WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/C/W/298
2 July 2001
(01-3299)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal:  English
COMMUNICATION FROM ZAMBIA
By means of a communication, dated 20 June 2001, from the Permanent Mission of Zambia,
Zambia has requested that the following text be circulated as an unrestricted Council document.
_______________
INTERVENTIONS OF THE DELEGATION OF ZAMBIA AT THE MEETING OF
THE TRIPS COUNCIL OF 18-22 JUNE 2001
IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 (AGENDA ITEM D);  INFORMATION ON
TECHNOLOGY CAPACITY-BUILDING (AGENDA ITEM E);  AND REVIEW
OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT UNDER
ARTICLE 71.1 (AGENDA ITEM K)
Agenda Item D:  Implementation of Article 66.2
My delegation would like to express its gratitude to developed countries that have provided
information with regard to this Ar ticle.  This information is helpful in particular when it is targeted
specifically to LDCs as is provided in Article 66.2.  However, my delegation would like to see more
comprehensive information on the types of incentives provided.
We think that this may help to identify the most  suitable incentives to fulfil the objective of
this Article.  We also understand that identifying in centives right away may not be an easy task given
that there may be many institutions, schemes and actors involved.
Nonetheless, in the process of trying to find effective ways of implementing Article 66.2 of
the TRIPS Agreement, my delegation wishes to gather more information from developed countriesregarding how they are fulfilling this mandate.  Th e information already provided in the notification
by them in documents IP/C/W/132 and addenda is a useful resource that should be analysed to show
how Article 66.2 can best be implemented to promot e technology transfer to LDCs and further the
objectives and principles of the TRIPS Agreement stated in Articles 7 and 8, respectively.
My delegation would therefore like to request developed country Members to provide
comprehensive information and, in particular, indicate the extent to which the transfer of technology
has taken place in LDCs.  In doing so, they should show how the incentives that they notified have
operated in practice.  Specifically, they are requested to provide any information that they currently
have on:IP/C/W/298
Page 2
(1) the fields of technology in which each incentive has been applied in transferring
technology to LDCs;
(2) the modes in which technology is being transferred to LDCs under each incentive (for
instance:  training of personnel, licensing agreements, commercial establishment, saleof goods, etc.);
(3) any factors which are perceived to have made some incentives more effective in
transferring technology to LDCs than others;
(4) how LDCs can have input into the choice of the fields in which technology is
transferred to them under each incentive.
Agenda Item E:  Information on Technology Capacity-Building
My delegation would like to thank UNCTAD, WIPO, the CBD and UNIDO for the
information on capacity-building which they provided showing that all of them have programmes oftechnical assistance for technological capacity-build ing.  What is important in our opinion is how
these organizations could be more helpful in the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement by
developing countries particularly LDCs in a balanced manner that places equal emphasis on both the
rights and obligations of these countries.  For instance, how this can be enhanced through technical
cooperation under the WTO!
Agenda Item K:  Review of Implementation of the Agreement under Article 71.1
As it has already been stated in this Council and in the last meeting by India, my delegation is
of the opinion that the review should be as comprehensive as possible and should not be limited tosome articles.  What is important here is to assess somehow the impact of the TRIPS Agreement on
development and, in particular, on the transfer of technology and capacity-building in developing
countries in general and, in particular, LDCs.  The following are some of the important questions and
points to consider in the review:
(i) The extent to which the transfer of technology has taken place.
(ii) Specifically, the impact of the Agreement on the creation of a sound and viable
technological base  as envisaged in Article 66.2.  Indeed, if the Agreement is being
implemented as many developed countries have indicated in their notifications, the
review should reflect the impact to establish how LDCs are benefitting in terms of a
sound and viable technological base .
(iii) The costs of implementing the Agreement in developing countries and particularly
LDCs.
(iv) The implication for developing countries, particularly LDCs, of the 20-year patent
rule.
(v) Whether increased protection of IPRs is jeopardizing developing countries' access to
essential drugs.
(vi) Whether IPRs have been misused by the right holders, etc.
(vii) Clarifying whether the implementation of Article 66.2 by developed countries is, in
fact, not a pre-condition for LDCs' implementation of their TRIPS obligations.IP/C/W/298
Page 3
The review should also broaden the discussion to topics that are not clearly included in the
Agreement, such as protection of traditional knowledge and folklore.
The language in Article 8 (Principles) should be  strengthened to ensure that nothing in the
Agreement would prevent countries from taking the necessary measures for achieving public policyobjectives, including public health protection.
__________