' view on the approach to allow capitals more 
time to prepare for meetings  which would enhance the effectiveness of addressing specific trade 
concerns. Egypt therefore welcome d the co -sponsors ' suggestion to circulate the meeting doc uments 
well in advance  of the meeting and to notify  the Member responding to an STC twenty  days prior to 
the meeting. More flexibilities sh ould however  be granted to developing Members  in terms of both 
the deadline for raising concerns a nd the time -limits for providing responses in order not to burden 
their already limited human resources . 
7.168.   The S&DT elements in th e proposal need ed to be further strengthened , including , inter alia , 
with r egard to the suggestion to provide substantive description of the concern raised or a  
substantive reply to it during the  first meeting  that such concern was taken up  and to impos e a 
time-limit for developing  Members  to provide answers to questions that could be directed to them .  
7.169.   Human expertise was not the only challenge developing Members  faced. Other limitations 
that would affect the way they raised or responded to trade concerns also existed which related to 
financial, technological and institutional fa ctors in addition to the language constrain ts by certain 
Members , including Egypt,  whose official language was different from any of the three WTO official 
languages.  
7.170.   On the mechanism suggested by the co -sponsors on the informal resolutions of trade 
concer ns, Egypt s ought  further clarification noting that Members already h eld informal consultations 
on trade concerns in the margins of the relevant Committee 's meetings . As such,  they c ould refer 
to those consultations in their interventions on the trade concern in question during the Committee 
meeting . That being the case, Egypt questioned  the rationale of extending the role of the Secretariat 
and the C hairs, especially given  that such consultations could include reference to, as had been 
mentioned by some Members, information that could be deemed sensitive or even confidential by 
the parties involved .  
7.171.   The proposal moreover cited cases when a Member  could disagree to the participation of the 
Secretariat  in the consultations , but it was not clear in situations where  the Secretariat c ould not 
participate or interfere into the process for various reasons ; when a Member could  disagree to either 
the process altogether or to the participation of the Chairperso n; and in cases where more than one 
Committee was involved.  
7.172.   Taking into account the difference in the nature of concerns raised by Members in the various 
WTO bodies including the possibility of the  concerns be ing technical in nature,  the feasibility of 
developing crosscutting guidelines for addressing trade concerns for all the Councils and Subsidiary 
Committees sh ould be further analy sed, especially  given  the fact  that the proposal went much 
further than what M embers had agreed in some of the Committees , such as the SPS Committee in 
its decision  in G/SPS/21 , which had not yet even been fully utili sed. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 54 - 
 
7.173.   The representative of Indonesia  thank ed the European Union  and the other co-sponsors and 
recalled that Indonesia  had provid ed comments on the proposal during the briefing by the E uropean 
Union  to ASEAN members , and urged the proponents to take into account all the inputs and 
comments of Members before further discussin g the draft proposal. In that regard, Indonesia had  
several  concerns and questions that needed to be addressed.  Indonesia wondered  whether the 
proposal w ould provide effective and efficient assistance in resolving trade concerns , or if it would 
only create an additional burden to the Members, the Regular Body Chairpersons  and the Secretariat.  
7.174.   Concerning Paragraph 12, the  responding  party should not have the right to request an 
informal meeting to the Chairperson. It w ould not only raise a significant number of informal 
meetings which w ould drain resources from both parties , but it w ould also drain the time and 
resources of the Chairperson without guarantee of success.  Indonesia also asked whether the 
Secretariat  should  be involved in the informal meeting particularly by  providing technical input , given 
that the Secretariat should  maintain its independence and sh ould therefore  not provide any inputs 
that could prejudice the discussions on a specific trade concern.  
7.175.   Concerning  the necessity of  the participation of capital -based  expert s in the proposed 
process , Indonesia said that it should be up to each Member to  freely decide its representation in 
any fora. In any case, the participation of capital -based expert s would not ensu re a positive outcome 
of the informal process.  Indonesia  likewise recogni zed that several STCs had been repeatedly raised 
in relevant Committees and Councils.  However, r epetition was not always bad  as it could put in 
check the STC at issue . To illustrate, in many cases, there could be measures that involved  technical 
regulation the enactment of which could take years.  
7.176.   The representative of Colombia  thank ed the European Union and the other co-sponsors  for 
the draft decision and express ed Colombia's readiness to collaborate with them , as facilitating the 
work and the organization of Committees was always a good objective. Although the co -sponsors 
had worked hard in order to improve the original draft , like othe r Members, Colombia  still had some 
reservations  on the proposal.  
7.177.   Looking at the  general  idea in the proposal, Colombia  did not see how it was going to 
contribute to effectively solve problems and issues that ha d repeatedly come up in regular bodies. 
In tha t regard, it was important to have further reflection on the implications  of Paragraphs 6, 7 and 
11 in order to look at how Members  could actually resolve the trade concerns both in the present 
and in the future.  
7.178.   For example , Colombia a nd a number of other  Members ha d raised trade concerns  in some 
Committees  regarding certain measures which were not in accordance with international standards. 
Although many years  had already passed,  no changes or improvements had been made with regard 
to addressing and resolving th ose concerns. Colombia believed that it wa s important to respect 
accepted international standards  and the same should be the case for all Members.  Anything which 
was not based on th at principle c ould not therefore  contribute to the improvement of the functioning 
of regular bodies.  
7.179.   Colombia also asked  further information about the administrative and financial burden that 
would fall upon the Secretariat as a result of th e proposal. Colombia  would be sharing th ose and 
other question s in the future with the proponents in another body.  
7.180.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated that the proposal concerned procedural 
guidelines. It was about strengthening Committee processes and not setting up mechanisms to 
muster political wil l.  
7.181.   On the question of interference with the decision -making by specific subsidiary bodies, the 
proponents saw value in horizontal rules when it made sense to increase predictability and improved 
planning. Article IV of the Marrakesh Agreement did not prec lude the establishment of such 
horizontal practices.  The proponents failed to see where the proposal would create new legal 
obligations or burden for Members. On the contrary, they considered that what they had proposed 
should help Members in preparing for  the work in the Committees.  
7.182.   In concluding,  the European Union and co -sponsors thanked all Members who had intervened 
for their comments. On the way forward, they planned to start a proponents -led process to improve WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 55 - 
 
the text on the basis of that day's and future discussions , with the view to elaborating an amended 
version.  
7.183.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
8  STRENGTHENING THE WT O TO PROMOTE DEVELOP MENT AND INCLUSIVITY  – 
COMMUNICATION FROM P LURINATIONAL STATE O F BOLIVIA; CUBA; ECU ADOR; INDIA; 
MALAWI; SOUTH AFRICA; TUNISIA; UGANDA AND ZIMBABWE (WT/GC/W/77 8) 
8.1.  The Chair said that the delegation of India had requested the Secretariat to include th at item 
in the agenda of the current meeti ng together with the communication circulated in document 
WT/GC/ W/778. A revision12 to the communication had been  circulated to include an additional co -
sponsor . She then invite d India to take the floor.  
8.2.  The representative of India introduce d the joint communication on WTO reform by the 
Plurinational State of Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, India, Malawi, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda and 
Zimbabwe in  WT/GC/W/778 , which sought  to bring balance to the on -going discussions on WTO 
reform by reaffirming the importance of development to the work of th e organization.  
8.3.  WTO reforms were at the centre  stage of Members'  discussions in Geneva. As the original 
proponents of reforms to correct the asymmetries in the covered agreements, developing Members 
were more than willing to engage constructively in th ose discussions.  
8.4.  The reform agenda being propagated , however , sought  to push a one -sided narrative with 
disregard for issues of importance and concern to developing Members  and erode d the core principles 
of consensus -based decision -making, non -discrimination and S&D T. Recent proposals to 
differentiate between developing Members , to impose punitive strictures for non -compliance with 
notification obligations and to do  away with S&D T in negotiations on fisheries subsidies were 
illustrative of the lack of balance in the reform pro posals that ha d been tabled. Th e current situation 
needed to be remedied and soon. Members  needed to have on the table reform proposals that 
reflect ed the views of developing Members , including LDCs.  
8.5.  There ha d never been a greater need to ensure that issues of their interest were not sidelined 
in ongoing discussions on WTO reform. With a view to fulfilling th at pressing need, the concept paper 
attempt ed to bring in balance and inclusivity to the discussions on reform and to strengthen the 
WTO while taking everyone along.  The concept paper remind ed Members that the Marrakesh 
Agreement Establishing the WTO recogni zed that international trade was not an end in itself , but a 
means of contributing to certain objectiv es, including ensuring that developing and LDC  Members  
secure d a share in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development.  
8.6.  In order to be widely acceptable, discussions on WTO reform should be premised on the 
principles of inc lusivity and equity and not serve d to widen existing asymmetries in the covered 
agreements. The concept paper emphasi sed that several  issues should  be addressed if the WTO was 
to be strengthened in a balanced manner.  
8.7.  Concerning the preservation of the core  values of the multilateral trading system , such core 
values  should  be preserved and strengthened particularly with a view to building trust among 
Members.  Preserving and strengthening the WTO should  include disciplining Members' laws and 
regulations which  mandate d unilateral action on trade issues that were inconsistent with WTO rules , 
strengthening the multilateral character of the WTO , especially through the preservation of the 
practice of decision -making by consensus , and respecting Art icle X of the Mar rakesh Agreement on 
Amendments , ensuring that plurilateral joint statement initiatives d id not change the fundamental 
architecture of the WTO  and c orrecting the existing imbalances in the covered agreements as had 
been mandated in the Doha Round , by buildi ng on the work done so far  in accordance with existing 
mandates.  
                                                
12 The latest revision was  subsequently  circulated in document WT/GC/W/77 8/Rev.2 which stated that 
the following Members were co-sponsoring the communication:  African Group ; Plurinational State of Bolivia;  
Cuba;  Ecuador;  India and Oman.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 56 - 
 
8.8.  Concerning resolving the impasse in the dispute settlement system , a functioning, independent 
and effective dispute settlement system was indispensable for preserving the rights and obligations 
of all Members and for ensuring that the rules were enforced in a fair and even -handed manner. 
Without such a system there woul d be little incentive to negotiate new rules or to undertake reforms. 
The resolution of the Appellate Body impasse therefore needed to precede other reforms.  All 
Members ha d a treaty  obligation to ensure the maintenance of a standing Appellate Body compris ing 
of seven members as per Articles 17.1 and 17.2 of the DSU.  
8.9.  Attempts at addressing the crisis in the dispute settlement mechanism should  preserve its 
essential features , namely an independent, two -tier dispute settlement system, automaticity in the 
launch of proceedings and decision -making by the Dispute Settlement Body by negative consensus 
where provided. Developing Members' concerns about affordability and equitable access to the use 
of the dispute settlement system were also important.  
8.10.   Concerning saf eguarding development concerns, the concept paper reaffirm ed the centrality 
of S&DT as a non -negotiable, treaty -embedded right for developing Members and LDCs. It was 
essential to preserve S&D T for allowing developing Members the space to formulate their d omestic 
trade policy in a way that help ed them to reduce poverty, generate employment and integrate 
meaningfully into the global trading system.  
8.11.   While developing Members ha d achieved progress on some economic indicators since the 
inception of the WTO, the old gaps in the levels of development were far from being bridged and in 
some areas ha d even widened. New divides especially in the digital and technological spheres were 
likewise becoming more pronounced. How intellectual property was held, the way profit s of 
multinational corporation s flow ed, how global value chains were structured, the way value -addition 
in manufacturing was organi zed and financial flows happen ed all show ed how little things ha d 
changed.  
8.12.   The concept  paper highlight ed the important issues  in the unfinished agenda of the WTO on 
development which need ed to be implemented and addressed on priority. Th ose include d 
rebalancing the asymmetric rules of the Uruguay Round , strengthening S&D T provisions in 
accordance with Paragraph  44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration  and addressing issues related to 
agriculture especially cotton, domestic support, SSM and a permanent solution for public 
stockholding for food security.  
8.13.   In the ongoing fisheries subsidies negotiations , the disciplines  should be fair, equitable and 
balanced. It was imperative to have an effective and appropriate S&DT for  developing Member s 
providing them with adequate policy space to address their development needs. The theft of 
traditional knowledge was another importa nt issue that need ed to be addressed in the reform 
process as it adversely affect ed the interests of developing Member s. 
8.14.   Concerning transparency and notifications, any outcome on transparency at the WTO should 
take into account the capacity constraints fac ed by developing Members and focus ed on addressing 
those difficulties through inclusive and mutually -agreed approaches.  The proponents  could not agree 
to the punitive approaches suggested by some Members in document JOB/GC/204 as a means to 
enforce transpa rency obligations. Members suffering from capacity constraints c ould not be expected 
to take on additional notification obligations.  
8.15.   Developed Members should lead by example in submitting comprehensive, timely and 
accurate notifications especially regardin g their final bound AMS commitments , Mode 4 market 
access commitments, Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement and disclosure of origin of biological 
resources and associated traditional knowledge in patent applications.  
8.16.   Transparency should permeate the full s pectrum of the operation of the WTO  from its day -to-
day meetings as well as Ministerial Conferences.  There was a need to take into account the resource 
constraints of small delegations by rationali sing the number of meetings at the WTO to ensure that 
there  were no overlaps. In areas where there were active negotiations for outcomes, th ose meetings 
should as far as possible take place in formal mode including having a minuted record of discussions.  
8.17.   Members'  immediate priority in WTO reforms should be to reso lve the ongoing impasse in the 
Appellate Body to address the unilateral measures as th ose pose d serious existential challenges for WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 57 - 
 
the organi zation. Any reform should  be development -centric, preserve the core values of the system, 
strengthen the provisions  of S&DT  in existing and future agreements and preserve the multilateral 
character of the WTO.  
8.18.   The representative of Zimbabwe  interven ing as a co -sponsor of the communications under 
items 8 and 9 , said that  trade was a means to growth and development . Zimb abwe had become  a 
Member  so that it would  meet some of its national development objectives. To th at end, Zimbabwe  
wished  to ensure that the WTO uph eld its principles of development and inclusivity in order promote 
its integration and increase its share in global trade.  
8.19.   The consensus principle was likewise  important in ensuring that small delegations , such as 
Zimbabwe,  had an equal say in decision -makin g resulting in an inclusive process.  There ha d been 
historical imbalances in the WTO rules  which had  restricted developing Members  in terms of 
industriali zation and structural transformation , trade competitiveness, agricultural production and 
productivity as well as  export potential and market access.  The Doha issues that were critical in 
redressing th ose imbalances and the challenges faced by developing Members  remain ed outstanding 
specifically the elimination of trade distorting domestic support including  that for cotton, a 
permanent solution on public stockholding for food security purposes, strengthening of the S &DT 
provisions, an effective and simple way to use the SSM  and addressing  fisheries subsidies.  
8.20.   The paper put forward interventions to strengthen  the WTO and promote the centrality of 
development and a fair, inclusive, transparent, balanced and rules -based multilateral trading system  
including through preserving the core principles of the multilateral trading system and adhering to 
rules in the Mar rakesh Agreement on the functioning of the WTO, upholding consensus decision -
making and following the set amendment procedures for any changes to rules.  
8.21.   In the reform process, Members should redress the imbalances of the past negotiations and 
ensur e that the DDA was not jettisoned but prioritised as part of the ongoing reform process in line 
with the given mandates. Development should remain central in the WTO. S &DT, which was an 
unconditional right for developing and LDC  Members , remain ed relevant i n providing policy space to 
those Members  in terms of addressing development challenges related to industriali zation and 
integration into global trade.  
8.22.   The impasse in the Appellate Body should be resolved as a matter of urgency and the outcome 
should be ba lanced  and development -oriented,  result in an independent Appellate Body  and be 
transparent and impartial.  
8.23.   Regarding transparency and notifications, Zimbabwe agreed that  transparency in the WTO 
was an important principle that all Members should  uphold. However, t ransparency requirements 
should  be improved and implemented in a manner that w ould create balance among Members , as 
well as recogni ze the special circumstances of developing Members , LDCs and SVEs in terms of their 
capacity to meet such obligations.  Those Members  faced challenges , some of which c ould not be 
addressed through the usual WTO capacity building programmes.  
8.24.   Those capacity challenges were structural and related to the level of development. Developing 
Members' r esources  were limited , such th at they we re diverted towards the most critical areas or 
those with the greatest economic growth potential  while the gaps between developed and most 
developing Members  in terms of availability of resources which include d human capital continue d to 
increase . 
8.25.   There was therefore no justification for increasing the obligations when such Members  were 
failing to comply. Overly burdensome transparency requirements w ould only reduce the current 
compliance levels. Additionally, punitive administrative measures to Members that fail ed to comply 
were counter -productive and would reverse the  WTO principle of development.  
8.26.   A cooperative approach and additional S &DT for developing Members  were required as 
opposed to punitive administrative measures or counter -notifications. Notifications by developing 
Member s should be simplified and related to the level of development in order to improve their 
compliance.  Zimbabwe  associate d with the statements to be made by the African and ACP Groups 
and the other co -sponsors  including the one just made by India on behalf of all co -sponsors . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 58 - 
 
8.27.   The representative of Uganda  thank ed fellow co -sponsors for working tirelessly and putting 
forward th e paper , which was a simple yet accurate reflection of the reality in th e organization and 
of the proponents'  views on the various issues addressed. It c ould not be denied that the benefits 
of multilateral trade ha d not been shared equally by all participating Members. Some of the Members 
continue d to lag behind in the face of challenges ari sing from the relatively small domestic markets 
with the high dependence on imported goods, technologies and management practices , as well as 
general lack of financial and human resources required to actively pursue innovation in the midst of 
reduced devel opment cooperation.  
8.28.   The communication explain ed how best th e organization c ould play its role to bring about the 
change the proponents  desire d to see. The credibility of the organization would be strengthened only 
when the status quo was upset and Members'  interests  were prioritised and delivered upon . 
8.29.   Uganda reiterated questions that had already  been asked before , and that several Members 
continued to ask , including  what the place of the WTO was in development ; how the rules of the 
multilateral trading system had either  aided or stampeded structural transformation and 
industrialization for Members ; how the trade distorting domestic supports employed by major 
economies fit into the free trade narrative espoused by some Members ; whethe r the paramount 
importance in the political economy of a Member should rest on the multilateral institution or on 
Members' needs or  interest s; whether the WTO would exist without the support of its Members ; the 
reason behind how Members could  pretend to wr ite new rules when the decisions made by their 
Ministers and the General Council were ignored in the name of expediencies  and how Members could 
write new rules when the enforcement mechanism of the organization was in dispute . Uganda 
therefore joined other  co-sponsors in encouraging Members to engage constructively in the 
discussion of th eir paper.  
8.30.   The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  said that Bolivia had decided to co -
sponsor th e draft because  it reflect ed the manner  in which any attempt at reform in th e organization 
should be made.  The WTO should aim to provide a multilateral mechanism that not only guarantee d 
the existence of a rule s-based trading system but that also provide d a vehicle for eradicating global 
dispar ities and heightening the visibility of the Sustainable Development Goals . Document 
WT/GC/W/778 contained  an accurate reflection of the challenges Members  faced and  stressed  that 
any reform should  keep development at its core, correct existing asymmetries  and strengthen the 
WTO's multilateral character . 
8.31.   The document also highlight ed the importance of S&DT as a fundamental right in th e 
organization.  Members should therefore  explore how th e documen t could help deepen the application 
of S&DT in concrete situat ions. For example , Members  could consider how trade rules could be 
adapted to the needs of landlocked developing countries to help improve their international trade 
position despite the intrinsic limitation of not having easy access to seaports.  
8.32.   The repres entative of Oman  said that her delegation  co-sponsor ed the proposal to ensure  that 
the rules in the Marrakesh Agreement remained  fundamental and respected  particularly  Articles I 
and II on the multilateral functions of the WTO, Article IX on the continuati on of the practice of 
decision -making by consensus and Article X which emphasise d that there should be consensus in 
making  amendments to WTO rules , because m ultilateral avenues based on consensus remain ed the 
most effective means in achieving development -oriented outcomes.  
8.33.   Oman was also  concern ed over the Appellate Body crisis as it was significant in preserving 
the rights and obligations of Members that the WTO protect ed. Without such system, Members w ould 
have no incentive to negotiate new rules due to the ir lack of enforcement. Nevertheless, under 
Articles 17.1 and 17.2 of the DSU, all Members ha d a collective duty to ensure the maintenance of 
a standing Appellate Body comprising of seven  members. Oman therefore urged Members to resolve 
that concern as soon as possible.  
8.34.   Due to the lack of progress in bridging the gap and standards of living between developing 
and developed Member s since the establishment of the WTO, Oman urge d all Members to give more 
importance on strengthen ing the S&DT provisions in accordance with Paragraph 44 of the Doha 
Declaration  which could be fulfilled  by giving developing Members  policy space to achieve their 
development goals. Oman  hoped that Members w ould support th eir proposal . WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 59 - 
 
8.35.   The representative of South Africa  believe d that the submission was timely and it outline d the 
core issues of interest , especially to developing Members , that should be prioritised as part of the 
reform of the WTO and to strengthen the multilateral tradi ng system for the benefit of all. The reform  
of the WTO should fundamentally be about reform for development and inclusivity.   
8.36.   Reform should  preserve the core values and basic principles of th e organi zation including 
S&DT and consensus decision -making . The resolution of long outstanding issues remain ed an 
important issue to be addressed. South Africa  continue d to seek meaning ful outcomes in agriculture 
on domestic support including cotton, public stockholding for food secu rity purposes, SSM and 
fisheries subsidies and the G90 S&DT proposal.  
8.37.   The reduction in agriculture trade barriers was the single biggest development issue. 
Agriculture account ed for a significant share of GDP, export earnings and employment in developing 
Members. The OECD Agriculture Policy Monitoring and Evaluation Report of 2019 show ed that 
between 2016 and 2018, 53 countries covered in the report had provided a total of USD 7.5B per 
year to the agriculture sector. In addition, the recent progress made b y many OECD countries in 
shifting towards less trade distorting measures ha d largely stalled. There was a need to rectify the 
imbalances in the existing rules in relation to domestic support as well as AMS entitlements. Th at 
was critical if the multilatera l trading system was to contribute to development, inclusive growth and 
the SDGs.  
8.38.   The key objective in Africa was to industriali ze, change the structure of their economies and 
move up the value chain. South Africa  would therefore be concerned with any refo rm agenda that 
limited Africa's  policy space to achieve th ose objectives. South Africa  was concerned with current 
proposals to narrow S&DT. The principle of less than full reciprocity and self -declaration of 
development status were hard earned rights that should  be preserved. South Africa c ould not 
support proposals that s ought  to change th at as it w ould not assist to make the multilateral trading 
system fair and inclusive and could  even hamper the WTO's negotiating function.  
8.39.   South Africa was  also concerned  about plurilaterals as they undermine d the multilateral 
trading system and fragment ed it. Whereas every Member ha d the right to join such negotiations, 
any plurilateral approach brought back to the WTO should  comply with the rules and procedures of 
the WT O in order to multilateralise such outcomes and should be submitted as a proposal and not 
an outcome . 
8.40.   Moreover, South Africa was concern ed that WTO reform was happening without a discussion 
and consensus about its objectives and expected outcomes. WTO reform d id not mean accepting 
inherited inequities or new proposals that would worsen imbalances. Reforms should  be premised 
on the principles of inclusivity and development and respond to the underlying causes of the current 
backlash against trade , and th e difficulties that developing Members continue d to face vis -à-vis their 
industriali zation challenges.  
8.41.   The two most serious and immediate risks to the relevance of the multilateral trading system  
were (1) the unprecedented challenges of unilateral trade me asures that violate d WTO rules and 
principles , and the manner in which national security measures were implemented which ha d taken 
Members into uncharted territory ; and (2) the continuing impasse in the Appellate Body selection 
process that threaten ed the dispute settlement mechanism , which  was the foundation of a 
functioning multilateral trading system . Without a resolution by 10 December, the  dispute settlement 
mechanism  would be rendered obsolete. In the absence of a functional, effective and independent  
mechanism for enforcing the rules, negotiating new rules bec ame futile.  
8.42.   The paper also emphasise d the importance of transparency and notifications . South Africa,  
however , pointed out the capacity constraints that developing Members we re facing. No furthe r 
transparency obligation should be imposed. Transparency was not only a developing Member  issue. 
Developed Members should  lead by example by submitting comprehensive, timely and accurate 
notifications. Transparency should also permeate every aspect of the  operation of th e organi zation 
including on how meetings were convened and the conduct of Ministerial Conferences.  
8.43.   The process of WTO reform should  meaningfully address the imbalances emanating from the 
Uruguay Round, keep development at its core, promote inclusive growth and ensure that the 
interests of developing Members were an integral part of the reform.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 60 - 
 
8.44.   The representative of Ecuador  said that h is delegation co-sponsor ed the document  because it 
outline d the issues of interest to developing Members  in the organization , and it reflect ed Ecuador's  
position. Th e document  dealt with concerns related to the current situation of the multilateral trading  
system. In that regard, development should be at the heart of all WTO work  making  discussions o n 
S&DT essential  particularly for developing and LDC Members to ensure the continued application of 
provisions related to  flexibilit ies. 
8.45.   S&DT was a right which could not be questioned . Since the creation of the WTO, S&DT  had 
been a core principle of the multilateral trading system. Any change to th at principle w ould upset 
the balance of the entire system. It was therefore important to reinforce the inclusivity an d 
transparency in negotiations because it was only in th at way that all Members  could ensure  fairness 
in their participation in the multilateral trading system.  
8.46.   The representative of Benin  said that the document on reform presented by India on behalf 
of developing Members , including some LDCs , emanate d from a need to shed light on a number of 
things including various aspects of WTO Agreements and the functioning of the WTO  for which there  
was room f or improvement . Changes to be introduced through the WTO  Reform process  should  be 
reach ed by consensus  while taking into account the needs, priorities and capacity constraints of 
LDCs.  
8.47.   Because of the diversity of issues covered and their high level of relevance, Benin ha d decided 
to endorse th e communication. B enin w ould cooperate on the ongoing reform process including with 
the other  co-sponsors to further foster discussion and work with other Members in order to seek 
consensus on the items identified.  
8.48.   The representative of China  commend ed India and the other c o-sponsors for their efforts in 
putting forward th e paper. China share d similar views on many issues raised in the paper on which 
it had clearly expressed its positions in its proposal on WTO Reform. In particular, China  agree d that 
WTO Reform d id not mean accepting other inherited inequities or new proposals that would worsen 
imbalance.  
8.49.   Reforms should  be premised on the principles of inclusivity and development. The priorities 
for WTO Reform should  be addressing the immediate existential crisis including the Appellate Body 
Selection Impasse and the resort to unilateral measures. Any reform  should also  reaffirm the 
principle of S&DT which was a treaty -embedded and non -negotiable right for developing Members.  
8.50.   The multilateral pro cess remain ed the most effective means to achieve inclusive, 
development -oriented outcomes , while Members would also  need to explore different options to 
address the challenges of contemporary trade realities in a balanced manner.  
8.51.   Above all, as China had mentioned at the 19 July Informal TNC and Informal HODs meetings , 
developing Members including LDCs were catching up and getting more and more involved in the 
WTO Reform process. Th e document was a good example  of that.  That kind of effort was extremely 
important because WTO reform should never be one -sided but inclusive and balanced. China w ould 
continue working with other Members to ensure the developing Members' voice was not ignored in 
the process.  
8.52.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , supported  the view in the paper which 
outline d that the immediate priorities in terms of WTO Reform should include finding a solution to 
the Appellate Body crisis a nd dealing with the unilateral measures taken by certain Members.  
8.53.   As the document la id out, any reform introducing new or amended rules should keep 
development at the centre of WTO work  and should shore up the multilateral nature of the WTO to 
ensure that negotiations continue d to be multilateral. The S&DT principle  should  be reasserted  in 
that regard .  
8.54.   Concerning addressing the Appellate Body crisis, it remained important to have an appeals 
procedure which was effective  and automatic and which  continued to uphold  decision -making by the 
Dispute Settlement Body by negative consensus where provided . Any reform should  give potential 
and third parties fair access to the system. It was equally  important that the  Appellate Body  
members b ore in mind the perspectives of LD Cs.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 61 - 
 
8.55.   With regard to development, the LDCs underscore d the significance of imbalances affecting 
the price of cotton and subsidies granted by major stakeholders  and highlight ed the importance of 
having transparency in terms of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agree ment.  
8.56.   In terms of transparency and notification in general, the LDC Group maintain ed its position in 
relation to their  constraints. Members  should no t impose  additional transparency and notification 
obligations before capacity building ha d been granted . No punitive measures should moreover be 
taken  in that regard . Concerning  transparency in the overall functioning of the WTO, Members should 
take into account the constraints faced by LDCs due to their limited resources and the importance 
of maintaining the inclusive nature of the system . In that regard, d ecisions should not be taken in 
informal meetings where LDCs ha d limited access  – particularly  in meetings leading up to Ministerial 
Conferences.  
8.57.   The representative of Pakistan  welcomed  the proposal and thank ed the sponsors for their 
timely and valuable contribution. Pakistan ha d consistently called for any reform agenda to place 
development and developing Members  at its core without compromising the fundamental pillars of 
the multilater al trading system.  
8.58.   Consensus based decision -making and S&DT for developing Members  formed the bedrock of 
the multilateral trading system. Any attempts to modify or dilute th ose rights w ould only weaken 
the system and w ould be detrimental for developing Members . The proposal also highlight ed the 
same points.  
8.59.   The main reason for the stalemate in the organization and the multilateral trading system 
was Members'  inability to deliver on the development needs of developing Members  and to effectively 
address the pending agenda of development. Any meaningful reform  should therefore  keep 
development at the forefront, preserve the core principles of the multilateral trading system, address 
the outstanding issues and should not make it more burdensome for developing Members . 
8.60.   The representative of the United States  thank ed the proponents for their paper. While the 
United States  disagree d with the vast majority of it, it expect ed some of th ose issues to be a 
significant part of the discussion in th e General Council as Members  approach ed MC12 . The United 
States thus appreciate d the opportunity to confront them head on.    
8.61.   The heart of th e paper return ed Members  to the longstanding, profound disagreement among 
themselves  on the relationship between trade rules and developme nt and on the role of S&D T in the 
WTO.  In Paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4, the co -sponsors once again t old Members  that the framework of 
WTO rules was onerous, unfair and anti -development. They further conceive d of S&D T as a means 
for self -declared developing Members  to disconnect from certain WTO rules such as in TRIPS, TRIMS 
and the SCM Agreement.  
8.62.   For Members who h eld that view, the common rules of th e organization  were rules for others 
– not themselves. They wish ed to avail themselves of the opportunities that WTO Membership 
offered, but they no longer want ed to contribute to the common effort to create those opportunities 
through the full implementation of existing WTO rules.  
8.63.   The United States  had seen their vision ex pressed in proposals submitted for the last two 
Ministerial Conferences , which included e ffectively exempting all self -declared developing Members  
from the prohibition in Article 2 of the TRIMS Agreement against applying a TRIM that was 
inconsistent with G ATT provisions on national treatment and quantitative restrictions – and 
permanently exempting all LDCs from all TRIMS obligations ; effectively exempting for eight years 
every self -declared developing Member  from the prohibition in Article 3.1(b) of the S CM Agreement 
against subsidies contingent upon the use of domestic over imported goods – and permanently 
exempting LDCs ; and c alling for technology transfer that was not voluntary and on mutually agreed 
upon terms by both parties.  
8.64.   Those Members wrongly beli eved that the opportunities made possible by WTO Membership 
would continue to appear even as they signal led to investors that they were "closed for business ".   
8.65.   The United States,  on the other hand , held a firm conviction that the trade rules developed in 
the system over the decades were inherently positive building blocks for sustainable development.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 62 - 
 
For example, the TRIPS Agreement ha d increased the possibility of technology transfer by creating 
conditions whereby intellectual property owners fel t confid ent in sharing their technology with 
entities in other Members.  
8.66.   WTO rules had been  crafted to establish conditions most conducive to increasing trade and 
investment flows such as open, transparent and predictable markets. Th ose rules reflect ed lessons 
from the past that should not need to be re -learned.  
8.67.   S&DT provisions were intended to be applied narrowly to facilitate the full implementation of 
WTO rules  – not to provide indefinite deviations from the m. Those provisions should be available 
only to those having the greatest difficulty integrating into the global trading system.  
8.68.   In addition, the United States  did not agree with the proposition that existing WTO rules were 
imbalanced in favo ur of developed Members . All Members had contributed to t he Uruguay Round 
Agreement.  In that regard, the United States  did not support additional work to renegotiate or revise 
S&DT provisions in existing WTO Agreements. For example, the CTD  SS ha d fulfilled its mandate to 
review all S&D T provisions and th at work had contributed to a significant harvest.  
8.69.   Concerning the Doha Round , the US said that  the Doha Round had failed because the more 
advanced, wealthier and most influential of the self -declared developing  Members had  refused to 
contribute in a meaningful way . To oversimplify it, countries like China had wanted to be treated like 
countries like Cameroon. The most advanced of the self -declared developing Members  had hidden 
behind the poorest and least advanced to ensure they would  not have to contribute.   
8.70.   As a result, the Doha mandates no longer guide d the work of th e institution. Th at had been 
the case since the Nairobi Ministerial Conference in 2015. There was no returning to the Round at 
that point. What Members  could do – and what the United States was doin g – was moving to ensure 
that the reasons the Doha Round had failed were not repeated.  
8.71.   Members should  be forthright in acknowledging that their fundamental disagreement on the 
relationship between trade rules and development and on the role of S&D T persist ed. They should 
also acknowledge that they would not be able to bridge th at divide until Members resolve d the issue 
of differentiation.  On th at point, the paper was predicated on a major flaw , which was the same flaw 
that had ended the Doha Round  – that self -declared developing Members were a monolithic group 
despite overwhelming evidence of increased differentiation in economic performance, weal th and 
influence.  
8.72.   If Members  wanted to deliver results for themselves and th e institution, it was time for action 
on that critical issue. Crossing their fingers and hoping that those among them who had refused to 
contribute previously w ould suddenly do so then was wishful thinking.  It was rather  time for the 
more advanced, more influential and wealthier economies among them to agree to forego S&D T in 
current and future WTO negotiations . 
8.73.   It was time for Members to deliver on the promise of the WTO: free and fair trade based on 
market -oriented policies with one set of rules and commitments applying to all Members and with 
S&DT available to those Members having the greatest difficulty integrating into the trading system 
through the full implementation of WTO ru les. 
8.74.   The representative of Bangladesh  thank ed the proponents for their submission and associate d 
with the statement made by the LDC Group . Development was a multifaceted concept and inclusive 
development was one of the pre -conditions of sustainability. Bangladesh  acknowledge d that all 
Members d id not have the same level of technical or management capacity but all should enjoy 
respect and recognition from each other.  
8.75.   The c hallenges faced by  many developing and LDC Members particularly the  graduating LDCs 
were unique and diverse such that they still need ed S&DT – which remained at the centre of the 
WTO's inherent and i nseparable principles. Leveling the  playing field through affirmative action c ould 
help impro ve Members'  collective journey in shaping and sharing their common future.  
8.76.   Bangladesh welcome d the idea of inclusivity in the overarching development goals  which 
meaningfully align ed with the fundamental principle of the SDGs  that no one should be left beh ind. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 63 - 
 
Inclusive development demand ed participatory discussion and decision -making in the WTO  – 
highlighting Members'  collective responsibility. Bangladesh therefore looked forward to working 
constructively and objectively with the proponents and other Membe rs in the integration process for 
their shared prosperity.    
8.77.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the ACP , support ed a narrative in the discourse 
on WTO Reform that integrate d the concept of inclusiveness, development and transparency into 
Members'  search for solutions to strengthen the functions of the WTO.  The ACP Group was therefore 
supportive of the general thrust of the submission and believe d that elements of the submission 
would prove helpful in guiding their discussions on WTO Reform.  
8.78.   The paper serve d as a good basis for discussions with a view to giving an indication of the 
issues which developing Members  felt should constitute WTO Reform a s well as sought  to address 
issues that were of broader  collective interest to a wider cross -section of  Members.  The proposal 
succinctly outline d some of the core challenges currently facing the WTO and the multilateral trading 
system and the core principl es which should guide the WTO reform process.  
8.79.   The proposal u nderscor ed the centrality of the dispute settlement mechanism and the need 
to urgently resolve the crisis facing the Appellate Body . 
8.80.   Members should m aintain the fundamental principle of S&DT which was a basic right for 
developing and LDC  Members  and which permeate d every aspect of the Doha Development Agenda . 
In that regard, there was an urgent need to get back to the reform agenda that had been  launch ed 
in 2001 in Doha. Th ose negotiations comprise d a number of development -oriented issues of critical 
importance to developing and LDC  Members  which need ed a resolution. Many of th ose issues were 
outlined in the proposal.  
8.81.   Members should also m aintain the mu ltilateral character of the WTO including through 
decision -making by consensus and a negotiating modality that involve d all of them.  
8.82.   It would also be important to e nsure transparency in the notification process , in the 
function ing and operations of the WTO  including  the rationalization of the scheduling of WTO 
meetings both formal and informal and in the organization and conduct of WTO Ministerial 
Conferences  all done while bearing in mind the resource constraints faced by developing Members . 
8.83.   While the ACP continue d to study the submission internally, the Group indicate d its readiness 
to constructively contribute to th ose discussions in a manner that ensure d that the multilateral 
trading system remain ed transparent, inclusive, rules -based and Member -driven with a 
development -oriented WTO as its core institution.  
8.84.   The representative of Sri Lanka  associate d with the statement s made by the ACP and India. 
Sri Lanka  welcome d the proposal and thank ed the proponents for bringing Members'  focused 
attention to the principles of and the Preamble to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO , 
which recogni zed that international trade was not an end in itself but a means towards raising 
standards of living and ensuring full employment.  
8.85.   The statement was most called for in the current context. The inequalities and imbalances in 
some of the existing multilateral trade rules ha d provided an inherent advantage mainly to the 
developed and some of the advanced developing Members  at the cost of the marginalization of most 
of the developing Member s.  
8.86.   Sri Lanka concur red with the facts contained in the proposal and share d that the resolution 
of the crucial and urgent issues challenging the existence of the multilateral character of the trading 
system warrant ed Members' urgent attention. Leaving the Appellate Body crisis unresolved 
indefinitely ha d already placed the WTO legal system in serious jeopardy . Sri Lanka therefore 
request ed all Members to collectively find a long -lasting solution to th e impasse at the earliest 
opportun ity and reiterate d what the proponents had highlighted on their proposal that the 
preservation of the multilateral character of decision -making in the WTO should  be upheld.  
8.87.   Sri Lanka  strongly align ed itself with the assertion that S&DT was a treaty -embedded and 
non-negotiable right for all developing Members. The multilateral trading system should therefore  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 64 - 
 
give policy space for developing Members to fulfil their development goals including industrialization .  
Developing Members continue d to confront many formidable challenges which underscore d the 
continued relevance of the S&DT provisions in their favour. As the long -awaited outstanding 
development issues from the Doha Round continue d to be of paramount imp ortance , Sri Lanka called 
for their early resolution including the preservation of S&DT in the new disciplines to be framed in 
the future.  
8.88.   The representative of the European Union  appreciate d the proponents' engagement in 
exploring how to reform the WTO th rough multilateral solutions.  The E uropean Union  share d the 
sense of urgency to resolve the dispute settlement crisis as Members had  already discussed  under 
the agenda item on the Informal Process on matters related to the Functioning of the Appellate 
Body. 
8.89.   With regard to transparency and notification, the European Union  encourage d all Members to 
continue to engage  and would  return to th at important area under  the next agenda item.  
8.90.   Notwithstanding the objective of advancing multilateral rulemaking, the E uropean Union  was 
also supportive of an open plurilateral track of negotiations.  The European Union therefore  welcome d 
the active participation of both developing and developed Members on e -commerce, domestic 
regulation in services and investment facilitation.  
8.91.   The European Union  reconfirm ed that development was a central pillar of th e organi zation 
and that developing Memb ers should be allowed assistance and flexibilities. To grant open -ended 
block exemptions to two-thirds  of the Membership was however  no longer a viable model.  
8.92.   Flexibilities should be made available to those Members who actually need ed them and the 
first fi le where th at approach should be pursued was that of fisheries subsidies. In that regard, the 
European Union  recall ed that developing Members account ed for 90% of the world's marine capture 
and a clear majority of  the world's biggest fishing nations were developing Members.  
8.93.   The representative of Egypt  thank ed the co -sponsors for th e communication and the ir efforts 
to capture the essence of the reform needed in the WTO to make it more responsive to the needs 
of developing Members  and to ensure that reform wo uld not undermine Africa' s efforts for regional 
integration and industrialization.  
8.94.   Under Egypt' s presidency of the African Union, Africa was taking significant steps to achieve 
its long-standing objective of a continental free trade area. Earlier th at month, the operational phase 
of the A fCFTA had been  launched during the Twelfth  Extraordinary Summit in Niamey which 
constitute d a milestone towards the boosting of intra Africa Trade and promoting economic 
integration of African States.  
8.95.   Members should  conside r several  important parameters in order to shape the WTO reform 
agenda . The core value and basic principles of the multilateral trading system should  be preserved 
and strengthened particularly with a view to building trust among Members  and the Appellate B ody 
impasse should be resolved immediately.  
8.96.   Members should  also focus on pragmatic solutions to implement effectively and operationali se 
S&DT  provisions within the WTO covered agreements. If differentiation was the problem , another 
differentiation was not the solution. S&DT  was one of the main defining features of the multilateral 
trading system not only because the developing Members  needed it but also because it was essential 
to integrate differently situated players into the system for the political and economic benefit of all.  
8.97.   For current and new negotiations, Members should  consider developing Members'  specific 
needs and challenges in order  to ensure that any new negotiated outcomes w ould provide the 
adequate policy space for social and developmental needs and deepen the integration of developing  
and LDC Members  into the multilateral trading system.  
8.98.   Regarding improving transparency and compl iance with notification obligations , the reform in 
that area should begin with a comprehensive review of the notification requirements to ensure they 
were not unnecessarily complex and burdensome. Based on th at review, updates to the WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 65 - 
 
requirements could be considered or incentives and technical assistance could be provided to 
Members  that ha d fallen behind.  
8.99.   The representative of Nigeria  thank ed the proponents of the paper on strengthening the WTO 
to promote development and inclusivity. Th e paper which was currently being reviewed in its capital 
had shed light on the shortcomings of the current system which need ed to be addressed in order for 
the multilateral trading system to foster prosperity for all.  
8.100.   Nigeria ha d been consistent in drawing the attention of t he General Council to the inequities 
and imbalances of current WTO rules and its adverse effects on the economies of developing 
Member s. Th ose issues include d the provision of AMS entitlement beyond de  minimis for some 
Members  and the  lack of interest to pursue mandated issues such as SSM for developing Members  
and PSH for food security purposes and the implementation of Paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial 
Declaration mandating the review of  all S&DT provisions with a view to strength ening them and 
making them more precise, effective and operational . 
8.101.   Though th e paper was still being reviewed in its capital, Nigeria  congratulate d the proponents 
and expressed its  openness to further discuss the core elements of the paper to ensure it eff ectively 
reflect ed the yearnings and aspirations of all developing Members . 
8.102.   The representative of Canada  thank ed the delegations who had submitted the discussion 
paper on strengthening the WTO to promote development and inclusivity  and appreciate d the 
considerations put forward on WTO reform including the importance of a functioning dispute 
settlement mechanism. Canada continue d to encourage all Members to continue constructive 
engagement and put forward pragmatic proposals that intend ed to strengthen and m odernise the 
WTO.  
8.103.   As it had said repeatedly in the past few months, Canada st ood ready to engage in deepening 
discussions on trade and development in a way that did not limit Members  to S&DT but that cover ed 
all angles of the development conversation related to trade. Canada  hoped that Members c ould 
advance on th ose new grounds to  ensure that development remain ed an engine for growth and at 
the heart of the multilateral trading system.  
8.104.   There seem ed to be a consensus on one thing around development among  Members  – that 
it was  a core element of the organization and Members should  find ways to ensure that the WTO 
fulfilled its objective of fully integrating developing Members into the multilateral trading system.  
S&DT c ould assist in th at but it c ould not be seen as a permanent carveout on the road to trade 
liberalization.  
8.105.   Canada  however share d the concern that the organization risk ed becoming irrelevant and 
incapable of making progress if Members  could not move beyond traditional positions , for example 
on differentiation, and look at applicable, pragmatic ways to address the trade and development 
nexus that work ed for all Members. They should currently consider different, more tailored 
approaches taking into acco unt each Member's  ability to make commitments in a particular area 
with the goal of all  of them  eventually reaching the same level of commitments.  
8.106.   It was time for the entire Membership to seriously look at what all the papers on the table 
propose d and to t ry to identify real areas of convergence beyond agreeing that something need ed 
to be done. In th at context, Canada  remind ed the Membership once more that trade alone c ould not 
solve all development issues. Sound governance and domestic regulatory framework s that were fit 
for the needs of their citizens were also required to ensure that the benefits of trade were more 
equitably distributed and that their development needs addressed.  
8.107.   Open-minded, constructive engagement from all Members to feed a renewed dis cussion on 
those issues was the only thing that w ould help them find a common way forward.  
8.108.   The representative of Morocco  associated with the statement made by the African Group. 
The revival of the WTO and the multilateral trading system was of fundamental importance for the 
entire international community to succeed in areas as diverse as world economic growth, social 
development and climate change which were closely linked to the development of an inclusive and 
fair multilateral trading system.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 66 - 
 
8.109.   The multilateral trading system that Members had  put in place in 1995 ha d had remarkable 
success in numerous areas. Several aspects admittedly need ed to be improved but gains on various 
fronts, and particularly trade and sustainable development, also need ed to be preserved.  
8.110.   The reform process should be progressive, transparent and inclusive to preserve WTO 
principles based on transparency, openness, predictability and consensus which should  be 
maintained and consolidated.  
8.111.   Morocco was concerned  about the large number of reform proposals and initiatives being 
put forward. Like many other developing and  LDC Members , Morocco  faced resource constraints that 
made it challenging to cover the organiza tion's regular committee work in addition to the work 
required for the negotiating clusters. Morocco  therefore call ed on all Members to give th at important 
question the attention it deserve d and to organi se thems elves to adapt to that reality.  
8.112.   With respect  to the negotiations on fish eries subsidies , Morocco  was optimistic about the 
discussion on illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.  On the issue of overcapacity and 
overfishing, the disciplines should be focused on large scale fishing since the subsid ies granted to 
that category were the most harmful.  
8.113.   Concerning the Appellate Body, priority should be given to resolving the current impasse by 
exploring mutually agreeable solutions while preserving the system's essential features and 
integrity. Morocco  therefore support ed the efforts being made by the Facilitator of the informal 
process  as part of a  results -oriented  approach.  
8.114.   Morocco reiterate d its deep concern over the situation of the Appellate Body  and again urge d 
all Members to show the political will  required to find a solution to the current impasse on the 
Appellate Body and to start the selection process without delay. Morocco was  also ready to consider 
such alternative transitional solutions as the D irector -General could  propose to provisionally remedy 
the blockage and avoid the collapse of the system.  
8.115.   Concerning  S&DT, any discussion on the development divide between Member s shoul d be 
based on relevant and equitable criteria with sufficient flexibility for the various Members  with the 
view to better integrate  developing and LDC Member s into the  international trad ing system . 
8.116.   Morocco was entirely committed to regional and continental  economic integration as 
evidenced by its active role in the implementation of the AfCFTA and in the revitalization of the 
greater Maghreb region. In that regard, Morocco highlighted its  proactive participation with the IMF 
as part of the Seventh Global Re view of Aid for Trade in the session held on 3 July dedicated to the 
discussion on economic integration in the Maghreb as an untapped source of aid for trade and 
growth.  
8.117.   Concerning  agriculture, Morocco  support ed the work being done by Ambassador John Deep 
Ford (Guyana)  who ha d made considerable efforts to advance th e process  in the CoA SS as its Chair . 
The creation of small thematic groups w ould permit more dynamic negotiations on domestic support, 
market access and export competition and w ould produce resu lts by the next Ministerial Conference. 
In view of the foregoing, Morocco  emphasise d the importance of agricultural negotiations in the 
multilateral trading system and of ensuring that all Members constructively contribute d to those 
negotiations.  
8.118.   Concernin g the objective of  improving transparency through the notification  obligations 
under the  WTO Agreements, Morocco  highlight ed its efforts in submitting  its notifications particularly 
those pertaining to fish eries subsidies. Morocco disagreed  with the attemp ts to introduce punitive 
and coercive measures  in lieu of  establish ing notification measures that t ook into account  the limited 
capacity of developing and LDC Members including those in Africa.  
8.119.   The representative of Norway  thank ed the proponents for presenting the paper and 
appreciate d the engagement of the proponents in the discussion on WTO Reform. Reform should be 
a matter of concern for all Members. The paper as well as t hat day's discussion illustrate d that 
Members' opinions d iffered significantly when it came  to the relationship between trade and 
development. The disagreements on th at issue was one of the reasons behind Members'  difficulties WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 67 - 
 
in the negotiating pillar. Unfortunately, old talking points w ould produce old results . Alternative 
approaches were needed.  
8.120.   Norway agree d that development was at the heart of the WTO and that inclusivity and 
development should be at the centre of attention when discussing reform of the WTO and when 
negotiating new rules. But multilateral re sults c ould not be pre -defined. They ha d to be negotiated 
not in the abstract but in relation to the specific area under negotiation.  What really matter ed was 
what commitments Members were ready to take on and how S&DT could be designed to address the 
development challenges developing Members and in particular LDCs were facing in each specific 
area under negotiation.  
8.121.   The representative of Indonesia  had already addressed  the underlying problems in relation 
to WTO Reform that had recently surfaced frantically  in many format s and proposals. The idea to 
reform was not a new one. Doha ha d clearly pointed out imbalances and inequities left from the 
Uruguay Round that need ed to be addressed.  
8.122.   Any further deliberation on WTO Reform should also address the imbalances  and inequities 
which were long overdue and should place development at the centre of reform. In doing so, 
Indonesia  support ed the preservation of several  principle s of the multilateral trading system  
including  consensus  based decision -making and ratification process subsequent to amendments , 
among others.   
8.123.   Many proposals and papers that were currently  on the table contain ed not only  a broader 
sense of reform or modernization but also technical improvement in specific Committee s and 
Council s that c ould also  be regarded as an effort to wards that direction . Many delegations however 
consider ed that most of those proposals and papers were scattered and unstructured. Th e current  
situation also ma de it difficult to do some mapping on w hether the reform  proposals  would be enough 
to shift the balance of Members' obligations.  
8.124.   If Members  so desired the reform , the issues  should be comprehensively  discussed and 
addressed  – the results of which should be agreed  by all Members. For that purpos e, the paper 
presented by the proponents feature d a consolidation of effort to ensure a more structured  process  
while maintaining most of the current features of the multilateral trading system.  
8.125.   The document had highlighted fundamental issues that need ed to be resolved which could 
enhance trust and confidence through a mutually beneficial arrangement of issues of common 
concern to all Members. Inclusivity and a holistic approach of discussion s on WTO Reform remained  
the best way forward.  
8.126.   The representative of Turkey  agree d that Members  should respect the core principles  of the 
WTO. Discussions on WTO R eform should yield fair and balanced outcomes for developing and LDC 
Members – providing enough policy space for their development concerns.  
8.127.   S&DT was an indispensable principle of the WTO rulebook and it ha d been an integral part 
of WTO Agreements and negotiations sin ce the establishment of the organization.  In that regard,  
S&DT ha d been an important tool to balance the system to an extent especially considering the 
imbalances in the Agreement on Agriculture as had been underlined in the paper under discussion . 
8.128.   All institutions should be open to change and improvement. In th at regard , broader actions 
could  be needed in certain areas to make the WTO more effective and up to date. Turkey therefore 
reiterated its  openness to such ideas  and w ould continue to contribute to t he discussion on how to 
respond to the challenges the organization  currently faced . 
8.129.   The representative of Guyana  underscored the  need to make progress on reducing any 
uncertainty related to the principles and the foundation  of the multilateral trading system as th at 
was essential to  the overall progress of the  negotiations , of all areas of WTO R eform and of other 
issues the organiz ation and its Members currently faced .  
8.130.   The paper place d the right emphasis on the importance of S&DT particularly in enabling  
Members to  pursue their national development strategies while respecting the rules they agree d on WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 68 - 
 
in the WTO and other multilater al forums. Guyana therefore  looked forward to continuing to 
contribute to th at discussion and  to the resolution of th ose issues.  
8.131.   The representative of Afghanistan  associate d with the statement  made by the LDC Group . 
As S&DT was a key pillar of WTO Agreements , focus should be given to its proper implementation 
particularly for Members who were in need of it especially the LDCs. Any discussion on WTO Reform 
and any negotiat ion of new rules should be framed on development and on inclusivity in international 
trade with the view to raising the global share of trade of small economies and LDCs.  
8.132.   Afghanistan likewise u nderst ood that the level and mechanisms of S&DT was a matter of 
concern for some Members. In that regard, Members should  find solutions that would respond to  
those concerns by creatively addressing them in  good faith and based on clear and impartial 
assessment of facts.  
8.133.   Afghanistan was eager to work with the proponents and Members in general  in that area 
and to have produc tive and inclusive dialogue on th ose and other  issues with the view  to help ing the 
organization  to overcome its challenges and to move forward.  
8.134.   The representative of South Africa  thank ed all the  Members who ha d taken the floor  for the 
comments they  had made with regard to the paper. South Africa emphasised that developing 
Members  had been proponents , as had been already mentioned by many of them,  of the reform 
immediately after the Uruguay Round because of the imbalances that had existed as a result of that 
Round . The call for such reform had subsequently led to the  launch of the  Doha Development Round 
which had been  seen as an opportunity to address th e unfinished business.  
8.135.   South Africa did not agree with the position of the United States that the Doha Development 
Round was dead.  Decisions in the WTO were reached by consensus and there was no decision by 
the WTO that declare d the Round concluded. In addition, South Africa  did not agree that the CTD 
SS ha d fulfilled its mandate and it was for th at reason that the G -90 would submit its revised proposal 
on S&DT by the end of September.  
8.136.   A number of delegations ha d also raised the important point that the trade and development 
nexus was a recogni zed principle. It was for th at reason that development ha d to be at the core of 
WTO work. S& DT was a right which was embedded in WTO Agreements and ha d to be preserved . It 
was not subject to the whims of Members and to abstract prognostications.  
8.137.   In the Marrakesh Agreement, Members  had committed to continue to make positive efforts 
to ensure that developing Members  especially LDCs secure d a share in the growth of world trade 
commensurate with the needs of their economic development. In looking  at both the Marrakesh 
Agreement and the Doh a Development mandate which were the existing mandates that Members  
had in the organization, both of them emphasise d the importance of development.  
8.138.   There could  be Members who wish ed to opt out of S&DT  and it was their prerogative to do 
so. Any attempts to put pressure on Members to give up their rights were not  however  acceptable 
and South Africa would  continue to reject those attempts.  
8.139.   South Africa reiterated that  WTO Reform should  preserve the core values and basic principles 
of the organization including  S&DT and consensus decision -making which were critical to preserve 
the functioning of the multilateral trading system and important to build trust. In th at context, as  
developing and LDC Members , the proponents  would continue to be guided by the Doha mand ate 
such that they had  expressed in their paper the importance of balance, inclusivity and priorities that 
were outlined under th at mandate.  
8.140.   The WTO Reform agenda should not only sway in one direction. It should rather  address the 
imbalances and inequities  that continue d to exist to the advantage of developed Members. There 
remain ed a substantial body of unfinished business under the Doha Development Agenda including 
addressing asymmetries in Agriculture , strengthen ing S&DT and addressing implementation iss ues, 
among other s.  
8.141.   The credibility and continued relevance of the multilateral trading system was premised on 
mutual benefit and mutual trust . More importantly, it was premised on the need to ensure that WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 69 - 
 
multilateral rules were supportive to Members'  development objectives. WTO Reform should  not lead 
to inherited inequities or worsen the imbalances that exist ed. It should rather  be premised on the 
principles of inclusivity and development and should  respond to the underlying c auses of the current 
backlash against trade and the difficulties that developing Members continue d to face including 
industrialization.  
8.142.   South Africa and the other co -sponsors would welcome further improvements and 
suggestions on the paper  and would continu e to engage with Members.  
8.143.   The representative of India thank ed all the  Members who ha d taken the floor under th e item 
and took note of both the  wide support and the  concerns raised on many issues.  India and the other 
co-sponsors would  work with Members to b etter understand their positions with the objective of 
taking forward an inclusive, balanced and development -oriented WTO Reform agenda.  
8.144.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
9  AN INCLUSIVE APPROAC H TO TRANSPARENCY AN D NOTIFICATION REQUI REMENTS IN  
THE WTO – COMMUNICAT ION FROM THE AFRICAN  GROUP; CUBA AND IND IA 
(JOB/GC/218/REV.1)  
9.1.  The Chair said that the delegation of Benin on behalf of the African Group had requested the 
Secretariat to include that item in the agenda of the current meeting together w ith the 
communication circulated in document JOB/GC/218/Rev.1. She recalled that  communication ha d 
also been presented in the CTG at its regular meeting on 8 and 9 July  and underst ood that a 
revision13 would be issued shortly to include an additional co -sponsor. She then invited  South Africa 
to introduce the communication  on behalf of the co -sponsors.  
9.2.  The representative of South Africa  introduc ed the proposal as had been co-sponsored by the 
Africa n Group, Cuba, India and  Oman and thank ed them for the ir contributions and support.  
9.3.  Transparency was one of the pillars of the multilateral trading system and was important for 
the functioning of the WTO system. While importance of transparency was understood, Members  
needed to recogni ze the challenges that dev eloping Members  faced in meeting their transparency 
obligations due to limited capacities and resources.  Members  should  therefore  take a developmental 
and inclusive approach to transparency.  
9.4.  The inability of many developing and LDC  Members  in fulfilling th eir notification obligations d id 
not and should not equate to wilful neglect of multilateral obligations.  For example, some 
notifications were complex and require d detailed data which exceed ed the capabilities of Members 
due to the lack of central database s containing all the legislation, statistics and data for different 
government agencies. Non -compliance relate d to the lack of proper infrastructure and limited 
institutional capacity.  While technical capacity and support provided by the Secretariat was very 
important, it was likewise important to review it to make it more targeted to specific constraints 
facing Members.   
9.5.  A more cooperative approach was required where Members were incentivi sed for complying 
with obligations . Punitive approaches were unhelpf ul. While the problem of non -compliance 
regarding notifications was real, constructive and effective solutions based on the nuancing of 
obligations in the context of an S&D T approach and incentives was required.  Punitive approaches to 
enforce notification and transparency obligations were not acceptable. Any work in th at area should  
support developing Members'  ability to address their difficulties through inclusive and mutually 
agreed approaches such as through si mplified notification formats, longer timeframes and targeted 
technical assistance and capacity building.  
9.6.  Notifications c ould only be made by the concerned Member and no counternotifications w ould 
be valid. Neither the Secretariat nor any other Member sh ould have the right to notify information 
on behalf of another Member unless th at possibility ha d been provided for in existing agreements.  
                                                
13 The revision was  subsequently  circulated in document JOB/GC/218 /Rev.2 which stated that the 
following Members were co -sponsoring the communicat ion: African Group, Cuba, India and Oman.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 70 - 
 
9.7.  Transparency was not only limited to notifications but should permeate all aspects of the 
function of the WTO. The pr oponents  therefore propose d a holistic approach to transparency.  
Transparency should underpin how an organi zation like the WTO was run including the day -to-day 
function of the WTO, Ministerial Conferences, decision -making processes including the organi zation 
of various types of Committee meetings to ensure effective participation and that the process was 
inclusive.  
9.8.  Transparency issues ar ose because some discussions t ook place in small Committees, informal 
open-ended meetings  and Green Rooms , among others.  Such practices limit ed the ability  of 
developing  Members to effectively participate in important deliberations.  
9.9.  Transparency was by no means an issue only relevant to developing Members. Some developed 
Members  also d id not comply with their notification obligations but for different reasons as could  be 
the case for developing Members . Examples include d notification obligations in the context of 
Agriculture around final Bound AMS commitments which should  be notified prom ptly. 
9.10.   Developing Members  had a much better notification record than major developed Members  
under GATS Article III.3. Other concerns remain ed around GATS Mode 4. In addition, Article 66.2 of 
the TRIPS Agreement was another area where more transparency could assist the promotion of 
technology transfer to LDC Members.  
9.11.   The TRIPS Agreement establishe d an obligation for Members to require patent app lications to 
disclose the origin of biological resources and/or associated traditional knowledge, including Prior 
Informed Consent and Access to Benefit Sharing. However, despite a long discussion in the TRIPS 
Council in Special Session, no outcome ha d been produced on th at important issue.  
9.12.   South Africa  reiterate d that it was not in developing  Members'  interests to expand their 
notification obligations under the existing Agreements. Members  needed a solutions -based, 
development -oriented, inclusive and coop erative approach to transparency . 
9.13.   In so far as obligations undertaken under the Marrakesh Agreement and its annexes were 
concerned, treaty obligations should be performed in good faith. It was therefore clear that the 
obligation to comply was not blind to the situation that a particular Member or groups of Members 
could  find themselves in.  
9.14.   Simplification of notification formats and longer timeframes to comply with notification periods 
would assist developing Members  while LDCs in particular  should not be s ubject to any notification 
except in areas where they could  have interest.  
9.15.   Any work in th at area should be on supporting and incentivi sing developing Members  to 
address th ose difficulties while punitive approaches suggested by some w ould not resolve such 
capacity constraints and w ould tend to target Members who were already not able to comply and 
who currently remain ed under financial administrative measures.  
9.16.   The proponents  welcome d suggestions to improve the paper and w ould engage the WTO 
Membership toward s strengthening it.  
9.17.   The representative of India associated  with the statement delivered by South Africa on behalf 
of the co-sponsors. The proponents'  key motivation for th e submission was to highlight the need for 
an inclusive , cooperative and developmental agenda on transparency.  
9.18.   Transparency was an important pillar for the effective functioning of the WTO. As had been 
enumerated in the paper, LDCs and developing Members  had genuine capacity constraints in terms 
of institutiona l requirements and human resources to fulfil the onerous notification obligations.  
9.19.   Delays in notifying c ould not be attributed to wilful non -compliance.  Therefore, i nstead of 
punitive measures, Members  needed to adopt an inclusive approach to incentivi se the participation 
of LDCs and developing Members  for complying with notification obligations.  
9.20.   Transparency permeate d all areas of WTO work including processes of decision -making in the 
organi zation and the Ministerial Conferences. It should therefore be app lied to Members'  work WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 71 - 
 
including priorities in negotiations and deliberations in the various regular bodies. Members should  
also ensure  that the processes were transparent, inclusive and provide d opportunity for participation 
of all Members.  
9.21.   Notification ob ligations c ould not be seen in isolation only for certain areas related to goods. 
They should be applied holistically to all Agreements under the WTO. There were significant 
notification gaps which ha d been listed in the paper in areas such as agriculture,  services and TRIPS 
where transparency need ed to be strengthened.  
9.22.   The elements of a constructive approach on the issue of transparency and notifications in the 
WTO should include r ecogni zing the genuine capacity constraints which LDCs and developing 
Member s faced and adopting a cooperative approach to address th em. 
9.23.   Members'  efforts should be directed to  creating a suitable ecosystem to strengthen the 
capacity of Members by providing technical assistance, simplification of notification requirements 
and reduc ing the administrative and technical burden for delegations who d id not have the resources 
and capacity.  
9.24.   Members should endeavour to promote transparency in all areas of their work including a 
participative process of decision -making, setting the agenda of  their negotiations and building faith 
and trust.  
9.25.   India reiterate d that any approach suggesting a resort to counternotifications, additional 
obligations and punitive measures w ould only deepen the divide among Members . Members  should 
rather focus on engaging in an inclusive and constructive approach to strengthen their work in th at 
area. 
9.26.   The representative of Oman  fully underst ood the importance of transparency in the 
multilateral trading system. Individuals and companies invol ved in trade had to know the  regulations 
and policies of trade in order to enhance trade between Members. Oman therefore  urged Members 
to respect transparency obligations by submitting their notifications on specific measures, policies 
or laws that could  affect foreign trade.  
9.27.   Even though Oman underst ood the importance of transparency in the WTO, it however noted 
that developed Members  that d id not face any capacity constraints should fully comply with 
transparency obligations to set an example to the develo ping Members  whereas other developing 
Member s facing human capacity constraints should be assisted and given more flexibility.  
9.28.   Notification obligations should be maintained within Members' level of development and not 
be taken beyond their capacity. Different Members face d different types of difficulties. For instance, 
Oman face d a language barrier in complying with notification obligations. Furthermore, employee 
turnover ma de it difficult to ensure proper capacity building in addition to the capacity to co llect and 
gather information needed to submit notifications.  
9.29.   A development -oriented, cooperative approach based on a mechanism to help Members 
comply with their notification obligations was more realistic. An inclusive approach to transparency 
that look ed at other areas of WTO work was needed to make sure that transparency was achieved 
in all areas. Oman  hoped that Members w ould support th e proposal.  
9.30.   The representative of Nigeria  co-sponsored the paper that addressed the pertinent issue of 
transparency in a  holistic and inclusive manner because  transparency and notification were critical 
to the effective functioning of the multilateral trading system . 
9.31.   The paper had drawn  attention to the challenges faced by developing Members  as they strive d 
to comply with their respective notification  obligations . Those challenges were largely institutional 
and were occasioned by the shortage of adequate manpower in government ministries, departments 
and agencies with in -depth knowledge of WTO Agreements and  its applications; weak inter -agency 
coordination on  the implementation of trade policy; limited resources and a host of other factors. It 
was therefore misleading for anyone to suggest that some Members especially developing Member s 
deliberately sh ied away from fulfilling their notification obligation s. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 72 - 
 
9.32.   It was also unlikely that th ose challenges c ould effectively be addressed by the limited online 
and on -site capacity building programme by the Secretariat. A cooperative approach to the issue of 
enhancing t ransparency and notifications that t ook into account the strength s and weaknesses of 
parties rather than the punitive approach proposed by some Members was likely to yield the desired 
result of improved transparency and notification.  
9.33.   Rather than cherry pi cking WTO Agreements, Councils or Committees where transparency 
needed to be enhanced, the paper had sought to address the issue of transparency holistically. It 
had drawn  attention to other areas such as GATS Article III:3 obligations where lack of transp arency 
was often deliberately ignored or overlooked in the WTO. It had also laid the foundation for broad 
based discussions on the need for transparency to permeate the functioning of the WTO.  
9.34.   Priority  should be given to some issues regarding transparency that were of critical importance 
to developing Members  in order for the multilateral trading system to engender inclusive growth and 
development. Th ose issues include d the need to enhance Mode 4 GATS transparency , to concreti se 
the implementation of Paragr aph 39 of the 18 December 2005 Ministerial Declaration that address ed 
the issue of disclosure of origin of biological resources and/or associated traditional knowledge in 
patent application and to encourage annual notification of ad valorem equivalent of n on ad valorem 
tariff or the conversion of non ad valorem tariff to ad valorem tariff in order to enhance transparency.  
9.35.   Nigeria  urged all Members to favourably consider the paper and its recommendations in order 
to effectively enhance transparency and improve the overall outcome for all.  
9.36.   The representative of Egypt  noted that a s one of the founding Members of the WTO, Egypt 
had always fully subscribed to the importance of transparency and its cruciality  in deepening 
understanding of Members' policies and practices in a way that ha d significantly contributed in 
bridging gaps and building confidence  over the past years . 
9.37.   It was in that vein that Egypt had co -sponsor ed the communication  which capture d the 
essence of the challenges faced by d eveloping Members  in fulfilling their transparency and 
notification obligations . Such challenges did not solely relate to limitations on human expertise but 
extend ed to financial, institutional and technological parameters . Those were challenges that were 
even more severe in the case of a big country such as  Egypt with 27 governorates each with its own 
administrative bod y often characteri sed by the lack of adequate technological infrastructure  making 
the aggregation of data on the national level a very comp licated task.  
9.38.   In addition, t ransparency c ould not be exclusively discussed in the framework of notification 
obligations . Transparency should  be strengthened not only in  the procedures related to the conduct 
of Ministerial Conference s but also in Members'  daily work  particularly on issues such as  overlapping 
meetings and extensive technical discussions conducted  with very short notice in advance seriously 
imped ing the ability of small delegations of developing and LDC Members  to engage  in important 
deliberations.  
9.39.   Following a more cooperative and gradual approach was the best way in dealing with the issue 
of improving transparency in the organization. Other proposed approaches w ould not help in facing 
those challenges and w ould result in  the further marginalization of developing and LDC Members . 
9.40.   The representative of Benin , on behalf of the African Group , co-sponsored  the paper  because 
the African Group supported the  ideas spelled out in it. An inclusive approach to transparency and 
notification requirements was the only way that would allow Members  to achieve transparency.  
9.41.   Transparency was only going to be effectively achieved if all Members were involved in the 
different processes of their work from the very beginning right up to the dec ision-making process 
and the implementation of decisions.  
9.42.   Capacity of developing  Members  and LDCs in particular need ed to be taken into consideration 
and they need ed to be given the necessary technical assistance in order to meet their obligations. 
Members  needed to ensure that they would not be subjected to additional requirements.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 73 - 
 
9.43.   The African Group  also reject ed any punitive approach because it would not contribute to 
improving transparency and compliance to notification obligations . Such approach  would rather 
achieve the opposite and Members should avoid that.  
9.44.   The representative of Uganda  said that  mutual trust was an essential pre -requisite in the 
multilateral trading system. Transparency and trust went hand in hand . The latter c ould not be 
estab lished without the former.  Transparency in th e organization extend ed to the scheduling of 
meetings bearing in mind the human resource constraints of majority of Members, the formality and 
informality of meetings on critical issues as well as organizational  aspects of Ministerial Conferences 
as had been explained in the paper.  
9.45.   The importance of adherence to and respect for the rules and principles of an organization 
such as th e WTO  could not be stressed enough. Consensus, as  had been  enshrined in the Marrake sh 
Agreement Establishing the WTO, was the cornerstone of decision -making and should  be preserved 
as such. The Marrakesh Agreement also clearly la id down the procedures to be followed to effect 
change which  should  be adhered to in letter and in spirit. Th at was the only way to ensure that the 
integrity of th e organization was preserved. Uganda hoped that Members w ould allow for genuine 
exchange regarding th e communication.  
9.46.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , endorse d the objectives spelled ou t in th e 
communication . The LDC Group inf ormed Members  that it would soon be issuing a paper laying out 
its view on WTO Reform . 
9.47.   The LDC Group recall ed a core issue raised in the communication  which was that the current 
notification and transparency obligations should  take into account the constraints of developing 
Members particularly LDCs. Furthermore, LDCs should not be forced to take on additional notification 
and transparency obligations beyond  their capacity. Any additional notification or transparency 
obligation could not be taken on by LDCs without getting sufficient capacity building.  
9.48.   As had been spelled out in the paper and as the LDC Group had  already stated, transparency 
should  apply to all of the work of the WTO and should touch upon issues such as  the convening of 
simultaneous informal meetings of small, restricted and exclusive groups particularly if decisions 
could  be taken. It was also important to highlight the need for translation and interpretation services 
as it was a  key aspect to ensuring transparency  particularly for LDCs . 
9.49.   With regard to transparency in WTO Agreements, the LDC Group fully endorse d the points 
raised in the current paper. The LDCs  had already  commented on those under  the previous agenda 
item in its statement concerning improving notifications under the GATS Agreement on Mode 4 and 
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement which stipulate d that developed Members should encourage 
their domestic enterprises to grant transfer o f technology to LDC Members.  
9.50.   The representative of Costa Rica  thank ed the proponents for th eir communication  and the ir 
presentation t hat day which reflect ed Members' interest in improving transparency and fulfilling 
notification obligations in the WTO. Cos ta Rica continue d to evaluate it in the framework of the work 
of the CTG in which technical discussions were taking  place on th at issue.  
9.51.   Transparency was a fundamental principle of the WTO that require d an urgent approach. 
Unfortunately , the level of compliance was very low and varie d depending on the area and the 
Member . What d id not change was the duty of each Member to comply with the same notification 
obligation.  
9.52.   The practical implementation of tran sparency provisions should  have a universal and unique 
character . Members should  all aspire to reach the  same and the greatest possible level of 
transparency . Members should likewise  have at their disposal mechanisms for capacity buildin g and 
technical ass istance  that would help them fulfil such  commitments.  
9.53.   Without transparency, trust c ould not be built and without trust it would be  difficult to move 
forward in the process of negotiating the reforms that the WTO require d. That was why Costa Rica  
worked with other Members to promote th at issue and was more than willing to address th ose ideas 
in the respective Committees. Costa Rica also  co-sponsor ed a proposal  discussed at the CTG  that 
did not impose  new notification obligations or increase existing ones for  any Member.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 74 - 
 
9.54.   It was natural for Members to have different views on the balance that should  exist between 
transparency and the human and financial resources required to achieve it. Costa Rica was no 
stranger to th at discussion. Members should however  have c onsidered that investment in 
transparency even from a small country such as Costa Rica  was the greatest contributio n one could  
give to the maintenance of the multilateral trading system.  
9.55.   Costa Rica  believe d in constructive dialogue and in recogni sing the diversity of opinions and 
positions of all Members especially the developing ones . Costa Rica therefore found  it disconcerting 
that according to Paragraph 2.7 of the communication , conclusions were drawn about what 
developing Members could  or could  not accept in terms of transparency  obligations . 
9.56.   Costa Rica however agreed that t he lack of information was not an exclusive concern of 
developed Members . There was ample room for improvement in areas such as agricultur e 
notifications  which was  a pending task for the vast majority of Members. Costa Rica also agreed  on 
the importance of improving tariff transparency . Non ad valorem tariffs generate d uncertainty and 
constitute d barriers to market access. It was therefore positive  to see a pr oposal along thos e lines 
being reflected in Paragraph 3.18 of the communication .  
9.57.   Costa Rica remained  ready to work with  all Members to promote the improvement of 
notifications in agriculture and in market access especially with the larger ones, regardless of their 
level o f development and which had the greatest potential to distort trade worldwide . 
9.58.   The representative of Switzerland  said that i n examining the recent proposals and documents , 
Switzerland saw a convergence of views on the importance of transparency for the WTO  to operate 
effectively. While Members share d the objective of improving transparency, they however differed 
on how to go about it.  
9.59.   It was true that certain developing Members  were experiencing difficulties in meeting their 
transparency obligations  owing mainly to resource constraints . But there were ways to improve 
transparency while still taking their constraints  and the complexity of certain notification 
requirements  into accou nt.  
9.60.   One approach that could be explored would be to simplify the notification formats. That option 
had been  proposed by the Working Group on Notification Obligations and Procedures back in 1996 . 
That was also in the spirit of a proposal for rules of origi n mentioned in Paragraph 1.4 of the 
communication.  Drafted on the initiative of Switzerland, it  had been  intended to take the resource 
constraints and capacity deficits of certain Members especially the LDCs  into account.  
9.61.   That proposal c ould serve as a model for minimi sing the administrative burden of notification. 
If necessary, developing Members  could obtain assistance from the Secretariat.  Consultations were 
still underway between th e proposal's sponsors and a number of developing and LDC Members  in 
search of mutually agreeable language on such aspects as S&DT  and technical assistance.  
9.62.   Switzerland remained  ready to continue the discussions with all Members to find areas of 
agreement on ways to improve transparency and non -preferential rules  of origin.  
9.63.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the ACP , said that the discussion on transparency 
and notifications ha d, over the past months, advanced with proposals issued by a number of 
Members. In those proposals and submissions aimed at improv ed transparency, the question of 
resource and capacity constraints and concrete support needed to surmount those hurdles ha d not 
been meaningfully addressed.  Moreover, a  number of the proposals s ought  to explicitly recalibrate 
the balance of rights and obl igations as it relate d to notifications.  
9.64.   While the ACP Group agree d that notifications were an important feature of transparency, 
punitive approaches around administrative measures or sanctions w ould not yield the desired 
results. It was evident that for most developing Members , their inability to fulfil notification 
commitments in a timely manner relate d not to strategic ambivalence but to genuine capacity 
constraints.  
9.65.   The capacity constraints were not limited to the preparation of the notifications alone. For 
Members of the ACP Group, th ose include d miniscule and small administrations ; collision between WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 75 - 
 
size of office and priorities ; constant staff turnover through rotation, promotion, resignation or 
retirement including persons who ha d developed the capacity to complete notifications ; slow uptake 
by line ministries and agencies from whom inputs were required for notifications and lack of training, 
knowledge and exposure to the provisions of WTO Agreements and notifications, among others . 
9.66.   Against th at background , it should be reiterated that the inability of developing Members  to 
comply with notification obligations remain ed inextricably linked to levels of economic development 
and access to appropriate technical resources.  Solutions shou ld therefore be pursued around 
strengthening capacity and creating meaningful flexibility for developing Members .  
9.67.   It was for th ose reasons that the ACP Group support ed the general thrust of the 
communication of the African Group and co -sponsors on an incl usive approach to transparency and 
notification requirements in the WTO.  With that in mind, solutions should be focused at increasing 
capacity, not punishing constraints.  
9.68.   The communication had recall ed the understanding arrived at by the  Working Group on 
Notification Obligations and Procedures which stated that consideration should be given to "the 
development of a special programme of assistance to developing country Members and particularly 
to LDCs, providing intensive technical assistance, possibly with  the participation of other 
organizations, focused on the development of systems and structures required to respond to 
notification obligations ". 
9.69.   That was an unfulfilled commitment by the Membership. Transparency and notifications 
should not  therefore  be limited to the tabling of formulaic submissions but , critically , good faith 
engagement with all Members in the pursuit of any new rules aimed at improving notifications in the 
organization .  
9.70.   The ACP Group support ed the core elements of the African Group 's communication and 
pledge d its continuing support to finding a mutually agreeable solution to all transparency related 
concerns.  
9.71.   The representative of Uruguay  welcome d the document and thank ed the proponents for the ir 
presentation and their contribution to the discussions  on transparency . Consensus clearly appear ed 
to exist among Members on the importance of improving the current level of transparency in all 
aspects of the WTO's work.  
9.72.   Uruguay reiterate d the importanc e of tabling proposals that confin ed their scope of application 
to the WTO's existing notification requirements. Uruguay  emphasi sed the need for creative solutions 
if Members  were to achieve faithful compliance with the transparency obligations that all  of them 
had undertaken  – allowing them to build the requisite capacity as the case could  be. 
9.73.   The representative of the European Union  appreciated the  contribution to the important 
conversation about how to improve transparency in general , and compliance with  notification 
obligations in particular.  
9.74.   The European Union  agree d with the African Group, Cuba and India that notifications were 
not the only aspect of transparency. The European Union also  recogni zed that notification work was 
resource -intensive and c ould be challenging particularly for small developing or LDC  Members . 
Notifications were however indispensable for the  monitoring function of the WTO. Moreover, 
notification work was, in its own experience, also capacity building in  and of itself  as it strengthen ed 
inter-agency cooperation.  
9.75.   In any case, the European Union's  suggestion would be to make the conversation more 
specific. Members  already ha d focused conversations in the Council for Trade in Goods on the basis 
of the propos al made by the E uropean Union  and other co -sponsors in JOB/CTG/14/Rev .2. The 
European Union  saw the communication  discussed that day  as a contribution to those conversations.  
9.76.   The E uropean Union  was in no way opposed to deepening the discussions on notific ations in 
the relevant other bodies . To the contrary, the European Union  looked forward to engaging with all 
Members on th ose issues.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 76 - 
 
9.77.   For example, as regards annual agricultural notifications on domestic support (DS:1) where 
no developed or developing Member was currently able to respect the deadline set out in the 
"notification requirements" of the Committee on Agriculture (G/AG/2), the E uropean Union  would be 
ready to discuss a revision and update of that document covering all agricultural notification 
obligations under the Agreement on Agriculture as well as Ministerial Decisions.  
9.78.   The European Union  would also be willing to take up a conversation about GATS Article III.3 
notifications in the Council for Trade in Services.  
9.79.   The representative of Banglades h associate d with the statement made by the LDC Group and 
reiterated its position on the issue as it had previously stated including in meetings of other regular 
bodies.  Transparency was an essential pillar of good governance  and t here were many ways to 
uphold it. Notification templates alone could not fully ensure transparency . 
9.80.   Notification provisions under different Agreements were diverse and the ability of many 
developing and LDC  Members  to notify was severely constrained by lack of technical capacity. A few 
customi sed training program mes could  not address the unique internal coordination challenges and 
capability vacuum experienced by  developing and LDC  Members . 
9.81.   Although the ongoing efforts of the Secretariat to provide technical support were deeply 
appreciated, the capacity constraint s had not been improved to the expected level. Members  could 
not deny that . In that regard, they should investigate  why the existing technical assistance 
program mes on notification enhancement c ould not meet their expectation s. 
9.82.   Bangladesh believe d in shared prosperity and peaceful coexistence of Members. No one c ould 
thrive alone. Bangladesh  encourage d Members to review the existing variation in understanding and 
explaining transparency issues. Members should also review and, where required, simplify the 
notification templates and procedures.  Bangladesh look ed forward to working actively with the 
proponents and other Members.  
9.83.   The representative of the United States  thank ed the co -sponsors of the communication on, 
and South Africa for its introduction of, an "inclusive approach " to transparency and welcome d 
engagement on th at critical issue of improving Members ' compliance with notification obligations.   
9.84.   As the paper note d, Members ' compliance with notification obligations ha d been disappointing.  
The United States  agree d with th at assessment. Transparency was a fundamental obligation for 
every Member. The ability to have a deep understanding of other Members ' trading systems was 
only possible when notifications were submitted in a timely manner.  
9.85.   It was also important to emphasi se that there was more harm to other Members than to the 
Member  itself when it fail ed to meet notification requirements since the lack of information about 
the Member' s laws and regulations actually hinder ed trade.  
9.86.   The communication note d that a deep understanding of WTO Agreements was necessary for 
compliance with WTO commitments. While th at was true, it was also a fundamental expectation of 
WTO Membership that every Member comport ed with its obligations and there were resources 
available to support those Members who require d assistance.  
9.87.   The United States and other co -sponsors ha d put forward a proposal in t he Council on Trade 
in Goods circulated in document JOB/GC/204/Rev.2 which outline d steps that c ould be taken to 
enhance transparency and strengthen notification requirements without setting additional 
obligations on any Member.  
9.88.   Many of the concerns set fo rth in the paper presented t hat day c ould be addressed through 
capacity building, flexibility of timeframes and potential simplification of format of notifications. All 
of th ose elements were addressed in some form through its joint proposal currently unde r 
consideration in the CTG.  
9.89.   The United States welcome d engagement on the issue of transparency and improving 
Members ' compliance with notification obligations  and stood ready and committed to working with 
Members to improve capacity to implement notificati on obligations.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 77 - 
 
9.90.   The representative of Japan  thank ed the proponents for the useful communication that raise d 
in particular developing and LDC  Members ' concerns. Japan reemphasise d that notification was an 
obligation which was embedded in the WTO Agreement. All Members  made a commitment to comply 
with th at obligation when they became Members. In that regard, Japan referred to its statement in 
the CTG Meeting on 9 July  concerning the trans parency proposal  of Japan and co -sponso rs. 
9.91.   Japan  had been trying to address Members' concerns so that more Members c ould support its 
proposal at the CTG which  had already  garnered wide support from Members. Since all  Members  
share d a view that notification was a fundamental obligation, Japan wo uld like to further discuss 
how they could work on improving transparency in a collaborative and constructive manner.  
9.92.   The representative of China  appreciate d the efforts made by the African Group, Cuba and 
India for submitting the ir document which had refl ected  the capacity constraints of developing 
Members especially LDCs which should be fully considered. The concerns and proposals reflected in 
the document should be further discuss ed. In th at regard, China  encourage d direct dialogue among 
Members so that the difficulties of developing Members could be better understood and addressed.  
9.93.   China  share d the concerns of other developing Members. At the same time, as many  other  
developing Members, China  always t ried its best to fulfil the required notifications. As the document 
showed, developed Members ' compliance of their notification obligations had reached a level that 
was f ar less than full implementation.  To enhance transparency and strengthen notifications, 
develo ped Members should  therefore  take the lead and the developing ones should also endeavour 
to do their best. Only by doing so c ould Members  achieve their goal.  
9.94.   The representative of Norway  thanked  the proponents for the paper presented and for the 
strong sup port they had  expressed for the fundamental importance of transparency for the effective 
functioning of the rules -based multilateral trading system.  
9.95.   Norway acknowledge d the capacity constraints of many developing Members . The lack of 
continuity in adminis tration was a bigger problem for many developing Members than for developed 
Members. In any case, t here was room for improvement in notification practices of all Members 
including those  with the best performance. Furthermore, Norway  had similar views as th e proponents 
as regards the issue of economic penalties a nd the question of notifications by the Secretariat on 
behalf of Members.  
9.96.   Norway  however ha d a question regarding the implications of a statement in the paper  which 
stated that , "developing countries  should not be subjected to any transparency obligations which go 
beyond existing obligations". In Norway's view , any new negotiated outcome w ould essentiall y 
include new commitments and it w ould be necessary to monitor th ose commitments based on 
notificat ions from Members.  
9.97.   If developing Members c ould not do more reporting than at present , the implication seem ed 
to be that ongoing negotiations w ould have to be terminated and that no new commitments and 
negotiated outcomes in the WTO c ould be foreseen.  Given the active engagement by developing 
Members in reform discussions and ongoing negotiations, Norway  hesitate d to believe that th at was 
the objective of the proponents  and therefore asked for a  clarification on th at point.  
9.98.   The representative of Canada  appreciate d the communication from the co -sponsors  which  
contribut ed to the discussion on how to improve Members' compliance with the existing notification 
obligations that all of them had undertaken as Members of the WTO. Ther e could be no doubt that 
all Members recogni zed that meeting the existing notification obligations was important to the well -
being of th e organization.  
9.99.   Countless efforts ha d been spent by the Secretariat over the years to support Members' work 
in ensuring  that th ose notification obligations were fulfilled. And they knew that the provision of 
technical assistance help ed. Canada  had heard that from Members and  it was evident in the record 
of notifications itself.  
9.100.   As Canada had  noted at the previous  CTG meeti ng, one Member had been  able to address 
a ten -year backlog of notifications thanks to a national workshop organi zed by the Secretariat. 
Moreover, a look at the global trade -related technical assistance database show ed that 118 national WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 78 - 
 
or regional workshop s or seminars had been  given from 2010 to 2018 with notifications as the topic 
of learning. The number include d 47 in the past three years alone. Looking deeper, Members  could 
see that 31 of th ose 118 seminars and workshops had been  specifically about agri culture 
notifications.  
9.101.   A quick review of G/L/223/Rev.26 show ed improvements in the notification compliance rate 
of many developing Members from 2014 to 2017 in respect of agricultural domestic support and 
export subsidy notifications. The records also sho wed that there were no homogeneous blocks of 
Members that submit ted notifications and Members that d id not.  
9.102.   Each Member  had its own unique challenges in collecting the required information. A number 
of them had succeeded in meeting the challenge while some of them had not. Canada support ed 
finding ways to build on th ose successes to date, to spread best practices and to consider b oth 
systemic and specific improvements that c ould help Members improve the organization's record of 
compliance with notification obligations. They were obligations that all  Members  agree d to take on 
when they had  joined th e organization.  
9.103.   In order to do tha t however, Members  needed to stop speaking of notifications as a burden. 
Although they could  take some time to prepare  and could  be a difficult task to do , as Canada had 
previously mentioned , notifications were Members'  contribution to the well -being of th e WTO. 
Members  submit ted those notifications in the interest of the entire Membership.  By not providing 
the information, Members  were only hurting the ability of th e organization to oversee and manage 
international trade.  
9.104.   The representative of Thailand  thanked the proponents for their  presentation t hat day. Like 
all other Members, Thailand support ed efforts to enhance transparency and notification records.  
Improvement in th at area was crucial to WTO 's work.  
9.105.   A desirable approach should be positive in nature and able to foster trust and engagement 
among Members  – both developed and developing. The interests and views of the proponents  as 
well as of the other relevant proposals should not be disregard ed. A ll Memb ers need ed to work 
cooperatively to find convergent elements that would be used as a basis to address the most pressing 
challenges in an inclusive manner.   
9.106.   A vast number of developing Members especially LDCs ha d legitimate capacity constraints 
with regard  to notifications. To address such constraints in a sustainable manner, thorough 
assessments of the problems w ould be needed in addition to the technical assistance provided by 
the Secretariat. Thailand remain ed committed to improving transparency a nd notification records in 
the WTO and look ed forward to further engaging with all Members on th e issue.  
9.107.   The representative of Argentina  reiterated that Argentina was  pleased that the issue of 
transparency was receiving the attention it deserve d. As for other iss ues, while Argentina  agree d 
with the objective, it was clear that Members ha d different views on what a balanced and inclusive 
approach would consist of.  
9.108.   Argentina  recogni zed that some Members could  face legitimate constraints in timely 
compl ying with their notification obligations . However, e very notification that was not submitted  
undermine d the rights of the rest of the  Members hip to receive the information such notifications 
provide d. 
9.109.   Argentina, together with co -sponsors, therefore  propose d at the CTG a truly inclusive 
examination that (i) put aside the binary dilemma of developing versus developed Members,  
(ii) allowed for improved overall transparency performance and (iii) focuse d technical assistance and 
capacity building efforts where dif ferentiated treatment was undeniably required.  
9.110.   Argentina  had listened carefully as several distinguished Members ha d invoked transparency 
as a pillar of th e organization and had advocated against a punitive approach to it. In that regard,  
the administrativ e measures envisaged in the document co -sponsored by Argentina discussed at the 
CTG would be imposed  only after several instances of prior review. Argentina  doubt ed that an 
exclusively incentive -based approach w ould yield the results anticipated by some of  the delegations.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 79 - 
 
9.111.   The representative of Sri Lanka  associate d her delegation with th e communication  presented 
by South Africa. Issues of transparency and notification were important to all Members and 
developing Members , such as Sri Lanka,  were complying to the best of their abilities . Compliance 
was not easy because of the level of technical details and complexity involved in the preparation of 
notifications.  
9.112.   Sri Lanka noted that d ata reveal ed that both developed and developing Members  were 
behind in their notifications. At present, no Member was  in full compliance with all of their notification 
obligations.  
9.113.   In sharing its national experience, Sri Lanka said that after having recogni zed its backlog of 
notifications , it had  made several genuine attempts in the recent past to comply with its obligations 
by seriously addressing the obstacles hindering its compliance. In that regard, Sri Lanka had  
managed to clear its backlog to a greater extent by increasing its compliance dramatically in most 
of the important WTO Agreements. What it had  witnessed in the process of preparation of th e 
notification s was however  traumatic and unappealing.  
9.114.   The obstacles had not only been confined to lack of technical assistance but had also 
indicated the institution's l ack of capacity to understand not only the technicalities behind the  
concepts but also the complexities of the notification formats. Gathering of data based on the 
technical aspects had rather been difficult and aggregation and analysis of data had yet been another 
mammoth task.  
9.115.   Lack of task within the institutions to carry out collection and aggregation of data and to 
conduct the screening of the relevant data had been another challenge that Sri Lanka  experience d. 
The most important aspect of th at challen ge was the lack of institutional memory , as officials tend ed 
to be assigned different tasks due to short staff and to be transfer red to different departments from 
time to time.  
9.116.   Judging from its first-hand experience, Sri Lanka  was concerned with some of t he ideas and 
proposals previously presented by s everal  Members  because they aimed to impose additional burden 
on small Members  such as  Sri Lanka and to  create additional rights to selected Members who were 
demandeurs of the proposal through an accordance of the rights to make counternotifications which 
they d id not have under the current disciplines of the WTO Agreements.  
9.117.   Moreover, those proposals  aimed to measure the compliance of developing Members  while 
making an attempt to divide and group them under unrealistic criterion  and to introduce 
administrative and other punitive measures which were detrimental to Members  that had genuine 
desire to fulfil their notification obligations. It aim ed to highlight only the notification required in 
selecte d WTO Agreements while disregarding the WTO Agreements which ha d the  most stake for 
developing Members .  
9.118.   That was precisely the rationale with which Sri Lanka  support ed the communication  currently 
being discussed under that item  as it acknowledge d that the  issue of lack of capacity  and experience 
by developing Members  could not be overstated. The issue of capacity ha d also been highlighted 
before when there had been  a Working Group on Notification Obligations and Procedures. The latest 
proposal had alluded to that report and had flagged that many developing Members  had difficulty in 
understanding the frequent, complex and highly technical information demanded and had therefore 
faced a prohibitive task in providing complete response to the notification requir ements and formats.  
9.119.   As the proposal flag ged, Sri Lanka c ould not also support any transparency and notification 
measures that went beyond existing obligations. Sri Lanka, like other developing Members , was 
already struggling with its existing obligations. That issue should be dealt  with in a more positive 
manner where they were accorded support and incentives to encourage the m to notify such as 
through  S&DT  provisions  which would make  the notification obligations  less demanding.  
9.120.   In that regard, the discussion o n Paragraph 54 of the report of the Working Group on 
Notification Obligations and Procedures ma de a significant resource therein which suggest ed that 
"simplified formats might be developed for the developing countries with more det ailed information 
being provided to the Committees only when requested. In some situations, prolonged timeframes WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 80 - 
 
might be considered". Sri Lanka therefore support ed the facts and the proposals contained in th e 
development -friendly communication.  
9.121.   The repres entative of Indonesia  support ed the statement made by  the African  Group and 
concurred  that the decision on transparency in the WTO sh ould not be limited to notification 
compliance. Transparency went beyond notification so as to provide balanced rights and obligation s 
among Members in achieving mutually advantageous arrangement s as had been stipulated in the 
Marrakesh Agreement.  
9.122.   The representative of Pakistan  noted that the  paper  presented by the co -sponsors  correctly 
identifie d some of the basic reasons for  the poor situatio n on notifications. Pakistan agree d that the 
imbalance between the nature of the obligation and the capacity of developing Members  to fulfil it 
was a major factor  in the current situation . Pakistan further stressed that n o Member ha d been fully 
complying with its notification obligations at all times.  
9.123.   Developing Members  lagged behind in particular due to their severe human and other 
resource constraints affecting their possessi on of  the detailed information required to fulfil their  
notification  obligations . Aside from  technical assistance and capacity building, allowing more time 
for notifications in a more simplified format and requiring less frequent notifications c ould also reduce 
the burden on developing Members and could improve t he overall compliance.  
9.124.   Transparency should not be limited to notification obligations and should cover a whole range 
of issues – some of which were covered in the proposal such as  transparency in tariffs, Mode 4 
obligation in Services, conduct of meetings and various procedural elements.  
9.125.   The representative of Turkey  commend ed the efforts of the African Group, Cuba and India 
in presenting  a paper on transparency. As transparency was the centr epiece of the whole functioning 
of the organization , Turkey always welcome d proposals on its enhancement.  
9.126.   While acknowledging that non -compliance with transparency obligations was a fact, 
Members  should also be aware of the genuine capacity constraints many developing and LDC 
Members  faced. Notification requirements could represent real challenges for Members  that lack ed 
not only the necessary infrastructure and technical capacity but also the required human resources. 
That was why  the Membership  needed to work constructively to assist those Members facing such 
challenges  to comply. What those  Members needed was simplification  of notification requirements , 
longer timeframes, technical assistance and  encouragement.  
9.127.   As had been rightly pointed out in the proposal,  Members  needed coordinated, development -
oriented and holistic actions that w ould help the inclusion of developing and LDC Members  within 
the system. T hat was t he only way Members  could reach their aim of enhancing transparency without 
further marginali sing the developin g and  LDC Members .  
9.128.   The representative of Chile said that the  document was a contribution to the discussion on 
transparency in the organization, on the rules -based trading system and on the WTO reform process. 
Chile reiterate d its support to the idea of im proving the system in terms of notifications noting that 
the different WTO Agreements ha d notification obligations which ha d been signed up to voluntarily 
by Members. Th ose therefore were commitments made by each Member.  
9.129.   Members  should  take note of the lo w level of compliance on notification obligations in the 
organization and the systemic damage it cause d. At the same time, the WTO and its Members c ould 
show solidarity to those who d id not have the capacity to notify but who want ed to fulfil their 
obligat ions – which could be done through technical assistance  and capacity building . 
9.130.   The representative of Mexico  thank ed the proponents for presenting th e document which  
reflect ed the interest of Members in discussing how to improve transparency. Interest shou ld 
likewise  be reflected in Members'  compliance with their obligations  in that area . Members should see 
that all of them were striving to honour their transparency and notific ation obligations.  Improving 
the notification requirements w ould therefore contribute to ensuring a more robust and healthy 
multilateral trading system  – which should  consequently  be in the interest of all Members.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 81 - 
 
9.131.   Legitimate differences existed due to developing Members' lack of capacity  – an area where 
the technical assistance already provided by the organization ha d an important role to play. In that 
regard, it wa s worth pointing out that Mexico  had benefitted from technical assistance.  
9.132.   Mexico  reiterate d its willingness to participate in discussions  on enhancing transparency and 
improving notifications – an objective which was w hat business es around the world  expect ed from 
the WTO  to deliver. In those discussions, Members were  not seeking ways of making n otification 
obligations more burdensome. At the same time, national insufficiencies should not be covered up 
at an international level. Members should rather ask themselves how they could make their domestic 
procedures more effective so that they could comply with the notification obligations and the 
transparency commitments they  had all signed up to.  
9.133.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  expressed appreciation to  the proponents for their 
communicati on concerning the challenges faced by some developing Members  in fulfilling their 
notification obligations . Notification was an obligation all  Members  had committed  themselves into  
as they joined the WTO.  
9.134.   Chinese Taipei  did not believe, as some Members ten ded to interpret, that the current inertia 
in notification was a conflict between Member  groups. Positive or negative incentives to comply with 
notification obligations  raised in various WTO meetings , including one that Chinese Taipei had  co-
sponsored , were not targeted at any particular group . Strengthening the notification obligation was 
something all Members  should work hard  towards, engage and improve.  
9.135.   The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  thank ed the proponents for th eir 
communication which illustrated the importan ce for Members to  see transparency as a structural 
issue. Lack of transparency d id not depend on the will of Members  to notify. Its root cause wa s much 
deeper than that as it had to do with the actual functioning  of the organization . 
9.136.   Transparency was not limited to notifications . The document g ave Members  a constructive 
view of a transparent WTO . In that regard, Members  should explore how technology and interaction 
between the Secretariat and Members could  contrib ute to improving transparency without the 
necessity of seeking recourse to punitive measures.  
9.137.   The representative of South Africa , on behalf of the African Group , thanked Oman, Cuba and 
India for co -sponsor ing the paper  and thank ed Members for their views. South Africa clarified  that 
the proponents  did not propose a standstill or freez e of obligations in new agreements. Th at matter 
could be further clarified in the paper as Members went  forward.  
9.138.   South Africa was encouraged to see t hat many Members ha d identified transparency as a 
core principle of the WTO. As such , due consideration should be given to legitimate capacity 
constraints expressed by many delegations that ha d taken the floor. The p roponents st ood ready to 
take up all the  issues in a constructive and inclusive way.  
9.139.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
10  PROCEDURES TO STRENG THEN THE NEGOTIATING  FUNCTION OF THE WTO  –
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES (W T/GC/W/757/REV.1 AND  
WT/GC/W/764)  
10.1.   The Chair recalled that Me mbers  had a discussion on th e issue at the February and May 
General Council meetings  and that t he delegation of the United States had requested that th e item 
be included again in the agenda of t he meeting together with the two communications circulated in 
documents WT/GC/W/757/Rev.1 and WT/GC/W/764. She then  invite d the United States to take the 
floor. 
10.2.   The representative of the United States  was pleased to continue Members'  discussion of th at 
important reform initiative. As the Membership was aware , the United States in January had 
submitted a detailed paper on differentiation at the WTO. On that factual and analytic basis, the 
United States in February had submitted to the General Council a p roposal to resolve the 
differentiation problem through an approach that recogni zed the complexity of th e issue.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 82 - 
 
10.3.   The US proposal establishe d objective criteria for determining whether a WTO Member could  
continue to avail itself of S&D T in current and future  WTO negotiations. The four criteria were: a 
WTO Member that was a member of the OECD or a WTO Member that ha d begun the accession 
process to the OECD; a WTO Member that was a member of the G20; a WTO Member that was 
designated as a high income country by the World Bank; or a WTO Member that account ed for no 
less than 0.5 per  cent of global merchandise trade.  
10.4.   Since the last meeting of the General Council in May, the United States  had progressively 
broadened and deepened its conversation with Members in Gene va, in capitals and in Washington.  
10.5.   The United States was  engaging Members who would meet at least one of the four criteria in 
the US proposal  and was  also engaging other Members  especially LDCs  who would benefit if the 
more advanced, wealthy and influentia l economies among them finally accept ed responsibilities 
commensurate with their role in the global economy.  
10.6.   The United States  was greatly encouraged by th ose conversations from which several 
important themes were emerging.  
10.7.   First, the United States  saw growing traction for its call for reform. Since January, 
differentiation ha d moved from the periphery to become one of the centr epieces of WTO reform.  
When it had  submitted its proposal to the General Council in February, it had not expect ed consensus 
within a few months. The United States assure d the Membership that its focus on th e issue including 
the US proposal to address it w ould not go away.  
10.8.   Second, as the United States  had seen through th ose conversations, the US analytic paper on 
differentiation enjoy ed support from a diverse and deep cross -section of the Membership. Some 
delegations in Geneva ha d not been willing to voice th at support but their authorities in capital ha d: 
specifically , their support for the idea that certain Members were inappropriately seeking S&D T in 
WTO negotiations despite overwhelming evidence of economic strength, wealth or influence; that 
those Members ' rigid insistence on receiving special treatme nt intended for much poorer, less -
integrated Members was damaging the WTO and Members'  collective ability to reach agreements 
and that th e issue should  be addressed if the WTO was to be a viable forum for trade negotiations.  
10.9.   Third, a growing number of Memb ers were giving serious thought to the US proposal. The 
United States  stood ready to continue its discussions with them and appreciate d their open -
mindedness and willingness to consider how they c ould take a leadership role in improving th e 
organization fo r the good of all.  
10.10.   Fourth, the United States'  continued engagement with Members in Geneva, in capitals and 
in Washington was important to resolve lingering misconceptions about the US proposal.  
10.11.   For example, the United States  continue d to be told that its proposal should not ask any 
country to change its declaration of developing country status. The United States  agree d and the US 
proposal d id not ask th at. Agreeing to forego S&D T in current and future WTO negotiations d id not 
require any Member to declare i tself to be developed nor did it require any Member to forego S&D T 
in existing WTO Agreements.  
10.12.   Another misconception was that once a Member fore went S&DT in current and future WTO 
negotiations, it w ould not have the ability to negotiate flexibilities that it need ed to join consensus 
on a WTO text. Th at was not so. Every Member w ould continue to have the right to negotiate such 
flexibilities. The United States  recogni zed that certain Members could  lack th e capacity to negotiate 
such flexibilities but it asked whether  any Member  seriously believe d that Members such as Chile, 
China, India, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Singapore, South Africa and Turkey lack ed that capacity 
in 2019 . 
10.13.   In addition, the United States  sometimes hear d that its proposal was all about one Member 
and th at the  United States just need ed to reach an accommodation with that Member. Th at was 
inaccurate. The US  concerns went far beyond just one Member.  There were a large number of 
relative ly wealthy, advanced and/or influential economies who would seek to avail themselves of 
S&DT in current and future WTO negotiations. The United States  believe d a broad -based solution 
was required.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 83 - 
 
10.14.   Fifth, the United States  had learned through its conversati ons that a few large Members 
were resorting to scare tactics in an effort to derail th e discussion. For example, certain large 
Members were saying that the US proposal would prevent them from continuing to provide trade 
preferences to LDCs. The United States  wished to be clear – there was no link between the US 
proposal and th at threat.  
10.15.   Finally, the United States  discuss ed one of the criteria in its proposal in more detail. A few 
Members ha d asked why OECD members and countries in the OECD access ion process should forego 
S&DT in current and future WTO negotiations.  
10.16.   In its view, OECD membership  and the decision to pursue membership  was a self -chosen 
mark of differentiation and responsibility. According to the OECD 's founding convention, members 
were to promote the highest sustainable economic growth, the highest sustainable employment and 
a rising standard of living. Importantly, the governments that had founded the OECD had stated 
their conviction that "economically more advanced nations should coo perate in assisting to the best 
of their ability the countries in process of economic development" . 
10.17.   OECD members ha d knowingly and voluntarily accepted special responsibilities and 
applicants for membership ha d vowed they were ready to do the same. Th ose countries ha d 
committed to holding themselves accountable to the highest possible standards, to seeking 
evidence -based solutions and to shaping policy norms that foster ed prosperity, efficiency, stability 
and a stronger world economy.  
10.18.   It was worth noting th at membership in the OECD was not automatic. It was earned through 
an intensive process of peer evaluation and often domestic reform that span ned years and require d 
enormous effort by the applicant, current members and the Secretariat. The difficulty of th e 
accession process reflect ed the value and importance of the OECD. Eleven countries ha d completed 
the accession process in the past twenty -four years . Despite the ardo urs of the process, there was 
currently a long line of countries interested in accession . 
10.19.   For th ose reasons, the United States  believe d that OECD members and applicants ha d self-
declared themselves to be ready to fully accept the obligations as had been negotiated at the WTO.  
10.20.   In closing, the United States  noted that the discussions that it was having with Members 
were constructive, sincere and candid. The United States  looked forward to continuing to engage 
with Members on th at reform proposal.  
10.21.   The representative of  China  noted that it was the  third time for the United States  to submit 
the same documents to the General Council which was reminiscent  of a UK comedy movie in 2008  
entitled Three and Out.  The movie ha d nothing to do with differentiation or S&DT  but its title 
resembled a  Chinese saying  "not to do anything more than three times " which stem med from the 
ancient Chinese military philosophy where  the fighting spirit of soldiers had been awaken  by the first 
roll of drums, was depleted by the second, and had been exhausted by the third.  
10.22.   China  had no problem to discuss the same important issue in the WTO  and appreciate d the 
clarification and elaboration that the United States had  just made. The document of a proponent 
should however be revised and improved based on discussions and conversations.  
10.23.   China  did not want to repeat what it had said at previous General Council meetings  since its  
position remain ed unchanged on development and S&DT.  China  request ed the General Council to 
take note of that.  
10.24.   The representative of the European Union  noted that as it had already pointed out under 
agenda item 8 , the E uropean Union  reconfirm ed that development was a central feature of the WTO.  
The current distinction between developed and developing Members  no longer reflect ed the reality 
of the rapid ec onomic growth of some developing Members.   
10.25.   The E uropean Union  recogni zed the right of Members to self -designate themselves as 
developed or developing. What matter ed was what a Member commit ted to do. Differentiation should  
become much more granular in func tion of an individual Member's demonstrated needs and 
capacities. LDCs however should get special treatment and in any case ha d a graduation mechanism.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 84 - 
 
10.26.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , thank ed the United States for its papers 
which contri buted  to the discussions on WTO reform. The two papers deal t in substance with the 
WTO negotiating function . Development was something that was crucial to the LDCs  and it  should  
be taken into account in all activities in the WTO to ensure a fairer and more equitable multilateral 
trading system.  
10.27.   The LDC G roup ha d taken note of the paper and the statement  from the United States. The 
LDCs were currently assessing th e input in their capital and within their Group in Geneva. The LDC 
Group s aw a constructive debate allowing all Members to see their interest s taken into account in 
looking at the negotiations at the WTO. The LDCs  would continue to contribute on th at subject.  
10.28.   The represent ative of India was surprised that the United States ha d resubmitted the WTO 
documents WT/GC/W/757/Rev.1 and WT/GC/W/764 on the sensitive issue of development without 
any substantive change or improvement and despite Members'  detailed comments and previous  
explan ations  at great length on the potential th ose had to deepen the divide among the Membership.  
10.29.   On earlier occasions , India had  explained the need and rationale of S&DT  for developing 
Members  which was an integral part of the basic architecture of the W TO Agreement.  
10.30.   S&DT was an integral part of the multilateral trading system. It was a non -negotiable right 
for all developing Members. The gap in the standards of living between developing and developed 
Members  had not narrowed to any significant extent si nce the establishment of the WTO. Th at 
necessitate d the preservation and strengthening of the S&D T provisions in both current and future 
WTO Agreements with priority to outstanding LDC issues.  
10.31.   While developing Members ha d achieved progress in some economic indicators since the 
inception of the WTO, old gaps were far from being bridged. The gaps ha d widened in many areas 
while new divides ha d emerged especially in the digital and technological spheres.  
10.32.   In view of the gaping  divide between Members'  levels of development, it would be grossly 
unfair and iniquitous if developing Members  had been  required to take the same obligations as 
developed ones. Against th at backdrop, attempts by the United States to cherry -pick and employ  
selective economic indicators to deny the persistent divide between developing and developed 
Members were painfully worrisome. Preserving S&DT  for all developing and LDC  Members , which 
was a core principle of the WTO, as well as addressing the asymmetries  in Uruguay Round 
Agreements should be an overriding priority.  
10.33.   It was incorrect to blame the self -declaration of development status and S&DT as the reason 
for the lack of progress in negotiations. Negotiations were stalled in the WTO due to the inability o f 
the developed Members to abide by the agreed negotiating mandates of the Doha Round, 
subsequent Ministerial Decisions and the progress made under the Doha Round of trade negotiations.  
10.34.   Further, as had been assessed by the UNCTAD, most S &DT provisions in t he WTO covered 
agreements were imprecise, unenforceable and in the form of best endeavour clauses . The asse rtion 
that onerous S &DT obligations were making the WTO irrelevant was therefore untenable. Moreover, 
while Members c ould declare themselves as devel oping, their specific rights and obligations were 
still subject to negotiations.  
10.35.   Development was a complex, multi -dimensional process and should  not be viewed as a zero -
sum game. It c ould be a win -win for all.  
10.36.   India re emphasi zed that the approach of pushin g for a divisive debate on development would 
only be counterproductive and would further undermine the credibility of the organization.  It would  
therefore  be best to keep th at issue out of their discussions.  
10.37.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the ACP, was not in a position to agree to the 
arbitrary use of indicators to categorise Members  – neither d id the ACP  think that arbitrary 
differentiation was the most productive approach in Members'  efforts to strengthen the operation of 
the organization.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 85 - 
 
10.38.   Any decision to opt out of an S &DT flexibility should be left to the voluntary and sovereign 
decision of a Member who chose to do so. The Trade Facilitation Agreement demonstrate d that th at 
was a practical solution.  The ACP  remained  open to dialogue with the proponent with a view to find 
creative ways to achieve their mutual objective.  
10.39.   The representative of Peru, on behalf of Argentina , Brazil, Colombia , Chile, Mexico , 
Paraguay , Peru and Uruguay , reiterated the position they had  expressed at the last General Council 
meeting that  development was a multidimensional phenomenon that Members ha d incorporated into 
WTO Agreements.  
10.40.   Recognition of the importance of development should point to the various forms  of 
implementation offered by the multilateral trading system to facilitate trade as a real engine of 
inclusive economic growth.  S&DT w as one of the tools that developing Members  could use to achieve 
better and faster integration into the multilateral trad ing system.  
10.41.   Members should  reflect on dealing with the development di scourse  with a focus that would 
enable  the pragmatic implementation of S&DT  according to the needs of each Member in negotiati ons 
in new areas. Members  that subscribe d to that statement support ed consensual solutions that 
result ed in balanced rights and obligations and that ensure d that all Members benefit ed from free 
trade in goods and services.  
10.42.   The representative of Uganda  had taken note of the submissions from the United Sta tes and 
noted that  the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO in articulating the objectives of th e 
organization recogni zed that Members at different levels of economic development ha d varying 
needs and concerns hence the unconditional right to S&DT  for all developing Member s. That 
fundamental and unconditional right was clearly elaborated in Part IV of the GATT Articles XXXVI 
and XXXVIII, GATS Article 4 and all the provisions on S&DT across the WTO Agreements.  
10.43.   Uganda continued to  reaffirm the Doha Develo pment Agenda and as such the declarations 
and decisions adopted at Doha and subsequent Ministerial Conferences . S&DT was an integral part 
of the ongoing negotiations to rebalance the WTO system to better respond to developing Members ' 
special situation and  needs particularly in the area of trade.  
10.44.   In that regard, Paragraph 44 of the Doha Mandate continued to be  crucial . Uganda  remained 
committed to work in the CTD SS to review all S&DT provisions with the view to strengthening them 
and making them more preci se, effective and operational in addition to all other mandates affirming 
S&DT and its importance for developing and LDC Member s. 
10.45.   Attempts to violate th at fundamental and unconditional right w ould be rendered futile . 
Uganda  therefore called upon all Member s to focus on fulfilling Paragraph 44 of the Doha Mandate 
for the good of all.  
10.46.   The representative of Turkey  support ed the idea of strengthening the negotiating function 
of the WTO. S&DT was an integral part of WTO Agreements and negotiations since the very 
beginning. As Turkey had  underlined several times at various occasions, rather than using criteria 
such as  membership to other institutions or groups , it would be more useful if Members  focused on 
what c ould be achieved regarding negotiating topics in a realistic manner. In doing so , Members  
should  take into account the capacity of each  of them  to undertake new commitments  and should 
focus on options that c ould be discussed , that would  evolve into acceptable  outcomes  and that would 
be beneficial for all.  
10.47.   The representative of Benin , on behalf of the African Group , said that t he African Group ha d 
followed th e update that the United States ha d just provided Members  relating to the WTO's 
negotiating function. Development was a key element of the WTO's work and it should underpin that 
work and its objectives. Members  could only achieve those objectives if they truly t ook into account 
the capacity, weaknesses and const raints of developing Members  and particularly those affecting 
the LDCs.  
10.48.   Following years of work, the African Group  said that, at the end of September, the African, 
the ACP and the LDC Groups would jointly submit a revised and restructured version of their WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 86 - 
 
proposals on S&DT which the G90 had come  up with . They  called upon all Members to engage in 
consultations that w ould lead to consensual agreements on those issues.  
10.49.   The representative of South Africa  recall ed the submission that it had  co-sponsored with 
China, India and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in document  WT/GC/W/765 and it continue d 
to be its response on th e issue. The persistence of the enormous development divide between the 
developing and developed Members was reflected  on a wide range of indicators. Th at was clearly 
demonstrated in the June 2019 UNCTAD Report entitled "From Development to Differentiation: Just 
how much has the world changed? " which highlight ed the development divide between developed 
and developing Memb ers including the structural and infrastructure divide.  
10.50.   Despite significant progress achieved by developing Members since the creation of the WTO, 
old divides ha d not been bridge d. In some areas, th ose divides  had even widened while new ones 
such as those  in the digital and technological spheres were becoming more pronounced. In addition, 
despite the progress achieved, developing Members  had not come anywhere near catching up with 
developed ones. 
10.51.   The multilateral trading system, from the early days of the GATT until the establishment of 
the WTO, ha d recogni zed the differences in levels of economic development and had wisely ensured 
that S&DT would be one of its cornerstone principles. The S&DT principle had been  understood as a 
way to ensure that negotiated  outcomes would accommodate differences in levels of economic 
development as well as the capacity constraints of developing Members. It would allow developing 
Members the space to calibrate trade integration in ways that help ed them support sustainable 
growth, employment expansion and poverty reduction. The Enabling Clause adopted in 1979 had 
provided a permanent legal basis for S&DT.  
10.52.   The persistence of the enormous development divide between the developing and developed 
Members was as relevant as it had b een back then. It was reflected on a wide range of indicators. 
It was evident in levels of economic development, industrial structure and competitiveness such as 
GDP per capita, poverty levels, levels of under -nourishment, production and employment in the 
agriculture sector, trade in services, receipts from IPR s, share of trade in value -added under GVCs, 
energy use per capita, financial infrastructure, R&D capacity, company profits and a range of 
institutional and capacity constraints, among others.  
10.53.   The ty pe of indicators that were used to measure development need ed to be carefully 
scrutini sed. In WTO Agreements, all the indicators used to assess development were based on per 
capita calculation.  
10.54.   Attempts at ignoring the need for S&DT provisions or diluting them was fraught with the risk 
of making future negotiations in the WTO even more difficult. The right of developing and LDC  
Member s to access the relevant S&DT provisions embedded in WTO discip lines and in current and 
future negotiations was undisputed. South Africa  did not therefore  agree with the arbitrary 
classification of Members according to the categories outlined in the US draft decision WT/GC/W/764. 
All developing Members  were entitled t o S&DT and c ould not be excluded upfront from claiming the 
flexibilities that they were entitled to even before negotiations beg an. 
10.55.   In that regard, South Africa  urged Members not to deviate from the Doha Mandate and  go 
against the spirit of S&DT as had bee n enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement. There could  be 
Members who would wish  to opt -out of S&DT . It was their prerogative to self -declare that they d id 
not require flexibility in  the implementation of WTO Agreements. Any attempts to put pressure on 
Member s to give up their rights were not acceptable and w ould continue to be rejected with the 
contempt it deserve d. 
10.56.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Members  for their interventions. Concerning 
China's quote of a UK movie that used the word third in its title, the United States noted that  there 
was a phrase called "third time's a charm". On a more serious note , regarding a point raised by 
Jamaica and South Africa, the United States  did not agree that its proposal c ould be characterised 
as suggesting arbitrary criteria. The US  proposal contained  clear, predictable and objective criteria 
including criteria that were self -selecting including OECD membership.  
10.57.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 87 - 
 
11  EXPORT RESTRICTI VE MEASURES BY JAPAN  – STATEMENT BY THE REPUBLIC OF 
KOREA  
11.1.   The Chair recalled that  on 10 July, the delegation of the Republic of Korea had requested the 
Secretariat to include th at item in the agenda of the current meeting.  She then  invite d the Republic 
of Korea to take the floor.  
11.2.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  said that s ince 4 July, Japan had completely 
stopped its export of three materials which were essential for the production of Korean semi -
conductors. Several hundreds of products were hig hly likely to be treated similarly in a matter of 
weeks. The Japanese measure was a clear and imminent threat to the raison d' être of the WTO and 
would inevitably cause a disruption in the world economy.  
11.3.   During World War II, millions of Koreans had been  forcefully requisitioned to support Japanese 
War efforts. Whether they had been  adequately compensated ha d been a thorny diplomatic issue 
between the two countries for decades. While relevant negotiation was ongoing, Japan had 
introduced the export restriction scheme out of the blue. There was no doubt that such a measure 
had been  strategically planned to gain the upper hand in th at diplomatic row. Th at was not Korea' s 
mere conjecture. It had been  confirmed and admitted several times by Japanese top officials.  
11.4.   Immediately after the measure had been  announced, Japanese leaders had made it clear that 
the measure had been  taken in the cont ext of the forced labo ur issue. Belatedly reali sing that the 
measure could not be justified pursuant to the WTO rules and principles, Japan had hastily started 
to patch up its claim. Its new argument was that the measure was a usual export control 
administ ration. Th e argument was disingenuous at best. Its true nature was nothing but a political 
pressure to force Korea to swallow the Japanese request in the forced labo ur dispute.  
11.5.   Using trade as a political tool had been  common in the past and  everyone knew  that disrupting 
trade for political purposes ha d usually resulted in catastrophic consequences. It was the very reason 
why the multilateral free trade system of GATT had been created in the wake of World War II. On 
account of th at system, every country c ould concentrate on the comparatively advantageous 
industries while depending on foreign trade in the less competitive sectors. The WTO was the 
guardian of th e system in which all Members  were mutually interdependent.  
11.6.   The export restriction measure of Japan t argeted at Korea r an exactly counter to the basic 
principles of the WTO Agreements. The fact that such measure had been  taken by no other country 
than Japan ma de Korea frustrated and perplexed. There was no doubt that Japan was one of the 
most benefitted c ountries from the free trade system. Japan ha d been a strong advocate of the 
system and less than a month ago, it had been  confirmed again at the G20 Summit in Osaka that  a 
free and open economy was the foundation of global peace and prosperity.  
11.7.   If any arbitrary restriction on trade had been  tolerated as a political leverage, the free trade 
system could not sustain in the form as Members had  signed into. If the three vital materials w ould 
not be supplied on time by Japan which ha d a worldwide supp ly monopoly, Korea' s semi -conductor 
production was sure to be adversely affected. Considering that the semi-conductor production sector 
was a pivotal industry in Korea, the Japanese measure was insidiously designed and deliberately 
aimed at hampering the p roduction of Korea.  
11.8.   Japan was not  however  thoroughly careful to anticipate the inevitable ramifications of its 
measure. Given that Korea was the largest supplier of semi -conductors, 75% of the total 
consumption, which were omnipresent components of all in dustrial goods, the Japanese measure 
would definitely disrupt a lot of other countries ' industries as well. The stoppage of semiconductor 
lines in Korea w ould adversely affect billions of consumers all over the world.  
11.9.   Misguided by political myopia, Japan had wrongly selected a disguised trade measure to 
pressure Korea. Consequently, both of the free trade system itself and all participating countries  
were put by Japan in the radius of collateral damage.  
11.10.   Korea strongly request ed Japan to withdraw its export restrictive measure  and urged Japan 
to return to the bilateral diplomatic table. Korea w ould continue to engage in the negotiations with 
open ears and a sympathetic heart as it ha d always done.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 88 - 
 
11.11.   Restoring diplomacy was Korea's  main message to convey to both  the General  Council and 
Japan. As Deputy Trade Minister, he was not there to make the problem worse. On the contrary, he 
was there  to solve it.  
11.12.   In order to straighten out the trade dispute, both countries ha d to meet and talk first. 
However, since the Jap anese measure had been  announced on 1 July, there ha d been no dialogue 
at all between the two. All requests for dialogue  made by Korea  had either  been rejected or ignored. 
If Japan continue d to decline meeting requests, it would be difficult to find a nego tiated solution in 
a mutually beneficial manner.  
11.13.   He was relieved to hear that Japan would be represented by the Director -General of 
Economic Affairs  of the  Ministry of Foreign Affairs  who was present at th at meeting. He was the 
highest bureaucrat in charge of foreign economic relations in Japan and so was he  in Korea. Both of 
them had comparable magnitude of competence, authority and diplomatic experience on how to 
deal with tricky situation s such as that . Both of them we re there at the same time at the same place. 
They were even sitting together shoulder to shoulder.  
11.14.   During the long history between the two countries, they had successfully settled thornier 
issues by meeting and talking. He therefore  wanted to seize th e opportunity as a timely occasion to 
have a serious dialogue with a view to defuse the amounting tension at an early stage. During his 
stay in Geneva, he and his Japanese counterpart  could have an official meeting in which they could 
explore various avenues that  could  lead them to a negotiated settlement  or at least take a single 
photo of them shaking hands  to significantly relieve the anxiety of the international  community.  
11.15.   He therefore invited  Japan's Director -General of Economic Affairs to a meeting through the 
General Council and its Chair . Otherwise, any offer would be flatly turned down just as all meeting 
requests of Korea had remained unanswered since 1 July.  
11.16.   If the General Council c ould issue through its Chair  a bona fide encouragement to have an 
immedia te bilateral meeting between him and his Japanese counterpart , the tension that had been  
caused by the Japanese measure could  be correctly managed. Providing a forum for trade 
negotiation was one of the main function s of the WTO  and the General Council 's major task was to 
make sure that the WTO function ed correctly.  
11.17.   He was certain that all Members in th e room want ed to see Korea and Japan make concerted 
efforts  to iron out the ir dispute through dialogue. Instead of allocating the floor to individ ual 
Members, he addressed the entire General Council and asked all Members whether there was anyone 
who d id not support immediate and direct dialogue between Korea and Japan for them to  bilaterally 
and timely re solve the issue . If there was no such Member,  Korea asked the Chair to recommend  
Korea and Japan to do so . Such recommendation would be respected by Korea.   
11.18.   In that regard, he would make himself ready at any time upon the convenience of his 
Japanese counterpart. Constructive engagement of th e General  Council would contribute to an 
amicable solution with regard to the  Japanese measure.  
11.19.   The representative of Japan  said that he  was sorry to disappoint the Korean delegates that 
it was not the Director -General from Tokyo who intervened on behalf of Japan  but it was Japan's 
Permanent Representative to the WTO who  also c ame from the Japanese Foreign Ministry  who took 
the floor .  
11.20.   The measure referred to by Korea was unrelated to the issue of forme r civilian workers from 
the Korean Peninsula. Th e measure was based on the export control system for national security 
and was not an appropriate agenda for the WTO.  
11.21.   The very title of th e agenda item "Export Restrictive Measures by Japan" was not correct. 
The purpose of export control s was to prevent the proliferation of relevant goods and technologies 
from a security perspective. Japan was one of the many countries including Korea that consistently 
conduct ed necessary reviews for the effective implementati on of export controls under the 
international framework. The measure taken by Japan was part of its operational review of export 
controls.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 89 - 
 
11.22.   Although the WTO was not an appropriate venue to discuss such measures, given that Korea 
had raised th e agenda item, Japan felt compelled to explain the background to th at review of its 
export controls. Japan had simplified its export procedures for Korea from 2004 as a voluntary 
measure in spite of challenges with Korea's export control system and its operation. Based o n 
exchanges between the agencies concerned, Japan had believed that Korea had intended to improve 
its system and to properly implement controls . Accordingly, Japan had  simplified the procedure 
applying to Korea.  
11.23.   For the last three years, despite requests b y Japan's authorities for consultations, Korea ha d 
however  repeatedly postponed to hold the Export Control Policy Dialogue between the two countries. 
Consequently, no further such exchanges ha d taken place. In addition, there had been  cases of 
inappropriat e export to Korea.  
11.24.   Those were the factors that had caused Japan  to decide to revert the existing simplified 
procedures to the original ones for exports to Korea. Each country c ould grant simplified measures 
for an export to a certain country at its own di scretion. Not all countries were treated equally.  
11.25.   As Japan had  stated at the CTG meeting on 9 July, the measure referred to by Korea was 
not a trade embargo. Th at was an operational review necessary for the proper implementation of 
Japan's export control system based on its security concerns. The measure taken by Japan simply 
revert ed the existing simplified procedures applied to Korea to the original procedures. The t hree 
items in question were already subject to the international regulatory framework under the non -
proliferation regime. Japan's measure was therefore fully consistent with the WTO Agreement.  
11.26.   Korea had stated that the measure taken by Japan had gone  again st the free trade system. 
Free trade however d id not mean allowing trade insensitive goods and technologies that c ould be 
diverted to military use without any controls or conditions. It was therefore pointless to just pick up 
export control measures conduc ted by responsible Members and to claim that they went against free 
trade.  
11.27.   Furthermore, Korea ha d focused on the economic aspects of the measure such as possible 
negative impacts on the global supply chain. Such an argument by Korea not only create d 
misco nceptions about the measure taken by Japan but also confound ed the real agenda which was 
the review of export control conducted for national security purposes. That was why th e discussion 
focusing on issues related to economic benefits was not acceptable.  
11.28.   Japan's export control agency w ould permit exports as long as it d id not identify any problem 
as a result of its examination.   
11.29.   In response to Korea's statement with regard to the update of Japan's export control policy  
and concerning  communication with its Korean counterpart, the Government of Japan had already 
held an administrative briefing on 12 July at the request of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and 
Energy of Korea. The update on 1 July had however been  necessary for the effective operation of 
export  control for Japan's threat to national security. The decision that it had  made was not subject 
to the consultation but Japan would continue to communicate with its Korean counterpart if they 
had any further questions.  
11.30.   The representative of the Republic of  Korea  recalled his proposal  to organise a  meeting 
between him and the Head Delegate of Japan. He therefore would like to hear Japan's response in 
that regard.  
11.31.   The representative of Japan  said that Japan had already fully responded to  the point raised 
by Korea and  did not intend to discuss the matter in further detail at the General Council meeting . 
Japan  instead re emphasise d that t he operational review wa s not a trade embargo . Exports w ould be 
permitted as long as Japan's Export Contro l Agency d id not have concerns as a result of its 
examination.  
11.32.   As the Japanese Government ha d repeatedly emphasised, th e operational review was not at 
all a countermeasure against the issue of Former Civilian Workers from the Korean Peninsula. In any 
case, Japan ha d already thoroughly explained th e matter to the Korean Export Control Agency and WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 90 - 
 
had confirmed with the Korean side that communications would  be made when  questions would be 
raised in the future.  
11.33.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  said that the previous statements had shown 
why Korea was so much  frustrated and upset by the evasive attitude of Japan. Ever since th e 
measure had been  adopted, Korea had request ed vehemently to have a sincere dialogue to exchange 
views and provide the relevan t evidence which had been  the bas is for Japan's sudden change of 
policy towards Korea. Korea so far  had given no hard evidence to support Japan's sudden change. 
There ha d also been no serious dialogue between the two countries. Th e agenda  item had illustrated 
a semblance of a cat and mouse chase between the two  countries  similar to  the "Tom & Jerry" show  
where Jerry would immediately hide after suddenly attacking Tom – leaving Tom very upset.  
11.34.   He then shared the story about the three famous  Japanese monkeys. In Japan there were 
three monkey s called Mizaru, Iwazaru and Kikazaru. Mizaru mean t a monkey covering his eyes; 
Kikazaru a monkey covering his ears and Iwazaru was a monkey covering his mouth. Japan's 
explanation on the response to his proposal was the same replica of th ose three famous Japanese 
monkeys. Japan ha d no courage to face what that country ha d done to Korea . Instead of covering 
its eyes, he wanted Japan to see the result of its actions directly. Instead of covering its ears, he  
asked Japan to hear the deplore of the victims of its actions. Instead of covering its mouth, h e urged 
Japan to come forward straight to the dialogue table.  
11.35.   He was there as a Deputy Trade Minister in charge of all foreign economic relations and he 
had found his counterpart  present at that meeting  who also had the same capacity  as him but had 
hidden himself behind his Ambassador . He therefore t ook the opportunity  to again  ask the  General 
Council whether there was any Member  that oppose d the direct dialogue between Korea and Japan 
on the matter. He noted that he saw none which  mean t that  his offer was received unanimously by 
the Member s of the General Council  – a report which would be conveyed to his capital . If his 
understanding was not correct, he asked Members to raise their hands.  So far, th at was his response 
to Japan's Permanent Representative to the WTO . 
11.36.   Japan had explained the rationale of the Japanese measures including  additional information 
in that regard which reminded hi m of two  interesting concepts of the Japanese language – "honne" 
and "tatemae". Tatemae was a façade. It was a fine decorative exterior to hide something behind. 
Honne was the real entity which was covered by tatemae. When communicating with Japanese 
peopl e, one should be  cautious not to be misled by the tatemae because tatemae d id not really 
illustrate  what the Japanese ha d deep in  its mind. So one would  have to see through the veil of 
tatemae in order to find the real things. It was like a sugar -coated pi ll. No matter how thickly covered 
a pill was with sugar , the sugar -coated pill  at its core remained as it was – a bitter pill. Japan' s 
explanation was  a typical example of tatemae.  
11.37.   He did not respond one by one to all the issue s raised by Japan in its previous intervention 
but if Japan was courageous enough to come forward to the dialogue table with him then he would 
explain and rebut them one by one.  
11.38.   Japan had also mentioned about security. He fully agree d in that respect . The WTO R ulebook 
clearly contain ed a clause about the security exception but the security exception was an exception  
which should be used only to safeguard national security . By definition , an exception was like a dog's 
tail such that a dog wag ged its tail and not vice versa. No m atter how fluffy the tail was, the tail 
could not wag the dog. But what Japan had done  to Korea in invoking the security exception clause 
was exactly the example of a tail wagging the dog. He would continue to wait for a positive response 
to his offer for a dialogue. Otherwise , he would  be very frustrated.  
11.39.   The Chair thank ed both parties f or the ir statements  and said that she sincerely hope d that 
both of them could find an amicable solution to th e issue.  
11.40.   The representative of Japan  did not want to further discuss  the matter at th at meeting but 
simply pointed out that on 12 July, Japan  had a five -hour briefing session with Korean Authorities in 
Tokyo . Japan also  confirm ed that it was ready to have further communications , if necessary , between 
the two authorities.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 91 - 
 
11.41.   The Chair  stressed again that she hoped that both parties w ould reach a bilateral, amicable 
solution on th at particular issue . 
11.42.   The General Council took note  of the statement s. 
12  STATEMENT BY THE UNI TED STATES ON TRANSP ARENCY IN WTO DISPUTE 
SETTLEMENT  
12.1.   The Chair recalled that the delegation of the United States had requested the Secretariat on  
11 July to include th e item in the agenda of the current meeti ng. She then invite d the United States 
to take the floor.  
12.2.   The representative of the United States  had requested th e agenda item to draw Members ' 
attention to the statement by the United States at the 22 July meeting of the Dispute Settlement 
Body. In that statement, the United States had discussed an important sy stemic issue that was 
critical for the legitimacy of the WTO:  transparency – or, perhaps more accurately, the lack of 
transparency – in WTO dispute settlement.  
12.3.   For more than twenty years, the United States ha d called for Members to support the WTO 
by brin ging openness and accountability to its operations including dispute settlement. At the 1998 
Ministerial Conference, the United States had proposed that all dispute settlement hearings at the 
WTO be opened to the public and all submissions by the parties b e made publicly available.   
12.4.   In its statement at the 1998 Ministerial Conference, the United States had urged that Members 
could act to improve transparency even without changes to the rules. To that end, the United States 
had formally offered to open ever y panel proceeding that it was a party to  and had invited every 
other Member to agree to make th at happen. The United States had also made a proposal to mandate 
greater transparency through public meetings and access to submissions but that proposal was 
without prejudice to the ability of Members to agree to greater transparency in each dispute.  
12.5.   The story over twenty  years later was disappointing at best.  Several Members  including 
Australia, Canada, Chinese Taipei, the European Union, Japan, New Zealand, N orway and others ha d 
joined the United States in supporting greater transparency in WTO dispute settlement, for example, 
by agreeing to open hearings and public submissions. But most Members continue d to insist on 
closed hearings and confidential submissio ns. What was worse  was that  some even s ought  to prevent 
the United States and other Members from making statements publicly available through direct 
viewing when they were made.   
12.6.   By pushing to keep WTO dispute settlement closed and secret, th ose Members d enied other 
Members, the public and the WTO itself of significant benefits. Open and transparent WTO dispute 
settlement enhance d Members ' understanding of the dispute settlement system particularly for 
those who d id not participate often in the system. Tra nsparent dispute settlement promote d 
confidence in the professionalism and objectivity of WTO adjudicators to the benefit of both parties 
and the dispute settlement system as a whole.   
12.7.   Experience under the WTO dispute settlement system since 1995 ha d demo nstrated that the 
findings contained in reports adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body c ould affect large sectors of 
society.  At the same time, increased membership in the WTO ha d also meant that more governments 
and their citizens ha d an interest in DSB r ecommendations. Yet the citizens of the parties and those 
Members not party to a dispute ha d been unable to even observe the arguments or proceedings that 
result ed in those recommendations.  
12.8.   The public ha d a legitimate interest in WTO dispute settlement pro ceedings. Indeed, 
acceptance of the results of WTO dispute settlement could  be facilitated if those being asked to assist 
in the task of implementation such as the constituencies of legislators ha d confidence that the DSB 
recommendations were the result of  a fair and adequate process.  
12.9.   Despite the myriad benefits that greater transparency would bring to the WTO, a number of 
Members – including several major users of the dispute settlement system such as China, India, 
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, the Russia n Federation , Turkey, Viet  Nam and others – 
had not only failed to agree to be more transparent in WTO dispute settlement  but had also actively WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 92 - 
 
obstructed efforts by others to provide greater transparency. Regrettably, some panels had 
acquiesced to the efforts of those Members by failing to permit another party to at least make its 
own statements open to public observation.  
12.10.   And so what the United States had  observed in the early days of the WTO continue d to 
remain the general rule a nd not the exception  that "Today, when one nation challenges the trade 
practices of another, the proceeding takes place behind closed doors ". 
12.11.   That was unacceptable. The lack of transparency in WTO dispute settlement at the inception 
of the WTO had been  regrettable but could perhaps be viewed as a remnant of the GATT system 
Members had  inherited that could be expected to change as the WTO dispute settlement system 
matured. At present , over twenty  years later and after the initiation of nearly 600 disputes, t he 
continued lack of transparency was simply untenable and threaten ed to further erode public support 
for and ultimately the viability of th e system that Members profess ed to support.  
12.12.   In the US statement, the United States had  first examined the rules it had and had dispelled 
common myths that certain Members s ought  to perpetuate about the dispute settlement system.  
There was no obligation in the DSU for WTO dispute settlement to be transparent. However, as the 
United States explain ed in detail in the sta tement, while the DSU d id not mandate and ensure 
transparency, it d id not prohibit decisions by Members to provide transparency either.   
12.13.   Second, the United States had highlighted that some Members including the United States 
had promoted transparent dispu te settlement over the years. For example, the United States and 
the European Union ha d agreed to open meetings in at least fifteen  dispute settlement proceedings 
including open meetings by panels, the Appellate Body and Article 22.6 Arbitrators. The Unite d 
States ha d also worked closely with Canada and had agreed to open meetings in a number of WTO 
disputes including in at least nine separate proceedings and including open panel meetings, appellate 
hearings and the meeting of an Article 22.6 Arbitrator. Op en meetings ha d also been held in disputes 
in which the United States had not been a party.  
12.14.   However, for too long, too many Members that claim ed to support the multilateral trading 
system actively undermine d it by promoting a lack of transparency in WTO di spute settlement. For 
example , the United States had proposed open meetings in at least seventeen  disputes with China, 
nine with India, six with Korea, three with Indonesia and three with Turkey but China, India, Korea, 
Indonesia and Turkey had always declined. The United States ha d also  proposed open meeting s in 
at least nine disputes with Mexico and Mexico ha d declined except for in a joint dispute with Canada.  
The positions of those Members opposed to greater transparency in WTO dispute settlement were 
misguided and only serve d to erode support for the WTO and its dispute settlement system.  
12.15.   Third, the United Stat es had explained why opposition to greater transparency was contrary 
to the choices Members ha d made in other fora including other international adjudicatory systems 
and regional free trade agreements. For example, at least 40 regional free trade agreement s 
involving more than 75 Members require d transparency – be it through public submissions, open 
hearings or both.  
12.16.   That highlight ed that Members d id not object to transparent dispute settlement in principle.  
They rather  recogni zed the value of transparency . There should  thus be no impediment for all 
Members to take action at present  to remedy the lack of transparency in WTO dispute settlement.  
12.17.   The US statement had also discussed additional benefits associated with a transparent 
dispute settlement system.    
12.18.   Many Members claim ed to want to reform and keep relevant the WTO and they had seen 
some proposals brought forward to enhance transparency and notifications. But the actions of too 
many Members ha d stymied transparency in WTO dispute settlement for far too  long.   
12.19.   The lack of transparency in WTO dispute settlement was not required by the DSU and 
Members c ould not defend the lack of transparency on th at basis.   
12.20.   To the contrary, whether the WTO ha d an open and transparent dispute settlement system 
depend ed to a great extent on the willingness of Members to support such a system.   WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 93 - 
 
12.21.   Members ' participation in other fora illustrate d that Members d id not object to transparency 
in international adjudicatory systems and trade agreements in principle. There was therefore no 
impediment to Members taking action at present  to address th e lack of transparency in WTO dispute 
settlement.  
12.22.   It was long overdue fo r Members to agree to open all substantive dispute settlement 
meetings to observation by all Members and the public while protecting confidential information.  
Each Member should immediately take steps in each dispute in which it was participating to reque st 
to make its statements publicly observable and to make its written submissions publicly available.  
12.23.   The representative of the Russian Federation  thank ed the U nited States  for introducing th at 
issue at the General Council  several days after it had been  presented to the DSB where it had been 
widely criticised. The Russian Federation agree d with the United States that the panels c ould not 
grant additional rights to the parties without the agreement of the parties to the disp ute. 
12.24.   What Russia respectfully disagree d with was that the increased transparency was essential 
for the results of WTO dispute settlement to enjoy legitimacy. In Russia' s view, such legitimacy was 
derived from strictly following the DSU rules as they ha d been designed and sealed in 1995.  What 
Russia f ound ironic were statements conveying messages such as if Members claim ed to support 
dispute settlement,  they should take all steps to provide for a transparent dispute settlement 
system . 
12.25.   The Russian Federation hoped to find support from the Membership in stating that the 
Member who claim ed to support the WTO dispute settlement system in the way it had been agreed 
upon should first not ruin th e system and in particular  should  abstain from the annihilation of the 
Appellate Body.  
12.26.   Should the proponent want to contribute to the support of the WTO dispute settlement 
system  and make it functional and not fictional, the proponent still ha d a chance to do so by 
unblocking the Selection Process of Appellate Body  members.  
12.27.   In that regard, the Russian Federation  recall ed the ancient oriental wisdom reflected in four 
Chinese characters that everyone could  see on a beautiful picture that decorate d one of the halls of 
the WTO which  stated that  "Actions speak louder than words ". 
12.28.   The representative of Canada  thank ed the United States for its statement  and noted that 
Canada  had attended the DSB meeting earlier th at week and d id not agree that the US statement 
had been  widely criticised at th at meeting. Canada s aw clear benefits in p roviding access to relevant 
information to various stakeholders in dispute settlement proceedings. Canada ha d advocated for 
open hearings and other transparency related elements in the dispute settlement  context for many 
years.  
12.29.   In that context, Canada had endorsed the practice document on transparency in document 
JOB/DSB/1 /Add.3 which outline d certain important practices concerning transparency. As the United 
States ha d set out to which Canada agree d, transparency in the dispute settlement  context was an 
important tool to safeguard and increase the credibility and legitimacy of th e institution. Canada  
encourage d all Members to endorse the practice mechanism on transparency and conduct disputes 
to which they were a party to in a transparent manner.  
12.30.   The repre sentative of Australia  welcomed  the US encouragement of Members to adopt 
practices that enhance d transparency and openness in WTO dispute settlement proceedings. 
Australia  strongly support ed transparency in WTO dispute settlement  by publish ing all its party and 
third party dispute submissions, advocat ing for open hearings and support ing enhanced third party 
rights. Australia  had also endorsed Canada's practice document concerning increased tr ansparency 
of dispute procedures and timetabling.  
12.31.   Enhanced transparency of dispute settlement proceedings through publishing submissions 
and holding open hearings that the public, industry groups and civil society c ould attend help ed to 
strengthen the syst em as a whole. All Members share d a responsibility to support and improve the 
efficient and effective operation of the WTO's dispute settlement system. And accordingly, Australia  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 94 - 
 
encourage d Members to give positive consideration to the call for greater ope nness and transparency 
in dispute settlement proceedings.  
12.32.   The representative of Japan  thank ed the United States for raising the important systemic 
issue which concern ed all Members. Japan note d that there was nothing in the text of the DSU which 
would requ ire absolute confidentiality in the process  and referred to one of the observations by the 
Appellate Body which stated that "under the DSU, confidentiality is relative and timebound".  
12.33.   Japan  recogni zed the need to balance the interest of transparency with other interest s such 
as the protection of confidential information. Japan's experience in the past ha d however  
demonstrated that the dispute settlement system was capable of balancing th ose various interests. 
In that regard, Japan said that the issue of tr ansparency was important for the legitimacy and 
integrity of the dispute settlement system.  
12.34.   The representative of Switzerland  thank ed the United States for raising the issue of 
transparency in the dispute settlement system  and noted that Switzerland wa s a staunch supporter 
of transparency in the multilateral trading system  as transparency contribute d to the credibility  of 
the organizati on.  
12.35.   Switzerland  was positively disposed towards improving the transparency of dispute 
settlement proceedings and ha d taken good note of the statements presented at the last meeting of 
the Dispute Settlement Body and during the current General Council meet ing. Those statements 
underline d the many upsides of open hearings and publicly available submissions by the parties , 
among others . Switzerland was ready to engage constructively in th at discussion.  
12.36.   The representative of Turkey  recogni zed the vital role of  transparency in WTO bodies . 
Confidentiality in dispute settlement proceedings  was not however  part of the general transparency 
discussion . Lifting the confidentiality principle would  not necessarily contribute to  making the system 
function more  efficien tly as had been  suggested by the U nited States .  
12.37.   Drafters of the DSU had explicitly imposed on Members a confidentiality obligation with 
respect to panel and Appellate  Body proceedings. Article 18.2 of the DSU stipulate d that "written 
submissions to the pane l or the Appellate Body shall be treated as confidential ". Moreover, 
Appendix  3 of the DSU also confirm ed the confidentiality principle for panel meetings and Article 
17.10 of the DSU reiterated such  practice for the proceedings of the Appellate Body.  
12.38.   The same rules also stipulated  that disputing parties c ould disclose the ir statements 
containing their  own positions to the public. In doing so, the DSU only allow ed disputing parties to 
waive the confid entiality principle in respect of statements of their own positions. The DSU made 
those elements quite clear . 
12.39.   In that respect  and contrary to  what the United States had  already implied in its statement, 
Turkey was not promoting lack of transparency  but was  only siding with existing rules as had been 
stipulated in the DSU following what  the U nited States  was doing in the Appellate Body discussions.  
12.40.   Members  should keep the intergovernmental, Member -controlled nature of the dispute 
settlement  system as had be en prescribed in the DSU. As had been mandated by Paragraph 30 of 
the Doha Ministerial Declaration, Turkey  also invite d the U nited States  to further elaborate on the 
matter  along with others  in the DSB SS.  
12.41.   Turkey  did not consider th e issue  as the main impe diment to the legitimacy of the dispute 
settlement  system . The main challenge and impediment had already been highlighted under agenda 
item 5 of the current meeting concerning the  launching of the Selection Process of Appellate Body 
members.  
12.42.   The representative of the European Union  support ed the proposals to enhance the openness 
of the dispute settlement proceedings.  Trade policy should be transparent in order to bolster public 
trust. Against that background, the E uropean Union  had been advoca ting to make open meetings a 
general rule and make party submissions public  and had likewise  supported proposals to th at effect 
also in the DSU review.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 95 - 
 
12.43.   The E uropean Union  underline d the importance of transparency from a systemic perspective. 
The WTO disput e settlement as it operate d at present  had nothing to hide . Increased transparency 
could only enhance its legitimacy with the public and reduce the space for misrepresentation.  
12.44.   The European Union  therefore urge d Members to adopt practices of increased tran sparency 
that were possible under the DSU.  But needless to say, transparency in dispute settlement 
proceedings presuppose d a functioning dispute settlement system.  
12.45.   The representative of South Africa  thank ed the United States for introducing th e item and 
said that transparency was essential for the operation of the WTO. The matter of transparency and 
confidentiality was being addressed i n the DSB SS  and that process was ongoing. Measures to 
increase internal transparency were to be welcomed especially in so far as such measures could  
enhance the ability of developing Members  to more fully participate in dispute settlement 
proceedings.  
12.46.   Since the WTO was an intergovernmental organi zation, Members ' rights includ ing publication 
of sensitive information should not be affected by disclosure to external stakeholders not party to 
dispute settlement proceedings. Ensuring transparency vis-à-vis the parties to a dispute was 
different from transparency in general includin g transparency in respect to the wider public and non -
party actors.  
12.47.   Full transparency at all stages of dispute settlement proceedings among the disputing parties 
and adjudicators was already provided for under the DSU. While there was value to consider how 
such information c ould be shared more widely, South Africa failed to see the value add ition of the 
communication.  
12.48.   When thinking about transparency and confidentiality issues in the WTO context, it was 
important to ask the question  concerning w ho transparency and confidentiality was directed towards . 
Transparency was already fully embedded in WTO dispute settlement proceedings since there was 
essentially no difference between the nature and timing of the information shared with the 
Membership as  a whole and the information shared with the wider public.  
12.49.   The General Council Decision  in document  WT/L/452 adopted on  16 May 2002 ma de 
redundant most of what the U nited States  was proposing since the asymmetry that traditionally 
existed between informat ion shared with Members and the public at large ha d then been eradicated 
through the simultaneous sharing of such information through the WTO website.  
12.50.   As a developing Member , South Africa ha d concerns regarding the additional strain that 
enhanced transpar ency of proceedings could put on its resources owing to the need to handle greater 
media attention as well as the potential risk of misrepresentation of the proceedings by the media. 
South Africa  suggest ed that transparency to external constituencies was sufficiently covered under 
the current dispensation including under amicus curiae briefs .  
12.51.   South Africa  called on the United States to respect mandated proceeding in the DSB SS 
where Members according to the recent Chair 's report ha d made progress to addres s areas of 
disagreement including third party rights, strictly confidential information and transparency and 
amicus curiae briefs taking into account issues  of developing Members . 
12.52.   South Africa  was concerned about the timing of th e communication and its imp act in 
diverting attention away from the impending crisis regarding the Appellate Body. Members'  time 
would be best spent to resolve the appointment crisis instead of considering issues that were either 
already reflected in the text of the DSU or which was subject to separate proceedings under the DSB 
SS. Focus should be on finding solutions to what was leading to the existential crises of the WTO. 
The communication by the United States should not detract from DSB SS deliberations and most 
critically should  not divert efforts to achieve an immediate and urgent solution to the A ppellate Body 
appointment crisis.  
12.53.   The representative of China  express ed its deep concerns on the US proposal. The current 
DSU ha d already made balanced provisions between transparency and confidentiality in dispute 
settlement procedures. The DSU explicitly stipulate d that all submissions and hearings should be 
kept confidenti al. Th ose rules should continue to be strictly observed.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 96 - 
 
12.54.   WTO dispute  settlement proceedings were  intergovernmental in nature. Many disputes could 
relate to sensitive information  and it  was not a privilege for those information to be open to the 
public. The private nature of hear ings was moreover  helpful for Members to reach a mutually 
satisfactory solution to the dispute. Due to the capacity and information asymmetry between 
developing and developed Members, permitting amicus curiae would further worsen the  already 
disadvantaged positions of developing country Members in dispute settlement proceedings.  
12.55.   When the viability of the dispute settlement system was under imminent danger due to the 
impasse on the Selection Process  of Appellate Body  members , Members'  priority should be accorded 
to discussions on how best to save the drowning Appellate Body without further delay.  
12.56.   The representative of Norway  thank ed the U nited States  for raising th at important issue as 
transparency was a key component in securing the l egitimacy of legal proceedings. Norway ha d 
therefore  been and remain ed a strong supporter of efforts to promote the transparency of 
procedures in WTO disputes such as the so -called practice document on transparency from 2016.  In 
particular , Norway underlin ed how important it was to support transparency and due process in 
those challenging times for the dispute settlement system.  
12.57.   The representative of Peru thank ed the United States for raising the issue of transparency  
in dispute settlement  which was being  taken up  by Members as part of their discussions  on how they 
could improve transparency in the various areas  of the organization. As part of th ose talks on how 
to clarify and improve the DSU, Peru ha d taken a position that meetings c ould be held by the WTO 
adjudicators in an open format so that the public interested in following them c ould do so as ha d 
been the case in a number of disputes.  
12.58.   Peru had  held th at position on the  basis that the opening up t o the public would not lead to 
any additional burden on the parties to the dispute given that the public would just be listening to 
the proceedings and not participating in them. In th at regard, the issue of the burden of excessive 
participation of third p arties through amicus curiae briefs was an element that need ed to be taken 
into account when  tackling issues related to  improv ing the WTO's dispute settlement mechanism.  
12.59.   Peru was aware that the DSU set out a series of provisions on how information was man aged 
in a dispute in such a way that there was a level discretion open to parties as regards confidentiality 
and transparency of their own legal actions. Th e level of discretion c ame down as the legal process 
move d forward becoming therefore transparent as  had been set out by delegations at the DSB at its 
meeting on 22 July.   
12.60.   Peru was therefore open to continue th at dialogue as well as to consider proposals on 
improving the rules and practices on transparency and other aspects of the WTO's dispute settlemen t 
mechanism recalling at the same time that there was a pressing need to ensure the functional nature 
of the Appellate Body in line with the WTO Agreements. The little amount of time Members  had left 
should  be invested in th at goal. 
12.61.   The representative of Indonesia  took note of the concern  raised by the United States . The 
rules enshrined in the DSU ha d adequately addressed the issue of transparency in dispute settlement  
by establish ing the conduct of transparency between parties in the dispute. The DSU  had also 
provided the  parties in a dispute the various  levels  of transparency that was expected in dispute 
settlement proceedings in relation to the public which touched upon matters such  as the type of 
document that c ould be disclosed and the option provided to the parties in a dispute to disclose or 
not to disclose such matters to the public. Like many arbitration systems, the WTO dispute 
settlement system dealt with  transparency  in a pr oportional manner  since WTO dispute s were both  
commercial and public in nature s uch that the system  could serve both transparency and 
confidentiality interests.  
12.62.   The representative of India took note of the detailed statement made by the United States 
at the DSB and the one at the current meeting on transparency in dispute settlement.  India 
suggest ed that the existing provisions contained in the DSU and the rules followed by panels and 
the Appellate Body  on transparency appear ed appropriate. Paragraph 2 of A ppendix 3 concerning 
the W orking Procedures ma de it mandatory on the panel to meet in closed session which include d 
the meeting of parties with the panel. There was no need to derogate from the existing written rules 
agreed by all Members.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 97 - 
 
12.63.   The provisions o f Article 18 of the DSU and Paragraph 3 of Appendix 3 allow ed a party to a 
dispute from disclosing statements of its own positions to the public provide d for substantial 
transparency. The right of a party to disclose its statements to the public under th at provision 
however had to be circumscribed by the right of the other party to keep its statements confidential.  
12.64.   The WTO dispute settlement system had  originally  been conceived to be a government to 
government process for efficient settlement of disputes.  One of the objectives of the dispute 
settlement system wa s to resolve the disputes among Members by preferring a solution that was 
mutually acceptable to the parties to a dispute without invoking the dispute settlement procedures 
of the DSU.  
12.65.   India had concerns that fully open panel and Appellate Body proceedings could lead to a trial 
by media and could eventually place unwarranted public pressure on the pane llists or the Appellate 
Body members. Th at situation w ould affect the interests of developing and L DC Members  which ha d 
resource and capacity constraints in relation to  dispute settlement . 
12.66.   India' s position on transparency was consistent both at the WTO and in its regional trade 
agreements . The issue of transparency was one of the twelve  issues under neg otiation in the DSB  
SS. Members  should allow the DSB  SS to  negotiate and come out  with a text on transparency 
acceptable to all  of them . 
12.67.   At present , the WTO dispute settlement system wa s facing an existential crisis of gravest 
concern as the Appellate Body  would be paralysed by December . An independent, two -stage dispute 
settlement system was imperative for the fair enforcement of the rules of international trade. The 
impending paralysis and possible disappearance of the Appellate Body w ould be a fatal blow  to the 
credibility of the WTO. An expeditious resolution of the Appellate Body crisis therefore needed to be 
at the top of the agenda . Discussion on any other issue would simply divert Members'  attention . 
12.68.   The representative of the United States  thanked Members for their respective interventions 
– whether  pro or con. The United States  clarified that there was no obligation in the DSU for WTO 
dispute settlement to be transparent. However, as the United States  had explained, while the DSU 
did not mandate transparency, it d id not prohibit decisions by Members to provide transparency 
either. The DSU also d id not require confidentiality by the parties. A Member c ould rather  make 
public its own written submissions,  oral statements and responses to questions. In response to the 
Russian Federation, the United States  happen ed to have been at the DSB meeting and as Canada 
had correctly  pointed out, the US Paper had not been widely criticised as had been alleged.  
12.69.   The Gen eral Council took note  of the statements.  
13  WAIVERS UNDER ARTICL E IX OF THE WTO AGRE EMENT  
13.1  Review of Waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement  
13.1.1   Least -Developed Country Members – Obligations under Article 70.8 and 
Article  70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to Pharmaceutical Products, granted on 
30 November 2015 until 1 January 2033 (WT/L/971)  
13.1.2   Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 28 July 2015 until 31 December 2023 
(WT/L/958, WT/L/1065)  
13.1.3   United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, gr anted on 5 May 2015 
until 31 December 2019 (WT/L/950, WT/L/1063)  
13.1.   The Chair recalled that in accordance with Paragraph 4 of Article IX of the WTO Agreement, 
"any waiver granted for a period of more than one year shall be reviewed by the Ministerial 
Conferen ce not later than one year after it is granted, and thereafter annually until the waiver 
terminates ". There were three waivers before the General Council for review, and they were listed 
in the proposed agenda. Two of the waivers under review provide d that an annual report should be 
submitted by the Member concerned regarding the operation or implementation of those waivers 
with a view to facilitating their annual review by the General Council.  The reports from Canada and 
the United States ha d been circula ted in documents WT/L/1065 and WT/L/1063 respectively.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 98 - 
 
13.2.   The representative of Trinidad and Tobago , on behalf of CARICOM , welcome d the report by 
Canada on the performance of the trade and economic development assistance provided under 
CARIBCAN.  From its inception in 1986, CARIBCAN ha d played a key role in enhancing trade between 
Caribbean beneficiary members and Canada thereby contr ibuting to their export earnings, 
generating important investment opportunities  and fostering greater levels of economic integration 
and development among beneficiary countries.  
13.3.   Analyses of the trade performance under CARIBCAN reveal ed the critical role t hat the 
programme play ed in sustaining the participation of Caribbean WTO Members in extra -regional 
trade. Exports to Canada from CARIBCAN beneficiaries over the past decade ha d remained relatively 
stable despite the steep decline in total goods exports fr om th ose countries over the period.  While 
the bulk of trade with Canada t ook place under MFN duty -free provisions, CARIBCAN continue d to 
be the main instrument through which dutiable imports from beneficiary countries enter ed Canada 
thereby underscoring th e important role of the programme in fostering expanded trade between the 
Caribbean and Canada.  
13.4.   CARICOM WTO Members were committed to their fullest participation in global trade and to 
the principles and practices which inform ed the multilateral framework.  In that regard, they 
reiterate d their commitment to domestic, regional and external trade policy reforms that could 
further their competitive engagement in international trade. For example, their countries were 
actively implementing their obligations unde r the Trade Facilitation Agreement and ha d adopted a 
regional strategy for implementation of certain obligations under the Agreement.  
13.5.   At the same time, as small and vulnerable economies, they continue d to face many of the 
same constraints that  had justifi ed the granting of the preferences under the CARIBCAN trade and 
economic assistance programme. Despite their efforts at reform, the existing trade, financial and 
development needs of CARIBCAN beneficiaries and the inherent economic and environmental 
vulner abilities  including significantly high levels of debt in most of the countries concerned, recurring 
natural disasters in the region and unprecedented exposure to the negative impacts of climate 
change underscore d the continuing relevance of the benefits of  CARIBCAN to trade and economic 
development in the Caribbean region.  
13.6.   Against th at background , CARICOM WTO M ember s invite d the General Council, when 
undertaking their review of the waiver required under Paragraph 4 of Article IX of the WTO 
Agreement, to tak e account of  the prevailing objective circumstances of CARIBCAN beneficiaries that 
had been  outlined , the continued existence of the exceptional circumstances which had justified the 
extension of the CARIBCAN waiver by the decision of the General Council o n 28 July 2015 , the 
assurances given by the Government of Canada that the terms and conditions attached to the waiver 
had been met and the continuing relevance of the preferences granted under CARIBCAN to the 
economic and development needs of the beneficia ry countries.  
13.7.   On behalf of Trinidad and Tobago , it had been noted that Trinidad and Tobago had a 
longstanding and mutually beneficial relationship with Canada including in trade . Trinidad and 
Tobago  thank ed Canada for the provision of its recent report on the trade -related provisions of 
CARIBCAN.  
13.8.   Canada represent ed an important market for Trinidad and Tobago' s export for energy and 
non-energy products especially for the large diaspora community.  Trinidad and Tobago' s trade with 
Canada occur red under the auspices of the CARIBCAN Arrangement which provide d unilateral 
preferential, non -reciprocal, one -way duty free imports of eligible products  – with the exception of 
textile, clothing and leather  – from Commonwealth Caribbean countries into the Canadian market. 
The CARIBCAN arrangement support ed Trinidad and Tobago' s goals for export growth and 
diversif ication and create d positive spill -off effects on other development goals including economic 
transformation and poverty and unemployment reduction.  
13.9.   Since 1 January 2015, Trinidad and Tobago had graduated out of the Canadian General 
System of Preferences S cheme. CARICOM had also been  unable to conclude negotiations with 
Canada for a trade agreement. As such, uncertainty exist ed with regard to Trinidad and Tobago' s 
preferential access into the Canadian market. In light of th at, the renewal of the waiver allo wing the 
CARIBCAN arrangement would secure preferential access into Canada.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 99 - 
 
13.10.   In 2018, approximately 98% of Trinidad and Tobago' s exports to Canada had been  duty-
free. In the same year, Trinidad and Tobago had been the second largest exporter to Canada amon g 
the CARIBCAN beneficiaries. As such, CARIBCAN ha d been very useful in supporting the export 
growth and diversification goals of Trinidad and Tobago.  
13.11.   Traditionally, Trinidad and Tobago' s main exports to Canada had mainly  been from the 
energy sector inclu sive of methanol, urea and liquefied natural gas. Other key exports had been 
from the Food and Beverage sector inclusive of sauces, condiments, aerated waters and alcoholic 
beverages.  
13.12.   The Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago ha d identified key  sectors for growth 
and diversification of the domestic economy. Among th ose sectors was the Food and Beverage 
sector. A significant amount of products from within th at sector were exported to Canada under the 
CARIBCAN Arrangement.  
13.13.   CARIBCAN preferences were a critical development tool not only for Trinidad and Tobago but  
also to all  CARICOM  States. Almost all of th ose economies ha d been seeking to stabili Ze their 
economies and diversify their productive base. Without the CARIBCAN Arrangement, th ose small 
and vulnerable economies would be faced with a daunting challenge in relation to opportunities for 
trade and more so that of development.  
13.14.   The Government of Trinidad and Tobago reiterate d its support and gratitude for the 
CARIBCAN Arrangement.  
13.15.   On behalf of CARICOM , Trinidad and Tobago welcome d the report provided by the  United 
States on the implementation of the trade -related provisions of the Caribbean Basin Economic Act. 
In pursuance of the strategic objective of building economic resilience, CARICOM  continue d to assign 
priority to the preferential trade relationship with the United States as a platform for building 
competitiveness, diversifying exports and s purring foreign direct investment.  
13.16.   The preferential tariff treatment in eligible products originating in designated beneficiary 
CARICOM countries pursuant to the provisions of the CBERA was of significant economic importance 
to CARICOM. Th e preferential pr ogramme create d opportunities to expand trade beyond the United 
States and beneficiary CARICOM countries thereby promoting the growth of economic development 
and opportunity in the region. CARICOM wishe d to register its interest in receiving continued duty -
free access into the United States under CBERA and therefore reaffirm ed the importance to the 
region preferential access had provided to eligible products from CARICOM.  
13.17.   The United States continue d to be a valuable trading partner for the region and was its 
largest export market. CARICOM export s to the United States in 2018 accounted for 32% of its 
exports to the world and imports from the United States into CARICOM amounted to 36% of 
CARICOM's imports from all sources in the same year. The region continue d to work actively to 
increase the level of its trade with the United States.  
13.18.   As had been outlined earlier, as small and vulnerable economies, CARICOM  countries 
continue d to face many challenges . In that vein, the CBERA was not only a reflection of the Un ited 
States' commitment to economic development in the Caribbean Basin but a demonstrable tool for 
assisting CARICOM countries  in stabili sing their economies. The region therefore welcome d the 
initiative by the United States to seek a renewal of the waiver to allow it to continue to provide duty -
free access to eligible products from CARICOM under CBERA.  
13.19.   CARICOM also welcome d the European Union's no objection to the extension of the waiver 
as had been expressed in the CTG and look ed forward to the completion of its internal procedures 
to enable it to formally support the request to facilitate the favourable consideration and adoption 
of the decision by the General Council.  
13.20.   On behalf of Trinidad and Tobago , it had been noted that Trinidad and Tobago ha d a 
longstanding mutually beneficial relationship with the United States. Trinidad and Tobago thanked  
the United States for its stance in relation to the continuation of the CBERA initiative  which was of 
great assistance to benefitting nations with regard to overall development. CBERA support ed 
Trinidad and Tobago's goals for export growth and diversification which create d positive spill off WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 100 - 
 
effects and other development goals including econo mic transformation and poverty and 
unemployment reduction.  
13.21.   Since the last review of the waiver in 2015, Trinidad and Tobago ha d been the largest 
exporter to the U nited States  among the CBERA beneficiary countries as a result of export of 
methanol and petr oleum oil. Trinidad and Tobago had accounted for 57% of total US imports under 
CBERA in 2018. In addition, since 2015, the U nited States  had been  Trinidad and Tobago's largest 
export market. As such, CBERA ha d been very useful in supporting the export grow th and 
diversification goals of Trinidad and Tobago.  
13.22.   Trinidad and Tobago in its commitment to fully meet each aspect of the eligibility criteria for 
the programme was currently making efforts to address any enforcement deficiency in relation to 
intellectu al property rights with the U nited States . The United States remain ed Trinidad and Tobago's 
number one import and export market over the period 2015 -2018. The relationship with the United 
States ha d therefore  proven to be a vital part of the country's over all trade.  
13.23.   An average of over 26% of Trinidad and Tobago's exports had gone  to the U nited States  for 
the period 2015 -2018. While an average of 52% of Trinidad and Tobago's imports had come  from 
the U nited States . That was an indication that the U nited Stat es had traditionally been the main 
source and destination of Trinidad and Tobago's trade and th at Member greatly benefit ed from the 
CBERA programme.  
13.24.   Trinidad and Tobago had recorded surplus trade balances with the U nited States  from 2015 -
2018 with minor ch anges in the composition of exports. Five products which maintained their 
position in the top 10 exports from 2015 -2018 had been  ammonia, liquified natural gas, other crude 
petroleum, methanol and urea. Furthermore, Trinidad and Tobago benefit ed from the p references 
under the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act with over 200 companies exporting duty -free to 
the United States in 2018.  
13.25.   Trinidad and Tobago ha d significantly utilised the preferences received under the CBERA and 
the CBTPA. In 2018, the country 's export to the U nited States  had amounted to 16.3B while imports 
had tallied TTD 12.5B. Trinidad and Tobago was also the top participant in th ose programmes. As 
such, renewal and continuation of the preferences received under th ose programmes were of critical 
importance to Trinidad and Tobago . 
13.26.   In a period of falling oil prices and a resultant recession, trade with the United States had 
been a positive light in an otherwise negative period helping t hrough  invaluable foreign exchange. 
Trinidad and Tobago's  recent experience ha d served to reinforce the vulnerability that small States 
with open economies like Trinidad and Tobago face d. In th e period of discussion on reforms to the 
WTO, it raise d the importance of features that should be maintained for  the benefit of small , 
vulnerable economies.  
13.27.   Trinidad and Tobago, along with the CARICOM Group, the European Union , Barbados, 
Jamaica and Haiti had supported the renewal of the CBERA at the CTG. The Government of Trinidad 
and Tobago thank ed the United Stat es for its commitment to the Caribbean and reiterate d its support 
for the continuation of the CBERA Arrangement until 30 September 2025 and as such would like to 
strongly encourage  Members to support the United States'  request for the renewal when it would  be 
considered in th e General  Council . 
13.28.   The representative of Guyana  took the floor to support the statement  made  by CARICOM 
and to join CARICOM in recognising the longstanding trade and development support to the 
Caribbean Community and Guyana provided by the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act and 
CARIBCAN. Th ose two arrangements with the United States and Canada continue d to provide vital 
market access to small , vulnerable economies of the Caribbean and ha d become even more relevant 
in light of the incr eased susceptibility of the region to natural disasters such as hurricanes, 
earthquakes and severe coastal flooding. Though the range of products was limited, the economic 
impact on its small economy and that of other beneficiaries was extensive. The Unite d States and 
Canada were generally among Guyana's top five leading export markets.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 101 - 
 
13.29.   The current waiver granted on 5 May 2015 for CBERA w ould expire at the end of th e year. 
Guyana place d on record that the exceptional circumstances justifying both waivers still exist ed and 
invite d all Members to fully support  the request submitted by the United States for the renewal of 
the CBERA waiver . 
13.30.   The representative of Haiti thank ed the United Stat es for its report on the implementation 
of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act which had been  substantially expanded in 2000 
through the US -Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act which would  expire on 31 December 2019.  
13.31.   Haiti welcome d the request by th e United States for  the renewal of th at waiver  as it would 
enable eligible Caribbean countries to continue benefitting from duty -free access to the US market 
for admissible products , pursuing their development and export diversification objectives in the 
market of their great neighbour.  
13.32.   The CBTPA was a preferential trade arrangement of capital importance for all beneficiary 
countries in the Caribbean Basin. Since the launching of th ose programmes collectively known as 
the Caribbean Basin Initiative, Caribbe an beneficiary countries ha d profited from it  – each according 
to its capacity to boost and diversify their economies.  
13.33.   To take Haiti as an example, the CBTPA contribute d greatly beyond the supplemental 
HOPE/HELP programmes to increase Haitian exports to th e US market consisting essentially of 
textiles which comprised 93% of its total exports. Th at preferential arrangement also ha d a positive 
impact on Haiti's economy  by creating jobs and opportunities for direct foreign investment. The 
industrial parks of t he Port au Prince metropolitan area and in the north of the country ha d been 
created largely with the aim of exploiting th ose trade preferences and ha d considerably helped to 
create jobs in a country where unemployment was nearly 60%.  
13.34.   Haiti therefore recom mend ed the General Council to renew th e CBERA  waiver as  had been 
requested by the United States.  
13.35.   The representative of Jamaica  aligned itself with the statement made by CARICOM . Jamaica 
thanked  Canada for the report presented under documents WT/L/958 and WT/L/1065 on the trade -
related provisions of CARIBCAN  and the U nited States  for its submission contained in documents 
WT/L/950 and WT/L/1063 reporting on the implementation of the trade -related provisions of CBERA.   
13.36.   Concerning  the CARIBCAN  waiver,  as one of the eighteen  beneficiary countries, Jamaica 
appreciat ed the Government of Canada for CARIBCAN under which approximately 97% of its exports 
were granted duty -free access. CARIBCAN ha d not only  contributed to the vibrant and mutually 
beneficial relationship which ha d existed between their two countries for many years but ha d also 
served to enhance the trade and economic integration of their economies.  
13.37.   Canada was the third leading market for Jama ica in terms of exports which  had amounted 
to US D 208M or 11% of total goods exports in 2018. In that same year, Jamaica' s import bill from 
Canada had been valued at approximately US D 128M. 
13.38.   Jamaica ha d consistently maintained a trade surplus with Canada si nce the early 1980s as 
a result of significant though fluctuating exports and fairly steady levels of imports. Based on the 
data for January  to April 2019, the trend was set to continue. Jamaica' s main exports to Canada 
included alumina, alcoholic beverage s and non -traditional food items. Jamaica' s imports include d a 
variety of manufactured goods and machinery and transport equipment.  
13.39.   Outside of the extractive industry , however,  the Canadian market  serve d as a key 
destination for non -traditional exports in cluding fresh produce, baked goods, yams and sauces and 
condiments, targeting the growing Jamaican diaspora. Jamaica ha d benefitted from Canadian 
investment in various sectors including the financial sector. Th at was evident in the thriving 
institutions such as the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, the First Caribbean Bank and the 
Bank of Nova Scotia. The data suggest ed that the bilateral trading relationship was expected to 
further expand in the coming years.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 102 - 
 
13.40.   As was borne out in the reports, CARIBCAN continue d to make a significant contribution to 
Jamaica on multiple fronts including through stimulating the expansion of trade and investment 
between their countries , the diversification of exports , increased export earnings , the promotion of 
the growth of economic enterprise and productive capacity and increased employment and value -
addition for its exports which were all priorities of the Government of Jamaica.  
13.41.   Jamaica look ed forward to the continued operation of C ARIBCA N particularly in terms of 
assisting its country to attain the targets set out in key development frameworks such as the 
Economic Growth Agenda and the National Development Plan – Vision 2030 . 
13.42.   Concerning the CBERA waiver, like other Caribbean countri es, Jamaica had been a 
beneficiary of CBERA since its inception with over 80% of total exports granted duty -free access to 
the US market. Jamaica  continue d to attach high importance to th at arrangement. The scope of 
coverage of the Act ha d facilitated the vibrant flow of trade in agricultural and manufactured products 
and ha d assisted with the diversification of their exports.  
13.43.   As had been indicated in the report, CBERA continue d to be a relevant market access tool 
for Caribbean countries. In 2018, regional  exports to the U nited States  under CBERA had increased 
by 9% to US D 1.7B up from US D 1.5B in 2017.  
13.44.   In Jamaica' s case, while it had not maintained the high levels of exports witnessed in the  
2010-2012 period where exports had peaked at US D 206M, over the p ast five years, approximately 
43% of Jamaica' s total exports  had entered the United States. Th at highlight ed the positive 
contribution of the preferential access to the US market to the production capacity of its small and 
medium sized enterprises.  
13.45.   Jamaica was seeking to leverage the value of its global brand not only to penetrate new 
markets but also to expand exports to existing markets such as the U nited States  and to integrate 
further into global value chains . Against th at background, any interruption in its trade flows with the 
United States  under CBERA would have a negative effect on its economy particularly in terms of its 
thrust towards increased exports, increased employment and the ability to create jobs .  
13.46.   Both CARIBCAN and CBERA continue d to be of immense value to Jamaica on the trade and 
economic fronts. Moreover, they significantly complement ed Jamaica' s National Export Strategy and 
the National Development Plan  – Vision 2030.  
13.47.   Jamaica  reaffirm ed its sincere gratitude to Canada and the U nited States  for the maintenance 
of CARIBCAN and CBERA which it viewed as a clear demonstration of their firm commitment to a 
partnership for trade and development with its Caribbean neighbours. Jamaica  therefore l ooked 
forward to continued positive engagement with a view to deepening its bilateral trade relations in 
that regard.   
13.48.   Jamaica  also thank ed Members for the support that ha d been given for the waivers enabling 
those arrangements over the years and look ed forward to the continuation of that support for any 
renewal requests.  
13.49.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs, intervened on the review of the LDC 
Waiver concerning the o bligations under Article 70.8 and Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement with 
respect to Pharmaceutical Products  circulated in document WT/L/971 . The waiver had been  re-
examined given the exceptional circumstances which had led to  the decision with the objective of 
providing LDCs the means to  get pharmaceutical  products  at affordable cost.  
13.50.   The waiver concerning the obligations under  Articles 7 0.8 and 7 0.9 of the TRIPS Agreement 
with respect to pharmaceutical products from November 2015 aimed to set up an international legal 
framework in order to allow LDCs to have acces s to affordable medicines in order to facilitate the 
access of their population to health services. The waiver was therefore an important legal instrument 
for producers, suppliers and others in the pharmaceutical industry  – making it possible for 
pharmaceu tical products particularly medicines to be made available and produced at affordable 
prices  and facilitat ing access of the population to th ose medicines.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 103 - 
 
13.51.   The exceptional circumstances however continued to exist.  The waiver  adopted in 
November  2015 ha d not prevented the people living in least -developed countries from  suffering from 
difficult health situation s such as Tuberculosis and HIV, among other d iseases as those still remained  
rampant in those countries . There  had also been outbreaks of Ebola and Cho lera which ha d caused 
many human lives in LDCs. According to Doctors Without Borders, 80% of deaths through non 
communicable diseases happen ed in low income countries or in intermediate income ones. It was 
therefore not acceptable for the LDCs to be so sev erely affected.  
13.52.   For those reasons, the LDC Group stressed that t he circumstances that had justified adopting 
the waiver still remained . Moreover, LDCs need ed flexibility in order to meet SDG 3. The LDC Group 
therefore welcome d and commend ed the leadership of the D irector -General  on that particular issue 
as that would facilitate access to healthcare at affordable cost for vulnerable population s. 
13.53.   The representat ive of Barbados  support ed the statement made by CARICOM and thank ed 
the United States and Canada for the ir respective  initiatives. Th ose initiatives ha d and continue d to 
be of tremendous benefit to Barbados and other economies in the Caribbean. Many small and 
medium sized enterprises benefit ed from the above and ha d served to enhance the trade exports of 
Barbados into their markets.  Barbados  welcome d the continued commitment of Canada and the 
United States in that regard which would  be of continued benefit to the markets in the Caribbean. 
The Government of Barbados therefore welcome d the support from Members for the continuation of 
the two waivers . 
13.54.   The representative of St. Lucia , on behalf of the OECS , associated with the statement made 
by CARICOM.  The OECS  called on all Members to  support the renewal of the CBERA waiver and  took 
note of the  report concerning the  CARIBCAN  waiver . CBERA and CARIBCAN  were important change 
arrangements for the OECS  WTO Members . They were not only indicative of a strong bilatera l trade 
relationship but also emblematic of the strong relationship which OECS WTO Members  enjoy ed with 
both Canada and the United States. The OECS therefore convey ed its  deepest appreciation to the 
Governments of Canada and of the United States and invite d and welcome d the support of the 
Membership  in that regard . 
13.55.   The representative of the United States  said that  the US trade preferences program me for 
the Central American  and Caribbean region had initially  been launched in 1983 by the Caribbean 
Basin Economic Recovery Ac t. Since its implementation, CBERA ha d continued to generate important 
benefits for beneficiary countries and territories.   
13.56.   The expansion of benefits thro ugh enactment of subsequent legislation represent ed an 
important affirmation of the ongoing US commitment to economic development in the Caribbean 
Basin by expanding duty -free access to the US market for eligible goods.   
13.57.   At present, seventeen  countries an d territories receive d benefits under the program me: 
Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Islands, Curaçao, 
Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent 
and the Gren adines and Trinidad and Tobago.  
13.58.   In 2018, US imports under CBERA preferences had increased 9.1 percent over 2017, to 
USD 1.7B. The United States'  report to the WTO include d detailed trade data on the program me. 
13.59.   The United States was seeking a new waiver to continue to provide th ose preferences to the 
countries and territories in the Caribbean. Its waiver request include d a revised termination date of 
30 September 2025 which was the date that certain preferences were scheduled to expire.  
13.60.   The United States was committed to working in partnership with its neighbo urs in the 
Caribbean to expand economic opportunities. The CBERA provide d a vital contribution to the efforts 
in that partnership by creating opportunities to expand trade between the United States and t he 
Caribbean thus promoting economic opportunity and growth in the region.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 104 - 
 
13.61.   The representative of Canada  noted that r ecognising the special relationship between 
Canada and the Commonwealth Caribbean,  CARIBCAN had been  established in 1986 to help improve 
the trade and economic prospects of the region. The objectives of CARIBCAN were to enhance 
Commonwealth Caribbean trade  in export earnings, improve the trade and economic development 
prospects of the region, promote new investment opportunities and encourage enhanced economic 
integration and cooperation.  
13.62.   Canada's commitment to th ose objectives t hat day  remain ed as importa nt as ever. The 
initiative's objectives, scope and coverage remain ed unchanged in light of the continuing relevance 
of the considerations underlying CARIBCAN. Canada thank ed those Members that ha d expressed 
support for the CARIBCAN programme and the associ ated WTO Waiver.  
13.63.   The General Council took note  of the reports contained in documents WT/L/1065 and 1063 
and of the other statements, and w ould revert to the review of other multi-year waivers under 
Article  IX.4 of the WTO Agreement at its meeting in Decemb er. 
14  WTO PENSION PLAN  
14.1  Annual Report and Financial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2018 
(WT/L/1060)  
14.2  Report of the Independent External Auditor on the Audit of the Financial Statements 
of the World Trade Organization Pension Plan (WTOPP) for the yea r ended 
31 December  2018 (WT/L/1064)  
14.1.   The Chair  drew Members'  attention to the Annual Report of the Management Board for 2018 
contained in document WT/L/1060 which was submitted to the General Council in accordance with 
Article 5(d) of the Regulations of th e WTO Pension Plan. She also dr ew their attention to the Report 
of the Independent External Auditor on the Audit of the Financial Statements of the WTOPP in 
document WT/L/1064.  
14.2.   Mr. Robert Prochazka (Austria), Chair of the WTOPP Management Board , present ed the 2018 
Report of the External Auditor and the 2018 Annual Report of the WTO Pension Plan  circulated in 
documents  WT/L/1064 and WT/L/1060. Th ose reports covering the period from 1 January 2018 to 
31 December 2018 ha d been prepared in accordance with Article 5 of the Regulation of the Plan for 
presentation to the General Council and to Plan Participants. The Management Board was also 
pleased to inform Members about the positive audit report with an unqualified opinion.  
14.3.   On investment issues, 2018 had been  a challenging year for financial markets. Th at had been  
reflected in the portfolio as different asset classes had produced negative returns except for 
international real estate funds. The Management Board's investment strategy  had delivered the rea l 
return of -6.5% for the year. Much of th at decline had been  due to price volatility in financial markets 
at the end of the year.  
14.4.   Over the last five years, the plan's portfolio had generated annual returns of 3.9% in nominal 
terms. The five -year return was therefore above the plan's target return of 3.5%. It was normal that 
in some years the return w ould be above the expected level and in others it w ould be below. Current 
economic circumstances remain ed challenging for investors and unlikely to remain so f or some time.  
14.5.   Following a few years of tough average returns, it w ould be normal to expect that markets 
could  correct and that the Pension Plan experience d some below average returns in the future. 
However, as a long -term investor, the WTO Pension Plan c ould tolerate and even benefit from th at 
short-term volatility. Market downturns provide d the opportunity to purchase assets at more 
attractive prices that also h eld the potential for more sustained returns.  
14.6.   Regarding the actuarial position of the plan, the  updated evaluation based on 2018 data 
showed that the actuarial position of the plan had decreased slightly. However, the Consulting 
Actuary continue d to recommend that the Board monitor the situation closely over the coming years 
particularly with regard  to investment returns and any long -term changes in staffing levels and 
policies.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 105 - 
 
14.7.   Concerning governance issues and outlook, the Management Board had successfully launched 
and had concluded a competitive procurement exercise for its Consulting Actuary. A ne w contract 
had been signed with a defined schedule for regular retendering and performance evaluation. In the 
second half of 2019, the Board w ould focus on reviewing the actuarial assumptions to be used in the 
triennial review of the actuarial balance of t he plan that w ould be completed in early 2020.  
14.8.   The Management Board's Working Group on Governance had met several times to focus on 
risk management. The Working Group on Investment had focused on environmental, social and 
governance aspects of investment. Those Working Group meetings had set the ground for the 
establishment of new policies and guidelines that had been  adopted by the Board in the first half of 
the year. Th ose efforts were simply part of the Management Board's commitment to be fully engaged 
in ensuring the continued good governance of the WTO Pension Plan.  
14.9.   The General Council took note  of the Annual Report in document WT/L/1060,  of the Report of 
the Independent External Auditor in document WT/L/1064, and of the statement  of the Chair of the 
WTOPP Management Board.  
14.3  Election of a Member (WT/GC/W/775)  
14.10.   The Chair  recalled that  Article 4(a) of the Regulations of the WTO Pension Plan provide d for 
the election by the General Council of a Chair, four members and four alternates to the WTO Pensi on 
Plan Management Board.  
14.11.   Following a vacancy that had arisen, on 6 May , the Chair of the WTOPP Management Board  
had sent out a communication inviting all Members to submit , until 13 May, expressions of interest 
in serving on the Board. He had then consult ed on potential candidates and had subsequently 
announced that Ms. Kelly Milton (United States) had agreed to have her name put forward. He had 
given another opportunity for Members to consult on the proposed candidate on 3 June.  
14.12.   As a result of th e process , document WT/GC/W/775 had been  circulated on 20 June where 
she had  indicated her intention to propose Ms. Milton for election to the Management Board at t hat 
day's meeting and had invited those still wishing to do so to submit any comments they could  have 
regarding the proposed nomination to her by close -of-business on 5 July.  
14.13.   As she had  received no comments or questions, she suggest ed that the candidate proposed 
in document WT/GC/W/775, Ms. Kelly Milton (United States), be elected to the Management Board 
as a Member.  
14.14.   The General Council so agreed14. 
15  OTHER BUSINESS  
15.1  G20 Osaka Summit and the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital Economy  – 
Statement by  Japan  
15.1.   The representative of Japan , speaking under "Other Business" , said that due  to the extremely 
kind and persistent reference by the South Korean Deputy Trade Minister  during the meeting , he 
became known as  the infamous Director -General for Economic Affairs of Japan's Foreign Ministry. 
Contrary to his Korean colleague's unilateral and rathe r self-serving expectations, he had  come to 
Geneva to brief his colleagues about G20 – not to respond to any provocations or instant lecturing 
on Japanese  culture . Unlike the specific implementation of Japan's export control system on sensitive 
items, he assumed that the G20 could be the subject  which would  be of more interest to many other  
Members.  
15.2.   In June, Japan had hosted the G20 Summit in Osaka and the Ministerial Meeting on Trade 
and Digital Economy in Tsukuba. Japan was  pleased to note that many parti cipants ha d enjoyed its 
country's hospitality, cuisine , various exhibitions  and sake – both from the Kangsai area and  the 
                                                
14 The decision was subsequently circulated in WT/L/1068.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 106 - 
 
disaster affected regions. Kobe beef had also been served but the real beef in th at year's meeting 
had been  the discussions on trade i ssues.  
15.3.   Twenty Members along with eight invited nations had fruitful discussions which had included 
WTO Reform and had adopted statements solid in substance. Back in January at Davos, Prime 
Minister Shinzo Abe had stated that it had been  Japan's aspiration to make th at year's  G20 Summit 
a chance to regain optimism for the future, providing reassurance that it was possible to achieve a 
hope-driven economy. With th at in the background, the Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital 
Economy  had confirmed Ministers' willingness to work constructively with other Members to 
undertake necessary WTO Reform with a sense of urgency.  
15.4.   The Ministerial Statement had gone  at great length to incorporate each major pillar of the 
WTO Reform i.e. monitoring, rulemaking and dispute settlement. A significant outcome had been , 
among others, the agreement by the Ministers which state d that action was necessary regarding the 
functioning of the dispute settlement system consistent with the rules as negotiated by the WTO 
Members. At the Osaka Summit, G20 Leaders had welcomed th at Ministerial Statement15. More 
specifically, the Leaders had reaffirmed thei r support for the necessary reform of the WTO reiterating 
the need for action on dispute settlement with the aim of provid ing political impetus to the 
discussions in Geneva.  
15.5.   Furthermore, on the margins  of the Osaka Summit, Prime Minister Abe had hosted the 
Leaders' special event on digital economy. As an outcome of th at event, the Osaka Declaration on 
Digital Economy16 had been  issued in which 24 Leaders had declared the launch of the so -called 
"Osaka Track". This was a process which demonstrate d those Leaders' commitment to promote 
international policy discussions inter alia international rulemaking on trade -related aspects of 
electronic commerce at the WTO.  
15.6.   Japan was very much encouraged by the Director -General's statement at that event  when he 
said that,  "if determination is there, there will be success". Japan in its G20 Presidency hope d that 
the Osaka Track through propelling international policy discussion under its umbrella to harness  the 
full potential of data and digital economy w ould provide politi cal impetus to the negotiation on e -
commerce at the WTO seeking to achieve a high standard agreement with the participation of as 
many WTO Members as possible.  
15.7.   Based on those positive achievements at the G20, Japan would like to work constructively 
with o ther Members to undertake necessary WTO Reform with a sense of urgency including in the 
lead up to the Twelfth Ministerial Conference.  
15.8.   Japan believe d that the Leaders at Osaka had been  able to deliver their strong will to promote 
free trade using an approach of identifying common grounds and agreeable points rather than 
dwelling on the gaps or obstinate positions. Japan hope d that under the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's 
presidency next year , they would continue to have meaningful discussions.  
15.9.   The General Council took note  of the statement.  
15.2  Waiver concerning the Preferential Tariff Treatment for Least Developed Countries  
– Statement by the LDC Group   
15.10.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , speaking under "Other Business" , 
thank ed and congratulate d the developing Members in particular  China, India, Chile, Brazil, Thailand 
and Turkey for their communication which refer red to the extension of t he waiver that grant ed 
preferential tariffs  for LDCs .  
15.11.   The waiver granted to developing Members for the benefit of LDCs had been  agreed for the 
first time in July 1999. At present, the waiver was being extended to 2029. Th e waiver extension  
had already  been approved by the CTG at its last meeting  and the LDC Group welcome d such 
                                                
15 The G20 Osaka Leaders' Declaration and the G20 Ministerial Statement on Trade and Digital Economy  
can be found in WT/L/1066.  
16 The Osaka Declaration on Digital Economy can be found in WT/L/1067.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 107 - 
 
development as it would continue to  strengthen the LDCs'  trade relations with developing Members  
and would benefit their integration into the multilateral trading system.  
15.12.   The implementation of th ose tariff preferences ha d led to a real increase in the LDCs'  exports 
to th eir trading  partners who were granting them such  tariff preferences.  The LDCs'  share of 
international trade however continue d to be marginal . Consequently,  the LDCs continued to  face a 
range of constraints which were preventing them from fully benefitting from th at potential. As such,  
the decision of the CTG at its previous  meeting to extend th e waiver  was both necessary and 
relevant.  
15.13.   The LDC Group again thanked Brazil, China, Chile, India, Thailand and Turkey and extended 
its gratitude to the  CTG Chair and the Secretariat for their unwavering support in th e process that 
had led to the decision that had been  taken at the CTG. The LDCs likewise thanked t hose developing 
Member s who alongside the LDC Group ha d held consultations in th at respect.  
15.14.   In that regard, the LDC Group hoped that the internal proce dures  of the European Union on 
that matter would soon be done  so that Members  could adopt a formal decision at the General 
Council  to extend the waiver . The LDCs  therefore called up on all the Member States of the European 
Union to speed up such process.  
15.15.   The General Council took note  of the statement.  
15.3  US Trade Restrictive Measures on the ICT industry  – Statement by China  
15.16.   The representative of China , speaking under "Other Business" , recalled that i n the May 
Market Access Committee meeting and the July Council for Trade in Goods meeting, China had 
registered its serious concerns on the US Executive Order on Securing the Information and 
Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain, and its announcement of putting relevant 
Chinese companies into the export control "Entity List ".  
15.17.   China urge d the U nited States  to withdraw the export control measures to Chinese 
companies including Huawei at the earliest stage. Additionally,  China remind ed the US Government 
of the consistency with the WTO Agreements when formulating its rules and regulations especially 
those WTO obligations on transparency, MFN treatment and elimination of quantitative restrictions . 
15.18.   The representative of the United States  noted that b ecause the item ha d not been included 
on the agenda, the United States  would not respond as it did not believe "Other Business " was an 
appropriate place to raise substantive items. As a general matter, the United States  reiterate d its 
view that the WTO Councils and Committees were not appropriate venues to discuss issues of 
national security.  
15.19.   The General Council took n ote of the statement s. 
15.4  Chairmanships of the Negotiating Group on Rules and on the Committee on Trade 
and Development in Special Session – Statement by the Chair  
15.20.   The Chair, speaking under "Other Business" , said that further to the imminent departures of 
Ambassador Roberto Zapata (Mexico) and of Ambassador François Xavier N garambe (Rwanda) , 
there was a  need to fill in the  vacancies on the Chairmanships of the  Negotiating Group on Rules 
and of the Committee on Trade and  Development in Special Session.  
15.21.   With respect to the Negotiating Group on Rules, as soon as the departure of Ambassador 
Zapata had been  announced and in close consultation with the Director -General, on 17 July, she had  
sent an urgent communication to all M embers in which she had  underscored the exceptional 
circumstances and the fact that th e position needed to be filled in immediately and she had  informed 
delegations that she had invited Deputy Director -General Karl Brauner to undertake urgent 
consultations  on her behalf. Th ose consultations had taken place on 17 and 18 July.  
15.22.   She again highlight ed the exceptional nature of th e process given the circumstances  and she 
thank ed all delegations for their understanding in th at regard.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 108 - 
 
15.23.   At the current  stage, she informed delegations that the discussions were still on -going and 
some delegations need ed additional time to consider th e matter. Given the urgency of the situation, 
she urged the Group coordinators and all delegations to consult among themselves and to conti nue 
to exercise flexibility and pragmatism so that a solution to th at issue c ould be found. A 
communication in th at regard w ould be sent to all delegations in due course.  
15.24.   With respect to the CTD SS, she would begin consultations immediately after th e Gener al 
Council meeting by meeting the coordinators of the four broad groups, that was: (i) Developed 
Members; (ii) Africa; (iii) Asia and the Pacific ; and (iv) Latin America and the Caribbean – GRULAC. 
In line with the Guidelines for the Appointment of Officer s and with the "Practical Steps" to improve 
their implementation she would be assisted in th e process by the Chair of the DSB, Amb assador  
David Walker, and by the former Chair of the General Council, Amb assador  Junichi Ihara. She urged 
the coordinators of the four  broad  group s to start consulting their constituencies as soon as possible, 
with a view to filling th e vacancy without delay.  
15.25.   The General Council took note  of the  Chair's  statement.  
15.5  Administrative matters for MC12 – Statement by the Chair  
15.26.   The Chair, speaking under "Other Business" , follow ed up on her statement at the May 
General Council meeting regarding the preparatory process on M C12 which w ould take place on 8 -
11 June 2020 in Nur -Sultan, Kazakhstan.  As she had  mentioned in May, the General Council w ould 
need to take a decision on a number of administrative and organizational matters.  
15.27.   Those were related to: (a) Election of Officers  – that was the Chair of the Conference as well 
as the three Vice -Chairs; (b) Attendance of Observers from Governments and International 
Intergovernmental Organizations; and (c) Attendance of NGOs.  
15.28.   With respect to the election of officers, she remind ed delegations that, in line with their 
established practice, the Conference w ould normally be chaired by the Minister responsible for 
Foreign Trade from the host country, Kazakhstan, i.e. from Asia. Therefore, the three Vice -Chairs 
would normally be appointed from the three other Groups, that was: (i) Developed Members; (ii) 
Africa; and (iii) Latin America and the Caribbean – GRULAC . She urged the group coordinators to 
start thinking about th e matter so that names c ould be presented after the summer break.   
15.29.   From her part, she intend ed to begin consultations as Members  resume d their work in 
September on all the administrative matters that she had just mentioned with a view of taking a 
decision on th ose matters by the Dece mber General Council meeting at the latest.  She would send 
them a communication with further details in due course and she invite d all of them to already begin 
considering th e issue if they had not yet done so.  
15.30.   The General Council took note  of the Chair's statement.  
15.6  Statement by the Chair in connection with Administrative Measures for Members in 
arrears  
15.31.   The Chair , speaking under "Other Business ", noted that the revised Administrative Measures 
for Members in arrears in WT/BFA/132 required that, at the end of each meeting of the General 
Council, the Chair of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration should provide 
information with regard to which Members and Observers were under Administrative Measures.  
15.32.   Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli  (Norway), Chair of t he Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , reported that  the Administrative Measures applicable to Members and Observers 
with arrears in contribution had been in place since 1 March 2013. In accordance with the Decision 
of the General Council, he should state all Members and Observers under all categories of 
administrative measures. As at 24 July 2019, there had been 18 Members and 5 Observers under 
Administrative Measures. The following 8 members were currently in Category I: Democratic 
Republic o f the Congo; Gabon; Liberia; Mozambique; Senegal; Uganda; Yemen and Zimbabwe. The 
following 2 Members were in Category II: Cameroon and Congo. The following 8 Members were in 
Category III: Antigua and Barbuda; Burundi; Chad; The Gambia; Guinea -Bissau; Nige r; Sierra Leone 
and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The following 2 Observers were in Category I: Comoros and WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 109 - 
 
South Sudan. Somalia was the only Observer in Category II. The following 2 Observers were in 
Category III: Libya and Sao Tomé and Principe.  
15.33.   The Chair said that she was required at each Council meeting to request Members and 
Observers in Categories II and III of the Measures to inform the Secretariat as to when their payment 
of arrears could be expected.  
15.34.   The General  Council took note  of the statem ents. 
 
_______________  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 110 - 
 
ANNEX 1  
THE REPORTS BY THE D IRECTOR -GENERAL AND THE CHAIRS OF THE NE GOTIATING 
GROUPS AT THE INFORM AL TNC AND INFORMAL HODs MEETINGS HELD ON   
19 JULY 2019  
Report by the Director -General1: 
 
Let me start by putting on record my thanks to all the Chairs, facilitators and coordinators for their 
hard work during the first half of the year.  
 
Members are aware that Ambassador Zapata and Ambassador Ngarambe will so on be leaving us. I 
want to say a particular thank you to them both for their work and dedication in driving forward the 
work of their respective groups. I am not sure you will actually miss the negotiations, but the 
negotiations will surely miss your cont ribution! So, thank you both once again.  
 
Of course, the departure of a serving chair is not new. We have been in this position many times 
before. The work will continue, and we will move quickly to identify new chairs. Ambassador Zapata's 
departure is a bit closer, I believe, so finding a new chair for the Rules Negotiating Group is urgent, 
especially in light of the timeline for the fisheries subsidies negotiations. I hope that members will 
be as constructive and flexible as possible as we work towards a  positive outcome. The urgency here 
makes this an exceptional situation – and so I count on your understanding.  
 
Turning to the substance, you have just heard directly from the Chairs, so I do not intend to repeat 
what they have said.  However, I would lik e to emphasize a few points.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, I agree with Ambassador Zapata that the working papers from the facilitators 
are an important step forward – not only because of their content but also because they show a real 
willingness to engage and  negotiate.  
 
However, they also underline the scale of the challenge before us. They reveal a lot of issues that 
will have to be resolved in just a few months. All delegations will have to be flexible, so the positions 
you have defended for years will nee d to evolve. The past few weeks have shown this is beginning 
to happen. This is very encouraging, although not yet enough. The working papers are a good 
platform for work and the negotiations have shifted gear. And they will need to even further intensify 
in September.  
 
I also would remind delegations of the recently -passed 30 June deadline for submitting your 
notifications of subsidies. Ministers recommitted to this obligation at MC11 to strengthen 
transparency on fisheries subsidies. As of today, only 58 of our 164 Members have submitted their 
notifications. That leaves 106 still to notify. This is better than in previous cycles, but there is clearly 
a long way to go. As always, the Secretariat stands ready to help.  
 
Now, moving on, let me say a word ab out agriculture. As highlighted by Ambassador Ford in his 
report, it is important for delegations to use the summer break to reflect on the range of issues, 
consider what is doable in the short run, and frame options for negotiations after the summer break .  
This will allow for more focused negotiations, which is something Members have been demanding. I 
hope that Members will reflect carefully on the Chair's Options Paper and think about which of them 
and other ideas are likely to narrow the gaps in the neg otiating positions.  
 
After the summer I think we will very soon need to define what will be possible for MC12. All of the 
Negotiating Chairs will have a key role to play here. They will need to have a very realistic 
conversation with the members on what m ay be doable in this timeframe. This does not mean 
discarding other elements – it simply means actively prioritising some outcomes for MC12. We will 
need to have this clarity by October at the latest if we are to give ourselves the best chance of 
success i n Nur -Sultan.  
 
I'll now give a quick overview on my own activities since our last meeting in this format.  
 
                                                
1 Also issued as JOB/TNC/75.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 111 - 
 
First, you will recall that we welcomed the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to the WTO in 
May and heard his call to preserve and strengthen t he multilateral trading system. I heard this 
similar message echoed in all my recent contacts.  
 
In addition to the Secretary -General, I have been honoured to welcome a number of other leaders 
to the WTO in recent weeks, including: Her Excellency Salome Zou rabichvili – the President of 
Georgia; Her Excellency Mercedes Araoz – the Vice President of Peru; His Excellency Andry Rajoelina 
– the President of Madagascar; His Majesty King Mswati III of Eswatini; His Excellency Andrew 
Holmes – the Prime Minister of J amaica; His Majesty King Philippe of Belgium; His Excellency Rumen 
Radev – the President of Bulgaria; and His Excellency Honourable Samdech Prime Minister of 
Cambodia. The prevailing theme in these discussions was these leaders' strong commitment to, and 
support for, the WTO.  
 
I also participated in a range of meetings at the invitation of Members and other stakeholders, 
including: a gathering of ambassadors organized by China on WTO reform and development; a 
meeting with the African Group where I congratul ated the Group on the entry into force of the African 
Continental Free Trade Area – which is a truly historic achievement; a workshop on the importance 
of digital trade for women's economic empowerment; the UN Chief Executives Board hosted by the 
ILO; a me eting of the initiative on Investment Facilitation for Development at the invitation of the 
proponents; and a meeting of the ACP Group of WTO members.  
 
In addition, as I announced at our meeting in May, at the request of Consumers International, the 
WTO f acilitated a Trade Dialogues session with consumers groups to hear their concerns on trade 
issues.  
 
Of course, we also held the seventh Global Review of Aid for Trade at the beginning of this month 
under the theme "Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment". I will provide a fuller 
report on this at next week's General Council.  
 
I was also invited to several ministerial and other high -level gatherings around the world to have 
conversations about the systemic challenges confronting the global trad ing system and the WTO.  
 
These included an informal WTO ministerial meeting of WTO Ministers of Developing Countries 
hosted by India and, in Paris, the OECD Ministerial and an Informal Gathering of Ministers hosted by 
Australia. On the side -lines of the me etings in Paris, I was invited by Canada to a ministerial meeting 
of the Ottawa group. I was also invited to another event in Paris where a group of 59 WTO Members 
announced their intent to work on a set of disciplines for domestic regulation in trade in s ervices. In 
addition, I attended the G20 ministerial meeting on Trade and the Digital Economy in Tsukuba, and 
on the same occasion, I met again with the Ottawa Group ministers. Finally, I attended the G20 
Leaders' Summit in Osaka.  
 
The G20 summit was produ ctive in a number of ways. There were moves towards easing the current 
tensions. The leaders' declaration is positive and supports WTO reform. But we need to see more 
action to reduce the tensions and uncertainties that are weighing on global economic grow th and 
trade expansion. Also at the summit, 24 leaders issued the "Osaka Declaration on the Digital 
Economy", which pledged support for progress on e -commerce at the WTO. This clearly sends a 
positive message, not only about that particular issue, but also  about broader engagement with the 
WTO as an institution. There is much more focus on our work now, especially through the lens of 
reform – so let me say a few words about this today.  
 
I think it is important to recogni ze that talking about all this is co nsistent with the path we've been 
on for the last few years. The Trade Facilitation Agreement in 2013 represented a positive change 
in how we do things at the WTO. It was innovative, and it worked. That is reform in action. And 
while we have followed the T FA with other breakthroughs, it is also the case that progress has 
remained stalled in many areas. We have lived with systemic problems and shortcomings for a long 
time. So it is not surprising that calls for reform have begun to grow.  
 
I've been getting q uestions inside and outside these walls about what reform will entail. I think there 
are two basic misconceptions here. The first is talking about reform as if it's in the future. Reform is 
already happening. The second misconception is assuming that we ca n define it all now. I think 
members must define as they go. This process is for members to shape. What a reformed WTO may 
look like will depend on what you set out to achieve, and what you actually manage to deliver. I WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 112 - 
 
would also say that this is highly u nlikely to be a well -defined process with a clear end date. In my 
view the work of reform has been, and will always be, part of what we do.  
 
No area of our work is perfect. All of it can be improved. And we will always need to be alert to how 
the system can better respond to members' concerns and adapt to economic conditions. Conscious 
of this, and acknowledging the range of perspectives, discu ssions seem to be focused on all 3 areas 
of our work.  
 
The first and most urgent is our Dispute Settlement System, particularly the impasse in the Appellate 
Body. Members continue to be engaged in the informal process of focused discussions facilitated by  
Ambassador Walker. I understand that this week's meeting was particularly constructive. And 
proposals are being tabled in the DSB with a view to resuming appointments in the Appellate Body. 
However, only three working months remain before we go below the minimum number of Appellate 
Body members. The systemic implications here are known to you all. I called on G20 leaders to 
instruct their negotiators to find a solution. While we continue to search for this solution, members 
need to look seriously at all op tions and alternatives. And I know that this conversation is already 
happening.  
 
The second area is strengthening the work of the WTO's regular bodies and committees to improve 
areas such as notifications and transparency and better utilize these bodies t o address Members' 
trade concerns. I understand that additional proposals have been tabled or revised, and more ideas 
have come to the fore in recent weeks.  I also understand that discussions have continued in the 
CTG and in member -led initiatives.  Some of these issues will be taken up at next week's General 
Council.  
 
The third area is how to improve our negotiating work so that we can keep delivering new 
agreements with real economic impact. We have already heard in detail about the progress in the 
various negotiating groups. Given the end -of-year deadline, I think the fisheries subsidies 
negotiations will show whether we can keep delivering on the multilateral track. Progress is essential 
in all of the other longstanding areas as well – particularly agri culture, including food security, and 
development. But I think we need to recogni ze the frustration that has built up with this work over 
many months and years without meaningful advances. So let's deliver. We are also seeing members 
putting their energy i nto the joint initiatives, and they are sparking much interest – but only 
participants can tell how ambitious they are or what could be achieved.   
 
So those are the three areas of focus at present. The outcome of these discussions is for you to 
shape. Wha t is clear is that this reform process is a serious test for this organi zation. Either we 
evolve and adapt in order to deliver on the expectations of our users – or, ultimately, we give way 
to a fragmentation of the global trading system.  
 
I think it is i ncumbent on all of us who believe in multilateralism to respond to the challenges of 
today, not to rely on recipes designed for other times. It may well be that some of the paths forward 
will not be followed by all, but they must be available to all and no  one should be forced to take 
them. Where those paths will lead, we will see when we get there. But don’t pack for a short trip.  
 
The challenges we have before us will not be tackled overnight – or over a few months. We are in 
for a rather long journey. B ut I believe it is one that is unavoidable. Staying where we are is not an 
option. In fact, the journey has already begun, whether one realises this or not. So let's seize this 
opportunity to update and strengthen the system.  
 
The direction we take is up to you. But we owe it to future generations to embrace this opportunity. 
History will not look kindly on us if we fail because we refused to accept that change was needed. 
We each have to make some fundamental decisions about the way forward. So let's take  the next 
few weeks to reflect on all this and recharge our batteries.  
 
The 2nd half of the year will be intense. This work may well define the future of the trading system.  
 
So be ready.  
 
Thank you for listening.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 113 - 
 
Reports by the Negotiating Group Chair s: 
 
1. Negotiating Group on Rules  
 
Thank you Chair. As I held a Heads of Delegation meeting of the Rules Negotiating Group on 
Wednesday when I reported on the status of the negotiations, I will try not to repeat everything you 
already heard there.  
 
Nevertheless, this is a good opportunity to give a brief summary to the Trade Negotiations 
Committee of where we are in negotiating disciplines on subsidies to fisheries.  
 
As you know, on Friday last week, the working papers from the facilitators were endo rsed by the 
Negotiating Group, along with an outline of the work programme for the second part of the year. 
These endorsements were then strongly supported by the Heads of Delegation on Wednesday.  
 
These working papers are the manifestation of the "clean c onsolidated" text that the Negotiating 
Group had been instructed to develop. Indeed, this instruction had to face the reality that in many 
areas there was little common ground among different positions. And, in some areas, discussions 
were not advanced eno ugh to even outline different positions.  
 
Therefore, these papers are a mix of legal text, options for different approaches in legal text, 
placeholders and outlines of issues. In all cases they are accompanied by comments, headnotes and 
annexes which give some background and context.  
 
These papers represent a significant step forward, and the process by which they were created 
showed a genuine willingness on the part of delegations to engage in serious negotiations.  
  
As I have repeatedly assured Members, these working papers are a platform for negotiations in the 
fall, and they remain open to further inputs from Members, in the work to build on the platform to 
develop and refine legal texts on all issues. In that work,  many delegations have made clear that 
they will continue to draw on document TN/RL/W/274/Rev.6 and room document RD/TN/RL/72, as 
important resources.  
 
Concerning the work programme for the second part of the year. The four week -long clusters for 
Septembe r to December will have to be supplemented by intensive facilitator led work between and 
during the clusters. Indeed, we can expect that there will be a constant state of negotiation during 
the entire period. All delegations, the Chair, the facilitators an d the Secretariat will need to adapt to 
the needs of the negotiations during those four months.  
 
Having said all this, there still remains a long distance to travel to get to an outcome as mandated 
in MC11. It will not be easy to complete the negotiations  by the end of December, but I did not hear 
any Ambassador question the deadline or the mandate, and indeed they have reaffirmed the 
commitment not only to delivering an outcome, but to rolling their sleeves as needed to get to that 
point.  
 
On the addition al facilitators requested to assist in the pillar of cross -cutting issues, I am still in the 
process of confirming availability of individuals nominated, including with their Ambassadors. As 
soon as I get these confirmations, I will inform the negotiating group.  
 
This leads me to my final comment about my departure. As announced in last Wednesday’s meeting, 
I will no longer serve as the Chair of the Rules Negotiating Group due to my departure from Geneva. 
I have done my best to leave the process well -positi oned to shift into high gear after the summer 
break. I would like to conclude by expressing my gratitude to Members for having entrusted me with 
this task, and for your continued support. It has been an honor serving you, and a privilege to work 
for the sy stem.  
 
2. Committee on Agriculture in Special Session  
 
Since the last report to the informal meeting of the Trade Negotiation Committee on 3  May 2019, I 
held three meetings of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session and back -to-back dedicated 
discussions on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes and Special Safeguard Mechanism on 
28 May, 20 June and 15 July 2019 respectively.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 114 - 
 
The Members -led Working Groups process, which was initiated at the beginning of this year, was 
conclud ed in June, following extensive discussions on all negotiating topics.  In total, 28 Working 
Groups meetings were held: 6 on Domestic Support, 4 on PSH, 4 on Market Access, 3 on SSM, 3 on 
Export Competition, 3 on Export Restrictions and 5 Cotton Technical Quad Plus meetings. The 
informal compilation of Working Groups reports prepared by the Coordinators on the basis of all the 
meetings was circulated to delegations on 11 July 2019.  
Let me take this opportunity to express my gratitude once more to all the Co ordinators and the 
Friend of the Chair for the excellent work undertaken in the Working Groups. This process, based on 
the series of questions posed by the coordinators, achieved its main objectives, namely triggering 
more informal and candid in -depth exch anges between delegations on all the issues covered in the 
agriculture negotiations.  
Responding to my call for new ideas to help advance the negotiations, a number of submissions 
have been circulated in recent weeks - on Market Access, Domestic Support and  Cotton. The 
submission on domestic support, the area where the majority of Members indicate the highest 
priority, presents in the most direct manner options on which Members need to deliberate, first to 
focus the negotiations on areas that have the greate st chance of agreement and then to develop 
and present possible outcomes on which to forge a consensus. Market access continues to receive 
increasing attention and a meaningful small possible first step was introduced to Members. A new 
detailed paper layin g out a possible way forward to achieve an outcome in the long -committed area 
of cotton is now on the table. A general communication covering a broad range of issues was 
circulated by the LDC group. I wish to commend these delegations for tabling these sub missions 
which should inject some fresh momentum in the negotiations.  
We took stock of the current state of play in the negotiations, topic -by-topic, at the 15 July CoA 
Special Session meeting.  
My intention now is to circulate by the end of the month a Re flections and Options  Paper summarizing 
my assessment of the state of play in the negotiations, which would also include questions to assist 
Members, as they reflect carefully during the holiday period over the options which would narrow 
the gaps in Member s' positions and enable us to make progress in the negotiations by identifying 
what could constitute doable outcomes on each topic.  
After the extensive work that has been undertaken in recent months, Members should now identify, 
categorise, and classify wh at is "doable", what is "less likely" and what is "not likely at all" by MC12, 
and stand ready to intensify their efforts on the most promising topics, addressing different levels 
of outcomes, be it an improvement in the rules, clarification of the existin g rules, and increased 
transparency, all towards building a trading framework that increases opportunities and provides 
flexibilities to access these opportunities while reducing trade distortions.  
Chair, the oft -repeated messages in the CoA SS over the pa st year can hardly be misunderstood – 
they ring in our ears – I will only mention the four messages which I hear with the strongest decibels 
from Members: 1. progress will only be made with increased engagement by all in the room on all 
priorities. 2. prog ress will only be made if imbalances are reduced; 3. progress will only be made if 
all contribute equitably; 4. progress will only be made if increased flexibility to seize opportunities 
for production and trade expansion are accompanied by measures that d o not inhibit the seizing of 
opportunities, but importantly at the same time do not increase trade distorting support.  
Chair, we have the messages and the options, we now need to examine which outcomes are feasible 
before MC12.  
To this end, I expect Memb ers to prepare new focused and concrete submissions and inputs and be 
ready to engage in the autumn in an intensive and proactive results -oriented negotiation phase.  
I plan to hold 3 CoA Special Session meetings between September and November; 26 and 
27 September, 28 and 29 October, 28 and 29 November, including Dedicated Sessions as mandated. 
These sessions will be complemented by consultations in various formats on which I will report to 
the CoA SS.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 115 - 
 
I also plan to explore opportunities that might exist a t upcoming high -level meetings, including 
Ministerial gatherings like the World Cotton Day launch on 7 October and WTO Heads of Delegations 
meetings, to make progress.  
I trust that a step -by-step process, during the coming months, focusing on specific topi cs in each 
area, might enable Members to arrive at an incremental package that they can achieve consensus 
on. The sooner we identify the "doable" elements and negotiate around them the more likely we are 
to achieve a meaningful outcome.  
3. Committee on Trade  and Development in Special Session  
 
As Members will recall, at the last Heads of Delegations meeting held on 3 May, I had reported on 
my bilateral and plurilateral consultations that I had undertaken with key Members.  You will also 
recollect that at that  meeting I had informed that I had not detected any significant shift in Members 
positions.   
 
Although there was agreement amongst Members on the centrality of development and the role 
WTO rules should play in harnessing it, yet differences existed on how  to achieve this objective. I 
had also been given to understand that the proponents were in the process of reviewing their S&D 
proposals and that they would try to submit their revised proposal to the Special Session, as soon 
as possible.  
 
Since then, I ha ve had two rounds of meetings with the G90 Coordinators and their Development 
Focal Points.  
 
The first meeting that I had with them took place in early June. In this meeting, I impressed upon 
the proponents the urgency of finalizing their revised proposal s and the need for submitting them 
as soon as possible to the Special Session.  I also emphasised that their submission would be a 
prerequisite for starting substantive work in the Special Session in preparation for MC12.  The 
proponents had informed me th at they remained cognizant of this urgency and of the fact that the 
more time Members had for detailed discussion on the revised proposals, the better chance they 
would have to find common ground.  
 
I had another round of meeting with G90 Coordinators and t heir Development Focal Points earlier 
this week to assess the state of their work on the proposals. I was informed by the representatives 
of the G90 who came for my consultations that they have been actively working on the proposals. I 
was told that the ro admap they had planned included a workshop in September where experts would 
come together to discuss new ideas and perspectives to help concretize the proposals.   
 
The G90 hopes to be able to submit their revised proposals in the Special Session by the end of 
September, or early in October. I sensed that the proponents were also planning to reach out to key 
Members, so as to discuss and take into account their concer ns before the final document is tabled.  
 
Based on this feedback, I am happy to report that the G90 members have clearly intensified their 
work. This gives me hope that we'll soon have a revised negotiating document before us which can 
form the basis for o ur work in the second half of the year.  
 
If you allow me, on a different note, I would like to take this opportunity to inform colleagues that 
also my mission as Permanent Representative of Rwanda has come to an end, and I wish to make 
the following short  remarks. Achieving a Multilateral Trading System that is free of distortions, 
imbalances and inequalities, and which is conducive for an efficient allocation of resources, allowing 
those behind to catch up, protecting the smallest and the weakest - is an ideal that we all aspire to 
and that we have formally declared to uphold in Marrakesh.  
 
During my five years in this business, I realize that it is much easier said and declared than done. I 
came to realize how achieving this long -term ideal implies short -term sacrifices that some Members 
are not yet ready to make. However, the experience of my own country and my own life experience 
have taught me that as long as the cause is right, no matter how full of hurdles the road is, sooner 
or later, its objectives  will be achieved. On the one hand, there is no short -cut, no easy way to 
translate this ideal of centrality of development into a concrete precise, implementable agreement, 
on the other hand, however, giving up on this noble fight is not an option. Buildi ng trust among 
Members, moving step by step, preferring a realistic, incremental approach as opposed to an ideal, WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 116 - 
 
ambitious, immediate, comprehensive package is definitely the best way forward. I wish you all the 
best, and I thank you all for your trust an d confidence. I hope our paths will cross again in the 
future.  
 
4. Dispute Settlement Body in Special Session  
 
As you may know, on 1 July 2019, the DSB in Special Session formally elected me as its new 
Chairperson. During that meeting, Members also had an opp ortunity to comment on previous Chair, 
Ambassador Seck's, report, which comprehensively reflects the work conducted in this negotiating 
group since November 2016 and provides Chair Seck's assessment of the state of play of the 
negotiations. I would like to  take this opportunity to thank Chair Seck for all his efforts.  
 
Looking ahead, with the summer break approaching, I have suggested that delegations use July and 
August to review the contents of Chair Seck's report and reflect on the next steps. I will al so take 
this time to consider Members' comments on the report when contemplating possible options of 
going forward. I intend to hold an informal open -ended meeting in early autumn to gather Members' 
views on how to proceed further.  
 
_______________  
 
 
 
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 117 - 
 
ANNEX 2  
STATEMENTS BY MEMBER S AT THE INFORMAL TN C AND INFORMAL HOD s MEETINGS 
HELD ON  19 JULY 2019  
Following the Director -General's statement at the above -mentioned meeting, the statements made 
by Paraguay; Singapore; Chad (LDCs); Republic of Korea; Chile; Benin (African Group); Panama 
(Article XII Members); European Union; Nepal; Australia; India; Thailand (ASEAN); China; 
Kazakhstan; Mexico; Sri Lanka; Colombia; Switzerland; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Japan; New 
Zealand; United State s; South Africa; Brazil; Jamaica; Canada; Uruguay; Turkey; Indonesia; 
Trinidad and Tobago; Egypt; Montenegro; Russian Federation; Malaysia; Norway; Uganda; Ecuador; 
Afghanistan; Hong Kong, China; Argentina; Nigeria; Chinese Taipei; Pakistan; Bolivarian Rep ublic 
of Venezuela; Haiti; Viet Nam; Peru and Philippines  are included below as part of the Minutes of the 
General Council meeting.  
 
_______________  
 
 
1. Paraguay  
 
Allow me to express our thanks for the reports that were presented.  
 
Without further ado, I would like to explain my delegation's priorities for the coming months.  
 
Regarding WTO reform, Paraguay considers that the discussions should continue to be inclusive and 
transparent, and that the development component must be respected as a fundamental pr inciple 
and right of Members. We must preserve special and differential treatment for Members who really 
need it. Also, the discussion on strengthening transparency and notifications should move away from 
a punitive approach in order to find a solution tha t would allow identification of appropriate 
incentives, as well as the most effective mechanisms for Members to fulfil their outstanding 
obligations.  
 
Regarding the situation of the Appellate Body, we reiterate our deep and systemic concern regarding 
the current situation, and we support the process led by Ambassador Walker to find a negotiated 
solution. The priority of the entire Membership must be to restore the Appellate Body to its full 
capacity and launch the process for selecting its members without d elay. 
 
According to the report presented by the Facilitator, it seems there is a great deal of convergence 
among the proposals that have been submitted. For our country, now is the moment to move forward 
on issues where we have agreement and delve deeper i nto the sensitive issues that are of concern 
to many Members. We hope that the document we have co -sponsored with Brazil and Uruguay, 
WT/GC/W/767/Rev.1, entitled Guidelines for the Work of Panels and the Appellate Body, will bring 
some interesting elements  to the informal process underway.  
 
With respect to the agriculture negotiations, we would like to thank Ambassador Ford for his efforts 
in driving the technical discussions in the Working Groups, but the technical discussions cannot 
advance unless the Mem bers show some flexibility in their political positions, especially on issues 
where they have an interest and are looking for results. My delegation has made significant efforts 
to contribute to this debate, trying to introduce new perspectives that would ensure balanced 
outcomes and new disciplines to be developed. For this, we believe that the Members should help 
identify a solution commensurate with their level of responsibility for distorting agricultural markets.  
 
As a signatory of the Joint Statement on Domestic Regulation of Trade in Services, we reaffirm our 
commitment to make progress on outstanding issues and hope to achieve an outcome that would 
allow us to improve the policy environment for trade in services.  
 
With respect to participation in the  various Joint Initiatives, as a landlocked developing country, we 
view with much enthusiasm the WTO's potential for contributing to the regulation of crosscutting 
components of trade facilitation. That is why we firmly support the work of the Initiatives on 
Electronic Commerce, Facilitation of Investment for Development and MSMEs.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 118 - 
 
As a signatory of the second Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce, we reaffirm our commitment 
to supporting the process of negotiation regarding trade related aspects of e -commerce. We applaud 
the co -conveners of the Initiative: Australia, Singapore and Japan, as well as the 16 Members who 
submitted textual proposals as a basis for the dynamic and rich discussion in the thematic Working 
Groups over the past three months.  
 
We co nsider that it is possible to overcome this systemic crisis with strong political will combined 
with the technical work by each one of the Members. My delegation is ready to continue making an 
active contribution to the discussions that will be held in the  next half of the year and hopes to 
achieve a balanced outcome that would take on board the interests of the Membership with a view 
to the next Ministerial Conference.  
 
2. Singapore  
 
As we approach the summer break, it is timely to consider what we want to achieve for the second 
half of 2019, and what we have to do in the months and days ahead. Allow me to offer three 
suggestions.  
 
First, we must continue to persevere and build on our efforts to revitalise the WTO. In the fisheries 
subsidies negotiations, de legations are engaging actively, and even late into the night, on text 
proposals and the facilitators' papers. In the Joint Statement Initiative on E -Commerce, Members 
have covered an extensive range of topics, identified commonalties and clarified their u nderstanding 
where there are technical differences among the various proposals. Singapore's paper on Good 
Practices in the TBT Committee was also discussed at the informal CTG consultations last month.  
 
We hope that this will contribute to Members' effort s to improve the efficiency of WTO bodies and 
strengthen the WTO's deliberative function. As we depart for the summer break, it is important that 
we do not lose the momentum in these areas and Members are prepared to resume substantive 
discussions when we reconvene in the fall.  
 
Second, we must continue to reach out to key stakeholders to promote a positive narrative of the 
WTO. In this context, I wish to highlight the Tenth Parliamentarian Workshop that was held in 
Singapore in June. The Workshop, which wa s jointly organi zed by the S. Rajaratnam School of 
International Studies and the WTO, was well -attended and attracted 51 parliamentarians from 22 
economies in the region, who engaged in substantive discussions on the WTO and other international 
trade issue s. More importantly, the Workshop enabled legislators to deepen their understanding of 
the important work that is being done by all of us in the WTO.  
 
It is particularly heartening that many smaller economies at the Workshop highlighted the 
importance of upholding and strengthening multilateralism, including the WTO, which is at times, 
the only way for their voices to be heard. This year also marks the tenth anniversary of the 
Workshop, and reflects Singapore's modest contribution to strengthen the WTO by propagating a 
positive narrative.  
 
Third, we must continue to address the critical challenges facing the rules -based multilateral trading 
system, which is embodied by the WTO. The latest Report of the TPRB from the Director -General on 
Trade -Related Develop ments notes that current trade tensions continue to create uncertainties in 
the global economy. In fact, the Report observed that "trade measures implemented by the G20 
economies accounted for the overwhelming share of the trade coverage of import -restrict ive 
measures recorded" in the report.  
 
The Global Governance Group (3G), comprising 30 small and medium sized countries, also expressed 
similar concerns in advance of the G20 Summit in Osaka with the escalating global trade tensions. 
It noted that "all co untries, especially small and medium sized countries like the 3G, will be 
negatively impacted if trade conflicts spill over into wider tensions and disrupt global trade. The 3G 
also reiterated the importance of an open, rules -based multilateral trading sys tem, as embodied by 
the WTO, in ensuring that trade remains free and open".  
 
As my Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said at the recent Shangri -La Dialogue in Singapore last 
month, "the US -China bilateral relationship is the most important in the world today.  How the two 
work out their tensions and frictions will define the international environment for decades to come. 
[…] The US and China need to work together, and with other countries too, to bring the global WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 119 - 
 
system up to date, and to not upend the system. […] We need to reform and strengthen multilateral 
institutions, not cripple or block them. […] To succeed in this, each must understand the other's 
point of view, and reconcile each other's interests".  
 
As we continue discussing the various proposals in t his house regarding important issues like the 
Appellate Body, transparency and notifications, guidelines for discussing trade concerns in WTO 
bodies and other aspects of WTO reform, I strongly urge all Members to actively identify and build 
on the commonal ities. This is crucial to rebuilding trust. Otherwise, the alternative is a more divided 
and troubled world, or as Director -General Azevêdo had described just a few moments ago – a 
fragmented global trading system – one that will negatively impact all Memb ers, large and small 
alike.  
 
3. Chad (LDCs)  
 
I take the floor on behalf of the LDC Group.  
 
At the outset, I would like to thank the Director -General for having delivered his report on the status 
of discussions and negotiations within the WTO. In addition, the  LDC Group would like to sincerely 
thank the different Chairs of Negotiating Bodies for their respective reports. And while we are on 
that topic, the LDC Group would like to extend our greatest admiration and friendship to colleagues 
and Negotiating Body C hairs who are going to leave our ship, Ambassador Roberto Zapata of Mexico 
and Ambassador Xavier Francois Ngarambe of Rwanda.  
 
The Group would like its statement to be included on the minutes of the General Council meeting.  
 
The LDC Group takes note of the intensification of the discussions which have taken place over the 
last few months since the last TNC in May. This intense ac tivity, within which the LDC Group 
participated in is a good sign of the interest that Members hold in the aim of achieving results on 
regulation of world trade as well as on the preservation of the multilateral trading system – which, 
in a way, assists th e most vulnerable Members.  
 
The Twelfth Ministerial Conference is coming up as the Director -General has mentioned. And we 
hope to achieve tangible results on important issues, particularly on agriculture and on fisheries.  
 
On agriculture, the LDCs underl ine the importance of achieving an outcome on the substantial 
reduction of domestic support which leads to distorted effects on markets and which has a negative 
impact on LDC economies. Particularly with regard to the cotton sector, the elimination of dome stic 
support should be made a priority. The LDCs are also calling for a solution on public stockholding for 
food security purposes which authorises LDCs to develop new programmes which do not yet exist. 
Furthermore, we are always looking for an outcome on the special safeguard mechanism in order to 
safeguard our small -scale, vulnerable farmers from market volatility.  
 
With regard to negotiations on fisheries subsidies, the LDC Group would like to reiterate its 
commitment to actively participate in seeking an outcome by the end of 2019 in line with the 
mandate given by our Ministers in Buenos Aires. We believe that the work over the past few weeks 
as well as document TN/RL/W/274/Rev.6  form good basis for these discussions.  
 
The LDC Group would like to under line the fact that these disciplines should seek to eliminate the 
most harmful subsidies, especially those on IUU fishing, overfished stocks, overcapacity and 
overfishing and should also be subject to discipline, especially for large scale industrial fishi ng. 
Special and differential treatment is an integral part of our negotiations and should allow LDCs and 
all other Members who are graduating from that category to be able to sustainably use their fisheries 
resources.  
 
Regarding WTO reform, the LDC Group believes that any reform which is undertaken should take 
into account global constraints for LDCs and graduating LDCs in terms of obligations and in terms of 
implementation with regard to our countries. Furthermore, all discussions relating to the reform 
process should be inclusive and should be based on the principle of consensus.  
 
Beyond these issues, we also have LDC issues particularly with regard to the implementation 
decisions in favour of the LDCs. These decisions should be implemented in an effectiv e manner. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 120 - 
 
Furthermore, the LDC proposals on graduation, Article 66.2 of TRIPS and those which appear in the 
context generally of the G90 should be approved as quickly as possible.  
 
The LDC Group would like to see that after the summer break. That work shou ld take place in a 
constructive way so that we have the best chances possible of success at MC12. The LDC Group will 
play an active role in such activities.  
 
4. Republic of Korea  
 
I would like to begin by recogni sing the extensive amount of efforts  that Membe rs have put towards 
making progress in the important areas of work in the organization.  
 
Regarding the fisheries subsidies negotiations, I appreciate the hard work by Ambassador Roberto 
Zapata, the Chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules, the facilitators, and all Members to produce 
the "working documents ". The significant time and energy inve sted by Members in the meetings 
with some of those lasting until late evenings should not go in vain. I believe the "working 
documents " would serve as a solid foundation for the work going forward right after the summer 
break.  
 
I have elaborated Korea' s comprehensive position at the Head s of Delegation level meeting on 
17 July. Let me remind Members of the three crucial factors, as we see  in crafting the discipline  on 
fisheries subsidies : 
 
• First, the importance of fisheries management should be properly considered.  
  
• Second, subsidies that are beneficial for promoting sustainability should not be 
prohibited or limited by a cap.  
  
• Third, the WTO discipline should be complementary with the existing global fisheries 
regimes.  
 
We have less than four  months until the mandated deadline for this negotiation but the level of 
convergence among Members still varies from area to area. We need to ratchet up our negotiating 
efforts. Korea will continue to work with other Members to find a common ground on thi s important 
and difficult issue at hand.  
 
Regarding negotiations on the trade -related aspects of electronic commerce, it is heartening to see 
that the negotiations are making progress thanks to the facilitators ' hard work. I hope the proposal 
submitted by  Korea along with many others would offer a good basis for producing a high standard 
outcome by MC12. This will enhance the benefits of electronic commerce for businesses, consumers 
and the global economy. Since we will spend four days per meeting from Sep tember every month, 
Korea is committed to further engaging in the negotiations to shift gears towards greater progress.  
 
Ensuring certainty and predictability of the system has been one of the key concerns in our efforts 
to resolve the Appellate Body impa sse. Members have put relentless efforts into solving the issue of 
prolonged vacancies in the Appellate Body, in particular, through the informal General Council 
process facilitated by Ambassador David Walker. Based on the convergence built so far by the 
process, Members should continue to engage sincerely and actively to address the remaining 
divergences without delay.  
 
The WTO Annual Report 2019 points out that mounting trade tensions, increase in trade -restrictive 
measures, and continuing economic uncert ainty created real challenges for world trade. 
Unfortunately, this report projects a continuous downward trend in global trade with estimated trade 
growth of 2.6 percent. As the temptations for unilateral trade restrictive measures are contributing 
to the uncertainty and unpredictability of global trade mechanism, a full and functioning Appellate 
Body, an essential element of the WTO dispute settlement system, is something we cannot dare to 
lose.  
 
As a staunch supporter of the rules -based multilateral trad ing system, Korea will continue to 
participate in this concerted effort to find the solution.   
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 121 - 
 
5. Chile  
 
Chile thanks the Director -General for his report.  
 
Tomorrow, we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the historic human landing on the moon, which 
took place on 20 July 1969. I would like to recall that seven years earlier to that historic moment, 
in his speech at the Rice Stadium, President John F. Kennedy said " We choose to go to the moon. 
We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other thi ngs, not because they are easy, but 
because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organi se and measure the best of our energies 
and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to 
postpone, and one whic h we intend to win, and the others, too. "  
 
This year, we also celebrate the 25th anniversary of the WTO. We have chosen to be part of this 
organization, not because it is easy, because sometimes it is hard. But because belonging to the 
WTO serves to organise international cooperation and measure th e best of our energies and skills to 
promote free trade, increase jobs and achieve sustainable development.  
 
We are entering into a key, sensitive period for the WTO and its future. Unfortunately, this moment 
is marked mainly by a lack of consensus in dif ferent fields. And we note with concern that often, 
discussions at the WTO are constrained by a polarised pattern. This polarization does not allow us 
to take the path to reach agreement and make our best efforts futile. It is time for the WTO to 
deliver. We, the WTO Members, have the capacity to be efficient and effective in trade negotiations, 
along with being inclusive and accommodating to real and specific development needs of our 
Members.  
 
We call on our colleagues gathered here today to be flexible i n your position because the final goal 
is not for us to demand, but to reach agreements that will be honoured by each one of us. We call 
on all our Members to deploy our diplomacy and negotiation skills to make the WTO and ourselves 
great again by reaching  substantive agreements to reform and organise our organization, and to 
make it as best equipped for the 21st century's trade challenges.  
 
At the July General Council meeting last year – which was my first General Council meeting – the 
mood in this very sa me room was tortured by pessimism. Many delegates mentioned the word 
"crisis". One year later, the support for the WTO and its reform is more visible. In the last twelve 
months, many Members have introduced proposals that are needed to improve these main f unctions: 
deliberative function, dispute settlement and trade negotiations.  
 
After one year, we will gather again at the July General Council meeting next week but with a 
difference – that we have at our disposal several concrete proposals that have chang ed the landscape 
of our discussions. Now, our approach should be to avoid polarised positions in the discussions and 
negotiations and to sustain substantive dialogue aimed at finding solutions and agreements. It is 
high time for a change in our mindset to allow flexibility and consensus.  
 
In this regard, Chile is very grateful for those Members who have submitted reform proposals in the 
field of transparency and notifications, dispute settlement, trade concerns and development, among 
other issues. All those  proposals have been subject of discussions and consultations which have 
evolved by taking up feedback from Members as evidenced by the improvements made in each text.  
 
Our challenges today are well -known. In the short -term, we must successfully conclude t he fisheries  
subsidies negotiation. The deadline is clear – December 2019. In this regard, we acknowledge the 
great effort made by Ambassador Roberto Zapata. We are also well aware of another deadline – 
10 December – in relation to the nomination of new me mbers of the Appellate Body. And in this 
case, we value the informal process led by Ambassador David Walker and his report on 
convergences.  
 
We have also done important headway in other areas such as e -commerce, domestic regulations in 
services and invest ment facilitation for development. We thank Ambassador Juan Carlos González 
for the highly productive discussions. We look forward to reaching agreement in all these areas from 
now until the Ministerial Conference in Nur -Sultan. These results in MC12 will be the best 
demonstration of the continuous relevance and importance of the WTO as an institution that can 
deliver.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 122 - 
 
To achieve results in those areas at MC12, we must, " organi Ze and measure the best of our energies 
and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to 
postpone ". We are not going back to the moon, but we are engaged in something fundamental for 
development and for peace i n the world. Chile is in a solutions -oriented mode to get this 
transformation done as soon as possible.  
 
6. Benin (African Group)  
 
I make this statement on behalf of the African Group.  
 
The African Group wishes to thank the Director -General as well as the Cha irs of the Negotiating 
Groups for the reports they presented this morning on the state of play of negotiations.  
 
We note that over the past days and weeks, new contributions were made by Members on matters 
related to negotiations.  
 
This pace should be main tained and even accelerated once our work resumes in September on all 
topics under negotiation with a view to achieving expected results.  
 
The African Group would also like to note the launch in Niamey on 7 July, by the Heads of State and 
Government of the African Union, of the African Continental Free Trade Area.  
 
The African Group wishes to remind Members of its concerns, priorities and expectations, regarding 
the following issues:  
 
Agriculture  
 
Reform of agriculture is the most important  development outcome for achieving Africa's overall 
agricultural development objectives. Given the importance of agriculture to the economies of several 
developing countries, and in particular the least -developed countries, the African Group wishes to 
recommend that, by the Twelfth Ministerial Conference, significant results are achieved in terms of 
reducing or eliminating domestic support that skews the international market of agricultural products 
within agreed timeframes.  
 
Similarly, resolute efforts wil l have to be pursued to identify a permanent solution for preserving 
public stockholding for food security purposes, as well as a special safeguard measure for developing 
countries, in light of the clear mandates we have on these two issues and with a view  to obtaining 
concrete outcomes by MC12.  
 
Furthermore, for some aspects of interest to the African Group under the market access and export 
competition pillars of these products by developing countries, the LDCs and NFIDCs should be dealt 
with following pr ogress in negotiations on domestic support.  
 
Cotton  
 
The African Group urges Members to respond favourably to the proposed modalities presented by 
the C -4 on 15 July and contained in document TN/AG/GEN/49 – TN/AG/SCC/GEN/20 . These 
proposed modalities are b ased on a gradual reduction of domestic support mechanisms that distort 
international trade in cotton.  
 
Regarding the development aspect of cotton, the African Group would like to invite all Members to 
contribute to the preparations for the World Cotton Da y in Geneva on 7 October.  
 
Fisheries subsidies  
 
Given the importance of fisheries activities for several African countries in terms of food security, 
nutrition, revenue generation, job creation and the promotion of women's empowerment, it is 
important for WTO Members to make real efforts to achieve SDG target 14.6, on sustainability of 
fisheries resources, by adopting a decision that would guarantee effective disciplines prohibiting 
certain forms of fisheries subsidies that lead to overcapacity and overfish ing. In addition to 
eliminating subsidies that lead to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, the African Group WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 123 - 
 
remains determined to achieve a substantial and balanced outcome in the negotiations on fisheries 
subsidies within the timeframes set in t he Buenos Aires Declaration.  
 
Furthermore, suitable and effective arrangements in the area of special and differential treatment 
should be conferred onto developing countries, in particular LDCs.  
 
Services  
 
With respect to domestic regulation of the servic es sector, the African Group is opposed to any work 
done outside the mandate of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation or any approaches supported 
by other Members who seek to introduce new rules to the GATS schedule of Members. We wish to 
remind these M embers that the insertion of disciplines to Article 6.4 of the GATS in the schedules 
requires consensus. These are the kinds of approaches that result in the fragmentation of the 
multilateral trading system.  
 
Special and differential treatment  
 
The African Group would like to recall that development must remain at the centre of our efforts and 
expected outcomes and that special and differential treatment is a right that should be maintained 
given the different levels of development.  
 
The Group will s ubmit, along with the other constituents of the G90, a revised text on the specific 
proposals on the S&DT of the Agreement, by the end of September.  
 
Appellate Body  
 
The Group stresses that it is urgent to relaunch the selection process in order to ensure the 
functioning of the Appellate Body, failing which the multilateral trading system will lose one of its 
fundamental pillars.  
 
That is why the African Group is contributing in a constructive manner to the review underway which 
should enable a way out of t he current deadlock. The Group also associated itself with the 
Communication brought today by 114 WTO Members, and has submitted proposals contained in 
document WT/GC/W/776 of 26 June 2019.  
 
Transparency  
 
On the issue of transparency, the African Group, Cu ba and India will present on 23 July, during the 
General Council, a proposal on the importance of transparency for the functioning of the multilateral 
trading system. This communication calls for a transparent, development -based approach that is 
inclusive and collaborative, in order to encourage Members to honour their obligations. The Group 
feels that an approach based on punitive measures is unacceptable, for it does not take into account 
the capacity constraints many developing countries face. It is ther efore important to underscore that 
transparency should permeate all aspects of the way the WTO functions, and should not be limited 
to notifications alone.  
 
Electronic Commerce  
 
The African Group recommends that the discussions on implementation of the Wor k Programme on 
Electronic Commerce be given a new impetus, on the basis of the existing mandate. Data are beyond 
a doubt at the heart of the digital economy. It is thus important to hold a balanced discussion on 
the value of data, costs and the implication s of the free movement of data, and on the way in which 
Members can use data to promote digital industry policy and inclusive growth. Future discussions 
should deal with problems such as market concentration and anti -competitive practices that arise in 
the context of the digital economy. We are of the view that the implications of the moratorium on 
electronic transmissions should be the topic of in -depth discussions as the deadline approaches. 
These should take into consideration the commercial practices of  digital enterprises, market 
concentration, taxation and competition in the digital economy.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 124 - 
 
Accession  
 
The African Group considers that the accession process should be facilitated and accelerated to 
effectively take into account the limitations and situa tion of African countries, in particular the LDCs 
among them. The African Group urges all WTO Members to support those African countries that are 
in the process of acceding to the WTO and to refrain from requesting that these candidate African 
countries en large any commitment resulting from their membership of the AfCFTA to other Members, 
or to demand of them commitments that are incommensurate with their levels of development, 
which would be totally unreasonable.  
 
Lastly, the Group reiterates its commitmen t to work towards achieving concrete and measurable 
results on issues under negotiation.  
 
7. Benin (C -4) 
 
I am making this statement on behalf of the Group of the four co -sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative 
in favour of Cotton at the WTO.  
 
The C -4 associates itself with the statements made by the African Group, the LDC Group, the ACP 
Group and the G -33. 
 
The Group thanks Ambassador Ford, Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session, and 
the members of the Quad Plus group for the exchange s of views and the sharing of useful trade 
information and statistical data in the informal Working Group on Cotton.  
 
The updated information resulting from the work of this Working Group enabled the C -4 to submit, 
on 15 July, a proposed modality for the r eduction of domestic support for cotton, issued under the 
symbols TN/AG/GEN/49 and TN/AG/SCC/GEN/20 . This proposal is part of an approach for the 
gradual reduction of domestic support that distorts the international cotton market. This approach 
should cont ribute to a tangible and measurable outcome on the issue of cotton by the time of the 
Twelfth Ministerial Conference.  
 
An updated version of this proposal will be circulated next week, with a view to providing useful 
clarifications on the modalities for co nsideration by Members.  
 
The C -4 would like to inform Members of the launch of the first celebration of the World Cotton Day, 
to be held here at the WTO headquarters on 7 October. The C -4 invites all Members to participate 
in this event. The C -4 is countin g on the support and assistance of all Members in ensuring that this 
event to launch the World Cotton Day will be a resounding success, as we fully expect it will be.  
 
8. Panama (Article XII Members)  
 
We thank the Director -General for convening this meeting.  
 
I am speaking on behalf of the Group of Article XII Members.  
 
We would like to reiterate our Group's position on the topic of WTO reforms. Article XII Members 
stand ready to continue the work aimed at strengthening all sectors and pillars of the multila teral 
trading system while addressing the imbalances that arise from diverse commitments and 
entitlements of the Members.  
 
Our Group has repeatedly pointed out imbalances between the average agriculture bound tariff of 
the original Members and that of the Article XII Members, as well as gaps in domestic support and 
commitments in export competition. We have drawn Members' attention to equally striking 
imbalances in NAMA and services.  
 
To be brief, Article XII Members have made extensive concessions in the course of their accession 
to the organization and we encourage all Members to see the commitments embraced by Article XII 
Members as guidelines for WTO reform and as a benchmark for future agriculture negotiations.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 125 - 
 
The Group encourages the Membership to t ake a proactive position and seek to push new ideas in 
how all Members can undertake commitments towards a stronger and more balanced rules -based 
multilateral trading system.  
 
9. Panama  
 
I would like to take this opportunity to add a few words in my national capacity.  
 
Negotiations on services are a neglected part of the built -in agenda and are a priority for Panama. 
They are no less important or a priority than agriculture, NAMA or any o ther negotiation. They should 
thus be conducted in parallel with them. Otherwise, for many Members, a balance of interests will 
not be struck. We reject any call to give greater priority to other negotiations or to establish 
sequencing.  
 
We wish to thank a nd congratulate Ambassador Zapata of Mexico for his efforts to organise work in 
the Negotiating Group on Rules, and in particular on fisheries. The first half of this year saw the 
production of working documents that will serve as a basis for the next phas e of negotiations. While 
those documents are important and represent a step forward in the negotiations, a lot still remains 
to be done and we should not be complacent.  
 
Panama, together with the other five Latin American countries that are part of the 6La t, will continue 
to work intensively and constructively with other Members with a view to identifying areas of 
consensus that would allow us to achieve an ambitious outcome and fulfil the mandate of our Heads 
of State and Ministers.  
 
Panama has decided to co-sponsor, along with twelve other Members, document WT/GC/W/777 on 
trade concerns aimed at showcasing best practices in the Committees to allay trade concerns and 
enhance the functioning of Committees.  
 
Moreover, in the second half of the year we will co ntinue to work actively on the Joint Initiatives on 
e-commerce, investment facilitation and MSMEs.  
 
Panama is committed to participating actively and contributing to any dialogue or initiative, 
preferably but not exclusively multilateral, that would help o ur organization adapt to current trends 
and new challenges.  
 
We also bid farewell to the colleagues who will be leaving us and wish them the very best in their 
new functions. We wish to single out Ambassador Zapata of Mexico and to thank him for his work, 
efforts and commitment to leading the fisheries subsidies negotiations.  
 
10. European Union  
 
Since our last meeting, we have unfortunately seen few signs, if any, that the crisis in which the 
WTO and the rules -based trading system find themselves might be reso lved soon. Today's meeting 
and the General Council next week are important moments to take stock of the situation. We need 
to be honest – but we also need to stay determined and optimistic.  
  
The outlook for international trade is still bleak, as shown by the recent WTO Monitoring Report on 
G20 trade measures. The report provides evidence that trade tensions are continuing and the trade 
coverage of import restrictive measures is increasing. Regrettably, the G20 summit could not 
alleviate the uncertainty cre ated by these tensions and gave little guidance on the most pressing 
issues.  
 
On the latter, in the past months, the process facilitated by Ambassador Walker to consider proposals 
addressing concerns expressed on the functioning of the dispute settlement s ystem has been very 
active but we still have not seen the necessary engagement from those that expressed such 
concerns. The EU is concerned that there is no sign of lifting the blockage of the Appellate Body 
members' appointment and that the WTO may soon c ease to function in the way we know it today.  
 
We also consider that closing the gaps in the rulebook as regards level playing field issues, such as 
industrial subsidies, is also becoming another pressing issue. WTO negotiations in this area are WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 126 - 
 
indispensable as they will be key to addressing in a dura ble way the current trade tension. Unilateral 
trade restrictions will eventually be to the detriment of all.  
 
While trying to tackle these big challenges upfront, we will continue working on the subjects where 
progress is more readily in sight, in the run -up to MC12.  
  
Regarding fisheries subsidies, the EU appreciates the fact that under the able leadership of 
Ambassador Zapata, the four facilitators' texts have been approved by the WTO Membership last 
week. While in the end these are unfortunately not clea n and consolidated texts as originally 
envisaged, they can serve as a decent platform when resuming our negotiations in September, under 
a new Chair, whom we should appoint before we leave for summer.  
 
The EU is pleased with the progress on the Joint State ment Initiatives on e -commerce, domestic 
regulation in services and investment facilitation.  
 
On e-commerce, we had very constructive discussions and many proposals during the first stage of 
negotiations. This is a good basis for the future negotiations, which we want to conduct in an open 
and transparent way, and for which we hope to make major progress by MC12.  
 
On domestic regulation, we look forward to continuing the work after summer based on the political 
guidance provided by the Paris Joint Stateme nt.  
 
On investment facilitation, we welcome the high level of convergence of views and are ready to shift 
gears after summer.  
 
These joint statement processes are encouraging as they clearly show that it is perfectly feasible to 
negotiate enhanced rules within the WTO.  
 
Last but not least, I would like to stress the need of strengthening the regular work function of the 
WTO. The EU appreciates all constructive feedback and engagement on the proposal on enhancing 
notification compliance in the goods area, which we co -sponsored with six other Members. We will 
continue working with Members on getting the balance right. We also look forward to the discussion 
on our proposal on guidelines for WTO bodies addressing trade concerns (co -sponsored with eleven 
other Members). We will formally introduce the proposal at the General Council. Both proposals are 
very much in the 'doable' sphere, and for some stakeholders even represent only minimum levels of 
ambition.  
 
In thinking of the WTO crisis, the fable of the boili ng frog comes to mind. If a frog is put suddenly 
into boiling water, it will jump out, but if the frog is put into tepid water which is slowly brought to 
boil, it will not realise the danger and be cooked to death. Apparently, however, it has been 
demonstr ated that this story is false. The frog will jump when the water gets too hot. Let us draw 
inspiration from the frog.  
 
11. Nepal  
 
My delegation would like to extend our sincere thanks to the Director -General for his comprehensive 
briefing on the state of play of trade negotiations and to the Chairs of the different Negotiating 
Bodies for the updates of their work.  
 
Nepal aligns itse lf with the statement delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDC Group.  
 
As a strong supporter of a fair, inclusive and rules -based multilateral trading system, Nepal 
underscores the need of strengthening the fundamental principles and objectives of the Marrakesh 
Agreement particularly in raising the standard of living and safe guarding multilateralism as our 
shared responsibility.   
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 127 - 
 
Given this backdrop, my delegation would like to highlight the following:  
 
Aid for Trade  
 
As Aid for Trade is critical for economic diversification, addressing supply -side constraints and 
achieving the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, increasing the volume of Aid for Trade and 
enhancing its effectiveness are both essential.  
 
We would like to extend our sincere thanks to the WTO for successfully organising the Seventh Aid 
for Trade Global Rev iew. The participation of Nepal was significant as we contributed as a speaker 
in five different sessions.  
 
Trade Facilitation  
 
As a Focal Point on Trade Facilitation at the LDC Group, Nepal values the importance of 
implementation of the Trade Facilitati on Agreement as it aims to reducing the time and cost of cross -
border trade. Without external technical and financial support, implementing the Category C 
commitments is almost impossible. We encourage development partners to provide enhanced level 
of supp ort to implement the agreement.  
 
We thank WTO TFAF and Summit Alliance International for accepting our request in organising the 
LDC Retreat on Trade Facilitation on the second week of June and preparing an 'LDC Profile' on TFA 
implementation.  
 
WTO Reform  
 
We view that the substance of the WTO reform should be comprehensive, address the global 
challenges including increased inequality and support to weaker economies to integrate meaningfully 
into the multilateral trading system, among others. The process in  this respect should be 
participatory, bottom up and Member -driven. A clear roadmap on mainstreaming the development 
dimension and S&DT is highly desirable.  
 
LDC Graduation  
 
We request Members that are in the process of graduation and to all other Member s to support and 
understand the crux of the LDC proposal contained in WT/GC/W/742 which only aims to correct the 
missing information and technical error in the existing provision of Annex VII.B of the SCM 
Agreement.  
 
LDC Services Waiver  
 
Viewing the incre ased share of the services sector in the LDC economies, and existence of enormous 
untapped potential in this sector, we foresee the importance of the WTO decision on the LDC Services 
Waiver where 24 Members have notified their preferences. Considering the non-implementation 
situation of the LDC Services Waiver, we encourage Members to find ways in operationalising the 
waiver decision and to provide necessary technical assistance as indicated in the Nairobi Decision.  
 
Technology Transfer  
 
We encourage Developed Members to provide incentives to the enterprises to transfer technologies 
in the LDCs in a meaningful way as envisioned in Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement.  
  
Domestic Support in Agriculture  
 
Acknowledging agriculture as a life blood  of the economy and critical for the development in LDCs, 
we encourage Members to make substantial cuts of trade -distorting domestic support. The LDCs 
should also be exempted from any reduction commitments and S&DT should form an integral part 
of it. 
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 128 - 
 
SSM 
 
As most LDCs suffer from price volatility and import surges, we encourage Members to achieve a 
speedy solution on this issue as agreed by Ministers in Nairobi.  
 
12. Australia (Joint Statement Initiative on E -Commerce)  
 
I will first report on progress in the E lectronic Commerce Joint Statement Initiative.  
 
Following the release of the Joint Statement in Davos, we have welcomed two Members to the 
initiative, bringing the number of signatories to 78, covering over 90 per cent of world trade.  
 
Since the May HODs/ TNC, we have held three rounds of negotiations which were open to all WTO 
Members. We witnessed increased interest and participation in the meetings with up to 
90 delegations represented. We hope this positive trend continues.  
 
This initiative is Member -driven. To date, we have received 18 high quality text proposals that we 
have used as the basis of our negotiations. Members now have a sense of the commonalities across 
the text proposals and understand the rationale behind any differences.  
 
We continue to take steps to ensure transparency. All proposals, comparison tables and reports have 
been circulated to all WTO Members and are available on the online portal.  
 
Our objective, as stated in Davos, is to achieve a high standard outcome that builds on existin g WTO 
agreements and frameworks with the participation of as many WTO Members as possible.  
 
We have encouraged Members to highlight the opportunities and challenges faced, including by 
developing countries, LDCs and MSMEs to ensure these are taken into account in the negotiations.  
 
And our negotiations have been complemented by a series of semin ars, which have provided 
perspectives from stakeholders, and helped close knowledge gaps.  
 
During our last meeting, we took stock of progress and agreed a meeting schedule to the end of this 
year, with the first round set for 24 -27 September. These meetin gs will be open to all WTO Members 
and we encourage all Members to participate.  
 
13. Australia  
 
Report on Paris Informal Ministerial Gathering  
 
I will now report on the Informal Gathering of WTO Ministers held in the margins of the OECD MCM 
on 23 May. This mee ting was organi zed by Australia and co -chaired by Canada's Minister Carr.  
 
Ministers and senior officials from 32 WTO Members, and the WTO Director -General, met in Paris to 
discuss how to advance work on fisheries subsidies and to progress WTO reform and n egotiating 
outcomes for MC12.  
 
Ministers resolved to strengthen the WTO's role in governing global trade in line with contemporary 
realities.  
 
They emphasised the need to engage in solution -finding mode to conclude fisheries subsidies 
negotiations by Dece mber 2019 and many noted the importance of complying with the 30 June 
deadline for subsidy notifications.  
 
Ministers also highlighted the need to work towards outcomes for MC12 in terms of WTO reform 
initiatives and negotiations. Many said agricultural ref orm was an essential element for MC12.  
 
A number welcomed progress on electronic commerce, services domestic regulation and investment 
facilitation, and affirmed the need for such initiatives to be transparent and inclusive.  
 
Ministers also acknowledged the importance of addressing trade and development issues and in 
improving transparency and notifications compliance.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 129 - 
 
Finally, Members emphasised the need to resolve the Appellate Body impasse without delay.   
 
Australian Statement  
 
Australia reiterates its commitment to strengthening the multilateral trading system.  
 
We welcome Members' engagement in discussions on improving the dispute settlement system and 
acknowledge the efforts of Facilitator Ambassador Walker. We urge Members t o continue to work 
toward pragmatic solutions, as maintaining a functioning dispute settlement system is in the interest 
of us all.  
 
Achieving concrete outcomes that improve the functioning of the WTO by MC12 will be important.  
There are many ideas on the  table but we must work hard to ensure that we deliver timely and 
meaningful improvements. We fully support improved compliance with monitoring and transparency 
obligations and have co -sponsored a proposal in this area. As well as co -sponsoring a proposal on 
guidelines for trade concerns.  
 
In addition, we emphasise the need to ensure WTO rules reflect modern trade realities to ensure the 
ongoing credibility and relevance of the organization.  
 
After the summer break, we will have just three months to the agr eed deadline for delivering on 
fisheries subsidies. We will need to move urgently into intensive text -based negotiations.   
 
We welcome the working papers prepared by the facilitators under the leadership of Ambassador 
Zapata, which are a good basis for th is work.   
 
Australia believes a subsidies cap as a complement to disciplines is a creative approach that would 
ensure meaningful reductions in the fisheries subsidies of major Members while providing policy 
space to those who need it.   
 
But beyond fisher ies subsidies, it is time now to focus our efforts on preparing the road to MC12.  
 
Australia is interested in updating subsidy rules to reflect contemporary challenges, including 
strengthening rules on industrial subsidies and state -owned enterprises.  
 
Agricultural reform is a pivotal issue. As recently declared by the Cairns Group, we must continue 
efforts to reduce the massive build -up of trade -distorting domestic support by a handful of larger 
WTO Members. Australia is also willing to advance other issu es of interest to Members and we must 
deliver concrete steps on agriculture at MC12.  
 
We are also committed to accelerating work on services domestic regulation. The Joint Ministerial 
Statement agreed by 59 Members in Paris on 23 May provides a pathway to wards real outcomes by 
MC12 that would benefit businesses, especially MSMEs, across all of our economies. We encourage 
all Members to participate.  
 
Enthusiasm, momentum and participation is growing in the Electronic Commerce Joint Statement 
negotiations. This sends a strong message about the importance of the WTO in addressing modern 
trade realities. We will work hard to achieve substantial progress in these negotiations by MC12 as 
agreed by Leaders in the Osaka Declaration.  
 
We also support MC12 outcomes in investment facilitation, MSMEs and women's economic 
empowerment.  
 
Finally, Australia welcomes continued discussions on development. We emphasise the importance of 
finding targeted, practical solutions on special and differential treatment in our negotia tions to 
support all Members' participation in global trade as a tool for economic development.  
 
14. India  
 
We thank the Director -General for convening this meeting and for his report and assessment as the 
Chair of the TNC. We also thank the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports.   
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 130 - 
 
State of Play  
 
As we approach the summer break, it is time to look back on the state of the WTO from two important 
perspectives. First, what is the state of the rules -based system that has served us well in the past? 
Second, how are the important negotiations moving forward?        
 
On both these counts, the situation doe s not appear to be encouraging. The WTO is facing formidable 
challenges due to a spate of unilateral measures that are WTO inconsistent, and an unprecedented 
attack on its cherished principles of non -discrimination, decision -making by consensus and special  
and differential treatment for developing countries. Further, the ongoing impasse in filling vacancies 
of the Appellate Body remains, with no response from the objecting Member, in spite of a dozen 
proposals to address concerns related to its functioning.  With only three months to go after the 
summer break, the Membership needs to act before the Appellate Body moves from the ICU to the 
mortuary . 
 
In the negotiating arena as well, while there is life in the fisheries subsidies negotiations, the same 
cannot be said for any other area, including agriculture, which is of core interest to most Members 
including developing countries.  
 
Against this background, let me briefly share some thoughts on important issues and areas of work.   
 
Fisheries Subsidies Negotiat ions  
 
India is committed to engage constructively. However, while negotiating the subsidy disciplines, we 
must be mindful of the mandates of SDG 14.6 and the MC11 decision on fisheries, both of which 
clearly state that there should be appropriate and effe ctive special & differential treatment for 
developing countries. These mandates need to be honoured in letter and in spirit. S&DT should not 
be replaced or derailed by new proposals citing inbuilt flexibilities for all.  
 
In this regard, any abridgement of  the mandate to provide S&DT to developing countries including 
LDCs can jeopardi se an outcome in this important area of negotiations. Further, we need to clearly 
understand that any suggestion which rewards Members who are major subsidizers and are largely  
responsible for the current state of affairs by protecting their harmful subsidies and restricts policy 
space for others to improve the state of their subsistence fishers  will neither help the negotiations 
nor protect the health of our oceans.  
 
Agricultu re remains the priority area of work for a large part of the Membership. It is therefore 
important that we engage in right earnest to build upon and advance the work of the last several 
years and to implement existing decisions and mandates. Finding a perm anent solution for public 
stockholding for food security should be a priority as it is critical to address fundamental issues of 
poverty, hunger and malnutrition and for achieving SDGs 1 and 2. We also need to work meaningfully 
to address the historic asym metries in the Agreement on Agriculture.  
 
Delhi Ministerial  
 
I would like to inform that a group of developing countries met in Delhi on 13 -14 May.  17 Members 
issued a statement outlining their desire to work collectively to strengthen the WTO to promote 
development and inclusivity. They urged that the process of WTO reform must keep development at 
its core, promote inclusive growth and fully take into account the interests and concerns of 
developing Members. They agreed to consult on various issues of com mon interest, including 
comprehensive and effective disciplines on fisheries subsidies with effective S&D T provisions.   
 
WTO Reforms  
 
WTO reforms are now at the centre  stage of our deliberations. However, the agenda for reforms is 
highly unbalanced, which is making it increasingly difficult for developing countries to engage 
constructively. It is with the objective of giving a voice to our priorities, which in turn, will  offer a 
choice to Members, that India along with some other developing Members has made two submissions  
– one on an inclusive approach to transparency and notifications and t he other  on WTO reforms for 
strengthening WTO for development and inclusivity.   
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 131 - 
 
Our paper on WTO reforms has elements related to preserving the core principles of the WTO, 
according priority to resolving the impasse in the Appellate Body, safeguarding the interes t of 
developing countries, adopting a cooperative approach to transparency and notifications and 
preserving the centrality of development at the WTO. But more on that at the General Council next 
week.  
 
Conclusion  
 
To conclude, we are at a critical junctur e, as challenges have amplified and the multilateral rules -
based trading system is facing existential threats. Keeping in view the aspirations of the large 
majority of Members, our priority should be to balance our agenda and make it inclusive, transparent  
and development -oriented.  
 
Foremost, we must work to preserve the system by ending the impasse on the Appellate Body 
appointments with a sense of utmost urgency and address the historic asymmetries in the WTO 
agreements. It would also be best that we avo id divisive debates, such as the one on differentiation, 
which would only further undermine the credibility of the system and deepen the divide among 
Members.  
 
Let me reassure the Director -General that  we will use the summer break to pack for a long journ ey, 
each step of which, hopefully, will strengthen the WTO.  
 
15. Thailand (ASEAN)  
 
Thailand delivers this statement on behalf of ASEAN.  
 
ASEAN recogni zes the importance of WTO reform, which should not only aim to enhance the 
functioning of our organization and  thus allow it to better address the current challenges in global 
trade in an inclusive manner, but also in ensuring that the system plays its full part in promoting 
growth and development. We are also encouraged to see the increasing level of engagement f rom 
Members on the issue of WTO reform.  
 
In this regard, ASEAN would like to express our shared views on some issues on WTO reform.  
 
With less than five months remaining before the Appellate Body could be rendered inoperative, the 
impasse of the Appellate Body selection process remains the most critical issue for Members to 
address. While we are concerned about a lack of substantive progress towards a mutually agreed 
outcome, we continue to fully support the Informal Process led by Ambassador David Walker. We 
therefore encourage engagement by all Members and reiterate the need to launch the Appellate 
Body Selection process without delay.  
 
The issue of Special and Differential Treatment in relation to the WTO's rulemaking efforts has also 
been extensively dis cussed in the WTO. In this regard, we reiterate that the development dimension 
shall remain a core principle of the WTO. We also urge Members to approach the discussion in a 
pragmatic and constructive manner.  
 
With regard to transparency, ASEAN is supporti ve of the objective to enhance transparency and 
notification records in the WTO. We are encouraged by the proposals submitted and the urgency 
shown by both developed and developing Members to tackle this important issue. While there are 
divergent views amo ng Members, we also note commonalities from proposals and discussions to 
date. We therefore urge Members to approach the discussions in a spirit of cooperation and 
compromise, with a view to achieving our collective objective in this area in a manner that reinforces 
trust and enhances positive engagement among Members.  
 
On the enhancement of the WTO's Regular Bodies, ASEAN welcomes Members' desire to strengthen 
the operation of WTO Bodies, including its deliberative function, and note relevant proposals in this 
regard, which will be discussed at the upcoming General Council Meeting. We reiterate our 
willingness to participate in discussions that leads to improved efficiencies of WTO regular work.  
 
Given the challenges and uncertainties being fac ed by the WTO, ASEAN strongly believes that 
Members have a shared responsibility to strengthen the WTO and help the organization remain 
effective and relevant. Moreover, ASEAN emphasises that the reform efforts should continue to focus WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 132 - 
 
on ensuring that dev eloping countries, and especially the least -developed among them, secure a 
share in the growth of world trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development.  
 
In this regard, ASEAN reiterates its commitment to establish an inclusive rules -based multilateral 
trading system and will therefore actively engage on the issue of WTO reform.  
 
16. Thailand  
 
We thank you for your report, as well as the reports by the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups.  
 
Thailand believes that with deadlines looming, it is import ant that we intensify our negotiation efforts 
to deliver meaningful outcomes to our stakeholders. This would also reemphasise the WTO's 
continued relevance and ability to make an impact in global trade.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, we would like to thank Amba ssador Roberto Zapata for his efforts in guiding 
the negotiations and wish him the best in his future endeavours.  
 
In this regard, Thailand welcomes the post -summer break work programme for fisheries subsidies 
negotiations as well as the working papers en dorsed by the Negotiating Group. We look forward to 
intensive negotiations this fall with a view to delivering meaningful outcomes on fisheries subsidies 
by the end of this year.  
 
Agriculture is also an issue of utmost importance. Meaningful outcomes in t his crucial issue at MC12 
in Nur -Sultan would send a much needed signal to the global community. Thailand fully supports 
the CoA SS Chair's intention to move us into negotiation mode expeditiously.  
 
On WTO reform, Thailand reiterates its commitment to eng age in the discussions to strengthen the 
WTO to enable our organization to respond to present -day trade challenges in an inclusive manner. 
We are encouraged by a rising number of submissions and engagement from a diverse range of 
Members.  
 
Many discussions  have taken place across various WTO bodies, including on transparency, 
strengthening the negotiating function and enhancing the functioning of the regular bodies. We have 
seen positive elements in a number of proposals and view that with some compromise b etween 
Members an outcome may be achievable.  
 
The critical issue of the Appellate Body impasse remains with time running out. We therefore 
reiterate the need for Members to expeditiously achieve a consensus to fill the vacancies of the 
Appellate Body.  
 
Lastly, Thailand welcomes the post -summer break work programme for the Joint Statement 
Initiative on Electronic Commerce given that there remain numerous issues that require substantial 
deliberation including market access as well as provisions to address th e challenges faced by 
Developing Members and LDCs. In this regard, we will continue to constructively engage in the 
process.  
 
17. China  
 
I would like to begin by thanking the Director -General and the Chairs of Negotiating Groups for their 
briefings on recent developments.  
 
With less than eleven months left before MC12, and with deeper exchange of different positions and 
views, we should take a pragmatic and realistic approach on managing the level of ambition, 
handling the negotiation and discussion pro cesses in a delicate manner, as well as balancing issues 
of interest in different areas.  
 
On Appellate Body, we need to continue the informal process led by Ambassador David Walker, with 
the full engagement of relevant Members, especially the United States , and exhaust all possibilities 
and options, trying our best to avoid the real crisis by the end of the year.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, we feel shocked that we will lose our rules negotiation Chair Ambassador 
Roberto Zapata at this critical juncture. We app reciate his important contribution, and we need to WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 133 - 
 
find a capable person to fill the big hole left behind him. Further, China tables its proposal and 
supports the capping approach. Nevertheless, we are open and flexible to all approaches that may 
be of hel p to find the way out.  
 
On transparency and notification, it is out of question that Members should comply with their 
obligations. In recent years, China has made considerable efforts in agriculture and subsidies 
notifications, including submitting our fis heries subsidies notification by the end of this June. In this 
regard, it is essential to provide technical assistance and capacity building to developing Members, 
as they have limited capacity in notifying their trade policies. In our view, punitive measu res, 
particularly financial ones, are not helpful, which will lead to negative rather than positive effects.  
 
On investment facilitation, we are glad to see that, building on the progress made so far, the 
structured discussions will enter into a results -oriented new phase after the summer break. We very 
much appreciate the important contribution made by Ambassador Juan Carlos González , and wish 
him all the best. And we support Ambassador Eduardo Gálvez Carvallo to replace the coordinator of 
the informal dis cussion. Along with all participating Members, especially the FIFD group, China will 
continue to engage actively and constructively, with a view to achieving concrete outcomes at MC12.  
 
On e-commerce and MSMEs, they are of great importance to business comm unities. China supports 
steady discussions and negotiations with the multilateral framework being the ultimate objective 
and direction. We look forward to it so that Members could have something by MC12.  
 
On WTO reform, for developing Members, due to capac ity constraints, it took time for us to 
understand and respond to the current reform initiative. Although we are a bit late, we have made 
tangible progress and are catching up on board: India, China and South Africa convened meetings 
in May, June and July,  respectively; China, and other developing Members individually tabled 
suggestions and proposals on WTO reform; some developing Members co -authored an overall reform 
paper.  
 
The clear signal from all of these activities and papers is quite clear: developin g Members call for a 
balanced reform agenda, with development at the centre. China will continue to work with other 
Members to safeguard the core values and basic principles of the multilateral trading system and 
make sure that it continues to promote deve lopment.  
 
18. Kazakhstan  
 
Today we are facing a unique situation in the history of this organization. The impasse of Appellate 
Body members' appointment poses a serious threat to the multilateral trading system.  
 
In this regard, we strongly support the reform s of the organization in order to make it more 
responsive and relevant to current day global trade challenges and realities.  
 
In respect of the dispute settlement mechanism, we believe it is important to preserve its impartiality 
and avoid political tensi on as well as a trade -off between Appellate Body appointment and other 
negotiating efforts made elsewhere.  
 
We commend the informal work being undertaken by a number of WTO Members who are trying to 
resolve the current situation. We urge everyone to redouble efforts and engage in a constructive 
manner in order to achieve a tangible outcome.  
 
Regarding the negotiating pillar, in fisheries subsidies, we need greater political engagement and 
willingness to compromise. We can see that many Members are inv esting a lot in these negotiations 
and it has a potential to shape up the architecture of future multilateral agreements with respect to 
development and special and differential provisions.  
 
On agriculture negotiations, I would like to thank the Chairs of  the Working Groups for their hard 
work and contribution to the overall process. Members became aware of their counterparts' 
sensitivities and I believe this should allow us to identify areas of convergence and come up with 
some deliverable at MC12.  
 
Kazakhstan is also looking for the reforms of the WTO in other areas that will ensure a level playing 
field between the commitments of the various members of the organization.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 134 - 
 
Kazakhstan supports plurilateral initiatives and believes that they can positively c ontribute to the 
multilateral track.  
 
In the Paris meeting, we co -sponsored the Joint Statement on Services Domestic Regulation, which 
commits us to conclude negotiations on domestic regulation in services this year and reach a 
meaningful outcome for MC12  on the issue.  
 
Regarding the investment facilitation initiative, we encourage to support the initiative by the entire 
Membership and reach meaningful outcome at MC12.  
 
Thus, we welcome outcome -oriented discussions during the second half of 2019 and we ex press our 
support for the development of the "Working document on investment facilitation" based on the 
Compendium.  
 
We are also part of the e -commerce initiative which is gathering pace. We thank the proponents for 
their proposals and at the same time enc ourage Members to be prudent when choosing the 
components of future substantive negotiations. Too ambitious aspirations may slow down the 
process.  
  
On transparency requirements, we firmly believe that notifications are critical for the proper 
functioning  of the multilateral trading system.  
 
We do realise that some Members may face challenges related to lack of knowledge or expertise 
constraints. Therefore, delays in submissions and in some instances absence of any are 
understandable. In solving this issue , in our view, the best approach is through positive enforcement 
in the form of capacity building and technical assistance – not punitive measures.  
  
In closing, Kazakhstan as the host of the Twelfth WTO Ministerial Conference stands ready to 
constructive ly engage in all the negotiating agenda items and look forward to a substantive outcome 
in June next year in Nur -Sultan.  
 
19. Mexico  
 
I would like to thank the Director -General for his status report and the Chairs of the Negotiating 
Groups and Joint Initiative s for theirs.  
 
Next Tuesday, I will make my final statement in the General Council in my capacity as Permanent 
Representative of Mexico. Today I will present an overview of some of my experiences during my 
time in Geneva.  
 
First, on the threat and imposition of restrictive measures and countermeasures that attack the 
multilateral trading system at its very core, I am not calling into question the legitimate right of 
Members to defend their interests, but this should be done in the context of the rul es agreed by all 
of us, and the dispute settlement mechanism is the only one that can determine whether or not a 
measure is compatible with those rules.  
 
We have heard several alarm bells announce fierce trade tensions and we note with concern that 
those t ensions only seem to persist. Regrettably, we are already witnessing their consequences, as 
indicated in the most recent TPRB report, which we will be discussing next Monday, "During this 
period (between October 2018 and May 2019) trade tensions continued to dominate the headlines 
and added to the uncertainty surrounding international trade and the world economy", which has 
pushed down global trade growth forecasts.  
 
Second, on the crisis with the Appellate Body, from the very first days of my assignment, I  witnessed 
the start of a threat to this Body, which back then we used to call "the crown jewel". In early 2017, 
one delegation conditioned the launch of what was then the only vacancy, followed by another that 
arose almost nine months later. A few weeks l ater another Member indicated that it would not allow 
it and had not allowed the launch of any process until its concerns over the functioning of the 
Appellate Body were allayed. To avoid its paralysis, Members have worked along at least two tracks.  
 
• The first track, which took place during each session of the Dispute Settlement Body, 
has been consistently presenting a proposal to start the selection process to fill the WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 135 - 
 
vacancies. Next Monday, for the 25th time, and now with 114 co -sponsors, we will 
request  the launch of the selection process to fill the vacancies for six of the seven 
members of the Appellate Body.  
 
• The other track consists of the process led by Ambassador Walker, which has 
demonstrated the readiness and interest of the rest of the Membershi p to identify 
possible areas of convergence and respond to the concerns of one Member, having not 
received to date any reaction by that Member to the 13 proposals submitted.  
 
We are in a crisis and we need to react immediately. Imposition of the law of the  jungle benefits no 
one. An efficient, albeit imperfect, dispute settlement system, is better for everyone and will above 
all, provide the certainty to trade actors that negotiated rules will apply.  
 
Third, the launch of joint initiatives. The Buenos Aires  Ministerial Conference allowed us to show the 
world that we can move forward if there is interest in a topic and willingness to dialogue. E -
commerce, investment facilitation, domestic regulation of services and MSMEs are promising in their 
potential to on ce again propel the WTO into the forefront of issues that have either not been 
addressed or only partially so by covered agreements. But more importantly, they will illustrate that 
our organization is capable of meeting current trade needs.  
 
Fourth, reform  of the WTO. It has been inspiring to see how the Members increasingly agree on the 
need to modernise the way our organization works. While the devil is indeed in the detail and each 
delegation has its own vision of how to achieve it, this should be seen a s an opportunity and a 
willingness to work on this endeavour constantly. Nevertheless, it is also true that if we do not budge 
from our entrenched positions, this exercise will be short -lived.  
 
Lastly, fisheries subsidies, a topic that has taken up 95% of my time, along with that of my 
colleagues in the mission. I have had the honour to preside over the sessions and bear witness to 
the interest of the Membership in achieving agreement by December. We should not waste a single 
moment. The possibilities are h uge and the benefits equally so for future generations and even more 
so for this organization.  
 
In conclusion, I am convinced that, insofar as the organization must evolve, so must the position of 
all its Members. We need to assess if our positions – both the traditional ones and the most recent 
ones – meet the needs of our trade actors and our societies. We have a golden opportunity to place 
the WTO once again at the centre of global governance. Let us not waste it reflecting on realities of 
15 years ago o r more.  
 
20. Sri Lanka  
 
Let me at the outset thank the Director -General and the Chairs of the respective Negotiating Groups 
for having provided overviews of the state of play on the ongoing activities of the WTO, including 
discussions that are in progress on many manded negotiations.  
 
The rules -based multilateral trading system, with the WTO at its centre, stands at a crossroads at a 
time when transparency, predictability and stability in world trade are required to counter the 
implications of risi ng protectionism, plurilateralism and unilateralism by some countries and the 
diluting of the developmental and social dimensions within the WTO agenda, challenging the very 
basic principle of inclusiveness and accordance of equal trade opportunities.  
  
The recurrent deadlocks and failures that prevent concluding the Doha Round, which was launched 
with the rhetoric of a Development Round, demonstrate the following:  
 
(i) The agenda has been heavily loaded with issues that go beyond the mandated agenda 
items, acc ording secondary treatment to and setting aside the issues that are most 
important to Developing Countries and LDCs, such as SSM and PSH in agriculture and 
other implementation related issues under the ambit of the CTD SS;  
 
(ii) The reforming the WTO is conside red the panacea for all setbacks we are experiencing 
today;  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 136 - 
 
(iii) Questioning and challenging the very essence of developmental dimensions in various 
negotiation platforms;  
 
(iv) Competing divisions on the role of trade and trade policy in development;  
 
(v) Promotion of  negotiations for promoting plurilateralism at the cost of multilateralism;  
 
(vi) The benefits of free trade and the existing WTO rules have not brought equal 
opportunities to all WTO Members; and,  
 
(vii) The deadlock on resolving the impasse on appointment members t o the Appellate Body.  
 
The above setbacks had and will continue to have drastic implications affecting the future of the 
organization.  
 
As reported by the Chairs, the status of the negotiations on mandated issues amply demonstrate 
the divergence has overshadowed the convergence putting many negotiating issues still at stake.  
 
On four working documents presented by the facilitators of the Negotiating Group on Rules 
concerning fisheries subsidies, while bearing in mind the negotiating mandates, we notice they serve 
a good basis for us to move forward while accommodating each ones' concerns to our fullest ability, 
as we are to take the impose d responsibility on our shoulders and come up with disciplines that will 
address the concerns of sustainability of fisheries resources, while bearing in mind that 
responsibilities are taken upon on proportionate terms.  
 
We consider these documents do not b ear any legal basis and prejudice our positions and we are 
still able to bring bridging proposals during the course of our discussions bearing in mind the textual 
proposals in the TN/RL/W/274/Rev.6  and RD/TN/RL/72  texts.   
 
During the ongoing negotiations across the various areas in agriculture, services and fisheries 
subsides, it is also of paramount importance to preserve the very unitary nature of the negotiating 
mandate on the policy space for developing countries and LDCs by way of designi ng appropriate and 
meaningful special and differential treatment provisions. If we are to negotiate and proceed in the 
remaining period by disregarding this mandate then we are asking for a recipe for a failure of the 
embarked negotiations.  
 
We will contin ue to have our participation in the forthcoming discussions as we believe in discharging 
our responsibilities in framing the most effective and fair disciplines to arrest the distortions in the 
areas of agriculture and fisheries subsidies.  
 
21. Colombia ( Struc tured Discussions on Investment Facilitation for Development ) 
 
In keeping with the open, transparent and inclusive nature of the Joint Initiative on Investment  
Facilitation for Development, I am pleased to update Members on the latest progress made by the 
initiative since my last report to the HODs in early May. Since then, the Structured Discussions held 
three well attended, substantive and interactive meetings: on 16 May, 25 June and, just yesterday, 
an open -ended meeting, with many Heads of Delegation at tending, was held to take stock of the 
work achieved in the first part of this year and devise the next steps in the months ahead. An 
informal note by the Coordinator on "Stock taking and Next Steps" (INF/IFD/RD/38) had been 
circulated to all Members ahead of yesterday's meeting.  
 
As has been the case since the beginning of the Structured Discussions, work has continued to be 
Member -driven and outcome -oriented – in pursuit of the objective laid down in the 2017 Joint 
Ministerial Statement, namely to "develop  a multilateral framework on investment facilitation". Full 
transparency has been ensured by allowing all WTO Members to have timely access to all documents 
for each meeting. All documents have been posted on the dedicated Investment Facilitation for 
Devel opment webpage on the Members' section of the WTO website. In addition, since the beginning 
of April 2019, all documents are circulated to all Members under the INF/IFD / document series.  
 
In line with the Joint Ministerial Statement, following the identifi cation of the possible elements of a 
multilateral framework on investment facilitation for development carried out in 2018, our work in 
the first part of this year has focused on developing these elements. To this end, our discussions WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 137 - 
 
were based on concret e text -based examples and suggestions submitted by Members on a 'no 
prejudice' basis, using the "Checklist of Issues raised by Members" as a reference point. The text -
based examples drew inter alia on Members' bilateral and regional international agreement s, 
domestic legislation as well as WTO text. Between March and June 2019, a total of 40 written 
submissions with concrete text examples and suggestions were received from 46 WTO Members – 
illustrating how the possible elements of a multilateral framework m ight be further developed.1 
 
As agreed by participating Members at the Structured Discussions meeting in March 2019, I prepared 
under my responsibility a "Compendium of Text -based Examples", updated after each meeting.2 The 
Compendium organi ses the submitt ed text examples and suggestions thematically, on an element -
by-element basis – in a coherent and user -friendly manner. The Compendium has proved very 
valuable in helping Members identify the many areas of common ground, those areas of common 
interest wher e approaches might differ, and those areas where further reflection is need ed. There is 
a widespread view, among participating Members, that the Compendium provides a solid basis to 
build upon in the months ahead.  
 
At yesterday's 'stocktaking and next step s' meeting, participating Members requested me to prepare, 
under my responsibility, a working document building on the "Compendium of Text -based 
Examples". The working document will organi se the elements within a coherent framework. It will 
be a tool to he lp Members further develop the elements of the multilateral framework – focusing on 
the areas of convergence as well as those of common interest that emerged from the example -based 
discussions in the first part of the year. It was felt that such a working document will be useful for 
Members to inform their capital -based officials, gather views of stakeholders and better visuali se the 
initial contours of a possible framework. As its name indicates, the working document is not a 
negotiating document. It will be a 'living document' that will be updated and complemented in light 
of Members' inputs and suggestions. In view of the need to intensify work in the months ahead, 
participating Members also requested me to circulate a schedule of meetings for the remaind er of 
the year.  
 
Also, as I will end my mission in Geneva this Summer, I am pleased to inform you that, at yesterday's 
meeting, Ambassador Eduardo Gálvez of Chile was appointed as the new Coordinator upon my 
departure.  
 
Let me conclude by stressing the open, inclusive and transparent nature of the initiative. I wish to 
invite – and encourage – all Members to participate in the forthcoming meetings. Participation is 
entirely without prejudice to Members' position on the Joint Initiative.  
 
22. Colombia  
 
Allow me to take the floor in my national capacity with regard to some of the negotiations currently 
under way.  
 
In the area of fisheries subsidies, Colombia reiterates its full commitment to achieving an outcome 
by December of this year that refle cts all the elements of the Buenos Aires Ministerial Decision. We 
support the facilitators' documents as a working platform for the second half of the year, along with 
the other negotiating texts and proposals that form part of the discussions in the Negot iating Group 
on Rules.  
 
In the second half of the year, we must step up our efforts on the negotiation of the text and look 
for areas of convergence. To this end, over and above the work schedule proposed by the Chair, we 
reiterate our willingness to work on an intersessional basis in various formats and configurations, 
with due respect for the principles of transparency and inclusiveness.  
 
In agriculture, we thank the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session and the 
coordinators of the work ing groups for the immense amount of work that they have accomplished 
over these past months. There are many elements that will be taken into account in moving us 
forward and facilitating our discussions on our path to Kazakhstan. We agree with the Chair t hat we 
must speed up our work and discuss the options before us. We need to focus, in the short time that 
                                                
1 The 46 Members  were: Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; Costa Rica; the European Union (EU=29) ; 
Guatemala; Hong Kong, China; the Republic of Korea; Mauritius ; the Pacific Alliance (Chile, Colombia, Mexico 
and Peru); Panama; the Russian Federation; Switzerland; and Uruguay . 
2 Latest version is contained in room document INF/IFD/RD/5/Rev.3.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 138 - 
 
remains to us, on the elements where we can make progress towards tangible outcomes for the 
Twelfth Ministerial Conference and in preparation for cont inued work towards the Thirteenth 
Ministerial Conference.  
 
Lastly, Colombia will continue to play a constructive role in all the initiatives arising from the Buenos 
Aires Joint Statements. We are optimistic that these initiatives are moving towards a more detailed 
and results -oriented discussion phase, which will undoubtedly result in tangible deliverables for the 
Conference in Kazakhstan.  
 
23. Switzerland  
 
The challenges facing the WTO are becoming increasingly pressing as time goes by.  
 
Switzerland has an eminent interest in seeing the turbulence affecting the multilateral trading 
system abated through negotiation and reform of the WTO. Such reform would notably enable the 
organization to tackle challenges such as new technologies, help achieve the Sustaina ble 
Development Goals and appease trade tensions.  
 
Already significant deadlines loom ahead this autumn.  
 
This is notably the case for the fisheries subsidies negotiations. Despite the intense work that has 
been done recently, several deep gaps remain. Tal ks can only succeed if we change our way of doing 
business. We will have to display flexibility, pragmatism and work in good faith to achieve SDG 
Target 14.6.  
 
Another major challenge is how to preserve and strengthen the dispute settlement system. The 
consultations held to address the concerns over the Appellate Body made it possible to identify an 
evidence based approach. Now we must move to the next phase, which consists of bridging the 
remaining gaps and identifying and implementing the solutions that h ave the support of the majority. 
The ultimate goal is to ensure the proper functioning of the dispute settlement system and the 
Appellate Body at its full capacity.  
 
Work underway in the context of the Joint Initiatives launched in Buenos Aires are advanci ng in a 
satisfactory manner. The subjects dealt with address the needs of today's economy, and completion 
of these processes will make it possible to modernise the trading system. We hope that tangible 
progress can be achieved in the areas covered by the n ext Ministerial Conference.  
 
We also welcome the progress made on the domestic regulation of services. Our objective is to see 
these negotiations through to a successful conclusion at the Conference in Nur -Sultan.  
 
Exploratory discussions on services market access were relaunched in the area of tourism. 
Environmental services will be addressed next. We wish to thank the authors of these timely 
initiatives.  
 
Regarding agriculture, Switzerland continues to participate in a constructive manner in  the work of 
the Negotiating Group.  
 
Another area of action is strengthening the WTO's monitoring role. We welcome initiatives aimed at 
enhancing transparency and the modus operandi of WTO Committees. Switzerland is currently 
leading consultations on the p ossibility of establishing a mediation mechanism in order to offer an 
additional tool for identifying amicable solutions to specific trade issues.  
 
Lastly, we should have a dispassionate debate about the development dimension of the WTO's work, 
including s pecial and differential treatment, which should be rethought in depth if we are to be in a 
position to conclude new agreements. Indeed, we cannot expect a competitive and economically 
advanced economy to benefit from the same flexibilities as a country tha t has just graduated from 
being an LDC. There are several means and approaches for determining the level of commitment of 
WTO Members based on their capacity to contribute to the multilateral trading system. It is not this 
classification that matters, but rather the binding commitments that each Member can make in 
different areas that are – or will be – the subject of the negotiations.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 139 - 
 
24. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  
 
I would like to the Director -General for his comprehensive report including his assessment and 
suggestions to Members on the way forward. Let me also extend my thanks to the Chairs of 
Negotiating Groups for their reports.  
 
I would like to start with an observation from the most recent trade release by the WTO which 
showed that global trade growth has been falling down and losing momentum. These trends and 
development is not good for all Members. It undermines our efforts to have better economic growth 
and employment. This requires more work in this House.  
 
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia believes that achi eving meaningful and balanced outcomes on our 
negotiations would be crucial for the credibility of the WTO and the multilateral trading system.  
  
Having said that, let me move to present our views on some certain issues of our work.  
 
In the area of WTO re form, we believe that enhancing confidence in the multilateral trading system 
depends fundamentally on reforming the WTO and working under its umbrella. In our view, an active 
engagement, a strong political will and a full understanding of the scope and el ements of proposed 
reform are required to advance WTO reform. In addition, Members should be more responsive to 
economic development needs and priorities for developing and least -developed countries. We also 
believe that reforming the WTO dispute settlemen t functions should aim at enhancing its 
effectiveness and strength while safeguarding the basic structure of the Dispute Settlement 
Mechanism.  
 
In the area of Electronic Commerce, I am pleased to inform the Membership that the Kingdom of 
Saudi Arabia has recently joined the initiative of the Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce. I 
would also like to inform you that Saudi Arabia's government passed the e -commerce law on 9 July. 
The new law aims to enhance the reliability of business transactions, stimulat e and develop e -
commerce activities and protect the rights of consumers and safeguard them from fraud, deception 
and misleading conduct.  
 
Regarding other issues, we believe that transparency is one of the most fundamental principles of 
the multilateral tra ding system. Improving transparency will enhance the business environment – 
making it more predictable.  
 
We also believe that empowering women and youth remain two key pillars to achieving sustainable 
economic growth including trade. Moreover, small and medium sized enterprises and entrepreneurs 
are key drivers to economic growth and job creation.  
  
On fisheries subsidies negotiations, firstly I would like to thank and highly appreciate the efforts 
made by my friend, Ambassador Roberto Zapata, and wish hi m all the best in his future endeavours. 
We note that despite Members' hard efforts to find common ground, considerable differences among 
their positions persist. To narrow this gap and generate consensus in this area, Members have to 
engage in a cooperati ve manner through recognising each other's needs and priorities, 
understanding technical and legal issues related to fisheries subsidies and allowing sufficient policy 
flexibility for developing and LDCs to develop their domestic fisheries sectors.  
 
The K ingdom of Saudi Arabia will have the honour to carry out the presidency of the G20 in 2020. 
It is the same year of the Twelfth Ministerial Conference of the organization in Nur -Sultan. From this 
responsibility, we recogni ze the importance of certainty and better outlook of the global economy 
and international trade. It is equally important to enhance confidence in the multilateral trading 
system which depends on successful efforts on reforming the WTO.   
 
In conclusion, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia stands re ady to work constructively with Members to 
guide the multilateral trading system towards a more open, inclusive and balanced direction.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 140 - 
 
25. Japan  
 
Japan thanks the Director -General for his comprehensive and prospective report.  
 
As the Director -General mentio ned in his report, at the G20 Summit held in Osaka last month, G20 
Leaders discussed various issues facing international trade and the WTO reform. G20 Leaders 
committed to strive to realise a free, fair and non -discriminatory, transparent, predictable and stable 
trade and investment environment. They also voiced their support for the WTO reform to improve 
its functions including its dispute settlement system.  
 
We are already halfway through 2019. There is no time to spare. Japan reiterates the importance of  
a pragmatic approach and is encouraged to see some progress in several areas.  
 
First, on the Joint Statement Initiatives, Japan commends the further progress made in the 
respective areas. On e -commerce in particular, the e -commerce meeting was convened ea rlier this 
week and the steady progress was achieved. Building on the momentum and the political impetus 
gained in Osaka, where the "Osaka Track" was launched in order to facilitate international policy 
discussions on the digital economy, Japan expects to see further intensive discussions in the fall in 
order to achieve substantive progress at MC12.  
 
On the proposal on enhancing transparency and notification, of which Japan is one of the co -
sponsors, we all share a common understanding of the significance o f this issue. We, as proponents, 
have listened to Members ' ideas and suggestions and made necessary changes to the proposal so 
that many Members can support it. Japan considers securing transparency to be the very first step 
towards WTO reform. We therefor e need to redouble our efforts towards a successful conclusion.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, thanks to the Chair 's leadership as well as the facilitators ' tremendous efforts, 
we now have working papers for further expediting negotiations in the fall. There are  however many 
areas that we need to work on. With a pragmatic approach in mind, Japan expects all Members to 
engage constructively in view of the deadline. Japan tabled its own proposal during the last round 
of cluster meetings hoping to contribute to expe dite discussions. We fully intend to play our part in 
ensuring the conclusion of this negotiation.  
 
On dispute settlement and the Appellate Body, yesterday at the informal General Council, 
Ambassador Walker, as the Facilitator of the Informal Process, outl ined his third report to the General 
Council. He identified a considerable number of areas of convergence. This is encouraging. Building 
on these areas of convergence, we should redouble our efforts in the Informal Process.  
 
Big challenges await us after t he summer break. No one doubts the importance of what is at stake. 
We will continue to do our utmost to work in cooperation with all Members.  
 
26. New Zealand  
 
Our last meeting before our summer break occurs in an increasingly complex backdrop of challenges 
facing the organization and the multilateral trading system. These challenges are well -known but if 
unanswered hold global economic consequences the potential dimensions of which I doubt any of us 
can fully conceive.  
 
Reform discussions continue  to take place to help address some of these issues and ensure this 
organization continues to be fit for purpose. We are strongly committed to these efforts including 
through the work of the Ottawa Group.  
 
I won't dwell today on the situation of the Appell ate Body, the facts of which and the tyranny of time 
are well -known. But on WTO reform efforts more broadly, as we have said before, meaningful and 
effective reform needs to hold the prospect to benefit all Members.  
 
At the same time we need to keep our ey e on the ball – our core function to deliver sustainable 
trade outcomes through negotiation.  
 
Our number one priority in this regard is fisheries subsidies. We are grateful for our outgoing Chair's 
efforts and commend him and the work of Facilitators in fi nalising the platforms for our work in 
September. We must now ensure we leverage this progress to fulfil the clear instructions from WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 141 - 
 
Ministers to successfully conclude the negotiation by December in order to implement our Leaders' 
commitments in SDG 14.6.  
 
For MC12, achieving a multilateral outcome on agriculture remains a core priority for New Zealand 
in order to help create a more level playing field and support SDG 2. We failed to achieve an outcome 
on agriculture at MC11. We simply cannot afford to do s o again at MC12. We are looking forward to 
receiving the Chair's 'reflections' paper later in July. As noted in the recent Cairns Group statement, 
there is unequivocal support from Cairns Group members to deliver an outcome on domestic support. 
Trade disto rting domestic subsidies have a significant distortionary impact on the efficient operation 
of global agricultural markets which adversely affects both farmers and consumers.  
 
We are also committed to advancing Joint Statement Initiatives particularly on e -commerce and 
services domestic regulation. Good work is being done in these initiatives to better facilitate services 
and digital trade which would particularly assist MSME participation. Successful outcomes will be 
demonstrative of the WTO commitment to respond to real, 21st century issues.  
 
A guiding light for New Zealand as we think about the WTO we want to emerge from current reform 
efforts is to shape a WTO that can contribute to advancing principles of sustainable and inclusive 
trade which hold the p rospect to benefit all. For New Zealand, this includes trade policy that 
contributes to the economic empowerment of women, supports MSMEs and contributes to 
sustainable development and contemporary issues of cross -boundary concern such as in the 
environmen tal sphere. We hope that mainstreaming these principles across all of our areas of work 
can increasingly be a shared priority for all Members.  
 
27. United States  
 
I would like to use today's informal HODs to share some reflections on the many reform -related 
discussions currently underway.  
 
I welcome efforts to lift us out of our collective rut and bring new ideas and thinking forward to 
ensure the WTO evolves to keep pace with the rapidly changing global economy and business 
realities. These conversations are long overdue.  
 
Not surprisingly, the range of ideas being advanced brings into focus the divergences that exist 
among Members. We believe that an open and frank exchange on these divergences can help us 
find a way to strengthen the WTO.  
 
And, to make the best use of these exchanges, we should resist the urge to deploy vaguely pejorative 
buzzwords – like "polarising" and "unpragmatic" – as rhetorical tools to cut off necessary discussion 
and debate.  
 
For the United States, there are two key points we be lieve are central to the current reform effort.  
 
• First, collectively we must focus on fulfilling our existing obligations and ensuring that 
there are built -in compliance mechanisms within the institution that establish clear and 
functional incentives for g ood behaviour and meaningful consequences for free -riding 
and non -compliance.  
 
We had expected that robust peer pressure in the Committees and a shared 
commitment in capitals would be sufficient to ensure compliance, but it is obvious these 
alone have not gotten the job done.  
 
If there are no consequences for non -compliance on the most basic of obligations such 
as transparency and notifications, we cannot expect compliance in other significant 
areas – let alone hard fought negotiated outcomes. We cannot sus tain a system that 
does not have a demonstrated commitment to compliance at its foundation.  
 
• Second, we must realise the unfulfilled expectation that Members would, over time, step 
up and shoulder greater responsibility commensurate with their economic gro wth and 
in doing so contribute to the creation of economic opportunities for those less advanced.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 142 - 
 
We are pleased that Members are finally beginning to discuss and engage on this critical 
issue but we have a lot of catching up to do.  
 
Some have proposed a wait-and-see approach to differentiation, but it is clear after 
20 years that for some, there are powerful incentives to maintain the status quo. It is 
difficult to see a way forward in current and future negotiations without some significant 
changes in ap proach on this important issue, and we need to see contributions from 
those manifestly able, by any objective measure, to make them.  
 
The status quo only promises more negotiating deadlock. We do not believe that 
deadlock is what the majority of Members wa nt from this institution.  
 
Finally, I would like to touch upon the important issue of fisheries subsidies, the subject of 
Wednesday's HODs meeting. It bears repeating how critically important it is that after twenty years 
of discussions and negotiations we  produce something more than minimal.  
 
The more these negotiations progress, it is becoming unfortunately less clear exactly what activities 
Members are willing to stop subsidising. We are not going to be in a position to deliver a meaningful 
outcome unles s we can plainly articulate how we are changing the status quo.  
 
28. South Africa  
 
We want to thank the Director -General for his report on his recent activities. We also thank the 
Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their updates. We associate ourselves with the African Group 
and ACP Statements.  
 
We note with concern the lack of progress on the long outstanding Doha issues of interest to many 
developing Members who are the majority in the WTO. Increasingly the WTO is failing to address 
the devel opment divide at a time when there is a backlash against globalization and multilateral 
trade agreements due to rising inequality. This is clearly demonstrated by the inability to make 
progress on the DDA and questions raised on S&DT. In our view, the Marr akesh Agreement, 
Ministerial mandates and decisions should continue to serve as the basis for negotiations.  
 
The multilateral trading system is in crises and the immediate priority is settling the Appellate Body 
impasse. Without resolution of this issue, existing rules will become unenforceable and the adoption 
of new rules becomes futile. Many of the concerns that have been raised by one Member have been 
addressed in several proposals and can provide a reasonable basis for a solution. Unlocking the 
appoin tment deadlock can be addressed independently from the broader substantive issues raised 
in this context.  
 
Developing country interest in the reform of the dispute settlement mechanism should also be 
addressed to ensure an outcome suitable to all. This in cludes concerns about accessibility, costs and 
efficiency as majority of the Membership is hardly ever participating in the procedures of the dispute 
settlement mechanism. Fundamentally, the independence and impartiality of the Appellate Body 
needs to be s afeguarded. We do not agree with any approach that renders dysfunctional the 
enforcement pillar of the WTO that all Members agreed to establish, in exchange for broader reform 
of the WTO.   
 
In relation to fisheries subsidies, we have very limited time to finalise the negotiations. While the 
Facilitators' Working Papers provide a fair reflection on the State of Play in the negotiations, these 
are without prejudice to the Members' textual proposals as well as TN/RL/W/274/Rev.6. There is still 
substantial wor k to be undertaken to conclude the negotiations by the end of the year. Any outcome 
on fisheries subsidies must ultimately deliver on the Ministerial Mandates and Decisions and must 
be in accordance with the letter and spirit of Paragraph 14.6 of the SDGs.   
 
Our ability to conclude will be based on an open, inclusive, transparent and Member -driven process 
that preserves the right of Members to submit proposals based on their issues of interests and 
negotiating mandate. The scope must be clearly defined with  focus on developing disciplines on 
issues specific to the mandate of the WTO.  
 
Turning to agriculture, we will continue to advocate for substantial reform of trade -distorting 
domestic support notably on Cotton, a permanent solution for Public Stockholding  and advancing WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 143 - 
 
the discussions on a Special Safeguard Mechanism. We underscore that S&DT must be integral to 
any outcome in agriculture and we would seek to ensure that LDCs and NFIDCs are exempted from 
further commitments. Meaningful outcome on domestic s upport is critical for MC12.  
 
On transparency, we need to adopt a development -oriented, inclusive and cooperative approach in 
view of legitimate capacity constraints facing especially developing Members. We are not supportive 
of punitive measures and it is  for this reason that we have prepared a Paper on "An Inclusive 
approach to transparency and notification requirements in the WTO".  
 
Regarding development, we would like to reaffirm the importance of keeping development at the 
centre of the work programme.  S&DT is necessary to allow developing Members the policy space to 
calibrate trade integration in ways that support sustainable development, structural transformation 
and growth. South Africa remains sensitive to any idea or proposal that would limit the s cope and 
application of the principle of S&DT or that alter the architecture of development as set out in the 
Marrakesh Agreement.  
 
We reiterate that South Africa continues to support the development objectives embedded in WTO 
Agreements and any discussio n on the necessary reform of the WTO should fundamentally promote 
development and inclusive growth, place the needs of developing countries at the heart of any kind 
of reform and preserve the core principles of the WTO.  
 
We thank both Chairs of the Negoti ating Group on Rules and the CTD SS for their commitment and 
call for the process to appoint new Chairs to be expedited in view of the importance of both issues. 
South Africa extends special gratitude to Ambassador Ngarambe of Rwanda for his leadership 
throughout the years and for coordinating the African Group with honour.  
 
29. Brazil  
 
As we break for the summer, it is important to recogni ze that the WTO is at a crossroads. The road 
we take from September 2019 to June 2020 will largely determine the future of the multilateral 
trading system. We should be the architects of its revival and under no circumstances the observers 
of its downfall.  
 
Brazil's determination to carry out domestic reforms in our national economy to secure growth, 
prosperity, jobs and compe titiveness has a vital international dimension.  
 
WTO reforms are an essential track for us. That is why we are engaged constructively in discussions 
on the reform of the Appellate Body, fisheries subsidies, e -commerce, investment facilitation, 
industrial subsidies which should be discussed horizontally in conjunction with agricultural subsidies, 
transparency notifications, development and S&DT, among others. We want ambitious results in all 
those fronts – outcomes that open markets and secure fa ir opportunities for all.  
 
Brazil will soon circulate a proposal on SPS. This is a key dimension for agriculture reform. We are 
looking forward to engage technically and politically with all Members. But let me be very clear from 
the outset on my two "Ns":  No Nur -Sultan without agriculture. Transparency is essential, but far 
from enough.  
 
On the Appellate Body, we support the Walker process and a guideline -based approach as it offers 
a pragmatic and effective solution to our concerns. We welcome the constru ctive engagement of 
Members in that process.  
 
Brazil decided to begin to forego its use of S&DT in negotiations at the WTO. It is a sign of our 
commitment to WTO reforms and to addressing concerns that help move this organization forward. 
S&DT is a dynamic  concept that allows for flexibility – when and if needed.  
 
Our international commitment to trade is not limited to the WTO. Together with our Mercosur 
partners, Brazil just concluded a trade agreement with the European Union, a remarkable 
achievement that  was made possible by the firm commitment of President Bolsonaro's government 
with free trade.  
 
The Mercosur -EU agreement is the largest free trade deal ever agreed in history between continental 
trading blocs. It will encompass 25% of the world's GDP and a market of 780 million people. It WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 144 - 
 
creates a most positive environment for new ambitious agreements, as we are now moving forward 
with trade negotiations with EFTA, Canada, Singapore and Korea.  
 
In a nutshell:  
 
• The WTO needs to evolve and we are responsibl e for making it happen.  
 
• Reform is essential and its agenda must be balanced and include agriculture.  
 
• We are doing our part.  
 
• We now have less than ten months to Nur -Sultan – we need to shape a package that 
strengthens the multilateral trading system and brings the WTO to the reality of trade 
in the 21st century.  
 
30. Jamaica (ACP)  
 
The ACP Group joins others in conveying its appreciation for the Director -General's comprehensive 
Report. We also thank the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports. The ACP Group wishes 
to express sincere appreciation to Ambassadors Zapata and Ngarambe for their service and 
tremendous contribution to our work. As they go, we wish them well.  
 
Developments within the multilateral trading system continue to pres ent unique challenges for the 
functioning of the WTO. Significant divergences exist among Members on very important issues, 
especially those issues of relevance to the successful integration of developing countries and LDCs 
into the global economy. We have  not been able to resolve issues surrounding the filling of vacant 
seats on the Appellate Body.  
 
Yet, the ACP Group deems it important to reaffirm its commitment to the preservation of an inclusive, 
transparent, rules -based multilateral trading system, wi th the WTO as its core institution. Further, 
development must be at the centre of our work.  
 
Agriculture remains an essential part of the economies and livelihoods of ACP countries. We welcome 
the creative approaches which are being taken by Ambassador Dee p Ford to sustain momentum in 
the discussions on agriculture. We have a particular interest in addressing existing imbalances in 
entitlements, as we think our attempts to maximise the benefits to be derived from agricultural trade 
are being thwarted by the se asymmetries.  
 
We reiterate that any outcome in the negotiations on agriculture must be in line with the mandates 
received from our Ministers especially as regards the special circumstances of developing countries 
and LDCs, SVEs as well as NFIDCs. We sup port the way forward by the Chair and pledge to continue 
to engage constructively.  
 
We wish to reiterate that TN/RL/W/274/Rev.6  remains the basis of the current negotiations on 
fisheries subsidies. To duly reflect the ACP's negotiating positions in the facilitator -led discussions, 
the ACP Group has introduced three room documents addressing IUU fishing, overfished stocks and 
overfishing and overcapacity.   
 
We appreciate and support the affirmation by the Chairman that the facilitators' papers are informal 
working documents on their sole responsibility. They therefore have no legal or interpretative 
significance and are entirely wi thout prejudice to the position of any Member.  
 
Further, any composite text developed across the various pillars of negotiation should be free of any 
internal linkages between the various pillars. Some pillars are at a more advanced stage of 
development. This fact should not be leveraged to extract concessions in other areas of negotiations.  
 
The departure of Ambassador Zapata will certainly be felt. Our immediate priority should however 
centre around seeking a new Chair who should be acceptable to the wi der Membership. The process 
must also take into account our commitment to delivering on the mandate received from Ministers 
in Buenos Aires.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 145 - 
 
On Special and Differential Treatment, we reiterate our concerns that these discussions are not 
taking place in ac cordance with the mandate of Paragraph 44 of the Doha Declaration which is to 
review the S&DT provisions with a view to strengthening them and making them more precise, 
effective and operational.  
 
The ACP reiterates its position that Members who so wish ca n self -declare or opt out if they do not 
require such S&DT flexibilities in the implementation of WTO Agreements. We reaffirm our belief 
that in moving forward with the discussions on S&DT, the principles of inclusivity, transparency, 
development and parti cularly S&DT for developing countries and LDCs are fully adhered to. The 
Group thanks Ambassador Ngarambe for his efforts in seeking to move the negotiations forward.  
 
On e-commerce, there is work to be done under the current mandate of the 1998 Work Progr amme, 
including on technical issues, with a view to increasing understanding and information, and, 
especially, on the development dimension. On the development element of our work, bridging the 
digital divide and overcoming the various challenges faced by developing countries and LDCs, in 
using e -commerce to enhance and diversify their economies and create employment are an 
imperative.   
 
Greater focus must also be placed on discussing the social and economic implications associated 
with the moratorium aris ing from the imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions as 
well as understanding the distinctions with respect to internal taxes.  
 
The services sector is an important one in many ACP countries. The ACP Group wishes to reiterate 
the primacy of development and special and differential treatment in any discussions or outcomes 
on services as well as ensuring that issues of interest to, and in favour of, developing countries and 
LDCs, including their right to regulate, are prioritised. Th ese are critical to the better integration of 
developing countries into the multilateral trading system.  
 
As regards Appellate Body reform, we are disappointed that we are not able to proceed to appoint 
Appellate Body members. The continuing impasse poses the real threat of eroding the effectiveness 
of the WTO as a rulemaking institution and undermines the adjudication function of this House. We 
note the report of the Facilitator and stand ready to contribute to efforts aimed at finding a mutually 
acceptabl e solution. Preserving an independent, impartial and well -functioning dispute settlement 
system which is essential to safeguarding the legitimacy and credibility of the multilateral trading 
system, is of great importance to ACP Members.  
 
The ACP Group cal ls on Members to approach the discussions on transparency and notification 
bearing in mind the genuine capacity constraints confronting some developing and least -developed 
countries. We are of the view that it is important for there to be an examination of  these constraints 
with a view to collectively finding ways to address them through positive and constructive measures. 
Punitive measures will only serve to erode confidence in the system and would disproportionately 
impact resource constrained developing countries.   
 
In conclusion, the ACP Group reaffirms its full commitment to continue to play a constructive role in 
any discussion that seeks to make the WTO better serve the interests of all its Members.  
 
31. Canada  
 
I will provide an update on the work of th e "Ottawa Group" WTO reform initiative and statement on 
behalf of Canada. The Ottawa Group Ministers met in May on the margins of the OECD meetings to 
"check in" and review the status of the work done since Davos meeting and to provide guidance on 
next ste ps. A group of Ministers also met in the margins of the G20 trade and digital Ministers 
meeting in Japan on 9 June.  
 
In Geneva, informal discussions have continued on the work of four WTO bodies.  
 
On SPS, four informal discussions have yielded some usefu l input and ideas such as strengthening 
the specific trade concerns procedure, broadcasting thematic sessions, enhancing the debate on 
notifications, facilitating the access to the catalogue of instruments and to the existing mediation 
procedure. Brazil in tends to use the inputs as a basis for a draft document including concrete 
proposals, to be discussed in early fall, before submission to the November SPS Committee.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 146 - 
 
Singapore tabled its paper on Good Practices in the TBT Committee at the Informal Council  for Trade  
in Goods meeting on 18 June. There were good discussions at that meeting and at the CTG meeting 
on 9 July on whether some of the practices and "tools" used by the TBT Committee may be useful 
for the CTG and other Committees.  
 
Switzerland and 13 co-sponsors submitted a proposal to the Committee on Rules of Origin aimed at 
enhancing transparency in non -preferential rules of origin. The proposal has gathered a broad level 
of support by Members and a revised proposal was discussed in the last formal Committee in May 
but unfortunately could not be formally approved.  
 
Concerning Trade in Services, Australia is continuing to explore ideas for strengthening the WTO's 
monitoring and transparency function for services trade measures.  
 
With respect to fisher ies subsidies negotiations, Canada has been working closely with other 
members of the Ottawa Group, as well as with Pew Trusts, the IISD and the ICC, to share 
perspectives on how to reach a successful conclusion to these negotiations by December.  
 
Allow m e to now move to Canada's statement on developments since the last Informal HODs.  
 
Canada notes that Members continue to submit proposals and discussion papers to the General 
Council on trade and development. We now have to take this conversation forward in a way that 
does not limit us to special and differential treatment but that cover s all angles of the development 
conversation related to trade.  
 
Members must try to identify real areas of convergence, beyond agreeing that something needs to 
be done. We need to find ways to ensure that the WTO fulfils its objective of fully integrating  
developing Members into the multilateral trading system while ensuring that the organization does 
not become irrelevant. It is clear that the status quo on special and differential treatment cannot 
continue.  
 
On agriculture, Canada's priority remains deve loping stronger disciplines on trade and production 
distorting domestic support that will reflect current trends and realities in international agriculture 
markets.  
 
To this end, Canada along with other Members of the Cairns Group circulated JOB/AG/160 on  
"Domestic Support  Options" which could be used as a basis for discussions on what can be achieved 
on domestic support at MC12 by examining various options on existing and new rules and disciplines, 
as well as on transparency.  
 
We also believe Members can take another step forward on export competition to ensure that the 
historic elimination of export subsidies is not circumvented.  
 
On process, we support the CoA SS Chair's plans to intensify discussions and use various formats to 
try to find a way forward  in agriculture.  
 
On fisheries subsidies negotiations, Canada thanks Ambassador Zapata for all his hard work and 
wishes him well in his future endeavours. We believe it is imperative that we appoint a new 
Chairperson before the summer break and resume neg otiations on 9 September as planned.   
 
Canada believes that these negotiations should focus on the disciplines for IUU fishing, overfished 
stocks and transparency and we support the Chair's proposed work programme.  
 
On the Joint Statement Initiatives, Can ada welcomes recent text proposals on e -commerce which 
will serve as a good basis to continue moving these discussions forward in the fall.  
 
On services domestic regulation, we have made meaningful progress and welcome the recent 
recommitment by Ministers  to this process.  
 
Canada also notes that the Participating Members in the investment facilitation JSI concluded a 
productive series of structured discussions yesterday with useful guiding tools provided by the Chair, 
Ambassador Gonz ález.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 147 - 
 
Canada thanks h im for his leadership and hard work as coordinator and wishes him well as he 
departs Geneva.   
 
We are pleased that the implementation of the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women's 
Economic Empowerment continues including the most recent workshop or ganized by the European 
Union on women and digital trade on 1 July. We call on all Members that have not yet signed on to 
the Buenos Aires Declaration to do so.  
 
Finally, Canada remains a firm believer in the WTO binding and enforceable two -stage dispute 
settlement system as a key pillar of the rules -based multilateral trading system.  
  
We deeply regret the persistent blockage of the Appellate Body appointment process.  We encourage 
all Members, including the United States, to meaningfully engage in the Wa lker process, where 
twelve proposals have been tabled in order to address the concerns raised and restore a fully 
functional Appellate Body.  
 
While we agree that we all must work urgently to resolve the Appellate Body impasse, we must not 
lose sight of the need to address the other challenges facing the organization including strengthening 
the deliberative functions as well as advancing work in negotiations.  
 
32. Uruguay (Informal Working Group on MSMEs)  
 
I make this statement in my capacity as General Coord inator of the Informal Working Group on 
MSMEs under my own responsibility.  
 
At our last meeting on the 28 June, we welcomed Mongolia as our 90th member of the Informal 
Working Group. I reiterate that all delegations are invited to join or attend the meetin gs of this open, 
inclusive and multilateral inspired initiative.  
 
Regarding our work programme, we started working on the issues on which we could have a concrete 
deliverable at MC12: a Ministerial Declaration that contains guidelines or recommendations to  
support participation of MSMEs in international trade.  
 
In relation to our transparency cluster, at our last meeting in February, five delegations submitted 
a proposal concerning MSME related information in TPR Government Report. This is one issue on 
which we could have a concrete deliverable by our next Ministerial Conference. Developing a 
checklist that could serve as a reference for Members to provide information on MSMEs either as 
part of the information they submit for the preparation of the Secretari at's TPR Report, as part of 
their Government Report, or as a standalone document that they would fill, on a voluntary basis, 
would serve to systematise information on and of particular interest to MSMEs in WTO Trade Policy 
Reports.  
 
Moreover, a proposal sp onsored by three other delegations for the creation of an online platform 
with the objective of supporting MSMEs navigate through the ever competitive international 
environment was discussed and approved in our last meeting. The idea is to gather in one pl ace a 
wide variety of information that would support the participation of MSMEs into international trade 
and promote their economic growth.  
 
MC12 is only one year away so it is important that we organise our work in the coming months and 
start putting toge ther the various elements of a Ministerial Declaration. Hence, our way forward 
would be to start developing concrete recommendations for MC12. The type of recommendations we 
are discussing include actions that can be taken at the level of the WTO, recommen dations for 
national policy makers and guidelines for the implementation of certain WTO agreements to help 
ensure that the interest of small businesses are taken into account. The issues that could be covered 
include: language derived from MSME -related lan guage in regional trade agreements, language on 
access to information to support the MSMEs platform and the Global Trade Helpdesk, language to 
support initiatives that takes into account the needs of MSMEs and recommendations on the small 
lens principle wh ich requires regulators to identify and take into account MSMEs interests when 
designing regulations.  
 
For our next regular session, which will take place on 12 October, we will discuss this language and 
consolidate the inputs in a Chair's text. The idea w ould be to finalise the draft Ministerial Declaration WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 148 - 
 
by the time of our first 2020 meeting, in late January or February, so we can have time to reach to 
non-members of this group to build support and become truly multilateral in the lead up to MC12.  
 
33. Urug uay 
 
I would like to start by thanking the Director -General as Chairman of the TNC and the Chairs of the 
Negotiating Groups for their reports.  
 
Fisheries  
 
Uruguay values the work of the facilitators in the areas of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishi ng, 
overfished stocks, overfishing and overcapacity, as well as the compendium of crosscutting issues. 
Although these are useful tools and a good basis for our work, a lot still remains to be done if we 
intend to implement all the elements of the Buenos Ai res Ministerial Decision. Our focus for the 
remaining months should be on finding solutions to fill the existing gaps in Members' positions.  
 
We commit to working in a constructive and flexible manner on the understanding that this is the 
only possible way to fulfil the mandate of SDG Target 14.6.  
 
The consequences of this negotiation go far beyond this organization. This is the first goal on the 
path to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We have the potential to make this either 
the first success of the 2030 Agenda or a failure with huge ramifications for the multilateral system 
as a whole.  
 
Lastly, I wish to thank Ambassador Roberto Zapata for his efforts in leading the negotiations for the 
past year and a half.  
 
Agriculture  
 
Uruguay wishes to thank Ambassador John Deep Ford for his ongoing efforts to help advance the 
negotiations in agriculture.  
 
Considering the systemic problems encountered by this organization, we share the view that it will 
be necessary to obtain tangible results i n this area by the next Ministerial Conference.  
 
As a way of contributing to the process, ten members of the Cairns Group, including Uruguay, will 
be presenting a document on domestic support options to help focus the discussions and lead us 
towards the n egotiation phase. We invite Members to continue examining this document after the 
summer break.  
 
In order to achieve the desired outcomes, all Members should be involved in a constructive manner 
in the discussions and demonstrate a real willingness to nego tiate, displaying some flexibility.  
 
We therefore invite Members to make all necessary efforts at the negotiation phase, which should 
start back after the summer break to achieve possible results that would enable us to move forward, 
even if through small steps, towards greater liberalization of trade in agriculture.  
 
Uruguay is ready to work with the Chair and all the Members who wish to move forward in this 
direction in the coming months.  
 
Lastly, and on account of the substantive comments we will make in  the General Council, allow me 
to reaffirm the need for adaptation and change based on the principles at the core of the multilateral, 
rules-based system. This is perhaps the least bad option for ensuring a peaceful and more just order 
that would enable th e realization of the legitimate development aspirations of all Members.  
 
34. Turkey  
 
I would like to thank the Director -General for his report and perspective and to the Negotiating 
Group Chairs for their respective reports and their hard work.  
 
Turkey is concerned about the course of events and developments concerning global trade relations. 
These developments have put immense pressure on the rules -based multilateral system.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 149 - 
 
During the G20 Summit, leaders underlined the importance of trade for e conomic growth and 
creating jobs as well as the need for reform. This was positive. Turkey has the political will to engage 
on these matters. But we did not get a clear guidance so the picture remains gloomy.  
 
Turkey has been constructive in the discussion s of WTO reform. This discussion will naturally have 
many facets. We have not backed away from discussing any issue. In the larger context, the current 
climate of trade tensions, rising trend of protectionism, and the looming crisis of the Appellate Body 
are not helping the reform process. On the technical level, insisting on extreme positions in one 
direction or another will not generate the ideal discussion to reach our destination.  
 
We regret the Appellate Body members selection process remains blocked.  There has been 
considerable work done so far. This work promises to address many outstanding concerns and 
issues. In light of this work, prolonging the impasse will not contribute to efforts to strengthen or 
improve the effectiveness of the WTO.   
 
Turkey  wants to see that we meet our deadline on fisheries subsidies. We should move forward with 
a text -based process as soon as possible. We thank Ambassador Zapata for his efforts and support 
his schedule. We are sad to see him leave. His contributions to thi s process, to other WTO work and 
our work as MIKTA partners will be remembered. I wish him success and happiness.  
 
Turkey, like others, want a strengthened, more resilient and a dynamic WTO with an ability to 
respond to current and future challenges. We wa nt the rulemaking function of the WTO to be strong. 
Turkey has co -sponsored two joint initiatives. We recogni ze the importance of the need to deal with 
e-commerce. We are also aware that e -commerce will entail a lot of work and negotiations to arrive 
at a balanced outcome.  
 
Work on domestic regulation has reached a certain maturity. This work becomes all the more 
important in the face of increasing role of the services sector globally. Discussions on investment 
facilitation are also advancing. We would lik e to reemphasise the need for WTO to focus more on 
services, including the issue of movement of natural persons in this picture.  
 
Turkey is co -sponsoring the proposal on dealing with trade concerns. Our effort aims at rendering 
the deliberative function o f the WTO more effective. It also aims at helping resolution of issues 
before they end up in litigation.  We will elaborate on this issue further in the Council.   
 
Transparency is key to the functioning of the organization. Any proposal to improve this as pect will 
always be welcome. Our key objective should be to ensure that all Members meet their 
commitments. Any proposal to that end should be inclusive and should not push Members away 
from the system.  
 
While working on new issues and reform, we should al so focus on the key aspects of the existing 
negotiating agenda that resonates with a large number of Members. Agriculture is one such area. 
We appreciate the efforts of Ambassador Ford. A development -oriented and fair outcome in 
agriculture negotiations th at will address the existing imbalances will contribute to the effectiveness 
of the multilateral system.  
 
Finally, Turkey supports the enlargement of the WTO. The accession processes of Belarus, Bosnia -
Herzegovina and Comoros have reached a certain level.  We encourage all Members to engage to 
make these accessions as deliverables at MC12.  
 
35. Indonesia  
 
My delegation's concerns over persisting difficulties that this House has endured has long been 
recorded. The insignificant progress in the Doha Development A genda and the impasse of Appellate 
Body selection process have created mistrust on achieving meaningful efficacy of the WTO.  
 
The informal process, led by Ambassador Walker, has some convergence on the issues of transitional 
rules for out the outgoing Appe llate Body members. The DSB has explicit authority and responsibility 
to determine the Membership of the Appellate Body. The selection process to replace outgoing 
Appellate Body Members shall be automatically launched 180 days before the expiry. In this re gard, 
there is sufficient substance to serve as a platform for further discussion on the Appellate Body WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 150 - 
 
working processes and there should be no further delay in starting the selection process of Appellate 
Body members.  
 
Therefore, we call on Members to renew their political will and address this problem with a sense of 
urgency to safeguard an open, predictable and rules -based multilateral trading system.  
 
The Marrakesh Agreement emphasised development as an integral part  of the multilateral trading 
system. While we acknowledge the need for a more pragmatic approach to discuss development 
elements in this House, it is necessary for us to maintain development, S&DT, at the centre of our 
negotiation – to ensure that internat ional trade helps to bridge the development gaps and to assist 
developing and LDCs Members to integrate and reap equitable benefits from the multilateral trading 
system.  
 
On current developments in agriculture, my delegation continues to stress the need fo r a meaningful 
negotiation on a Special Safeguard Mechanism and on a permanent solution for Public Stockholding 
for Food Security Purposes as highlighted by the G -33 statement in the informal CoA SS last week. 
We agree that the Uruguay Round left imbalance s and inequities. To achieve meaningful outcomes 
towards correcting these imbedded imbalances and inequities, we urge Members to show flexibility 
and willingness to engage in a results -oriented negotiation as we approach the upcoming Ministerial 
Conference . 
 
My delegation wishes to congratulate the Chair  of the Negotiating Group on Rules, Ambassador 
Roberto Zapata, and all the facilitators for the progress in the fisheries subsidies negotiation. We 
note the challenges toward having a consolidated text. Howe ver, we believe that the working papers 
from last week's deliberation is a significant step towards a consolidated negotiating text.  
 
As a developing archipelagic country, Indonesia greatly relies on its fisheries sector for inclusive 
growth and source of health and nutrients for our people. In this regard, my delegation is of the 
view that our negotiations on fisheries subsidies shall not lose sight with the overall objectives of 
the Sustainable Development Goals.  
 
We are adamant that the fisheries subsidi es discipline shall contribute in ensuring poverty 
eradication, improving the livelihood of the small fisherfolks and artisanal fisheries as well as 
promoting sustainability of fish stock in ensuring food security and combatting IUU fishing. In doing 
so, flexibilty is also needed through effective S&DT provisions in order to help the shortcomings of 
developing and least -developed country Members in balancing its obligation to contribute to 
sustainable fisheries and its right to development.  
 
Finally, Indon esia would like to reiterate its readiness to be actively and constructively engaged in 
any necessary process particularly in finding acceptable solutions that will address everybody's 
interest and concerns.  
 
36. Trinidad and Tobago (CARICOM)  
 
This statement i s being delivered on behalf of the Caribbean Community Group in Geneva.  
 
At the outset, we wish to thank the Director -General for the report on his activities and for the 
reports presented by the Chairpersons of the Negotiating Groups. The CARICOM Group is  
appreciative of the sustained demonstration of transparency.  
 
As the Director -General is aware, we still remain in need of a resolution in the matter concerning 
the functioning of the Appellate Body. The WTO's dispute settlement system is a core pillar of  the 
rules-based multilateral trading system and essential to the trust, predictability and equity built into 
the WTO. We must therefore seek to ensure not only enforceability of the rules and vigilance but 
also that in our enthusiasm to resolve the impass e, we do not create rules or mechanisms that 
implicitly or explicitly impinge on the impartiality and independence of the Appellate Body and its 
Members or result in a diminution of the balance of our rights and responsibilities or those of other 
Members. Further engagement, in a solution -finding mode, is necessary on areas under discussion 
where convergence remains elusive.  
 
As we stated in May, we do not believe that the right of developing countries to special and 
differential treatment is an issue for negotiation or interpretation. S&DT is an important factor in WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 151 - 
 
fostering economic development and the CARICOM Group recogni zes this given our size and 
vulnerabilities. We remain committed to retaining our hard won right of access to S&DT in 
accordance with the Marrakesh Agreement.  
 
In the area of fisheries subsidies, we acknowledge the progress made since the May cluster. We 
support maintaining the momentum and thank Ambassador Zapata for his commendable efforts and 
look forward to the nomination of a new C hair as soon as possible. There is still need for much 
consultation and discussion of Members' proposals to safeguard the rights and responsibilities of 
developing country Members especially those which are small and vulnerable like our own. We will 
contin ue to work within the ACP Group to actively realising this goal.  
 
On the subject of agriculture, first allow me to express our profound gratitude to Ambassador Ford 
for his passion and dedication in driving what continues to be a very complex and painstaking 
process. We note that the approach adopted has succeeded in int ensifying the discussions. 
Nonetheless, we remain deeply concerned over the grim outlook for negotiating a balanced outcome 
at MC12.  
 
With food and nutrition security and agriculture export development as key economic growth drivers 
in building our econom ic resilience, it is our desire to agree on an inclusive outcome at the soonest. 
We further anticipate that any outcome on the 'domestic support pillar' will not negatively and unduly 
disturb existing special and differential treatment and specific flexibi lities for SVEs and LDCs. With 
respect to 'market access', our paramount interest is to ensure that small economies are not 
disadvantaged. For that reason, CARICOM reaffirms the acquis of the 2008 draft agriculture 
modalities text insofar as it ensures tha t any agreed tariff reduction formula allows special flexibilities 
for small, vulnerable economies.  
 
CARICOM has taken note of the proposed way forward at the conclusion of the 15 July CoA SS and 
stands ready, open and committed to play its part in advanc ing the process.  
 
Services, accounting for over 75% of exports, remain an important sector which contributes 
significantly to the socio -economic growth and development of CARICOM countries. We therefore 
are disappointed with the lack of progress made withi n the context of the built -in mandate of the 
GATS. We take note of the exploratory discussions on market access in the Council on Trade in 
Services which have so far led to the tabling of two papers by Members on tourism services and 
more recently on envir onmental services and look forward to engaging in these discussions. Although 
these discussions are exploratory, Members must be cognizant of the flexibilities for developing 
countries like ours as set out in GATS Article 19.  We must also bear in mind tha t the modalities and 
guidelines for our work, that is, on request and offer process, have already been defined in the 
negotiating guidelines and procedures.  
 
On the issue of domestic regulation, we note the importance of the Working Party on Domestic 
regulation in the negotiation of "any necessary disciplines" under GATS Article 6.4.  In this regard, 
we wish to underscore the importance of the right to regulate as a fundamental principle and our 
offensive interest in ensuring disciplines on qualification re quirements and procedures and licencing 
requirements and procedures in favour of our countries.  
 
With respect to electronic commerce, we continue to note the developments outside of the WTO 
which appear to be going apace. We further urge Members to ramp up  their efforts in reinvigorating 
work under the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce as mandated by our Ministers at MC11 
and particularly on the development dimension with the aim of narrowing the digital divide and 
knowledge and technology gaps between developed countries and developing and least -developed 
countries.   
 
Discussions on WTO Reform must reflect the views and circumstances of all Members and must be 
aimed at protecting the development interests of all developing and LDC Members. We have seen  
new ideas related to transparency and strengthening notification requirements under WTO 
agreements. We believe that it is important for this body to understand that several Members are 
faced with enormous capacity constraints especially in terms of human resource limitations. The 
focus of measures to enhance transparency should be constructive in nature with a view towards 
assisting Members in arriving at an ideal position to make the organization better for us all.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 152 - 
 
CARICOM reiterates its strong commitmen t to a rules -based multilateral trading system that is 
transparent, inclusive and consensus -based.  
 
37. Egypt  
 
We thank the Director -General for his report. My delegation associates itself to the statement made 
by the Ambassador of Benin on behalf of the African Group. I would like to express appreciation to 
the Chairs of Negotiation Groups for their informative an d comprehensive reports as well as for the 
diligent efforts to move our work on the various negotiating issues forward.  
 
Within a year to MC12, we have no clarity to achieve a concrete outcome in any of the Doha 
remaining issues. We have a very heavy agen da ahead of us and we need to work collectively on 
practical, workable and dynamic agenda. Let us have a frank discussion to agree at least on one 
goal and one need for effective MC12 outcomes. We need to establish dialogue or process to achieve 
such targe ts.  
 
We want to expedite our efforts toward positive and constructive engagement by addressing the 
following:  
 
• First, Members should advance negotiations in areas where progress should have been 
achieved, especially in agriculture and fisheries subsidies . The effective and 
implementable progress in these two areas will have a great impact on the progress of 
other tracks and will give a strong message on the future of the WTO.  
 
• Second, as we repeatedly mentioned, one of the unique characteristics of the WTO is 
its dispute settlement system, including its Appellate Body. The absence of the Appellate 
Body will risk preserving the rights and obligations of the WTO Members, and will not 
support the negotiating function of the WTO in eit her the Doha remaining issues or new 
issues. We need to resolve this impasse without delay.  
 
• Third, international trade is not an end in itself but a means of contributing to certain 
objectives including raising standards of living. Special and differentia l treatment is one 
of the defining features of the multilateral trading system and is essential to integrate 
developing Members into global trade. The rights of developing Members to have S&DT 
must be preserved and strengthened in both current and future W TO agreements.  
 
Having said that, I would like to share our views on the several topics.  
 
Agriculture  
 
Egypt is one of the biggest net food importing developing countries with a value of agriculture 
imports that is about three times that of agriculture ex ports which makes agriculture negotiations 
of paramount importance to my country and makes a second Ministerial Conference without concrete 
outcome on agriculture not only disappointing to Egypt but also a red flag for the work and future 
of the WTO.  
 
Egypt notes with deep concern the persistence of wide divergence in Members' views on how to 
pursue the reform of the Agreement on Agriculture as well as what seems to be an attempt to 
undermine special and differential treatment for developing countries. We believe that this shall 
rather be the time such provisions are strengthened not only to help our countries pursue their 
developmental goals but also to enable us to respond to the serious challenges of climate change 
threatening to undermine our efforts to  ensure the food security of our people. We encourage 
Ambassador Ford to continue his consultations in order to move forward.  
 
Fisheries subsidies  
 
We welcome the recent outcomes of the HODs meeting last May and the instruction given to the 
Negotiating Gro up on Rules to exclude aquaculture and inland fisheries from the scope of the 
negotiations. This is a very important step to give more clarity to the scope of the negotiations. 
Egypt views that any future decision or agreement with this regard shall consid er:  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 153 - 
 
(i) the needs of developing countries and LDCs for proper and effective special and 
differential treatment provisions,  
 
(ii) the flexibility to implement any outcome under diverse national or local circumstances,  
 
(iii) the institutional and financial constraints confronting most developing countries, and  
 
(iv) undertaking commitments that we can implement.  
 
As Members are aware, Egypt along with other esteemed co -sponsors recently tabled two documents 
on possible options for agreement on fisheries subsidie s and possible consultation mechanisms. We 
are looking forward to getting Members' views and feedback on the way forward in this regard.  
 
To conclude, Egypt views that in the run up to Nur -Sultan, it is our duty to work collectively to set 
out reform prior ities in a manner that is transparent, inclusive, consensus -based and development -
oriented. Bearing in mind what our leaders recogni zed in Marrakesh with regard to the need for 
positive efforts designed to ensure that developing countries and especially th e least -developed 
among them secure a share in the growth of international trade.  
 
Before ending, I would like to pay a special tribute to Ambassadors Roberto Zapata, François 
Ngarambe, Marc Vanheukelen and Juan Carlos González  for their sincere efforts in  fulfilling their 
mandate and their contribution to the work of the organization. We wish them all the best in their 
future endeavours.  
 
38. Montenegro  
 
We would like to thank the Director -General for his report and all his efforts and support to facilitate 
and intensify dialogue on a range of negotiating issues among Members.  
 
Allow me at the outset to highlight that we all agree that a rules -based multilateral trading system 
is vital to ensure a stable and predictable framework for world trade. In a climate of protectionist 
tendencies that are threatening to jeopardise the foundation of the rules -based multilateral trading 
system, it is of utmost importance to strengthen the WTO.  
 
We remain convinced that we can work together towards deliverables at MC12. We are not expecting 
the same level of result on all issues but we consider that we are still on track to do our best to 
make progress in the ongoing negotiations after the summer break. Montenegro remains fully 
committed to actively engage and contribute to this process.  
 
We believe that the first step of our common action should be to support the activities for the 
strengthening of the dispute settlement system – in particular the issue of the filling up of the 
vacancies in the Appellate Body. On how to proc eed on that issue, Montenegro among other 
Members shares the view that the unobstructed and functional dispute settlement system is crucial 
for keeping the multilateral trading system reliable.  
 
Regarding fisheries negotiations, we would like to thank the Chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules, 
Ambassador Zapata, for his leadership and hard work invested in these negotiations. We wish him 
all the best in his future endeavours. We would also like to express our appreciation to the facilitators 
and the Secre tariat for their comprehensive work performed in order to finalise negotiations on 
related issues as well as all delegates and Member -proponents for their contributions. We welcomed 
the work towards a consolidated draft text as a base for the continuation of negotiations after the 
summer break. At the same time, we are still expecting that negotiations will take into account 
specific realities, main players and challenges and have flexibilities to address the rules of the WTO.  
 
We welcome a good start on th e negotiations on e -commerce – demonstrating that there is a way 
to move forward in the negotiations of future WTO rules with those willing to advance.    
 
As regards the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women Empowerment, we continue to support 
its implementation and would like to underline that it is important to raise awareness on the national 
level of the importance of women empowerment therefore cre ating a favourable environment for 
changes in practice both in the public and private sectors. In this regard, we welcome and support WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 154 - 
 
the efforts of the WTO Secretariat and the ITC in creating the preconditions for a more successful 
implementation.  
 
Finall y, Montenegro hopes that in the spirit of free and open discourse, we will be able to tackle most 
of the pending issues and successfully finish some of the ongoing negotiations. Concrete outcomes 
for MC12 depend on all of us.  
 
39. Russian Federation  
 
In Osaka,  the G20 Leaders recogni zed that "trade and geopolitical tensions have intensified". They 
reaffirmed their support for the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its functions. They agreed 
to work constructively with other WTO Members including in the lead -up to MC12.  
 
Russia acknowledges that the WTO has to be reinforced. However, such reinforcement should start 
with strengthening of the foundations rather than their destruction.  
 
Let me briefly describe how we see the current situation. On the one hand, the proponents of WTO 
reform have tabled a number of zero -sum proposals that alone or in company have very a limited 
chance to fly. On the other hand, the opponents insist on maintaining the principles that have proven 
to be inefficient and, in fact, have led us to the trap of long -lasting negotiating stalemate. Moreover, 
all that is amid the backdrop of the crisis of confidence within the WTO and the Appellate Body 
selection process kick -off being systemically impeded by one Member. As a result, the existe ntial 
threat to the WTO enforcement mechanism fetters and to no extent stimulates the rest of the 
Membership in its search for development of the necessary new rules or the improvement of existing 
ones.  
 
The gap between Members' positions does not seem to narrow. If this trend continues, the prospects 
of any multilateral deal in Nur -Sultan look grim.  
 
Good examples are moratoria on TRIPS non -violation complaints and on imposition of customs duties 
on electronic transmissions. Both should be reviewed at MC12 . However, even on those minor issues 
we have not seen any convergence so far.  
 
It looks more and more that the only meaningful outcome on the upcoming Ministerial Conference 
may be the accession of Belarus. This country has already accomplished huge amoun t of work, both 
legislative and in terms of negotiations, by virtue of its Membership in the Eurasian Economic Union. 
The MC12 objective is no doubt ambitious but it is evident that Belarus is fully mobilised and 
engaged. This gives us good chances to comp lete the accession process by MC12.  
 
What we currently need is a clear roadmap to Nur -Sultan. But we are unlikely to agree on any way 
forward without a trade truce. It is our duty, as officials responsible for trade, to stop the vicious 
cycle of escalating  trade tensions.  
 
We should collectively declare the importance of the WTO and the multilateral trading system as a 
powerful force supporting economic growth, development, stability and peace. The appointment of 
the Appellate Body members should be immedia tely unblocked. To restore the confidence in the 
system, Members should eliminate all unilateral trade -restrictive measures adopted in contrast to 
the WTO law in letter and spirit.  
 
The most important for us after the summer break should be to start talkin g about convergence of 
Members' requests and sensitivities. This approach should enable us to balance the interests of all 
the negotiating parties and to reach the necessary consensus.  
 
Russia remains committed to advance the WTO's negotiating agenda on al l issues of interest to the 
Membership, notably on agriculture, fisheries subsidies, as well as in areas covered by Joint 
Statement Initiatives.  
 
In agriculture, we welcome Members' active participation in discussions at the CoA SS aimed at 
formulating new  approaches to constrain trade -distortive domestic support. We are now at the point 
where a summary of the submission and ideas is needed with hints to possible options and solutions.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 155 - 
 
In fisheries subsidies, we particularly praise the four facilitators' streamlined texts. The documents 
represent the best effort of the facilitators and the group to make an objective snapshot of the 
current state of play. However, we still significantly diverge on majority of substantial issues. Much 
more flex ibility will be required during the upcoming semester. Members will need sufficient 
opportunities for bilateral work during and between the clusters.  
 
Various unsettled legal issues exist on the e -commerce track. Russia is the co -sponsor of the Joint 
State ment on Electronic Commerce in Davos as well as the Osaka Declaration on digital economy. 
We encourage other Members to join us in the discussions on a set of open and predictable 
regulations. We are also very encouraged to see the progress made so far on other MC11 Joint 
Initiatives such as services domestic regulation, investment facilitation and MSMEs.  
 
To conclude, I would like to stress the importance of constructive engagement among all the 
Members. A more pragmatic approach can help us bridge the dif ferences and find a common way 
forward.  
 
40. Malaysia  
 
At the outset, Malaysia associates with the ASEAN Statement delivered by Thailand. We also thank 
the various Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their updates.  
 
Seven months have passed and since the las t General Council Meeting in May this year, Ministers 
have gathered in a series of meetings highlighting the importance of the multilateral trading system, 
noting the current standing challenges faced by this institution. Ministers have been calling for 
Members to actively engage in finding ways to address the issues as well as strengthening the WTO 
through reform initiatives.   
 
The most important issue at hand is the need to ensure the smooth functioning of the dispute 
settlement system. We note that Memb ers have been engaging constructively in addressing the 
situation. It is important to be reminded that it is the collective responsibility of all Members to 
identify potential solutions to address the issue pertaining to the selection process of Appellate Body 
members. On this note, it is encouraging that there have been convergences in the discussion that 
has been undertaken by Ambassador David Walker in the structured and focused discussion.  
 
We reiterate the urgent need for Members to exercise flexibili ties to resolve the pending issue to 
ensure that the credibility of the multilateral trading system is not undermined. We also wish to 
reiterate the need to launch the Appellate Body selection process as soon as possible considering 
that we are less than f ive months away from the expiration of the terms of two more Appellate Body 
members which will inevitably lead to the possible paralysis of the Appellate Body.  
 
On the call for strengthening and modernising the WTO system, there has been various proposals  
put forward by Members including on improving transparency particularly on notifications and the 
corresponding procedural aspects. We are encouraged to also see that developing Members have 
put forward papers that contribute to the improvement of the tran sparency at the WTO. In this 
regard, Malaysia is still assessing the proposals and remain committed in engaging constructively 
with Members.  
 
While we move towards improving the system, development is a crucial component to ensure that 
all Members are able  to reap the benefits of the global trading system.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, Malaysia recogni zes the importance of the work on fisheries subsidies that 
could make significant contribution to more sustainable fisheries globally. Malaysia is supportive of 
the effort to prohibit subsidies in line with the existing mandate and we look forward to start 
negotiating based on the recently endorsed draft facilitators' texts in September 2019. We call for 
the process going forward to be a transparent and an inclusiv e one to reflect the call for transparency 
in the various fora here at the WTO. We wish to express that given again the limited time we have 
until December 2019, we remain committed to achieve an outcome as directed by the Ministers. The 
discipline we envi sion is one that is simple and not unduly burdensome to Members as well as 
recognising the importance of special and differential treatment for developing and LDC Members.  
 
On this note, we would like to record our appreciation for Ambassador Zapata for h is tireless effort 
in undertaking the consultations and conducting the meeting to move the discussion forward.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 156 - 
 
We also welcome the various ongoing discussions on MSMEs and investment facilitation as well as 
the negotiating progress in the Joint Statement I nitiative on Electronic Commerce. The process is 
open and we encourage other Members to be partake in the discussion to provide their valuable 
insights. It is encouraging that these initiatives are currently looking at the way forward as they 
work towards MC12.  
 
The world is watching us now and at this critical juncture, it is important for efforts to be considered 
for the existence of the WTO to remain relevant.  
 
41. Norway  
 
Norway thanks the Director -General for his report and thanks the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups 
for their updates.  
 
This time around, I believe we have reason to be somewhat more upbeat in our assessment of the 
state of play in the negotiating pillar.  
 
The main reason for this flicker of optimism is the progress made in the fisheries subsidies 
negotiations. Thanks to the steady leadership of Ambassador Zapata and the able contributions of 
the four facilitators, we now have four working papers that will help us to engage in more focused 
negotiations in the fall. This is a significant step forward to delivering on the whole mandate within 
the agreed timeframe.  
 
In this context, I would like to express our gratitude to Ambassador Zapata for his tireless ef forts. 
We wish him all the best in his future endeavours.  
 
Norway will continue to pay special attention to the discipline on overcapacity and overfishing due 
to the real impact it can have on the sustainability of fisheries resources. Furthermore, we reco gnize 
that this is an area where challenges related to the development dimension need to be addressed 
effectively.  
 
We will continue to work for an effective and comprehensive outcome. We will help search for 
solutions that can bridge gaps, but the least common denominator will not be enough to meet the 
whole mandate. We will need to do better than that.  
 
Norway notes that for several Members, agriculture is a key part of any negotiated outcome at MC12. 
In our view, the Membership needs to be realistic wi th regard to what is possible to achieve when 
views are divided on how to make progress. This is the situation in general including on domestic 
support.  
 
Norway is willing to engage constructively in any discussion on agriculture taking into account our 
well-known sensitivities. To achieve results at MC12, proposals submitted by proponents and text 
based discussions will be needed after the summer break.  
 
Norway is pleased by the constructive engagement and active participation of many Members in the 
Joint Statement Initiatives and encourages others to take part as well.  
 
We value the constructive meetings we had on e -commerce and look forward to continuing the 
negotiations in the fall with the aim to update the rulebook in an area of great importance to trade 
and industry.  
 
Furthermore, we welcome the progress achieved on Investment Facilitation for Development, and 
support the ambition to move the discussion to a new phase.  
 
On development, we look forward with anticipation to the revised proposals from  G90. I would also 
like to take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Ngarambe for his efforts as Chair of the CTD SS.  
  
I regret to once again stress that the most urgent issue facing the organization is the crisis affecting 
the dispute settlement function. Many Members have engaged actively in the search for a sustainable 
solution. This engagement deserves recognition and the process to fill the vacancies in the Appellate 
Body should be initiated without further delay.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 157 - 
 
Last, but not least, I would like to thank all Members that have presented their views on WTO reform 
including the development dimension. As we see it, the  Membership can best start preparing for 
MC12 by putting forward ideas, exchanging views and seeking a way forward together.  
 
In a time of increased trade tensions, risks of further unilateral measures and bilateral deals outside 
the framework of the WTO,  safeguarding and strengthening the multilateral trading system is more 
important than ever before.  
 
42. Uganda  
 
We commend the Director -General for his report and all the Chairs of Negotiating Groups for their 
reports. At the outset, my delegation associates itself with the statements made by Benin, Chad and 
Jamaica on behalf of the African, LDC and ACP Groups respectively.  
 
The rules -based multilateral trading system is fundamentally indispensable. It is these rules that 
have over the years helped us determin e the mandates that have guided our work in this 
organization. Indeed they have preserved the order in world trade though not to perfection.  
 
The objectives of the WTO are very clear. In consonance, my delegation reaffirms its belief in the 
values of the D oha Development Agenda and all the mandates including on special and differential 
treatment. Therefore, some of the current proposed approaches by some Members on this issue are 
found to be diversionary. Discriminatory, cherry picking approaches to the man dates of our Ministers 
would be unacceptable.  
 
It is indeed the disregard, whether wilful or otherwise, of the rules which is at the core of the present 
crisis in the Appellate Body. If we want to ensure the future of this organization, all Members must 
resolve to follow established rules to influence the change they desire. Hostage taking tactics by 
some Members are certainly bound to backfire in the present era.  
 
The critical importance of mutual trust and respect to resolve issues remains undeniable. The  
creation of wilful crises only serves to break such trust and diminish respect. We wish to prevail on 
the Director -General that the selection process to fill vacancies in the Appellate Body must be 
launched without any further delay, and as a priority.  
 
With regard to e -commerce, our fear is that the activities of some Members in the WTO have 
undermined the progress under the mandated 1998 Work Programme. The argument that 
discussions on certain critical aspects such as classification issues have been exha usted is simply 
not plausible in the light of rapid developments in this area.  
 
There remains a wide spectrum of issues to be discussed such as 'strengthening' domestic services 
capacity of developing countries especially LDCs for participation in e -commer ce services, the access 
to cutting edge technology that is indispensable to the digital economy and above all bridging of the 
very wide digital gap.  
 
Finally, on general reforms, we have had talks that the WTO needs to adapt and create a fairer and 
a more level playing field. We do not want reforms just for the sake of it. The reforms we undertake 
must for all purposes and intent cater for the interests of all the Members. We shall not accept 
reforms that serve only the interests of the few.  
 
The reforms we  intend to carry out should incorporate and include all the authentic Ministerial 
mandates. As we have advocated before, any proposals for reform in this organization must be 
generated and driven by a genuine development perspective for the interests of al l Members of this 
organization. Failing this, any meaningful progress may prove impossible.  
 
My delegation remains committed to advancing work in line with the agreed rules and principles.  
 
43. Ecuador  
 
Ecuador wishes to thank the Director -General for his report as well as the report of the Chairs of the 
negotiating groups.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 158 - 
 
We are less than a year away from the Twelfth Ministerial Conference in Nur -Sultan and we need to 
give a decisive boost to the negotiations in order to achieve the outcomes that eluded us at the 
previous Conference.  
 
Ecuador considers that today, more than ever, is the moment to reaffirm multilateralism as a 
principle and fundamental pillar of the negotiations taking place within this organization. We 
underscore the need to deepen multilateral negotiations based on transparent, inclusive and 
balanced processes that can produce consensual outcomes taking into account the different interests 
and development levels of Members so that the regulation of global trade be nefits all of us. We 
cannot disregard the need of developing countries to maintain a public policy space to allow us to 
take actions that help our economies grow and integrate further into global trade.  
 
Given Ecuador's production and export structure, agr iculture is the most important topic for our 
country in the multilateral negotiations. It is a priority that we share with most Members of this 
organization.  
 
Beyond the goal of increasing trade, which has its own merits, fundamental objectives for Ecuador , 
as a developing country and a small and vulnerable economy, are food security, rural development 
and poverty alleviation in rural areas.  
 
The multilateral trading system should reflect the commitment made by countries to achieve the 
Sustainable Developme nt Goals, among which ending hunger and poverty feature prominently, inter 
alia through proper management of agriculture.  
 
Ecuador thus supports comprehensive and broad reform, with a focus on development and the 
principle of Special and Differential Treat ment, that strikes the right balance between a commitment 
to obtaining benefits for all Members and the unequivocal priority to honour the commitments and 
outstanding mandates entrusted to us by our Ministers at past Conferences.  
 
We consider very benefici al the exercise which the Working Groups recently completed. However, 
we hope to leave behind us exploratory conversations and to come back after the summer break to 
work in more concrete terms in the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session, in order t o make 
the most of the time left before the Conference in Nur -Sultan.  
 
Similarly, regarding negotiations on fisheries subsidies, Ecuador considers it a priority to engage in 
a real, text -based negotiation process on the basis of existing working documents and the proposals 
submitted by the Members.  
 
Ecuador considers it crucial for the development of disciplines to consider the realities and specific 
needs of each Member particularly of those who, like Ecuador, identify in fisheries an instrument of 
develop ment and an opportunity to improve the living conditions of thousands of mainly poor people, 
whose livelihood depends on this activity. Therefore, the discipline should clearly contain elements 
of an effective special and differential treatment and the pro tection of small scale fishing.  
 
Members should help identify solutions, taking into considering our past contributions to the 
multilateral trading system as well as our respective levels of development.  
 
Lastly, one of the cornerstones of the multilateral  trading system is the dispute settlement 
mechanism which brings certainty and predictability that WTO law will be applied by all of its 
Members irrespective of size, share of global trade or level of development. The Membership has an 
obligation to start as soon as possible the process of appointing Members to the Appellate Body 
before that collegial body finds itself without a sufficient number of Members to continue functioning. 
It is wholly unacceptable to envisage options that will not ensure the full functioning of this 
mechanism, as imperfect as it is, but which has played a pivotal role in keeping the multilateral 
trading system alive.  
 
No negotiation topic and no initiative to reform the WTO can or should be linked to unblocking the 
election of members to the Appellate Body. Any procedural concerns should be resolved without 
jeopardising this mechanism which is of paramount importance for the survival of the global 
economy.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 159 - 
 
44. Afghanistan  
 
I would like to thank the Director -General for convening th is meeting as well as for his 
comprehensive report. We express our appreciation to the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their 
respective updates on the current state of negotiations.  
 
I would like to join others to say goodbye to the departing Ambassad ors and wish them all the best 
in their future personal and professional endeavours.  
 
Afghanistan recogni zes the WTO as the only global institution for international trade as its work 
impacts all countries and their populations despite the size of their e conomies and geopolitics. We 
believe that if this organization functions effectively, it will positively contribute to the economic 
development of all Members and in particular to the livelihoods of the people living in the most 
vulnerable economies and co nflict-affected countries like mine.  
  
Hence, we are of the view that we have to overcome our organizational challenges and do our 
homework to deliver the substantive work to achieve concrete outcomes for all Members – helping 
them to reap the benefits of the global trade and development based on a fair, balanced, transparent, 
inclusive, sustainable and rules -based multilateral trading system.  
 
Afghanistan, as an LDC, supports the efforts aiming at strengthening the WTO and addressing the 
systemic threats o f this organization. We thank sincerely Members who are engaged in these efforts.  
 
While we support the current negotiations, we subscribe to the call to all Members to do their best 
to overcome the challenges and empower this organization based on soluti on-targeted and result -
oriented approaches and efforts.  
 
On this end, Afghanistan is committed to engage in these efforts and we are of the view that the 
current pace of the negotiations needs to be accelerated by prioritising them based on their 
mandates and urgency for balancing the benefit of global trade and inclusive trade for all Members, 
especially LDCs.  
 
S&DT in the WTO is an essential part of the WTO agreements for a fairer, more equitable, inclusive 
and transparent system. All S&DT measures must also be made more effectively – in compliance 
with the Paragraph 44 of the Doha mandate – in line with the founding principles of the WTO.  
 
On the issue of services, Afghanistan stresses on the implementation of the LDC services waiver. 
And we thank those Members who have notified their preferences.  
 
For my delegation, the most urgent issue is the selection process of Appellate Body members given 
the importance of the dispute settlement system in the multilateral trading system.  
  
Afghanistan thanks various  proponents for their efforts and we support the current informal process 
led by Ambassador Walker to tackle the issue and to reach a concrete outcome as soon as possible 
considering the 10 December deadline.  
  
We expect that the commitments on domestic support, market access and export competition of 
original Members with those who acceded the WTO under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement 
and undertook significantly larger commitments and liberalization should be levelled.  
 
The commitments ma de by Article XII Members can be seen as benchmarks where Agriculture 
reforms should lead.  
  
On the joint initiatives, Afghanistan supports the work of MSMEs and women empowerment through 
trade. We are participating in the meetings and discussions on e -commerce and investment 
facilitation despite the fact that Afghanistan is not yet a subscriber of them.  
 
We appreciate discussions on these initiatives and commend their proponents, coordinators and 
Members for their extensive works and we acknowledge the op portunity through open, transparent 
and inclusive discussions where all Members can participate and engage.  
  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 160 - 
 
On the WTO accession, I urge all Members to extend their support to acceding members to conclude 
their accession process expeditiously, in particu lar, to support the efforts of the post -conflict 
acceding countries of the g7+ WTO Accession Group which Afghanistan proudly coordinates.  
 
Afghanistan looks at the WTO accession process and membership as an effective way to sustain 
peace, stability and pro sperity through conducting WTO related legal and institutional reforms, trade 
integration and participating in the international trade and value chain.  
 
Therefore, we commend the various activities and events organi zed under the Trade for Peace 
initiative  led by the Accessions Division in collaboration with the g7+ WTO Accession Group. I would 
like to take this opportunity to express our sincere thanks to DDG Alan Wolff for his genuine support 
and wisdom extended to this initiative.  
 
In this regard, I hav e the honour to report that the first and historic meeting of the Accessions 
Working Party of South Sudan to the WTO was successfully convened in March and I have been 
honoured to Chair the Working Party.  
 
It is a remarkable event that the latest Member o f the WTO, Afghanistan, chairs the Working Party 
on the accession of a recent acceding member.  
 
Afghanistan's accession experience is very relevant and fresh and would be of great help for acceding 
governments especially South Sudan.  
  
In conclusion, Afg hanistan affiliates itself with the statements made by the LDC Group delivered by 
Chad and the statement of the Group of Article IX Members delivered by Panama.  
 
45. Hong Kong, China  
 
I would like to thank the Director -General and the Negotiating Group Chairs for the detailed reports 
on the latest developments.    
 
As we move into the second half of 2019, we continue to see Members' increasing engagement in 
the discussions of how different functions of the WTO could be reformed and improved. The concrete 
proposals that have emerged from Members' discussions are a clear reflection of the great 
importance that Members attach to this organization. We want the organization to continue to work, 
and we want it to work well for every Member.  
 
On the nego tiations on fisheries subsidies, we would express our sincere thanks to the Negotiating 
Group Chair and the four facilitators for their hard work. I would also like to take the opportunity to 
express our gratitude to Ambassador Roberto Zapata for his leade rship and efforts in leading the 
discussions in the Negotiating Group on Rules since March 2018. We regret that he has to leave us 
at this important juncture but would wish him success in all his future endeavours.  
 
We note that notwithstanding the broad c onsensus among Members on the prohibition of fisheries 
subsidies that contribute to overfishing and overcapacity, divergent views on various issues remain.  
We would reiterate Hong Kong, China's full support for the work of the WTO to clarify and improve 
disciplines on fisheries subsidies. In order to reach a meaningful agreement by the end of this year, 
we all must redouble our efforts and intensify our work in bridging the gaps between now and the 
end of the year.  
 
While we are all earnestly seeking concr ete outcomes in respect of WTO reform through intensive 
discussions on all fronts, smaller delegations, because of resource constraints, are often facing 
increasing challenges in preparing for and following up on all relevant discussions, especially when 
the relevant meetings are held in parallel and the Secretariat may also be overloaded by the growing 
number and length of meetings.  
 
To ensure Members' meaningful engagement in all relevant discussions and meetings, Hong Kong, 
China has been working on arra ngements to support the better functioning of the CTG and its 
subsidiary committees.  We hope to help focus Members' attention on deploying small and practical 
steps which are readily available and implementable under the existing framework but could quick ly 
and effectively relieve part of the administrative burdens of Members and the Secretariat. At the 
moment, we are suggesting the use of annotated agenda for the CTG meetings and an annual plan WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 161 - 
 
of meetings for the Council and its subsidiaries. We believe these small administrative steps would 
help all delegations to better prepare themselves for active engagement in the relevant meetings 
and organise our work and resources better.  
 
We understand that the above ideas are shared by many Members and are comp lementary to 
proposals and initiatives being discussed in various WTO forums. Streamlining and modernising day -
to-day routine work would help Members and the Secretariat focus more of their time and resources 
on other substantive work.  
 
On the Appellate B ody issue, Hong Kong, China commends Ambassador Walker for his effort in 
leading the consultations under the informal process. With the imminent retirement of two Appellate 
Body members this December and bearing in mind the time required for identifying th eir successors, 
urgent actions are needed to resolve the impasse and preserve the integrity of this important 
function of the WTO.  
 
We are committed to engaging constructively to address the systemic concerns as identified but we 
do not believe it is justi fied to delay the appointments pending completion of the ongoing discussions 
on reforming the system. The selection process should proceed immediately without further delay 
while we continue with our meaningful dialogues on reforming the Appellate Body in parallel.  
 
46. Argentina  
 
To paraphrase what our European Union colleague said at the previous meeting, there are ongoing 
activities, but they cannot be interpreted as a sign that we are making progress in resolving the 
present crisis. I wonder what we are cre ating – what we are building. Someone might perhaps say 
that we are going through "creative destruction". If so, we should be less creative.  
 
Interestingly, governments often indicate the "achievements" that have been made. Looking back, 
it would be diffic ult to address that point as far as the WTO is concerned in recent times.  
 
The commitment to the multilateral trading system is unanimously reiterated. Meetings overlap. 
Documents accumulate. Papers are revised and new co -sponsors are added but the result s do not 
appear and are not immediately seen.  
 
Large companies set themselves goals and give bonuses to their employees for objectives reached 
and/or surpassed. Certainly, having a horizon works and helps to direct the sails to correctly take 
advantage of the wind. However, our horizon seems to be flat: an uninterrupted horizontal line.  
 
We insist that the WTO is and must continue to be an organization led by its Members. Where are 
we leading it? Can we perhaps say that by closing in on our positions we are  defending our national 
interests? Could we argue that paralysing the organization in its different pillars is synonymous with 
doing a good job? We want a WTO that works, that evolves, that is up to the challenges of the 21st 
century. We are demanding to t hose who seek to accede. We demand flexibility in one area but are 
inflexible in another. We are, in a way, a great contradiction.  
 
On the day this organization was founded, we pledged to work together, but then groups were 
formed and their positions were extreme.  
 
It is proclaimed that this must be a rules -based system, but if you claim transparency, which is a 
foundational rule, it is said that you can violate it without any consequences.  
 
Free trade is proclaimed, but many blatant restrict ions on that freedom are implemented.  
 
Some present themselves to the world showing a desperate economic situation, while expressing in 
domestic speeches the great development achieved.  
 
We sometimes witness statements that denote a simulation game of very  poor quality.  
 
The crucial issues are well known: the situation of the Appellate Body, the early expiry of the deadline 
for reaching an agreement on fisheries subsidies, long outstanding issues on agricultural trade 
reform, for many Members the much ment ioned Joint Initiatives and, in the case of Argentina, I add 
the proposal we co -sponsored on transparency.  WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 162 - 
 
On a positive note, this week we have seen a reconfirmation of the good pace and genuine 
involvement in e -commerce. I understand that many Members wo uld like to see that same 
dynamism at the multilateral level and we share that aspiration.  
 
We would also like to thank Ambassador Zapata, not only for his efforts to that end, but also for 
having provided the high level of prestige that this organization so badly needs.  
 
It seems that we are witnessing slow motion destruction while all emergency exits are blocked.  
 
Let us hope that our collective intelligence will allow us to open at least one path on which we all 
agree. And I hope we find it before it is  too late. But if not, I hope that we can at least collectively 
manage the collapse as efficiently as possible.  
 
47. Nigeria  
 
Nigeria wishes to commend the Director -General for the excellent manner he has been piloting the 
affairs of this Committee. We thank h im for the detailed report he presented on the status of ongoing 
trade negotiations. We also wish to thank the Chairs of various Negotiating Groups for their reports. 
We wish to associate ourselves with statements made by Benin on behalf of the African Gro up and 
Jamaica on behalf of the ACP Group.  
 
We believe that the WTO as the central pillar of the multilateral trading system should continue to 
play a positive role in shaping the dynamics of global commercial relations and engender inclusive 
growth and de velopment for all. Nigeria is fully committed to the multilateral trading system and 
has been actively engaging in the ongoing negotiations. In order to ensure the system delivers 
unambiguous benefits for all, we wish to share our expectation in the ongoin g negotiations with 
Members.  
 
This Committee may wish to note that agriculture is perhaps the most important sector of interest 
to developing countries, in particular African Countries. The sector is in the heart of Nigeria's strategy 
for economic diversification and structural transfo rmation. Currently, the sector accounts for 22.8% 
of GDP and 36.5% of total employment in Nigeria. It is therefore in our interest that the outcome of 
the ongoing negotiations addresses apparent imbalances in the system especially under the domestic 
suppor t pillar.  
 
We urge Members to work towards achieving a fruitful outcome by MC12 that:  
 
(i) substantially reduces trade distorting domestic support beginning with the elimination 
of AMS beyond de minimis;  
 
(ii) addresses the shortcomings of decoupled and direct p ayment programme of Paragraphs 
5–13 of Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture;  
 
(iii) addresses mandated issues such as PSH for food security purposes and SSM; and,  
 
(iv) safeguards the rights of developing countries to special and differential treatment 
especially  on programmes under Article 6.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture.  
 
Regarding transparency and notification, we believe they are critical to the effective functioning of 
the multilateral trading system. We therefore wish to reaffirm our readiness to support  any efforts 
that encourage transparency in the administration of trade policy and enhance notification. We urge 
Members to set aside any idea that prescribed punitive measures for Members that are unable to 
fulfil their transparency obligations as this wi ll be counterproductive. In our opinion, non -compliance 
by Members especially developing countries to transparency obligations is not deliberate but due to 
inherent institutional challenges. We therefore urge Members to adopt a balanced and cooperative 
approach to transparency and notification.  
 
My delegation would like to underscore the importance of ensuring the effective functioning of the 
Appellate Body so as to uphold the integrity of the rules -based multilateral system. The WTO dispute 
settlement syst em remains the pillar of the multilateral trading system. A unique feature of the WTO 
is its ability to enforce its own rules thereby ensuring stability and predictability of the international 
trading system. This unique feature risks being eroded if the d ispute settlement system collapses. WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 163 - 
 
The clock is ticking and we may stand the risk of facing an Appellate Body that fails to fulfil the 
prescribed quorum by the end of the year. Therefore our priority should be to resolve this impasse. 
Consequently, we urg e all Members to continue to work constructively towards finding harmonious 
solutions in order to urgently fill the Appellate Body member vacancies.  
 
We agreed in Buenos Aires to continue to engage constructively in fisheries subsidies negotiations 
with a view to adopting by MC12 an agreement on comprehensive and effective disciplines on 
fisheries subsidies. We note that working papers on all pillars of the fisheries subsidies negotiations 
have been circulated. We urge Members to take advantage of the summe r break to reflect on these 
working papers with a view to developing proposals that will enable us to deliver on our Ministers' 
mandate by December 2019. Members should also ensure that special and differential treatment 
remains an integral part of any agr eement on fisheries subsidies as mandated.  
 
Nigeria wishes to reiterate its earlier position that S&DT is a right of developing countries enshrined 
in the Marrakesh Agreement which must be preserved. We know that without S&DT, many 
developing countries wou ld not have signed onto the WTO Agreement in the first place. We therefore 
urge Members to focus on how to deliver on mandates of Ministers as per Paragraph 44 of the Doha 
Ministerial Declaration which is that S&DT should be made more precise, effective an d operational.  
 
Nigeria welcomes the WTO reform initiatives. We urge Members to take advantage of the initiative 
and work towards addressing the imbalances in trade rules and provide clarity on the development 
dimension to ensure international trade effect ively drive growth and development. The reform should 
reinforce the fundamental rules of the multilateral trading system.  
 
In conclusion, Nigeria believes that the dynamics of global commercial relations is continually being 
shaped by a number of factors s uch as technology, business and investment climate and politics, 
among others. In our view, the WTO needs to take into account these realities if the institution is to 
remain relevant in this 21st Century. It is in recognition of this fact that Nigeria is actively 
participating in the respective joint initiatives. We urge all Members to come onboard this open and 
inclusive process.  
 
48. Chinese Taipei  
 
We thank the Director -General and the Negotiating Group Chairs for their respective progress 
reports.  
 
We understand that the TNC is an arena for summarising all the negotiating issues ahead of the 
General Council meeting next week. I would like to take this opportunity, if I may, to provide you 
our views on the negotiations or issues we consider to be vita l to the future sustainability of the 
WTO and the responses that are needed in the real world that we face today.  
 
But I am going to do this in a non -standard way – not by addressing each of the issues one -by-one 
but by raising some general principles tha t we believe to be important.  
 
Given that there are so many different opinions on so many aspects of WTO reform, our first principle 
is the so -called 85% principle. We do not insist on 100% agreement with a proposal raised by any 
Members. Most of the time,  85% agreement is enough for us to support a proposal unless the 
remaining 15% is really crucial. Being constrained by details or minor differences, in our experience, 
is rarely constructive.  
 
The second principle is that fairness or a level playing field should be set above efficiency. We are 
of the view that a proposal to facilitate trade or to improve trade efficiency can be supported only if 
it is based on a level playing field. Without fairness, it makes no sense at all to facilitate an unfair 
market s cenario. For instance, we would surely all agree that we should not improve the efficiency 
of a slavery market or improve the efficiency of human trafficking. This principle should be self -
evident.  
 
The third principle is what I call the "bottom line princ iple". Members should bear in mind that, first 
and foremost, the WTO is established to facilitate fair and free trade according to the Marrakesh 
Agreement. Thus, sustaining a level playing field and a fair and free trading environment, in our 
opinion, is t he real bottom line of this organization.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 164 - 
 
We understand that there is a great amount of variety among the 164 Members, so some may argue 
that there are all kinds of market economies, all kinds of different needs for S&DT, and all kinds of 
reasons why some  obligations are not acted upon. But even if some of these arguments may be 
reasonable, they should all have a bottom line. We do not think it can be argued that "all economies 
can be seen as a kind of market economy", or "all violation of obligations can be justified because 
of the wide variety of the Membership". If we accept this kind of tautology, then we are hitting our 
heads against the wall. We have to convince ourselves not to fall into this tautology trap.  
 
And, finally, the idealism principle. Des pite the fact that Members all support the multilateral system, 
it is sometimes helpful to remind ourselves that the WTO was established on the basis of some ideas, 
and some moral philosophical backgrounds. I do not have to repeat the theses here, but refe rences 
can be easily found in the Marrakesh Ministerial Declaration. We have to convince ourselves that 
more constructive progress can be made if we can keep those idealistic conceptions in mind, ahead 
of the plain argument.  
 
These are our four abstract pr inciples to face the realistic WTO negotiation and reform issues. We 
would like to share these views with Members.  
 
49. Pakistan  
 
We wish to thank the Director -General and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports. 
Pakistan appreciates the efforts  of all Members who aim to preserve and strengthen the multilateral 
trading system.  
 
On the larger issue of reform, it has been our consistent view that, any reform should have 
developing countries at its centre and must be geared towards addressing their needs. Reform 
should not, at any cost, alter the fundamental principles of the WTO. It is unfortunate that the 
concept of development has come to be questioned. Insofar as trade and development are crucially 
linked, questioning this fundamental concept can not lend to positive progress. We note that new 
proposals are being submitted which underline more development friendly aspects that can be the 
focus of reform. We welcome such efforts and look forward to engaging positively.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, Pakis tan believes that the time for finding an effective mechanism to save  
our oceans and the livelihoods of many coastal communities is very short. We see these negotiations 
as a chance to reignite global confidence in multilateral cooperation. The negotiation s have 
progressed steadily with good efforts made by the facilitators to capture the various nuances of 
Members' positions. We now need to shift to focused text -based negotiations. From our perspective, 
the element of special and differential treatment and  artisanal fishermen have seen less attention 
than some of the other elements. Effective S&DT and safeguarding development aspects of this 
negotiation will be critical for finding a balanced and effective outcome.  
 
We would like to express our satisfaction over the process being led by the Chair of the CoA SS in 
the agriculture negotiations. The Working Group process was helpful in triggering technical 
discussions in a frank manner among the delegates. We support the continuation of this 
configu ration but would like to deepen the discussions in a problem -solving mode. We are hopeful 
that such focused discussions will in turn help generate new solutions and ideas.  
 
We note that the process led by Ambassador Walker to resolve the Appellate Body dea dlock has 
seen some progress. We appreciate the efforts of Ambassador Walker and call on all Members to 
engage in earnest to resolve this impasse in good faith. Pakistan, like many developing countries, 
views the dispute settlement mechanism as a main pill ar upholding the multilateral trading system 
and values the contribution of the Appellate Body in giving strength to this pillar. We must move 
towards reinvigorating the Appellate Body without compromising its independence, integrity and 
impartiality. The resolution of the deadlock is an independent and most urgent issue and must not 
be linked with any other reform process.  
 
50. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  
 
We thank the Director -General  and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports . Their 
efforts are much appreciated.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 165 - 
 
We would like in particular to pay tribute to Ambassador François Ngarambe of Rwanda for his work 
in leading the Committee on Trade and Development in Special Session, and to Ambassador Roberto 
Zapata of Mexico, Chair of the Nego tiating Group on Rules, for his leadership of the negotiations on 
fisheries subsidies. We wish him every success in his future work. We also appreciate the valuable 
work of the facilitators and the Secretariat.  
 
With regard to the proposed programme, start ing in September, our delegation will be taking an 
active part in efforts to ensure the delivery of the negotiating mandates under the WTO and 
Sustainable Development Goal 14.6.  
 
We hope that effective special and differential treatment will be accorded to  developing and least 
developed countries.  
 
We stress the importance of artisanal fisheries for economic, social and cultural development, in 
particular through their contribution to poverty reduction and food security.  
 
Allow me to share with you three co ncerns that, in our view, will jeopardise the future work of the 
WTO.  
 
The first is the paralysis of the Appellate Body. We recogni ze that there are aspects of its functioning 
that could be improved. It is an irresponsible act by the United States Governme nt to have hijacked 
the process of the selection of members of the Appellate Body as a pretext to force change without 
putting any alternative solutions on the table. Time is running out but we can still rescue this 
important achievement of the Uruguay Rou nd. 
 
The second is the criminal and illegal use of unilateral coercive measures – of a protectionist nature 
and for political motives – by the United States Government against Venezuela, applied as levers of 
coercion and blackmail against sovereign States such as ours.  
 
In this context, we reiterate our strongest condemnation of these measures which restrict trade and 
seek to undermine our independence and self -determination.  
 
Since 2014, the United States Government has been applying numerous punitive sanc tions against 
Venezuela. I may highlight here the embargo on its oil exports which represent 95% of its financial 
income, the illegal confiscation of its gold reserves in the Bank of England and the prohibition of the 
use of its bank accounts abroad. As of  30 April 2019, a total of $7,000 billion belonging to the people 
of Venezuela has been frozen or confiscated by United States banks, money intended for the 
purchase of medicines and food for our people.  
 
These criminal measures are bringing death and suffering to the Venezuelan people. They are 
causing distortions in our relationship with our trading partners and sabotaging our ability to honour 
international commitments such as its assessments and contributions to this organization.  
 
We regret, in thi s context, that we are unable to honour other commitments, such as, for example, 
that of notifications.  
 
The third relates to the so called "reform process", in the course of which proposals have been made 
on the principles of this organization. These incl ude special and differential treatment, transparency 
and consensus.  
 
We associate ourselves with the proposals that developing countries have put on the table. We are 
working on a document that reflects the concerns of countries that are confronted on a da ily basis 
by a system that favours the interests of a few and accentuates asymmetries between developed 
and developing countries.  
 
Any initiative to strengthen the WTO must be based on a proper diagnosis of the realities of 
international trade, in which hi storical debts are recogni zed, commitments are honoured, the specific 
characteristics of each Member are respected and the existing imbalances in world trade are 
corrected.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 166 - 
 
51. Haiti  
 
Haiti associates itself with the statements made by Trinidad on behalf of CARICOM, Chad on behalf 
of the LDCs and Jamaica on behalf of the ACP countries.  
 
My delegation thanks the Director -General for his report, which takes stock of progress in the 
negotiations and in the bilateral exchanges and meetings in which he h as been engaging over these 
last few days.  
 
My delegation also thanks the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their oral reports and for their 
commitment and leadership in guiding discussions in their respective areas of expertise.  
 
My delegation remains concerned about the decline in world trade and the continuing trade tensions 
threatening the very existence of the multilateral trading system – which until now has safeguarded 
the interests of all Members, in particular the most vulnerable among them.  
 
My delegation notes the limited progress in the discussions on the Appellate Body. As yet the various 
proposals which have been put on the table have not been sufficiently aligned for us to envisage any 
sort of immediate outcome.  
 
My delegation therefore enc ourages Members to redouble their efforts to identify what we might 
term a safe "landing zone" as soon as possible.  
 
My delegation is calling for a solution that takes due account of the nature of the problems raised 
and safeguards the independence of judg es in the performance of their functions.  
 
Where agriculture is concerned, my delegation would like first of all to commend Ambassador Deep 
Ford on his tireless efforts to open negotiations on all three pillars. Agriculture remains a key activity 
for small economies like ours. It is the principal livelihood for the people living in our rural areas, 
who, because of the lack of infrastructure, are unable to respond to what is often unfair competition.  
Thus, my delegation is opposed to any domestic suppor t that distorts the agricultural market and 
has a negative impact on our smallholder farmers.  
 
With regard to fisheries subsidies, my delegation would like to congratulate Ambassador Zapata for 
his energy and dedication in seeking the necessary measure of alignment so that an outcome can 
be achieved by the end of December in accordance with the instructions given by Ministers at the 
Eleventh Ministerial Conference.  
 
As much remains to be done, my delegation calls on Members to work in a constructive spirit with a 
view to achieving a result as soon as possible.  
 
On WTO reform, my delegation welcomes all the proposals currently on the table. It considers that 
any reform, while consolidating any successes achieved thus far, must respond to the new realities 
of world trade, make the negotiating machinery more efficient and place development – including 
the development of the weakest economies – at the heart of its concerns.  
 
In conclusion, the Haitian delegation reaffirms its support for a transparent, inclusive and fair 
multilateral trading system. It would like to take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Zapata of 
Mexico and Ambassador Ngarambe of Rwanda for their contributions to the work of the WTO. My 
delegation wishes them every success in their future ende avours.  
 
52. Viet Nam  
 
We would like to join other Members in thanking the Director -General and the Chairs of WTO 
Negotiating Groups for the detailed and substantive progress reports. We associate ourselves with 
the ASEAN joint statement delivered by Thailand.  
 
We reiterate Viet Nam's full support on the rules -based, free, open, fair, transparent and inclusive 
multilateral trading system as embodied in the WTO. We share with other Members the sense of 
urgency relating to the Appellate Body vacancies which may e volve into a state of emergency. 
Encouraging progress in the informal process to break the Appellate Body impasse is well -noted for 
which we readily thank Ambassador David Walker of New Zealand. In this regard, we are pleased to WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 167 - 
 
note that the vast majority  of Members, including Viet Nam, are now having the same view that the 
selection process must be commenced without delay. We urge remaining Members to seriously 
consider the immediate launch of the selection process. This must be one of the foremost import ant 
issues for the entire Membership at this point in time.  
 
In the fisheries subsidies negotiations, much has been done under the excellent leadership of the 
Chair and thanks to the devotions from the four competent facilitators to provide a solid foundat ion 
for our continued negotiations after the summer break. We found the Heads of Delegation meetings 
between negotiating clusters very helpful and fully support this way of engagement. We would like 
to emphasise three points:  
 
(i) Disciplines on subsidies shou ld take into account the need to ensure livelihood for small 
and artisanal fisheries.  
 
(ii) Adequate and proper technical assistance.  
 
(iii) Possible exemptions for subsidies having little or no negative effects.  
 
Considering some level of maturity for a number of negotiating topics and enormous efforts and 
political goodwill from Members, we are confident that some concrete outcomes are possi ble to 
deliver if Members focus their deliberations on a potential landing zone to bridge different positions.  
 
On this occasion, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to the great contribution of the 
Chair, Ambassador Zapata, who has led us a long way and is leaving us at a critical juncture. We 
wish him all the very best in his future endeavours. We also avail our full cooperation and support 
to his successor.  
 
We welcome the fact that the WTO reform discussions have gained momentum and many good 
initiatives have been tabled which Viet Nam carefully studies, engages and makes contribution to 
one-by-one. However, we maintain the view that a comprehensive approach to WTO improvement 
is needed. A balanced package in a structured manner and with a  big-picture perspective is more 
appropriate than individual initiatives in isolation. As such, we encourage and are ready to engage 
in any efforts in this direction.  
 
Last but not least, prioritising deliverables and tangible outcomes for MC12 is crucial  for our work in 
the fall, after the summer break, towards Nur -Sultan 2020.   
 
53. Peru (Lima Group)  
 
I am making this statement on behalf of the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, 
Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay and P eru, which are Members of 
the Lima Group.  
 
The Governments of the aforementioned WTO Members want to reiterate our commitment to the 
international trading system and to the job all Members do at the WTO.  
 
Nevertheless and for the record, it is important t o indicate that our Governments do not recogni ze 
the legitimacy of Nicolás Maduro's regime nor that of its representatives.  
 
54. Peru  
 
Peru would like to thank the Director -General for his report and for his comments on the state of 
the multilateral trading sy stem and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports.  
 
Peru would like to highlight the progress made in the negotiations of the open -ended group carried 
out under the Joint Statement Initiative on Domestic Regulation in Services. While Peru sti ll has a 
substantial backlog to tackle together with other interested Members, the route leading to the 
Ministerial Conference is becoming clearer thanks to the efforts of the facilitator, the Members and 
the Secretariat. We will continue to be active in t his negotiation.  
 
Regarding the process under the General Council to address the concerns of certain Members about 
the functioning of the Appellate Body, we are grateful for the efforts made by Ambassador Walker WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 168 - 
 
during the consultations which have enabled us to identify are as of convergence which we have been 
analysing in our capitals in particular the area related to the interpretation of the Antidumping 
Agreement. Peru is taking a realistic and flexible approach to this process and encourages Members 
to follow suit. At the  same time, we stress the need for active participation by the Members which 
raised concerns about the functioning of the Appellate Body without which we would lack sufficient 
guidance. The selection process for members of the Appellate Body should therefo re begin without 
further delay.  
 
With regard to efforts to reform or modernise our organization, it would be advisable to carry out an 
information gathering exercise as we approach the end of the year with a view to gaining a better 
understanding of which communications and proposals are still in force and which of those should 
be considered as we prepare for the next Ministerial Conference.  
 
Allow me also to express my special appreciation to Ambassador Zapata of Mexico and the facilitators 
for having secu red the support of Members for the texts that will serve as a basis for the negotiations 
in the second half of the year. We have hard work ahead of us and, to this end, we reiterate Peru's 
commitment to deliver on the mandate of the Ministerial Conference to come up with a tangible 
result by the end of this year. With a view to achieving this goal, it is vital that the GRULAC candidate 
be appointed as the new Chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules as soon as possible.  
 
Lastly, I would like to extend my con gratulations to the delegations of Australia, Japan and Singapore 
for the results obtained thus far in organising and conducting the discussions on electronic commerce 
and also to the Members that have submitted proposals and taken part in the discussions within the 
Joint Statement Initiative. We hope that the progress made to date will convince other Members of 
the importance of participating in the meetings that are to resume in the second half of the year.  
 
55. Philippines  
 
The Philippines associates itself with the ASEAN statement delivered by Thailand.  
 
This has indeed been a turbulent first half of the year for the multilateral trading system. But if we 
do a mid -term stocktake of the work so far, we can see that there has really been positive movement 
in the WTO 's negotiating and other rulemaking fora.  
 
In fisheries subsidies, under the chairmanship of Ambassador Roberto Zapata, whose leadership we 
will sorely miss, the Negotiating Group on Rules now has working consolidated texts for further 
discussion. Mu ch work lies ahead, and deep divergences remain, but we must recogni ze the fruits 
of Members ' dedication, hard work and flexibility in coming up with these consolidated working texts. 
With this in mind, the Philippines remains keen on delivering an outcome  on "comprehensive and 
effective fisheries disciplines " by the end of this year, as mandated by the Ministers at MC11 in 
Buenos Aires and by SDG 14.6. To demonstrate our commitment, the Philippines has submitted its 
fisheries subsidies notifications, in fu ll compliance with the MC11 directive.  
 
There has also been intensified Member -driven discussions this year on other important issues 
affecting trade, particularly on the trade -related aspects of e -commerce, investment facilitation, 
domestic regulation in  services, and MSMEs. There is clearly some momentum building, and while 
we see this as a positive development that complements the WTO 's negotiating function, we should 
not neglect the importance of moving forward on DDA issues, including agriculture.  
 
It goes without saying that this is a crucial time for the WTO. What we do in the second half of the 
year will spell the difference in the outcomes that we hope to produce in MC12. Indeed, the gaps in 
our positions can sometimes seem too wide. But let  us start to build bridges. Let  us seek to 
understand each other 's positions in an enlightened and constructive manner. And for the next half 
of the year, let  us begin our negotiating work in a positive and collaborative spirit and renew our 
faith in each other a nd in the system with the core values and principles that all of us as Members 
of the WTO share.  
 
May we express our good wishes and all the very best to our departing colleagues. And to those of 
us remaining, a good summer break that we will hopefully be energi sed to do work in earnest until 
the second half of the year.  
 WT/GC/M/179  
 
- 169 - 
 
56. Russian Federation  
 
It was against my initial intention to take the floor one more time but the intervention from the 
Honourable Delegate from Peru forced me to do so. It is really a problem that some Members 
mistakenly believe that they are in a position to judge who should be a representative of a legitimate 
foreign government. Please be informed that only people without any unwelcomed intervention to 
their domestic affairs from abro ad are entitled to decide on that. It would be very advisable to the 
delegates to this House to focus their activity in the WTO on trade rather than on political issues 
non-related to this organization.  
 
57. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  
 
We take note of the statement made by Peru and we would like to thank and subscribe to the 
statement made by the Russian Federation. We reiterate what we have said on previous occasions 
that this is not the forum to discuss the recognition of governments.  
 
__________  