So too, TRIPS included a provision for compulsory licences for health - the breadth of that provision was a major subject of controversy prior to the Cancun meeting. It recognises that in the formulation of the trade rules, the voices and concerns of the least-developed countries were not given sufficient weight, that provisions on special and differential treatment were not adequately ‘hard wired’ into the international trading system, that development itself is a complex matter, and that trade ministers have neither necessarily the competence nor interests to design a global trading system that promotes development. A corollary, then, of the right to development within the international trade regime is the ‘right to trade’. This right to sanction would be tradeable (see Stiglitz and Charlton 2005). Rather than merely raise tariffs, sanctions should also be able to include suspension of other WTO commitments of interest to advanced countries, including the TRIPS agreement. Setting aside the differences in their ability to bring suit, even when a developing country prevails, enforcement is difficult.